The Quaestorship of Marcus Antonius

ACCORDING TO T. R. S. Broughton,' M. Antonius was quaestor in 52. However, in his commentary on Cicero Att. 6.6.4 D. R. Shackleton Bailey2 has discarded Broughton's dating and assigned Antonius' tenure of that office to 51. In this way he has reverted to an old tradition, for Drumann-Groebe,3 Mommsen,4 Nipperdey,5 and Biilz6 were of the same opinion. Of course, Broughton was not the first to date Antonius' quaestorship in 52. This dating was advocated among others by Willems, Sobeck, and Niccolini.7 Neither Broughton nor Shackleton Bailey found it necessary to adduce arguments for their interpretation, but it may be interesting to look more closely into the question. Is there any discrepancy in the sources that allows one to draw such divergent conclusions? Our main sources are Cicero, Caesar, and Hirtius.A Shackleton Bailey' adduces as evidence to reject Broughton's opinion only Hirtius BGall. 8.2.1.10 This passage relates to events that occurred on or shortly before 29 December 52, and Antonius is in fact there termed quaestor, as he is

Classical Antiquity Studies · Classical Studies and Legal History · Historical and Religious Studies of Rome · Medicine