hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith). You can also browse the collection for 66 BC or search for 66 BC in all documents.

Your search returned 57 results in 48 document sections:

1 2 3 4 5
Mani'lius 7 C. MANILIUS, tribune of the plebs, B. C. 66, was a partisan of Pompey, and is described by Velleius Paterculus (2.33) as " semper venalis et alienae minister potentiae." Manilius entered upon his tribunate on the 10th of December, B. C. 67, and on the last day of the year carried a law, granting to the freedmen the right of voting in all the tribes along with their patrons; but as there seems to have been a violation of some constitutional forms in the comitia, the senate was able on the following day to declare the law invalid. (D. C. 36.25; Ascon. in Cic. Corn. pp. 64, 65, ed. Orelli; comp. [MANLIUS, No. 5].) Not disheartened by this failure, Manilius shortly afterwards brought forward a bill, granting to Pompey the command of the war against Mithridates and Tigranes, and the government of the provinces of Asia, Cilicia, and Bithynia, in the place of Lucullus, Marcius Rex, and Acilius Glabrio. This bill was warmly opposed by Q. Catulus, Q. Hortensius, and the leaders of
Ma'nlius 5. Cn. Manlius, tribune of the plebs B. C. 58, brought forward a law granting to the freedmen (libertini) the right of voting in all the tribes; but he was prevented from passing it by Domitius Ahenobarbus, who was then praetor (Ascon. in Cic. Mil. p. 46). Baiter, in his note on Asconius (l.c.), has shown that this Cn. Manlius is a different person from C. Manilius, who was tribune in B. C. 66. and who brought forward a similar law. [MANILIUS, No. 7.]
rom his writings there. The fact that he is cited by Africanus (Dig. 46. tit. 3. s. 39, and 50. tit. 16. s. 207) shows that he was at least his contemporary. But it may be collected from another passage (Dig. 9. tit. 2. s. 11) that he was prior to Proculus, or at least his contemporary; for in that passage Ulpian cites Mela before Proculus. In another passage Ulpian (Dig. 19. tit. 1. s. 17) cites Mela as the authority for an opinion of Gallus Aquilius who was a friend of Cicero, and praetor B. C. 66; and again (Dig. 19. tit. 9. s. 3) as authority for an opinion of Servius Sulpicius. He is often cited in connection with Labeo and Trebatius. As Africanus wrote under Hadrian, who died A. D. 138, and in the reign of Pius, the successor of Hadrian, we cannot with certainty fix the period of Mela as earlier than that of Antoninus Pilus; but from the other citations here mentioned it has been inferred that he was a contemporary of Labeo and Trebatius. We are not acquainted with the title of a
etellus Celer, who is mentioned by Cicero as one of the orators in B. C. 90, and that he received in consequence the praenomen Quintus and the cognomen Celer. Manutius further supposes that after the death of the elder son Quintus, the wife of Nepos bore him a third son, to whom he again gave the names of Quintus and Nepos. This supposition accounts not only for the two brothers bearing the same praenomen, but also for the younger, and not the elder, having the cognomen of his father. In B. C. 66, Metellus Celer served as legate in the army of Pompey in Asia, and distinguished himself by repulsing an attack which Oroeses, king of the Albanians, made upon his winter-quarters. He returned to Rome before Pompey, and was praetor in B. C. 63, the year in which Cicero was consul. Like the other members of his family he distinguished himself during his year of office by a warn support of the aristocratical party. He prevented the condemnation of C. Rabirius by removing the military flag fr
ventured to use force against Metellus, but now he employed the troops of Sisenna to fight on the side of the Cretans. But as these troops shortly afterwards withdrew from the island, for some reason unknown to us, Octavius took refuge with Aristion in Hierapytna, from which, however, he fled at the approach of Metellus, leaving the Cretans to their fate. Thereupon Lasthenes and Panares, the chief leaders of the Cretans, made their submission to him, and the war was brought to a close. In B. C. 66 Metellus returned to Rome, but he was prevented from obtaining a triumph by the partisans of Pompey. Metellus, however, could not relinquish his claim to a triumph, and accordingly resolved to wait in the neighbourhood of the city till more favourable circumstances. His patience was as great as his desire for the honour; for he was still waiting before the city in B. C. 63, when the conspiracy of Catiline broke out. He was sent into Apulia to prevent an apprehended rising of the slaves; and
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith), (search)
Naso, Q. Voco'nius the judex quaestionis in the trial of Cluentius, B. C. 66. Since Cicero in one passage calls him Q. Naso (pro Cluent. 100.53), and in another Q. Voconius (Ibid. 100.54), Garatoni and Klotz, in their notes upon Cicero's oration, make two different persons out of Q. Voconius Naso, namely Q. Voconius, the judex quaestionis, and Q. Naso, the praetor. But Madvig has shown satisfactorily (de Ascon. p. 121), that Cicero refers only to one person, the judex quaestionis, pointing out moreover that the judices quaestionum were appointed to preside in those cases which the praetors, from their limited number, could not attend to, and that accordingly a praetor and a judex quaestionis would not be in the same court. This opinion of Madvig is also adopted by Zumpt (ad Cic. Ver. p. 234). Cicero in his oration for Flaccus, B. C. 59, speaks (100.21) of Q. Naso, as having been praetor, but the year of his praetorship is unknown. (Orelli, Onom. Tull. p. 649.)
Oppia'nicus the name of three persons, two of whom play a prominent part in the oration of Cicero for Cluentius. Oppia'nicus 1. STATIUS ALBIUS OPPIANICUS, was accused by his step-son A. Cluentius of having attempted to procure his death by poisoning, B. C. 74, and was condemned. Oppia'nicus 2. OPPIANICUS, the son of the preceding, accused Cluentius himself in B. C. 66, of three distinct acts of poisoning. Oppia'nicus 3. C. Oppianicus, the brother of No. 1, said to have been poisoned by him (Cic. Clu. 11). A full account of the two trials is given under CLUENTIUS.
Oppia'nicus 2. OPPIANICUS, the son of the preceding, accused Cluentius himself in B. C. 66, of three distinct acts of poisoning.
C. Orci'vius was a colleague of Cicero in the praetorship, B. C. 66, and presided over cases of peculatus. He is called by Q. Cicero "civis ad anmitionem gratiosissimus" (Cic. Clu. 34, 53; Q. Cic. de Pet. Cons. 5.19). The name is also written Orchicius and Orcinnius, but Orcivius seems to be the correct reading. (See Orelli, Onom, Tullian. s. v.
ccusers would come forward, and no judges would condemn a criminal; and they therefore made the consuls bring forward a less stringent law (Lex Acilia Calpurnia), imposing a fine on the offender, with exclusion from the senate and all public offices. It was with no desire to diminish corruption at elections that Piso joined his colleague in proposing the law, for an accusation had been brought against him in the preceding year of obtaining by bribery his own election to the consulship. In B. C. 66 and 65, Piso administered the province of Narbonese Gaul as proconsul, and while there suppressed an insurrection of the Allobroges. Like the other Roman nobles, he plundered his province, and was defended by Cicero in B. C. 63, when he was accused of robbing the Allobroges, and of executing unjustly a Transpadane Gaul. The latter charge was brought against him at the instigation of Caesar; and Piso, in revenge, implored Cicero, but without success, to accuse Caesar as one of the conspirato
1 2 3 4 5