¹ Cicero, Phil. ii, 85.

² Gelzer, M., Caesar (English trans., 1968), 321Google Scholar, n. 2, might imply that Antony gave the order, but Cicero, , Phil. ii, 87Google Scholar would probably have said not ‘iussit’ but ‘iussisti’ if so; Dio xliv, II, 3 explicitly attributes it to Caesar.

³ Dobesch, G., Caesars Apotheose zu Lebzeiten und sein Ringen um den Königstitel (1966)Google Scholar, lists the extensive and inconclusive bibliography on both sides of the question up to that date.

⁴ See esp. Collins, J. H., ‘Caesar and the Corruption of Power’, Historia iv (1955), 445Google Scholar and the earlier writers there mentioned.

⁵ Weinstock, S., Divus Julius (1971), 324Google Scholar thinks Caesar had been made dictator Albanus (direct successor of the rex Albanus) by the Senate; this would make his wearing of the red boots of the Alban Kings less provocative? (Dio xliii, 43, 2).

⁶ Cicero, pro Deiot. 33; Suet., DJ 76, 1; Dio xliii, 45, 3–4: but this was also beside the statue of L. Brutus, and possibly only involved a claim to be liberator and refounder of the city.

⁷ Cicero, ad A. xii, 45, 2; xiii, 28, 3; Dio, ib. See Burkert, W., ‘Caesar und Romulus/Quirinus’, Historia xi (1962), 356Google Scholar.

⁸ Dio xliii, 43, 1; xliv, 4, 2; 11, 2.

⁹ It is probable, though not absolutely certain, from the later sources, Dio xliv, 6, 1–3 and DH v, 35 (see below, p. 155), that Caesar and his contemporaries regarded the gold crown, like the rest of the triumphal dress, as part of the Etruscan royal insignia. See Kraft, K., ‘Der goldene Kranz Caesars und der Kampf um die Entlarvung des “Tyrannen”’, Jahrb. f. Numism. d. Bayer. Numism. Gesellsch. (1953), 7Google Scholar, with Carson, R. A. G., Gnomon (1956), 181Google Scholar. (Carson also rightly rejects Alföldi's idea that a Greek-style diadem is visible behind Caesar's head on a coin issued in his lifetime.)

¹⁰ See the vote in early 44 of a temple to Caesar and his Clementia (or just the latter? Dio xliv, 4, 5; 6, 4; Appian, , BC ii, 106)Google Scholar; also what Dio says on his omitting to persecute Cassius and others who voted against these honours, xliv, 8, 1.

¹¹ For his use of this title, Syme, R., ‘Imperator Caesar, a study in Nomenclature’, Historia vii (1958), 172Google Scholar; Combès, R., Imperator (1966), 123Google Scholar.

¹² Suetonius, , DJ 79, 1Google Scholar.

¹³ Caesar's close friend and agent, Oppius, wrote (perhaps after Caesar's death) de vita prioris Africani (Peter, , HRR II, 46Google Scholar). His other biographies, on Caesar himself, and Cassius, were clearly propagandistic. The life of Africanus was certainly eulogistic, stressing the sign portending his birth (or indeed his divine parentage ?) and his close connection with Jupiter. Comparison with Caesar has often been thought likely.

Mommsen, Röm. Forsch. 2, 502 argued that Livy xxxviii, 56 is based on a bogus speech of the elder Ti. Gracchus in which Scipio was tacitly contrasted with Caesar—he is said to have reproached the people for wishing to make him consul or dictator in perpetuity, and to have refused statues in the Forum, Curia and the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, and the right that ‘imago sua triumphali ornatu e templo Iovis optimi maximi exiret’. Various dates for the forgery have been suggested (one view prefers Sulla to Caesar), but Mommsen's theory still seems likely, and would imply that Caesar and Scipio were easily thought of together.

¹⁴ Syme, R., The Roman Revolution (1939), 54Google Scholar; numerous continental and American scholars stress that the Cicero passage is final, e.g. Carcopino, J., Les Étapes de l'Impérialisme romain (1961), 148Google Scholar; Taylor, L. R., The Divinity of the Roman Emperor (1931), 239Google Scholar; Ehrenberg, V., ‘Caesar's Final Aims’, HSCP lxviii (1964), 149Google Scholar.

Gesche, H., Die Vergottung Caesars (1968)Google Scholar does not persuade me that the cult was only to come into operation posthumously. This is hardly the natural way to take Cicero or Dio, and it would be odd to go so far as to select a priest who after all might (however young and strong) die before his proposed object of worship became available. It is true that Antony had not been inaugurated flamen by the Ides.

¹⁵ De div. ii, 110.

