hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
43 BC 170 170 Browse Search
44 BC 146 146 Browse Search
49 BC 140 140 Browse Search
45 BC 124 124 Browse Search
54 BC 121 121 Browse Search
46 BC 119 119 Browse Search
63 BC 109 109 Browse Search
48 BC 106 106 Browse Search
69 AD 95 95 Browse Search
59 BC 90 90 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith). Search the whole document.

Found 3 total hits in 3 results.

e it is sometimes difficult to determine whether passages in the classical authors relate to the father or the son, and in some cases it is probable that the father and the son have been confounded by ancient writers. In a case of doubt the presumption is that the son [No. 6] is intended, since his tragical death, followed close by the Marsic war, has rendered the year of his tribunate a conspicuous era in Roman history. We read nothing more of Drusus, until he obtained the consulship in B. C. 112. He probably passed through the regular gradations of office as aedile and praetor. He may be the praetor urbanus, whose decision, that an action of mandatum lay against an heir as such, is mentioned ad Heren. 2.13, and he may be the Drusus praetor, an instance of whose legal astuteness is recorded in a letter of Cicero to Atticus (vetus illud Drusi praetoris, &c., 7.2); but we should rather be disposed to refer these passages to some member of the family (perhaps No. 2 or No. 1), who atta
Drusus 4. M. LIVIUS C. F. M. AEMILIANI N. DRUSUS, son of No. 3, was tribune of the plebs in the year B. C. 122, when C. Gracchus was tribune for the second time. The senate, alarmed at the progress of Gracchus in the favour of the people, employed his colleague Drusus, who was noble, well educated, wealthy, eloquent, and popular, to oppose his measures and undermine his influence. Against some of the laws proposed by Gracchus, Drusus interposed his veto without assigning any reason. (Appian, App. BC 1.23.) He then adopted the unfair and crooked policy of proposing measures like those which he had thwarted. He steered by the side of Gracchus, merely in order to take the wind out of his sails. Drusus gave to the senate the credit of every popular law which he proposed, and gradually impressed the populace with the belief that the optimates were their best friends. The success of this system earned for him the designation patronus senatus. (Suet. Tib. 3.) Drusus was able to do with appl
ius (Suet. Tib. 3) mentions three triumphs of the Livia gens, and only two (of Livius Salinator) are positively recorded. There is, however, no proof that Dusus triumphed. The Fasti Triumphales of this year are wanting, and Vaillant (Num. Ant. Fam. Rom. ii. p. 52) has been misled into the quotation of a conjectural supplement as an authority. In a passage in Pliny (Plin. Nat. 33.50), which has been relied upon as proving that Drusus triumphed, the words triumphalem senem do not refer to the Drusus mentioned immediately before. Plutarch (Quaest. Rom. vii. p. 119, ed. Reiske) mentions a Drusus who died in his office of censor, upon which his colleague, Aemilius Scaurus, refused to abdicate, until the tribunes of the plebs ordered him to be taken to prison. It is highly probable that our Drusus is intended, and that his censorship fell in the year B. C. 109, when the remains of the Capitoline marbles shew that one of the censors died during his magistracy. (Fasti, p. 237, Basil. 1559.)