vol. III p.1216-1218
Son of the previous. He had inherited his cognomen from his father, and, unlike what Val. Max. IX 14, 4 thinks in error, he did not earn it himself ex moribus. On his deathbed, his father made his young son swear to charge C. Curio, <50> but because Curio was threatening a counter-charge, the two parties settled things instead (Cic. Cornel. and Ascon. ad loc. p. 55. 56). 674 = 80, Nepos was intending to bring a charge against M. Lepidus for extortion with his brother Celer (cf. nr. 86), then perhaps in 677 = 77 against P. Gabinius (Cic. div. in Caec. 64) and 684 = 70 against Verres, according to a few sources, because of his robbery in Achaea (Ps.-Ascon. Verr. p. 128 Or.). [from suppl. III p.223: The idea that Nepos intended to prosecute Verres because of his robbery in Achaea in 684 = 70 is incorrect. Ps.-Ascon. 128 Or. = 207 Stangl is rather about his charge against Curio, which is also meant in Cic. Verr. act. I 6 and l. I 30 according to certain academics; on the other hand, cf. Zielinski Philol. LII 256f. Anm. (p. 1217, 23). On the conflict between Nepos and Cicero, cf. also Plut. apophth. Cic. 5. 6. ([Münzer.])]] <60> In the war against the pirates in 687 = 67, he was tasked with monitoring the sea between Asia Minor and Phoenicia as a legate of Pompey (App. Mithr. 95. Flor. I 41, 10), in the Syrian campaign in 690 = 94 he occupied Damascus with Lollius (Joseph. ant. XIV 29; bell. I 127) and in the following year he returned to Rome, because he wanted to become tribune of the plebs, so that he could successfully support Pompey’s ambitious plans (Plut. Cato min. 20, 1ff. Quintil. IX 3, 43, cf. Mommsen R. G. III 200). <1216/1217> He was elected, but Cato was elected alongside him, who had put himself forward so that he could fight against him (Plut. loc. cit. and 21, 2. Cic. Mur. 81). Cicero, who felt that he was now threatened, tried in vain to get on his good side; on the last day of his consulship, when he was trying to make the usual speech to the people, Nepos raised an objection and only allowed him to win the usual honour, <10> but after this, everybody declared that he had saved the republic from destruction (Cic. fam. V 2, 6-8; Pis. 6. 7. and Ascon. ad loc. p. 6; Sest. 11 and Schol. Bob. ad loc. p. 294. 366. Plut. Cic. 23, 1. Dio XXXVII 38, 2). On 1st January 692 = 62, Cicero opposed Nepos in the senate; on the 3rd he retaliated by making an attack in the popular assembly (Cic. fam. V 2, 8. Plut. Cic. 26, 4. 7) and this was when Cicero retorted with the speech contra contionem Q. Metelli, <20> which we have a few fragments of (Cic. ad Att. I 13, 5. Gell. XVIII 7, 7. Quintil. IX 3, 50. Schol. Gronov. p. 412 et al., cf. Cicero ed. C. F. W. Müller IV 3, 269-271). The tribune’s plan to bring a charge against him failed because of the senate’s resolution (Dio XXXVII 42, 2f.). He was just as unsuccessful in getting his proposal passed, which he had put forward in agreement with the praetor Caesar, that Pompey should be called to Italy to restore order by force. <30> When the proposal was brought before the people, a formal battle broke out. Cato first stepped in against the reading, and then tried to prevent it using violence; he was driven out by armed crowds, returned to the front of another group of people, and held his ground. Nepos said that he was giving way to violence, and went to Pompey in Asia; the senate suspended him, as well as Caesar, from his official position (Dio XXXVII 43, 1-4. Plut. Cato 26, 2-29, 2; Cic. 23, 2. Suet. Caes. 16. Schol. Bob. Sest. p. 302 Or.; cf. Mommsen St.