¹⁶ See now Weippert, O.. Alexander-imitatio u. römische Politik in republikanischer Zeit, Diss. Augsburg (1972), 171Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Ziegler, K.-H., Die Beziehungen zwischen Rom und dem Partherreich (1964), 37 f.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Phil. ii, 85 (pace Balsdon, J. P. V. D., ‘The Ides of March’, Historia vii (1958), 80Google Scholar).

¹⁹ Phil. i, 3; see below, p. 157.

²⁰ Cicero, ad A. xiv, 1. 1. But note Cicero to Matius, ad f. xi, 27, 8: ‘si Caesar rex fuerit, quod mihi quidem videtur.’

²¹ Crawford, , Coinage of the Roman Republic (1974), 507/2Google Scholar. If Taylor, L. R., ‘Varro's de Gente Populi Romani’, C. Phil. xxix (1934), 221CrossRefGoogle Scholar is right, this work was written in 43 or 42 and in its stress on ancient kings worshipped for their benefactions was supporting Octavian's insistence on Caesar's divinity— but not, n.b., on his kingship.

²² Crawford, , CRR, 435/1Google Scholar; Salomonsen, J. W., ‘De Afspiegeling van een politiek conflict op Romeinse denarien uit het jaar 53 voor Chr.’, Jaarboek voor Munt- en Penningkunde xli (1954), 1Google Scholar.

²³ Polybius xxi, II; Cf. Livy (P) xxxvii, 25, 1–14; Appian, Syr. 23. Since Rome had insisted on freeing Cius, which Philip had taken on Prusias' behalf, no wonder he needed reassuring (Polybius xv, 22; xviii, 44).

It is unlikely that Justin xxix, 2, 1 should be right in already putting into the mouth of Demetrius of Illyria (speaking to Philip) a conviction that Rome was at war with all kings, and thought it nefas to have one on her frontiers; for what royalties save Pyrrhus and Teuta had they recently fought? For this τόπος, Fuchs, H., Der geistige Widerstand gegen Rom (1964), 14, 46Google Scholar; Castiglione, L., ‘Motivi antiromani nella tradizione storica antica’, Rend. R. Inst. Lomb. lxi (1928), 623Google Scholar and in Atti del I Cong. Naz. di Studi R. (1929) I, 240Google Scholar.

²⁴ Livy (P) xliv, 24, 1–6 (but not in Polybius xxix, 4). Cf. Livy xlii, 52, 16: Perseus says the Romans want no kings near them. Similar sentiments attributed to Jugurtha (Sallust, Jug. 81. 1) and Mithridates (Justin xxxviii, 7 and Sallust, , Hist. iv, 69Google Scholar M, 17). Maccabees i, 1–8 knows the Romans have defeated (and raised up) many kings, but none of them claim crown or purple; Orac. Sib. iii, 178 — Rome puts fear into all kings.

²⁵ e.g. Macedon and Illyria, Diod. Sic. xxxi, 8; Cappadocia, Justin xxxviii, 2, 7; Strabo xii, 2, 11.

²⁶ Plutarch, , Cato Maior 8, 8Google Scholar; ORF no. 8 fr. 58.

²⁷ Polybius xxx, 19.

²⁸ Especially Guia, M., ‘La valutazione della monarchia in età romana’, Stud. Class. e Or. xvi (1967), 308Google Scholar and Classen, C. J., ‘Die Königszeit im Spiegel der Literatur der römischen Republik’, Historia xiv (1965), 385Google Scholar. See also Wickert, L., ‘Princeps und Βασιλεύς’, Klio xxxiv (1943), IGoogle Scholar.

²⁹ ORF no. 8 fr. 180 (of Ptolemy).

³⁰ Cato knew Carthage was a mixed constitution, HRR Cato fr. 80.

³¹ Polybius vi, 4, 2.

³² Ennius, , Annales 109 VGoogle Scholar: ‘O Tite tute Tati, tibi tanta, tyranne, tulisti’. Possibly here, as in Greek tragedy, not in a wholly unfavourable sense (cf. Servius, , Aen. iv, 320Google Scholar).

³³ A Roman usage, Fraenkel, Ed., Elementi Plautini in Plauto (1960), 182 f.Google Scholar; so is the use of rex to denote the greatest possible might— ‘si rex opstabit obviam’, Stich. 287. See Classen, o.c. (n. 28). Wealth, e.g. Rud. 931, Poen. 671. Terence, Eun. 397, a boast of intimacy with royalty, but this could be from the Greek original.

³⁴ For detail, Welwei, K. W., Könige und Königtum im Urteil des Polybios, Diss. Cologne 1963Google Scholar.

³⁵ Polybius xxii, 8; viii, 8; at Carthage the Romans behaved more like a monarch (he does not say king) than πολιτικῆς καὶ Ῥωμαικῆς αἱρέσεως, xxxvi, 9, 11.

