Quintus Mucius Stcevola (consul 95 BC)

Origin

Stcevola belonged to the plebeian family of Mutsiev , which rose during the Second Punic War . The first of Stcevol, the magisterial great-grandfather received Quintus, praetor 215 BC. e. of the same name ^[1] . The sons of the praetor were consuls: Publius in 175, Quintus in 174. The son of the first of them, also Publius , being consul in 133, contributed to the reforms of Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus ^[2] . He became the father of Quintus Mucius.

A characteristic feature of this family was the abundance of Rome's largest authorities in the fields of jurisprudence and sacred life. Quintus Mucius' father and father's brother Publius Licinius Crassus Mucianus were the supreme pontiffs and authors of special legal works; Quint's cousin — another Quintus , Mutsius Stsevola , who was called Avgur to distinguish from his younger relative, was also an outstanding expert in law, primarily civil law ^[3] . Stcevola Pontiff continued this family tradition ^[4] .

An important role in the life of Quintus Mucius was played by family ties with Licinius (his uncle became Licinius Crassus for adoption). One of the representatives of this noble family Lucius Licinius Crassus became a friend of Stcevola and a colleague in a number of magistrates ^[5] ; he was also married from about 119 BC. e. on the daughter of Stcevola Avgur, that is, the second cousin of Stcevola Pontiff ^[6] . Cicero, in one of his treatises, calls these friends peers ^[7] , and in the other reports that Crassus was thirty-four years older than himself ^[5] . From here, the birth date of Quintus Mucius is calculated - 140 BC. e. ^[eight]

Cursus honorum

Around 115 BC e. Quintus Mucius inherited from his father a membership in the college of pontiffs ^[9] . He began his political career with a questure , which dates back to 110 BC. e. ^[8] In 106, he became a people's tribune ^[10] , and this was the only magistracy of Stcevola, which he did not share with his friend Crassus: he was elected by the people's tribune a year earlier ^[5] . It is known that Quintus Mutsius presided at the national assembly on the day the Servilius law on the transfer of ships from riders to the Senate was considered, and it was his friend who defended this law ^[5] .

The next stage in the career of Stcevola - edility - is dated 104 ^[11] or 103 ^{[12] the} year BC. e. As an aedile, Quintus Mucius organized with Crassus magnificent games ^{[13] [14] [15]} , in which the Roman public first saw lions ^[12] . In 100 BC e., at the decisive moment of the senate’s struggle with the tribune of Lucius Appuleius Saturnin , Stcevola, among other aristocrats, came to comitia to take part in an open battle with the “rebels” ^[16] . Subsequently, no later than 98 BC. e., he was a praetor ^[17] . Some scholars admit the likelihood of his praetorship in 101 ^[18] , 100 ^[19] or 99 ^[20] BC. e.

In 95, Quintus Mucius became consul. Together with his permanent colleague Crassus, he passed lex Licinia Mucia de civibus redigundis - a law that conducted a rigorous investigation into all Italians living in Rome who called themselves Roman citizens ^[21] . Those of them who could not prove their citizenship were expelled from the city ^[22] . Cicero suggested that the consuls could push such a step could be the indignation of Mark Emilia Skavra over the participation of false citizens in the work of the national assembly ^[23] ; in historiography, a hypothesis was put forward that Stsovola and Crassus were fulfilling the assignment of the “faction” of the Metellians, who thus fought against Guy Maria ^[24] . Probably, such a tightening of legislation was one of the immediate reasons for the outbreak of the Allied war four years later ^[11] .

The conflict between Stcevola and Crassus also belongs to the same year. When the senate “out of courtesy” granted the latter a triumph , Quintus Mutsi “did not stop himself from imposing a ban on the decision of the senate, based on concern for the welfare of the state, and not his colleague” ^[25] . This episode shows that the relationship between constant colleagues was quite complex ^[26] .

Governmentalism in Asia and the Publius Rutilia process

In the 90s BC e. Stcevola was governor of the province of Asia . A more accurate date of his viceroyage is the subject of scientific discussion: there are opinions in favor of the year of the praeture (tentatively - 98 BC) ^{[27] [28]} , the year after the praetra (97 BC) ^{[29] [30] [31]} and the year after the consulate (94 BC) ^{[32] [33] [34] [35] [36]} . The legate under Quinta Mucius was the consular Publius Rutilius Rufus , an owner of an impeccable reputation ^[37] (it is believed that he concentrated all his power in his hands ^[38] ). It was hypothesized that Stcevola was appointed as a “model” governor in order to improve the internal situation in Asia and increase the loyalty of the provincials towards Rome in the context of the approaching war with Mithridates ^[39] , or that the purpose of his mission, designated by the Senate, was fundamental way to change the nature of the exploitation of the provinces by Rome, moving from ruin to cooperation ^[40] .

