| |
. .

49 . . .?

. . 2020. 2. . 1825.

.18

Did the Proconsul Caesar enter the City of Rome at the Beginning of 49 B. C.?


R. M. Frolov

This paper argues that, in the first months of 49 B. C., the proconsul Caesar did not enter Rome but remained near the city (ad urbem). He delivered speeches in the senate and in a contio, both legally convened for him outside the city limits. Our ancient sources do not allow us to conclude that Caesar entered Rome in order to organize right on the spot the emptying of the aerarium at the temple of Saturn on the forum or that he spent some time in the regia (likewise located in urbe). Thereby Caesar demonstrated his respect for republican regulations (according to which, a promagistrate lost his power upon entering Rome and, among other things, was not entitled to convene the senate). However, while avoiding the formal breach of these rules, the proconsul still attempted to control and direct the political processes in the city of Rome.


Keywords: Roman republic; promagistrates; in urbe; ad urbem; pomerium; sphere domi

.19 , 49 . . . , (ad urbem). contio, . , , , - , in urbe. , ( , , , ). , .


: ; ; in urbe; ad urbem; pomerium; domi



49 .1 . . , , 2. - , , -, , ( /), 3. , 49 . , .20 , .

, in urbe ( ) , 49 .   1 ( : Caes. BCiv. 1. 33), contio. , (Dio Cass. 41. 1516). , , ad urbem ( ). , , ad urbem (Att. 9. 15. 6; 9. 17. 1; . Fam. 4. 1. 1)4. , ad urbem , .

, (ἔξω τοῦ πωμηρίου), . . (Dio Cass. 41. 15. 24). , , [3, . 5761], , [4, S. 46]5 . contio (Dio Cass. 41. 16. 1: καὶ πρὸς τὸν δήμον, καὶ αὐτὸν ἔξω τοῦ πωμηρίου συνελθόντα; . Sen. Ben. 5. 16. 5: castra in circo Flaminio posuit). ( ), , (3. 103109) [5, . 7880; 6, . 91; 7, . 93; 8, S. 9899]. .

. . (, , 49 .) [4, S. 4657; 9; 10, . 209210; 11; 12, S. 212214; 13]. , , aerarium sanctius6, . , . , , , 7. in urbe (BCiv. 1. 3233), ( ) .

: contio 49 . ad urbem (Cic. Att. 9. 6a; Att. 9. 6. 1; 9. 11a. 1; 9. 16. 3; 9. 17. 1; Fam. 8. 15. 1; Caes. BCiv. 1. 32. 1: ad urbem proficiscitur), - in urbe - , , ?8 , , , sacrosanctitas () , (, , .21 ) ? , , 9, ? , , , ?

, , , , , (Dio Cass. 41. 17. 2; . Flor. 2. 13. 21: iussit effringi). . .-. . , , , , [11, p. 288289, n. 17]. , (. ). , , , , - in urbe (    ; . [4, S. 49]).

, . 7 49 . : , . , , , (Att. 10. 3a. 1: visum te aiunt in regia, nec reprehendo, quippe cum ipse istam reprehensionem non fugerim). , , : , ( , ). in urbe, , , [11, p. 288289, n. 17; 16, S. 5152, Anm. 34; 19, S. 233; 20, p. 400, 403404]. , , . [4, S. 49, Anm. 163], ( visum te aiunt in regia).

, 10. , , , . , - . , regia , , (contra [19, S. 233]). regia , , , , ( ), , (regnum). , , : ( ), , , ? .

.22 regia 25 49 ., : , , () . , , ! (Att. 8. 9. 2: si quidem etiam vos duo tales ad quintum miliarium. quanto autem ferocius ille causae suae confidet, cum vos, cum vestri similis non modo frequentis sed laeto vultu gratulantis viderit!). , , Att. 10. 3a. 1 , ad urbem. , , , , . . , (. Cic. Att. 9. 7. 2: ne ad urbem ἀπάντησις mea animadvertatur)11. , ( ), . , ad urbem, , , , .

regia Cic. Att. 10. 3a. 1 . , , , . - , (Att. 10. 4. 8). , , ( ) , , . , . (voluisse Caesarem occidi Metellum), , -, , -, , , , (pace [11; . 288289, n. 17]). 2 , , , (Att. 10. 8. 6), - .

ad urbem 1 49 . (. ), , (, ), ad urbem (Cic. Att. 7. 17. 3; 7. 18. 3; 9. 7. 2; 9. 18. 1; 9. 19. 4; 10. 4. 11; Fam. 4. 1. 1; . Att. 8. 11 b. 3: ab urbe), , , in urbe, 12.

. , .23 , mos maiorum, (wurde von niemandem empfunden [17, S. 183]). , , , 13.

, , in urbe, ad urbem, . . , . , , , , . . , , 14. , . 49 .

, , 49 . . , , -, , . -, , , . , . , 15, , ( ), (nullo cogendi iure senatus) [24, p. 116117]. , (3. 108109), privatus. , , - ,   , , . . . 16.

, , (, , ), ( ) : in urbe, , . , , .

.24 , , (. [2, . 331334]). , , (. [4, S. 4849]). , : , , (Plut. Caes. 35. 34; . Pomp. 62. 1; Mor. 206C). ( , sacrosanctitas , ) 17.

, ad urbem. , , , argumentum ex silentio: , , in urbe , . , , ex urbe proficiscitur ( BCiv. 1. 6. 7 ), ab urbe proficiscitur (BCiv. 1. 33. 4)18. , , . , , - , ?


