03-06-2010, 08:30 PM
Quote:Just to be a pedant, but there's no evidence that Trebonius was a military tribune. (...) Trebonius appears to have been a very senior officer: Caesar B.G. 6.33: "Having divided the army, he orders T. Labienus to proceed with three legions toward the ocean into those parts which border on the Menapii; he sends C. Trebonius with a like number of legions to lay waste that district which lies contiguous to the Aduatuci; he himself determines to go with the remaining three to the river Sambre".
But the C. Trebonius in 6.33 surely cannot be the same man as the equestrian in 6.40! The former was away with his three legions laying waste while the attack on Q Cicero's fort, in which the latter played a part, was in progress. I'm assuming that the reason Caesar mentions the second Trebonius as being 'a Roman knight' is to differentiate him from the man of the same name, senatorial legate in command of legions (Quaestor in 60BC, and later one of Ides of March conspirators).
Quote:However, while the last stand of the centurions is mentioned (...) no mention is made of the tribune. We have to assume that he's one of the "part of the soldiers [who] arrived safe in camp contrary to their expectations" as a result of the centurions' actions.
Exactly - the 'part of the soldiers who arrived safe' were the veterans led by Trebonius. No other mention of the tribune indicates that Trebonius himself was that man! This would be the simplest explanation, although of course we don't know for sure - he could have been a prefect especially deputised to command the detachment of veterans left at the fort. I wouldn't think he was a legate though - previously, the legate Q Cicero is mentioned as having command 'over the legion and camp' (6.32), which would seem to include everyone in it. Where there are dual legates in command (as with Sabinus and Cotta at the same fort the year before), Caesar would surely name them both.
Quote:It's worth remembering that there was normally a large group of generally young men of high status who followed the commander and his officers. These young men could be given a variety of tasks, and appointed to formal officer positions if and when necessary.
These men were referred to as cohortales, is that right? I think Catullus wrote about a couple of associates of his who went off to Asia as 'friends' of the governor, and didn't get as much out of it as they'd hoped! And as the useful quote from Plutarch's Cato shows, just about every officer on campaign, down to the tribunes, appears to have had a handful of 'friends' tagging along.
Probably worth remembering, too, that in the republican era there were no firm boundaries between 'military' and 'civilian' - any appointment could just as easily be both. So long as a man had pedigree and connections, he could potentially end up doing just about anything. During the civil wars, Caesar's Quaestor in Illyricum, Q Cornificius, conducted a successful independent campaign against Pompeian forces there, in command of two legions.
Quote:Trebatius actually turned down the offer of a military tribunate.
Is that attested elsewhere? From the tone of Cicero's correspondence I got the impression that Testa had taken the job, but grumbled about it!
Writing to Porcius Cato while governor of Cilicia, Cicero mentions that "five cohorts—without a legate or a military tribune, and, in fact, actually without a single centurion" had been detached to Philomelium (ad fam XVIII). This suggests that tribunes could be sent out in command of quite sizeable bodies of men, perhaps if suitable legates were not available.
- Nathan
Nathan Ross
