Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 1.djvu/1096

1078 DRUSUS. for settling 3000 poor citizens in eacli. He was applauded, and was assisted in carrying the niea- sTire. These twelve colonies are supposed by Niebuhr {Hist of Rome^ iv. p. 349) to be the same with those mentioned by Cicero {pro Cae- cina, 35). In all these measures, the conduct of Dnisus was seen to be exempt from sordid mo- tives of gain. He took no part in the foundation of colonies, reserved no portions of land to himself, and left to others the management of business in which the disbursement of money was concerned. Gracchus, on the other hand, was anxious to have the handling of money, and got himself appointed one of the founders of an intended colony at Car- thage. The populace, ever suspicious in pecuniary matters, when they saw this, thought that all his fine professions were pretexts for private jobs. Besides, Drusus cleverly took advantage of his absence to wound him through the side of Fulvius Flaccus. Flaccus was hot-headed and indiscreet, and Dnisus contrived to throw the obloquy of his indiscretion and misconduct up^m Gracchus. Thus was the policy of the senate and Drusus completely successful Gracchus was outbidden and dis- credited, and his power was for ever gone. (Pint. a Gracchus, 8—11; Cic Brut. 28, de Fin. iv. 24.) The policy and legislation of Dnisus in his tri- bunate bear some resemblance to those of his son, who was killed in his tribunate 31 years after- wards. Hence it is sometimes difficult to deter- mine whether passjiges in the classical authors relate to the father or the son, and in some cases it is proliable that the father and the son have been confounded by ancient writers. In a case of doubt the presumption is that the son [No. G] is intended, since his tragical death, followed close by the Marsic war, has rendered the year of his tribunate a con- spicuous era in Roman historj'. We read nothing more of Drusus, until he ob- tained the consulship in a c. 112. He probably passed through the regular gradations of office as aedile and praetor. He may be the praetor urbatms, whose decision, that an action of manda- tum lay against an heir as such, is mentioned ad Heren. ii. 1 3, and he may be the Dnisus praetor, an instance of whose legal astuteness is- recorded in a letter of Cicero to Atticus {vetus illwl Drtisi prueioris^ &c. vii. 2) ; but we should rather be dis- posed to refer these passages to some memlier of the family (perhaps No. 2 or No. 1 ), who attained the praetorship, but did not reach the higher office of consul. Drusus obtained Macedonia as his province, and proceeded to make war upon the Scordisci. He was so successful in his military operations, that he not only repelled the incursions of this cruel and formidable enemy upon the Roman territory in Macedonia, but drove them out of part of their own country, and even forced them to retire from Thrace to the further or Dacian side of the Danube. (Florus, iii. 4.) Upon his return, he was wel- comed with high honours (Liv. Epit. Ixiii.), and his victory was received with the warmer sjitisfac- tion from its following close upon the severe defeat of C. Cato in the same quarter. (Dion Cass. Fnig. Peiresc. 93, ed. Reiniar, i. p. 40.) It is very likely that he obtained a triumph, for Suetonius (2Y/>. 3) mentions three triumphs of the Livia gens, and only ttco (of Livins Salinator) are positively recorded. There is, however, no proof that Drusus DRUSUS. triumphed. The Fasti Triumphales of this year are wanting, and Vaillant {Sum. Ant. Fam. Ronu ii. p. 52) has been misled into the quotation of a conjectural supplement as an authority. In a pas- sjige in Pliny (//. A^. xxxiii. 50), which has been relied upon .as proving that Drusus triumphed, the words triumpJuilem senem do not refer to the Dnisus mentioned immediately before. Plutarch (Quaest. Rom. vii. p. 119, ed. Reiske) mentions a Drusus who died in his office of censor, upon which his colleague, Aemilius Scaunis, re- fused to abdicate, until the tribunes of the plebs ordered him to be taken to prison. It is highly probable that our Dnisus is intended, and that his censorship fell in the year B. c. 109, when the remains of the Capitoline marbles shew that one of the censors died during his magistracy. (f"i/>/i, p. 237, Basil. 1559.) 5. C. Livius C. F. M. Aemiliani n. Drusis was a son of No. 3. Pighius {Annates^ iii, 2(t), contrarj" to all probability, confounds him with Livius Dnisus Claudianus, the grandfather of Ti- berius. [See No. 7.] He approached his brother. No. 4, in the influence of his character and the weight of his eloquence. (Cic. Bnit. 28) Some have supposed him to be the jurist C. Livius Drusus. referred to by Cicero {Tttsc. Qu. v. 38) and Valerius Maximus (viii. 7), but see No. 3. Diodorus (5(rny)^ Vet. Nov. Coll. ii. p. 115, ed. Mai) mentions the great power which the two Drusi acquired by the nobility of their family, their good feeling, and their courteous demeanour. It seems to have been thought, that they could do anything they liked, for, after a certain law had bt'en passed, some one wrote under it in jest, " This law binds all the people but the two Drusi." It is far more likely that two brothers than that, as Mai supposes, a father and son (viz. .No. 4 and No. 6) should be thus referred to ; and, from the context, we doubt not that No. 4 and the present No. 5, contemporaries of the Gracchi, are designated. 6. M. Livits M. F. C. N. Drusus was a son of No. 4. His ambitious temper manifested itself with precocious activity. From boyhood he never allowed himself a holiday, but, before he was of an age to assume the toga virilis, he frequented the forum, busied himself in trials, and sometimes exerted his influence so efl^ectually with the judices as to induce them to give sentence according to his wish. (Senec. de Drcv. Vit. 6.) His character and morals in his youth were pure and severe (Cic. do Off. i. 30), but a self-sufficient conceit was conspi- cuous in his actions. When quaestor in Asia, he would not wear the insignia of office : " ne quid ipso esset insignius." (Aurel. Vict, de Vir. III. 66.) When he was building a house upon the Palatine mount, the architect proposed a plan to prevent it from being overlooked. " No," said he, " rather construct it so that all my fellow-citizens may see everything I do." This house has a name in historj' : it passed from Drusus into the family of Crassus, and can be traced successively into the hands of Cicero, Censorinus, and Rutilius Sisenna. (Veil. Paterc. ii. 15.) Velleius Paterculus slightly ditfers from Plutarch {Reip. Geremi. Fra^ctpUi^ ix. p. 194, ed. Reiske) in relating this anecdote, and the re- ply to the architect has been erroneously attributed to an imaginary Julius Drusus Publicola, from a false reading in Plutarch of 'IoiJAjos for Ajotiioy, and a false translation of the epithet o lru.a-y<ay6'i