ISSN 0320-961X (Print)
ISSN - (Online)


For citation:

Dymskaya D. D. Antonius Hybrida and Catilinarian conspiracy. Ancient World and Archaeology, 2023, vol. 21, iss. 21, pp. 191-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18500/0320-961X-2023-21-191-206

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).
Full text:
(downloads: 155)
Language: 
Russian
Article type: 
Article
UDC: 
94(37)+929[Катилина+Гай Антоний Гибрида]

Antonius Hybrida and Catilinarian conspiracy

Autors: 
Dymskaya Daria Dmitrievna, Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Abstract: 

The paper analyzes the role of Caius Antonius in the events of 63 BC. The author comes to the following conclusions: despite the agreement with Cicero, which assumed the transfer the rich province of Macedonia to him after the consulship, Antonius considered other ways to get out of debts. Intrigued by Catiline’s promises and being under the influence of his relative Lentulus Sura, he could have taken part in the meetings of the Catilinarii, but retreated from them as soon as he saw that the matter was becoming futile. Since Catiline was popular among debtors, including Antonius, and also because of their electoral alliance concluded on the eve of the elections for 63 BC, Hybrida was considered a friend of Catiline and therefore was under suspicion. Unwilling to risk, he privately made it clear to Cicero that his connections with the Catilinarii were a thing of the past. The orator convinced the senate of Antonius’ loyalty and subsequently eulogized his colleague as a hero. His harsh assessment of Hybrida’s activities in a speech on behalf of P. Sestius was not due to the events of 63 BC but to the political struggle that unfolded in the 50s BC, when Cicero’s conduct during the consulate met sharp criticism and he was forced to defend his own decisions and the actions of his assistants, one of whom was P. Sestius, quaestor of Antonius. It is also possible that the perception of the latter’s role in the events of 63 BC could also have been influenced be the subsequent enmity between Cicero and Hybrida’s nephew Mark Antony.

Acknowledgments: 
Мы хотели бы выразить благодарность к.и.н. А.В. Короленкову за ценные рекомендации, высказанные в ходе работы над статьей. Все ошибки и недочеты исключительно на нашей совести.
Reference: 

Бугаева Н.В. 2012. Кого Тит Ливий считал победителем при Пистории? // Восток, Европа, Америка в древности. Сборник научных трудов XVII Сергеевских чтений. М. C. 143–149 [Bugaeva N.V. 2012 Kogo Tit Liviy schital pobeditelem pri Pistorii? // Vostok, Evropa, America v drevnosti. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov XVII Sergeevskikh chteniy. Moskva. S. 143–149].

Лившиц Г.М. 1960. Социально-политическая борьба в Риме 60-х гг. I века до нашей эры и заговор Катилины. Минск. [Livshits G.M. 1960. Sotsialno-politicheskaya bor’ba v Rime 60-kh gg. I veka do nashey ery i zagovor Katiliny. Minsk].

Любимова О.В. 2016. За что Красс возненавидел Цицерона (Plut. Crass. 13.3–5)? // ВДИ. № 3. C. 626–641 [Liubimova O.V. 2016. Za chto Krass voznenevidel Tsitserona (Plut. Crass. 13.3–5) // Vestnik drevney istorii. № 3. S. 626–641].

Хрусталёв В.К. 2012. К вопросу о суде над проконсулом Македонии Гаем Антонием Гибридой в 59 г. до н.э. // Проблемы истории, филологии, культуры. Вып. 1 (35). C. 49–61 [Khrustalev V.K. 2012. K voprosu o sude nad pro-konsulom Makedonii Gaiem Antoniem Gibridoi v 59 g. do n.e. // Problemy istorii, filologii, kultury. Vyp. 1 (35). S. 49–61].

Batstone W.W. 2010. (ed., transl.). Sallust: Catiline’s Conspiracy; The Jugurthine War; Histories. Oxf. 

Buongiorno P. 2003/4. Gaio Antonio. Hybrida: una biografia (Diss. Laur.). 

Drumann W. 1899. Geschichte Roms in seinem Übergange von der republikanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung. Bd. I. B.

Dyck A.R. 2008. Cicero: Catilinarians. Cambr. 

Gelzer M. 1926. Sergius (Catilina) // RE. Hbd. 27. Stuttgart. S.1693–1711.

Gruen E.S. 1973. The trial of C. Antonius // Latomus. T. 32. P. 301–310.

Hodgson L. 2017. Res Publica and the Roman Republic. «Without Body or Form». Oxf.

John С. 1876. Die Entstehungsgeschichte der Catilinarischen Verschwörung; ein Beitrag zur Kritik des Sallustius. Besonderer Abdruck aus dem achten Supplementbande der Jahrbücher für classische Philologie. Leipzig.

Kananack C.H.E. 2012. Reconsidering «The Conspiracy of Catiline»: Participants, Concepts, and Terminology in Cicero and Sallust. PhD Diss. Exeter. 

Klebs E. 1894. Antonius // RE. Bd. I. Hbd. 2. Stuttgart. Sp. 2577–2582.

Kraggerud E. 2007. Grammar and Interpretation at Sallust. Cat. 57.4 // Symbolae Osloenses. Vol. 82.1. P. 55–57.

La Bua G. 2019. Cicero and Roman Education: The Reception of the Speeches and Ancient Scholarship. Cambr.; N.Y. 

Lewis R.G. 1988. Inscriptions of Amiternum and Catilina’s Last Stand // ZPE. Bd. 74. P. 31–42.

Long G. 1869. Decline of the Roman Republic. Vol. III. L. 

Mackay Chr.S. 2009. The Breakdown of the Roman Republic: From Oligarchy To Empire. N.Y. 

Manuwald G. 2018. Cicero: Agrarian Speeches. Oxf. 

McGushin P.C. 1977. Sallustius Crispus, Bellum Catilinae: a Commentary (Mnemosyne Suppl. XLIV). Leiden. 

Mommsen Th. 1882. Römische Geschichte. Bd. III. B. 

Odahl Ch. 2010. Cicero and the Catilinarian Conspiracy. N.Y. 

Ramsey J.T. 2007. Commentary // Sallust’s Bellum Catilinae. Oxf. 

Ramsey J.T. 2019. Did Cicero ‘Proscribe’ Marcus Antonius? // The Classical Quarterly. Vol. 69. Issue 2. P. 793–800.

Rice Holmes T. 1923. The Roman Republic and the Founder of the Empire. Oxf. 

Stern E. von. 1883. Catilina und die Parteikämpfe in Rom der Jahre 66–63. Dorpat. 

Stone M. 1999. Tribute to a Statesman: Cicero and Sallust // Antichthon. Vol. 33. P. 48–76.

Sumner G.V. 1963. The Last Journey of L. Sergivs Catilina // ClPh. Vol. 58. No. 4. P. 215–219.

Vacanti C. 2018. I Catilinari. Progetto di una congiura. Napoli.

Received: 
23.01.2023
Accepted: 
31.01.2023
Published: 
27.04.2023