In the province of Stcevola streamlined the activities of tax dealers, who earned a lot of money thanks to the connivance of previous governors. Having completed an impartial court, he “delivered the provincials from all legal crocheting”; in cases where the interests of farmers and local residents clashed, he was not afraid to make decisions in favor of the latter, forcing those responsible to compensate for the losses incurred. If the facts of illegal executions were revealed, Quintus Mutsi did not stop even before a similar punishment. Diodorus says that the main agent of the farmers, a slave who had already concluded a ransom agreement with his master, was crucified by order of the governor ^[41] .

Stcevola issued an edict, which guaranteed the Greeks in those cases that did not concern the Romans, a court of their own laws ^[42] . All representatives of the administration were now obligated to pay their own expenses. All these measures, coupled with the general policy of economy, significantly improved the economic situation of the province, so that the locals even established annual festivities - Muzii in honor of Stcevola; it is known that Mithridates, having occupied Asia in 89-88 years BC. e., did not begin to cancel this holiday ^[43] . They reacted to what was happening in Rome: the Senate, by a special decree, “henceforth declared Stcevol a model and norm for the performance of official duties for magistrates leaving for this province” ^[44] .

Nevertheless, Quintus Mucius ruled the province for only nine months and returned to Rome, leaving Publius Rutilius to wait for a successor ^[45] . The activities of the “model magistrate” significantly damaged the interests of the public , who, according to ancient tradition, initiated a deliberately unfair trial against Publius Rutilius on charges of abuse of power and secured his conviction ^{[46] [47] [48] [49]} . Rutilius, who refused to protect the most prominent speakers, made a small exception for Stsevola, who was also concerned with this matter: Quintus Mucius added “a few words” to his ex-subordinate’s speech and “spoke clearly and smoothly, but not at all with the force and fullness that demanded a similar court and a similar case ” ^[50] . After the sentencing, the convict went into exile - in that province, which he allegedly robbed. No one tried to bring Stcevol to trial. Traditionally, these events date back to 92 BC. e. ^[51]

In historiography, there are different opinions about the reasons for this lawsuit and, accordingly, why Quintus Mucius did not become his defendant. Scholars who support the traditional version of the clash between the senate trying to streamline the exploitation of the provinces and the horsemanship, who are interested in continuing their robbery, suggest that the prosecutors only wanted to demonstrate their capabilities and that Rutilius as homo novus was a more convenient target for attack than a noble and branched the bonds of Stcevol ^{[52] [53]} . According to other hypotheses, the Rutilian process has become one of the episodes of the struggle between different intra-Senate groups. Perhaps Gaius Marius struck at Rutilius as one of the most prominent representatives of the Metelli “faction”; in this case, the prosecutors did not plan to offend Stsevola, who was a relatively independent politician and peculiar to Maria ^{[54] [55] [35] [56]} . Perhaps, prominent senators whose material interests were related to Asia united against Quintus Mucius and his legate: they include Mark Emilia Skavra, Mania Aquilia and the same Guy Maria. Even Lucius Licinius Crassus could stand on the side of the accusation - for the sake of revenge on Stcevole for the captured triumph ^[57] .

Later years

Stcevola did not pretend to censorship , which crowned the cursus honorum of the Roman aristocrat: according to Cicero, "no one from the Stcevola family ever aspired to this post" ^[5] . Nevertheless, he was able to strengthen his position around 89 BC. e., when, after the death of Gnei, Domitius Agenobarba was elected the great pontiff ^[58] .

In the domestic political struggle, which had grown during the life of Quintus Mucius into a civil war, he behaved very carefully, not connecting his fate with any of the parties and trying to maintain freedom of action ^[59] . Back in 94 or 93, the granddaughter of his relative Stsevola Avgur became the wife of the son of Gaius Maria; nevertheless, when in 88 the enemy of the last Lucius Cornelius Sulla occupied Rome and proposed to the Senate that Mary be declared an “enemy”, Avgur, who opposed Stcevol, was left without support: all the other senators, including Stcevola Pontific, were silent ^{[60] [61]} . A year later, Rome was occupied by the troops of Mary and terror was first launched against persons of consular and praetor dignity, but Stcevola survived: the presence in the city and in the Senate of such authoritative people as he strengthened the Marian regime ^[62] .

