Milena Raimondi

The paper investigates the creation of the historical tradition on the legendary rescue of Vesta’s temple cult objects by the pontifex maximus L. Caecilius Metellus during the fire of 241 B.C. While modern studies focused on the reasons behind L. Metellus’s blindness, this paper emphasizes the importance of the different views between the family tradition of the Caecilii Metelli, recorded in the laudatio funebris of 221, and the Roman annalistic and antiquarian tradition...

The conflict in 119 B.C. between Marius and a Caecilius Metellus, who had secured his election to the tribunate of the plebs and then supported the consul L. Aurelius Cotta in the senatorial opposition to the tribune, has been generally interpreted as a turning point in Marius’career. This paper aims to reconsider the episode as a turning point also in the history of the Caecilii Metelli at the time of the “Metellan supremacy”...

Epigrammata Damasiana (18 and 40 Ferrua) provide evidence that Damasus, a most important deacon and a supporter of pope Liberius, tried to reconcile the Roman priests with Liberius after his exile. Damasus’ ecclesiastical action before 366 may help to understand his disputed episcopal election on Liberius’ death. Roman deacons’ prosopography is helpful in order to detect ecclesiastical factions and to highlight Damasus’ role among Roman deacons; deacons were involved in the struggle between Liberius and Felix, the deacon imposed upon the see during Liberius’ exile; Siricius, wich became bishop of Rome after Damasus, was Damasus’ supporter among deacons. Damasus’ action gained the majority of consensus in clerical and Christian community. When Damasus was elected bishop of Rome in 366, the procedure of his appointment was a regular one. While modern studies follow our fullest account (Gesta inter Liberium et Felicem episcopos) written by a supporter of Ursinus (a deacon who contrasted Damasus in 366 and got to be ordained bishop), the focus here is on the documents of papal elections of Siricius and Eulalius/Bonifacius included in the Collectio Avellana. This section of the Avellana shows that popular acclamation (testimonium) was an important element of a regular election in order to approve or reject a candidate. In late empire (IVth/Vth century) popular acclamations for the elections of the bishop of Rome were watched over by imperial administration. Popular acclamations were juridically recognized by Constantine (CTh 1, 16, 6) and functioned for a long time. Ambr. Ep. extra coll. 5, 5 (ed. Zelzer) is especially remarkable for a new intepretation of Ursinus’ failure: Ambrosius’ text would suggest that a popular acclamation disapproved Ursinus and disapproval was accepted and ratified by Roman administration. This paper argument is that Roman citizens approved Damasus as they did later for his successor Siricius and that this popular acclamation was confirmed by imperial intervention.

The political role of Ausonius, of other Gallic officers and Theodosius’ relatives in the accession of Theodosius I are discussed. Ausonius’s Gratiarum actio for his consulship and other works written in 378/9 (Precationes consulis designati and Epigramma I Schenkl) are analysed. The silence on Theodosius in the Gratiarum actio should heighten the praise of Gratianus’s exploits. Gratiarum actio also asserts the role of Ausonius as a political-dynastic tutor of the young emperor. In 378/9 Ausonius was not isolated in Gallia, but he was well informed about Gratianus’ comitatus in Illyricum: his informers were probably Gallic friends such as Proculus Gregorius, Siburius and Siagrius. Before the accession of Theodosius I, these Gallic officers and Eucherius, comes largitionum and Theodosius’ uncle, played a role in Ausonius’ appointment as consul, since Ausonius’ tutorship could provide support to Gratianus’ dynastic legitimacy.