Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T05:50:17.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factio: Some Observations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Robin Seager
Robin Seager
Affiliation:
The University, Liverpool
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When the word ‘party’ became obscene in the context of the history of the Roman republic, it was frequently replaced by ‘faction’—or factio, to give an air of authenticity. It is the purpose of this paper to examine the occurrences of factio in writers of the republic and early principate in order to discover to what extent the usage of modern historians is justified by the sources. It will not be denied that there are numerous occasions when factio functions as a collective, with the meaning ‘group, clique, faction’. But originally factio had a verbal force, sometimes active—‘way of doing things’—sometimes potential—‘capacity to do things or get things done’. This verbal force is retained in many instances, including some where the rendering ‘faction’, i.e. ‘group’, has become standard. The precise shade of meaning may vary, but three principal connotations can be discerned: influence, concerted action, and intrigue.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 62 , November 1972, pp. 53 - 58
Copyright
Copyright ©Robin Seager 1972. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

I am grateful to Professor E. Badian for his comments on a draft of this paper; he is not of course responsible for the views expressed or for whatever faults may remain.

1 A moderate statement of orthodox doctrine: L. R. Taylor, Party Politics in the Age of Caesar 8 ff.; much more extreme: D. C. Earl, Tiberius Gracchus 7 ff.; a mild caveat, unfortunately little observed later in the book: E. S. Gruen, Roman Politics and the Criminal Courts 4 f. Objections, many of them cogent: C. Meier, Res publica amissa 163 ff.; more briefly: Wiseman, T. P., JRS 60, 1970, 212 f.Google Scholar

2 Plaut., Bacch. 843; Rud. 1371.

3 Non. 304; cf. J. Hellegouarc'h, Le Vocabulaire latin des relations et des partis politiques sous la république 106 f.

4 Plaut., Aul. 167 ff.

5 Plaut., Cist. 493 f., Trin. 466 f., 497 f., cf. 452. 490 f.

6 Titin., fr. 108; Turpil., fr. 208.

7 Auct. Her. I, 8.

8 Cic., Brut. 164.

9 The plurals of Cic., QF 3, 1, 15 and Tac., Ann. 4, 21 provide no parallel.

10 Cic., Rep. 3, 23.

11 Sall., BC 51, 40.

12 Hirt., BG 8, 50, 2.

13 ‘La puissance qui résulte de leurs opes’: Hellegouarc'h, o.c. 106, though he prefers ‘le groupe des pauci’.

14 Liv. 2, 30, 2.

15 Liv. 3, 41, 1.

16 Thus particularly in Cic., Brut. 164, Rep. 3, 23; Hirt., BG 8, 50, 2; Liv. 3, 41, 1.

17 Non. 304.

18 Sall., BJ 31, 15.

19 Sall., BJ 41, 6.

20 Thus rightly Hellegouarc'h, o.c. 101.

21 Ps.-Sall., Ep. 2, 10, 8; the idea of combined action seems to be uppermost again in the following section: ‘nobiles … domi factione instructi’, this time in a pejorative sense.

22 Cic., Rep. I, 44.

23 Nep., Att. 8, 4.

24 Caes., BC I, 22, 5.

25 RG I, 1.

26 Hirt., BG 8, 50, 2.

27 Liv. 2, 16, 4.

28 Suet., Claud. 13, 1; the same may be true of Suet., Nero 2, 2: ‘successorque ei per factionem nominatus’.

29 Thus Caes., BC I, 22, 5; Liv. 2, 16, 4; Suet., Claud. 13, 1, Nero 2, 2.

30 C. Grac., fr. 55 ORF3.

31 Calv., fr. 26 ORF3.

32 Cic., Att. 7, 9, 4.

33 Contra Hellegouarc'h, o.c. 104, n. 3: ‘le groupe des populares dirigé par César’.

34 Sall., BC 34, 2.

35 Liv. 1, 17, 1.

36 Liv. 7, 32, 12.

37 Liv. 9, 26, 22.

38 Val. Max. 4, 1, 13.

39 Ps.-Ascon. 259 St.

40 Cato, fr. 126 P.

41 Sall., BC 51, 40, BJ 41, 1.

42 Caes., BG 6, 22, 3.

43 Liv. 2, 48, 4, cf. 1.

44 Liv. 33, 48, 11.

45 Tac., Dial. 36, 3.

46 Tac., Agr. 12, 1.

47 Tac., Ann. 3, 27.

48 Tac., Ann. 11, 16.

49 Caes. BG I, 31, 3; 6, 12, 1; stated as a principle in 6, 11, 5, an example in 5, 56, 3, cf. 5, 3 f.

50 Caes., BC 3, 35. 2.

51 Cic., Fam. 8, 15, 2.

52 Nep., Pel. I, 2; 1, 4; 2, 4; Phoc. 3, 1 f.

53 Nep., Dion 6, 3.

54 Liv. 1, 51, 2; 4, 9, 2; 9, 16, 6; 21, 2, 4; 3, 2; 9, 4; 23, 1, 2; 8, 2; 12, 6; 24, 23, 11; 26, 39, 15; 29, 6, 5; 8, 2; 30, 7, 7; 42, 12; 32, 19, 2; 32, 2; 33, 45, 6; 46, 4; 47, 4; 48, 11; 34, 21, 4; 48, 2; 61, 11; 35, 31, 6; 33, 7; 34, 7; 12; 37, 5; 36, 12, 4; 37, 9, 3; 38, 31, 5; 39, 36, 5; 41, 25, 3; 27, 3; 42, 63, 12; 43, 17, 7; 22, 3.

55 Tac., Hist. 5, 12; Ann. I, 58.

56 Cic., Rep. I, 68 f., esp. 69: ‘ut exsistat ex rege dominus, ex optimatibus factio’.

57 Cic., Rep. 3, 44. Cicero's use of the plural (QF 3, 1, 15) has a specialized sense.

58 Sall., BJ 31, 1 ff., cf. 30, 3.

59 Sall., Hist. 3, 48, 3M.

60 Sall., Hist. 3, 48, 8M.

61 Ps.-Sall., Ep. 2, 2, 4; 4, 2; 8, 6; 9, 4; 11.6.

62 RG I, 1.

63 Sall., BC 32, 2.

64 Sall., BJ 29, 2.

65 Liv. 1, 18, 5.

66 Liv. 1, 35, 6.

67 Liv. 2, 18, 4; 2, 27, 3.

68 Liv. 3, 64, 3.

69 Liv. 38, 55, 3.

70 Liv. 9, 46, 13, cf. 10.

71 Liv., Per. 77; 84.

72 Vell. 2, 18, 2; Val. Max. 3, 2, 17; Flor. 2, 4, 6; 2, 9, 8.

73 Suet., DJ II; 20, 5; Tip. 3, 2.

74 Tac., Hist. I, 13.

75 Earl, o.c. (n. 1) 7.

76 The adjective factiosus presents no problems. On its earliest occurrence it is associated with wealth and clearly means ‘influential’: ‘ted esse hominem diuitem / factiosum’ (Plaut., Aul. 226; cf. Plin., Ep. I, 5, 15). Later it always has the pejorative flavour of ‘factious, given to intrigue’: thus Sall., BC 18, 4; 51, 32; 54, 6; BJ 8, 1; 15, 4; 28, 4; 77, 1. The links with nobility and wealth are frequent; cf. also Cic, Off. I, 64. For the association with potentia, cf. Auct. Her. 2, 40; Nep., Ages. I, 5; Lys. I, 3.