Gaius Marius died in January 86 BC. e. At his funeral, the Marian officer Guy Flavius ​​Fimbria (according to Cicero, “completely maddened man” ^[63] ) attacked Stcevola with a sword and wounded him. Upon learning that the wound was not fatal, Fimbria summoned Quintus Mucius to court and asked what he was going to accuse his victim of, answered: “That he did not accept the blow of the sword to the hilt” ^{[63] [64]} (historians see here the gladiatorial terminology ^{[62] [65]} ). Fimbria was not punished, but soon went to the East to fight with Sulla and died there.

In subsequent years, many nobles left Rome, controlled by Cinnoy and his political heirs ^[66] . Stcevola remained in the city even when Sulla landed in Italy and won a series of decisive victories: according to one source, the supreme pontiff said that he prefers to calmly accept his fate, but not to go “with arms under the walls of the fatherland” ^[67] .

In 82 BC e., at the very end of the war, Quintus Mucius became a victim of Marian terror. Gaius Marius the Younger , besieged in Prenestus and realizing the hopelessness of his situation, managed to convey to Rome, the praetor Lucius Junius Brutus Damasippus, the order to kill a number of senators. The epithet Libya writes about “almost the entire nobility” ^[68] , but other sources name only four names: Publius Antistius , Lucius Domitius Agenobarb , Guy Papirius Carbon Arvina and Quintus Mucius Stcevola ^{[69] [70] [71] [72]} . Given that the latter was a relative of the wife of one of the Marian consuls, and Carbon was a cousin of the other, E. Badian made the assumption that these four “were hardly just victims of arbitrariness”: perhaps they still wanted to go over to Sulla’s side, but their plan was revealed ^[59] . There is a hypothesis that Damasippus acted arbitrarily, and the story of the disposition of Mary transferred from the besieged city is a legend that arose later ^[73] .

Damasippus invited his victims to the curia, supposedly to a meeting, “and killed them there in the most cruel way” ^[72] . Stcevola managed to run out of the Senate building and tried to escape in the Vesta temple, but was overtaken before entering it ^{[68] [74]} or even already inside the temple ^{[75] [76]} and was killed. His body, along with others, hauled down with hooks to the Tiber ^{[69] [72]} . According to Flora , Quintus Mucius “fell to the altar of Vesta and burned in his flame” ^{[77] [78]} .

Intellectual Activities

Stcevola was the first to systematize the ideas of the Romans about civil law ^[79] . He created a brief guide to this field of knowledge in one book and a generalizing codebook in eighteen books, in which the exposition was grouped around individual issues ^[80] and the epistemology of stoicism was used to develop legal problems ^[81] . This work, entitled “On Civil Law,” has been preserved only in the form of quotations and excerpts in other texts. He is often quoted by Aulus Gellius ^{[82] [83]} ; he was commented during the Late Republic by Servius Sulpicius Ruf ^[84] , during the Empire - by Lelius Felix (the composition of the latter “To Quintus Mucius” consisted of at least several books) ^[85] . Stcevola became the oldest of the Roman lawyers whose work was used to compile Digest ^[79] . At the same time, Cicero claims that Quintus Mucius, as a lawyer, had only great experience, but did not delve into the theory of law ^[86] .

In the last years of his life, after the death of his cousin Stcevola Augur (about 88 BC), Stcevola Pontific received as a student of the young Mark Tullius Cicero: he comprehended civil law under the leadership of two Mutsiev ^[87] .

Quintus Mucius often delivered speeches in court and always said “clearly and smoothly” ^[50] . In his treatises, Cicero highly appreciates Stcevola as an orator, citing among his strengths experience in legal matters, insight, and the ability to briefly and “surprisingly successfully” formulate the essence of the matter ^[88] . Mark Tullius built the characterization of Quintus Mucius to a large extent on the comparison with his colleague and a frequent opponent in the courts of Crassus. From his point of view, Stcevola is “the best orator among jurists,” while Crassus is “the best jurist among orators” ^[88] ; Stcevola is “the most elegant of the few words”, and Crassus is “the most few words of the graceful” ^[89] . Cicero calls these two the best experts in oratory for his time; it is known that the young Quintus Hortensius first appeared in court in their presence, and Stsovola and Crassus immediately discerned a great talent in him ^[90] .