1. Emmelius D. Grenzen schreiben. Das Pomerium und die Konstitution von Stadtgrenzen im antiken Rom. Bielefeld, 2019. 331 S.

2. Pelling C. Plutarch Caesar. Oxford; New York, 2011. 519 p.

3. Berti N. La guerra di Cesare contro Pompeo: commento storico a Cassio Dione. Libri XLIXLII. Milan, 1987. 170 p.

4. Woytek B. Arma et nummi. Forschungen zur römischen Finanzgeschichte und Münzprägung der Jahre 49 bis 42 v. Chr. Vienne, 2003. 631 S.

5. Hunink V. M. Annaeus Lucanus. Bellum Civile, Book III. A Commentary. Amsterdam, 1992. 305 p.

6. M. Annaei Lucani Pharsalia / C. M. Francken (ed). Vol. I. Leiden, 1896. 224 p.

7. Brisset J. Les Idées Politiques de Lucain. Paris, 1964. 236 p.

.25 8. Bachofen A. Cäsars und Lucans Bellum Civile: ein Inhaltsvergleich. Zürich, 1972. 176 S.

9. Fabre P. Lentulus, César et laerarium // Revue des Études Anciennes. 1931. T. 33. P. 2632.

10. Gelzer M. Caesar. Politician and Statesman. Oxford, 1968. 359 p.

11. Ferrary J.-L. A Roman Non-Entity: Aurelius Cotta, tribun de la plèbe en 49 avant J.-C. // LItalie préromaine et la Rome républicaine. Vol. I. Rome, 1976. P. 285292.

12. Alföldi M. R. Caesar in 44 v. Chr. Bd. I. Bonn, 1985. 450 S.

13. Libero L., de. Der Raub des Staatsschatzes durch Caesar // Klio. 1998. Bd. 80. S. 111133.

14. . . Aerarium sanctius  // . . : : . . . / . . , . . (.). , 2012. . 815.

15. Schmidt O. E. Der Briefwechsel des M. Tullius Cicero. Leipzig, 1893. 534 S.

16. Jehne M. Der Staat des Dictators Caesar. Köln; Wien, 1987. 496 S.

17. Jahn J. Interregnum und Wahldiktatur. Kallmünz, 1970. 195 S.

18. Rawson E. Caesar: Civil War and Dictatorship // Cambridge Ancient History. 2nd ed. Vol. 9 / J. A. Crook, A. Lintott, E. Rawson (eds.). Cambridge, 1992. P. 424467.

19. Becker W. A. Handbuch der römischen Alterthümer. T. 1. Leipzig, 1843. 722 S.

20. Shackleton Bailey D. R. Cicero, Letters to Atticus. Vol. 4. Cambridge, 1968. 479 p.

21. Welch K. E. T. Pomponius Atticus: A Banker in Politics? // Historia. 1996. Bd. 45. P. 450471. Piscataway, NJ, 20

22. Schneider M. Cicero Haruspex: Political Prognostication and the Viscera of a Deceased Body Politic 04. 252 p.

23. Lintott A. W. Lucan and the History of the Civil War // Classical Quarterly. 1971. Vol. 21. P. 488505.

24. Fantham E. Lucan and Republican Senate // Interpretare Lucano / P. Esposito, L. Nicastri (eds.). Napoli, 1999. P. 109125.

25. Fantham E. Lucan. De bello civili: book II. Cambridge, 1992. 244 p.

26. Helzle, M. Der Stil ist der Mensch: Redner und Reden im römischen Epos. Stuttgart; Leipzig, 1996. 349 S.

27. Asso P. A Commentary on Lucan De bello civili IV. Berlin; New York, 2010. 333 S.

28. Carsana C. Commento storico al libro II delle Guerre Civili di Appiano. P. I. Pisa, 2007. 309 p.


  • 1   .
  • 2 . [1] pomerium , .
  • 3., , Cic. Att. 7. 7. 4: itaque si hoc imperium mihi molestum erit, utar ea porta quam primam videro ( 50 .). . [2, p. 332] (niceties) .
  • 4 (Vell. Pat. 2. 50. 2: in urbem revertit; Suet. Iul. 34. 2: Romam iter convertit; Oros. 6. 15. 5: Romam venit), , ( ) in urbe (Plin. Nat. 33. 56: introitu urbis).
  • 5 [2, . 330], , .
  • 6 . [14].
  • 7 : [10, . 209, n. 5; 13, S. 126; 15, S. 167; 16, S. 5152, Anm. 34; 17, S. 183; 18, . 430].
  • 8 [2, . 332] , , .
  • 9 .-. [11, p. 288].
  • 10 , .
  • 11 . [21, . 466, n. 90; 22, p. 100101, n. 240], , .
  • 12 , (Att. 9. 15a) (in oppidum introisse) (velle ante Kalendas esse ad urbem).
  • 13, (Cic. Att. 9. 9. 3; 9. 15. 2). , , , .
  • 14. [23] [5, S. 52, 76].
  • 15 , , , . . , [.: 4, S. 53, Anm. 181; 5, S. 7879]. , , .
  • 16 ( , privati) . privatus ( ) [., : 25, p. 130131; 26, S. 8687, 134135; 27, p. 16, 150].
  • 17 , , , , (BCiv. 2. 41). . [28, . 146]. , , , . ad urbem.
  • 18 (discedens ab urbe) , (Caes. BCiv. 1. 33. 2; 34. 3).
  • 1413290009 1532551010 1532551011 1629660098 1632066519 1632070869