-F. I 262, 1. III 1244, 2; this is probably the context for the speech Caesar wrote for a Q. Metellus, Suet. Caes. 55). <40> After a short while, Nepos returned with Pompey (Plut. Cic. 26, 8) and became praetor in 694 = 60. As praetor, he passed a law about collecting tax in Italy, which the senate didn’t want to put his name on to begin with (Dio XXXVII 51, 3). <50> During the following year, he became augur to replace his dead brother Celer (nr. 86), and afterwards he went off into a province as governor (Cic. ad Att. II 5, 2), but since he was still in Rome in April (loc. cit. 12, 2), it seems to have fallen through. He became consul in 697 = 57 with P. Lentulus Spinther (inscriptions CIL I 604 = X 219. X 8098? Chronogr. Idat. Chron. pasc. [both Marcellus instead of Metellus]. Cassiod. Dio XXXIX 1, 1 and ind. Val. Max. IX 14, 4. Ascon. Milon. p. 43. Schol. Bob. Sest. p. 291. 308. Plin. VII 54). <60> Cicero, whose return was being dealt with at the time, was afraid of him because of their old feud (Cic. ad Att. III 12, 1. Dio XXXIX 6, 3), but Pompey’s position made sure that Nepos declared in the senate on 1st January that he wasn’t going to oppose Cicero’s return (Cic. Sest. 72. 87; p. red. 5. 9; de domo 7. 70; ad Quir. 10. 15). <page break 1217/1218> However, to begin with he didn’t make any such intentions clear. One of Cicero’s supporters, the tribune of the plebs P. Sestius, cut him off during a trial in the temple of Castor, which then lead to a scuffle (Cic. Sest. 79; de domo 13). When Milo charged Clodius de vi in accordance with the lex Plautia, the consul prevented it from being accepted (Cic. Sest. 89. Dio XXXIX 7, 4). When the senate agreed to Cicero’s return at the beginning of August, he was on his side for the first time, <10> yielding to the majority opinion and his relative P. Servilius’s persuasion (Cic. Sest. 130; p. red. 25; de prov. cons. 22; Pis. 35; fam. V 4 [Cicero’s thank-you letter to him]. Dio XXXIX 8, 2). However, because of his relationship with Clodius, he once again supported him in November when he was campaigning for becoming aedile (Cic. ad Att. IV 3, 3f. Dio XXXIX 7, 4). He then got Hispania Citerior as a province (Plut. Caes. 21, 2); 20> Cicero (ad Qu. fr. II 1, 1) doesn’t name him among those who had taken part in a senate meeting in December, which has lead people to conclude that he had already travelled over there near the end of his year in office, but the fact that he was present for the meeting of the triumvirs in Luca in April 698 = 56 suggests the date was later (Plut. loc. cit.). In his province, he made a surprise attack against the Vaccaei and beat them (Dio XXXIX 54, 1. Cic. prov. cons. 22), but in the following year, they were able to balance out their defeat and occupied Clunia, <30> without letting Nepos be able to do anything against them with his weak military powers (Dio XXXIX 54, 2). After the second year had ended, he seems to have returned to Rome and died there shortly afterwards (Ascon. Scaur. p. 24; cf. Wilsdorf Fasti Hisp. prov. [Leipz. Stud. I] 126f.); he made Carrinas his heir (Val. Max. VII 8, 3). In appearance, he resembled a famous actor Pamphilus (loc. cit. IX 14, 4. Plin. VII 54); <40> as a speaker, he wasn’t particularly important (Cic. Brut. 247); one letter is extant which he wrote to Cicero from Spain (fam. V 3).
([Münzer.])
This article is referenced by: M. Caecilius Metellus (80), Q. Caecilius Metellus Celer (86), Q. Caecilius Metellus Nepos (95), Tertia Mucia (28)
Previous article: Q. Caecilius Metellus Nepos (95)
Next article: Caecilia Metella (135)