Stcevola's religious beliefs were significantly influenced by stoicism. Quintus Mucius distinguished between two types of religion: philosophical stoic and popular, helping to keep ordinary citizens in subjection ^[91] .

Stcevola was married to Celius, known for her immoral behavior ^[92] . At least three daughters were born in this marriage, of which only one is mentioned in the sources - Mucia Tertius , who became the third wife of Gnei Pompey the Great and the mother of all his children. Having received in 62 BC. e. divorce, Mutsia married Mark Emilia Skavra . Antique authors call the Brothers of Mucia Tertius Tetius and Nepot ^{[93] [94]} ; they were probably born from Celia’s first marriage ^[95] .

Through his granddaughter Pompey Magna Stcevola became the ancestor of a number of prominent nobles of the 1st century AD e.

Античная традиция (главным образом в сочинениях Цицерона, близко знакомого с Квинтом Муцием) сделала Сцеволу воплощением высших достоинств римлянина ^[81] . Марк Туллий называет его «благороднейшим и наиболее выдающимся мужем» ^[63] , «из всех людей самым умеренным человеком» ^[13] , «образцом сдержанности и благоразумия» ^[75] . Цицерон считает своего учителя честнейшим человеком; так, когда Сцеволе назвали цену угодья, которое он хотел купить, он сказал, что ценит предмет сделки намного дороже и заплатил за него сто тысяч сестерциев «сверху» ^[96] .

В сюжете о наместничестве в Азии Сцевола выглядит как образцовый римский магистрат ^[44] .

Квинт Муций действует в исторических романах Милия Езерского «Марий и Сулла» и Колин Маккалоу «Первый человек в Риме» и «Венок из трав».

Sources

1. Луций Анней Флор. Эпитомы // Малые римские историки. — М. : Ладомир, 1996. — 99-190 с. — ISBN 5-86218-125-3 .
2. Аппиан. Roman history. — М. : Ладомир, 2002. — 880 с. - ISBN 5-86218-174-1 .
3. Асконий Педиан (неопр.) . Сайт «Аttalus». Дата обращения 9 января 2016.
4. Valery Maxim . Memorable deeds and sayings. - SPb. : Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, 2007. - 308 p. - ISBN 978-5-288-04267-6 .
5. Валерий Максим. Memorable deeds and sayings. - SPb. , 1772. — Т. 2. — 520 с.
6. Веллей Патеркул. Римская история // Малые римские историки. — М. : Ладомир, 1996. — С. 11-98. — ISBN 5-86218-125-3 .
7. Авл Геллий. Аттические ночи. Книги 1 - 10. — СПб. : Издательский центр Г«уманитарная академия», 2007. — 480 с. — ISBN 978-5-93762-027-9 .
8. Авл Геллий. Аттические ночи. Книги 11 - 20. — СПб. : Издательский центр «Гуманитарная академия», 2008. — 448 с. — ISBN 978-5-93762-056-9 .
9. Диодор Сицилийский. Историческая библиотека (неопр.) . Сайт «Симпосий». Дата обращения 18 декабря 2015.
10. Дион Кассий (неопр.) . Римская история . Сайт «Древний Рим». Дата обращения 10 января 2016.
11. Тит Ливий. История Рима от основания города. — М. : Наука, 1994. — Т. 3. — 768 с. — ISBN 5-02-008995-8 .
12. Лукан. Фарсалия. — М. : Ладомир, 1993. — 352 с. — ISBN 5-86218-056-7 .
13. Павел Орозий. История против язычников. - SPb. : Издательство Олега Абышко, 2004. — 544 с. — ISBN 5-7435-0214-5 .
14. Плиний Старший. Естественная история (неопр.) . Дата обращения 27 ноября 2015.
15. Плутарх. Comparative biographies. - SPb. , 1994. — Т. 3. — 672 с. — ISBN 5-306-00240-4 .
16. Цицерон. В защиту Луция Корнелия Бальба // Вестник древней истории. — 1987. — № 2 . — С. 235-252 .
17. Цицерон. О природе богов. - SPb. : Азбука, 2015. — 448 с. — ISBN 978-5-389-09716-2 .
18. Цицерон. Об обязанностях // О старости. О дружбе. Об обязанностях. — М. : Наука, 1974. — С. 58-158.
19. Цицерон. Письма Марка Туллия Цицерона к Аттику, близким, брату Квинту, М. Бруту. - SPb. : Наука, 2010. — Т. 3. — 832 с. — ISBN 978-5-02-025247-9 ,978-5-02-025244-8.
20. Цицерон. Против Гая Верреса («О судебном деле или О сицилийском наместничестве») // Полное собрание речей в русском переводе. - SPb. , 1901.
21. Цицерон. Speech. — М. : Наука, 1993. — ISBN 5-02-011168-6 .
22. Цицерон. Три трактата об ораторском искусстве. — М. : Ладомир, 1994. — 475 с. — ISBN 5-86218-097-4 .

Literature

1. Badian E. Q. Mucius Scaevola and Province of Asia // Athenaeum. — 1956. — Т. 34 . — С. 104—123 .
2. Brennan T. The Praetorship in the Roman Republik. — Oxford, 2000. — Т. 2. — 534 с.
3. Broughton T. Magistrates of the Roman Republic. — New York, 1951. — Vol. I. — P. 600.
4. Broughton T. Magistrates of the Roman Republic. — New York, 1952. — Vol. II. — P. 558.
5. Carney T. A Biography of Marius. — Assen, 1961. — 76 с.
6. Ihne W. Römische Geschichte. — Leipzig, 1879. — Т. V. — 464 с.
7. Kallet-Marx R. The Trial of Rutilius Rufus // Phoenix. — 1990. — Т. 44 , № 2 . — С. 122-139 .
8. Last H. The Senatorial Recovery // Cambridge Ancient History. — 1932. — Т. IX . — С. 172—177 .
9. Long G. Q. Mucius Scaevola, son of Publius (consul, bc 133) and pontifex maximus 7) // William Smith: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. — 1870. — Т. 3 . — С. 733—734 .
10. Luce T. Marius and Mithridatic Command // Historia. — 1970. — Т. 19 . — С. 161—194 .
11. Marshall B. The Date of Q. Mucius Scaevola's Governorship of Asia // Athenaeum. — 1976. — Т. 54 . — С. 117-130 .
12. Meier C. Res publica amissa. Eine Studie zu Verfassung und Geschichte der späten römischen Republik. — Wiesbaden, 1966. — 332 с.
13. Nicolet C. L'ordre équestre à l'époque républicaine (312—13 av. J.-C.). — Paris, 1966. — 76 с.
14. Schur W. Das Zeitalter des Marius und Sulla. — Leipzig, 1942.
15. Sumner G. Governors of Asia in the Nineties BC // GRBS. — 1978. — № 19.2 . — С. 147—153 .
16. Waddington W. Fastes des provinces asiatiques de l'Empire romain depuis leur origine jusqu'au règne de Dioclétien. — Paris, 1872. — 272 с.
17. Альбрехт М. История римской литературы. — М. : Греко-латинский кабинет, 2002. — Т. 1. — 704 с. — ISBN 5-87245-092-3 .
18. Бэдиан Э. Цепион и Норбан (заметки о десятилетии 100—90 гг. до н. э.) // Studia Historica. — 2010. — № Х . — С. 162-207 .
19. Егоров А. Муции Сцеволы, Лицинии Крассы и Юлии Цезари (римская интеллигенция и кризис конца I - начала II вв. до н.э.) // Мнемон. — 2003. — № 2 . — С. 191—204 .
20. Егоров А. Социально-политическая борьба в Риме в 80-е гг. I в. до н. e. (К истории диктатуры Суллы) // Социальная борьба и политическая идеология в античном мире. — 1989. — № 2 . — С. 108—143 .
21. История римской литературы. — М. : Издательство АН СССР, 1959. — Т. 1. — 534 с.
22. Ковалёв С. История Рима. — М. : Полигон, 2002. — 864 с. — ISBN 5-89173-171-1 .
23. Короленков А. Процесс Рутилия Руфа и его политический контекст // Вестник древней истории. — 2014. — № 3 . — С. 59—74 .
24. Короленков А., Смыков Е. Сулла. — М. : Молодая гвардия, 2007. — 430 с. — ISBN 978-5-235-02967-5 .
25. Kumanetsky K. History of the Culture of Ancient Greece and Rome. - M .: "Higher School", 1990. - 351 p.
26. Seletsky P. On some modern studies of the socio-political history of Rome in the 90s of the 1st century BC e. // Bulletin of ancient history. - 1978. - No. 3 . - S. 205-215 .

• Quintus Mucius Stcevola (consul 95 BC) (English) . - in Smith 's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology.
• Quintus Mucius Stcevola (consul 95 BC) (рус.) . - biography on the site ancientrome.ru .