³⁶ Philip, xvi, 28, cf. xviii, 33; Perseus, xxv, 3; Attalus, xviii, 41; Antiochus, xxviii, 18; Eumenes, xxxii, 8; Cleomenes, v, 39, 6; Demetrius of Bactria, xi, 39, 9; the friends of Philip and Alexander, viii, 10; it is βασιλκόν to investigate charges carefully, iv, 85, 5; it is a king's part to do good and rule willing subjects, v, 11, 6. But extraordinary that Hiero made himself king without wronging anyone, vii, 8.

³⁷ vi, 6–7.

³⁸ id. xviii, 10, 7.

³⁹ id. xxi, 18; xxiv, 5. Antiochus Epiphanes was treated with great honour by the Senate and iuventus when in Rome; all regarded him pro rege rather than pro obside, Livy xlii, 6, 9.

⁴⁰ Justin xxxiv, 3, 2, Popillius refuses Antiochus' kiss (Polybius xxix, 27, his hand) till he has drawn his circle round the king and the latter has given in to Rome's demands.

⁴¹ Livy xlii, 39, 1–6. One may note that kings, Perseus and Genthius, began to be led in triumphs.

⁴² Origo Gentis Romanae xiv, 5, from L. Julius Caesar, who probably wrote in the Ist century B.C.; but Sex. Caesar put Venus on his coins from c. 130–25, Crawford, CRR 258/1Google Scholar.

⁴³ Evidence collected by Classen, o.c. (n. 28): I only refer to some striking examples.

⁴⁴ Cicero, de rep. i. 64. Classen, C. J., ‘Zur Herkunft der Sage von Romulus und Remus’, Historia xii (1963), 447Google Scholar discusses the murder of Remus as a motif possibly developed as a political criticism of Romulus and of monarchy as opposed to collegiate rule.

⁴⁵ HRR Piso fr. 8.

⁴⁶ Ennius, , Annales 149 VGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ All the kings save Superbus had statues on the Capitol, carefully restored under the Republic: Pliny, , NH xxxiv, 22Google Scholar. There was also one of Porsenna. Vessberg, O., Studien zur Kunstgeschichte der römischen Republik (1041). 83 fGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁸ e.g. Piso fr. 20.

⁴⁹ Ennius, Annales 177 and 194 VGoogle Scholar (the latter the noble speech about the return of the captives—nec cauponantes bellum …). Ennius is often thought to have influenced the tradition on Pyrrhus.

⁵⁰ De Sanctis, , Storia dei Romani i ² (1956), 350Google Scholar, pace Mommsen, Röm. Forsch. 104, n. 73 and Münzer, , Römische Adelsparteien (1922), 80–1Google Scholar. Claim first explicit in Caesar ap. Suet., DJ 6, 1Google Scholar: ‘nam ab Anco Marcio sunt Marcii Reges.’

⁵¹ Plutarch, , Numa 21Google Scholar (his Mamercii Reges perhaps a confusion with Marcii Reges). Perhaps we should note Romulus 2, 3, Aemilia the daughter of Aeneas mother of Romulus, probably from an early Greek source as the confused chronology shows; whether the Aemilii took the story up is unclear.

⁵² Plutarch, , Numa 21Google Scholar; HRR Cn. Gellius fr. 17.

⁵³ Around 93 B.C. L. Pomponius Molo put Numa, though as priest rather than king, on his coins. C. Marcius Censorinus shows heads of both Numa and Ancus, wearing diadems; later C. Marcius Philippus shows Ancus, and Cn. Calpurnius Piso shows Numa, both with the diadem (Crawford, , CRR 334/1. 346/1 and 3, 425/1, 446/1Google Scholar).

⁵⁴ But observe the introduction to Anth. Pal. iii, 19, on the relief set up by Attalus and Eumenes of Pergamum to their mother Apollonis; it showed Romulus and Remus. Their mother is called Servilia. Is this a Greek confusion or did the Servilii (one of the Alban families) claim descent from Ilia and thus the Alban Kings? (Could they have thought Servilia derived from Ilia and that name recalled her Trojan origin? That might explain why the version found favour at Pergamum.)

⁵⁵ Münzer, , RE viii, 2, 2502Google Scholar is surely right in suggesting that this story was invented during the brief mid-second century prominence of the Hostilii. That they also connected themselves with Tullus Hostilius is made possible by the appearance in 42 B.C. of a tribune designate with the proud name Tullus Hostilius.

⁵⁶ Münzer, , RE xiv, 2, 1536Google Scholar holds that in origin the cognomen had nothing to do with the kings of Macedon. A. L. Marcius Philippus, moneyer, may even have put a portrait of Philip V on his coins at the end of the 2nd century, Crawford, CRR 293/1Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Henderson, M. I., ‘Potestas Regia’, JRS xlvii (1957), 82Google Scholar would put it later than I would. Coli, U., Regnum (1958)Google Scholar, argues for a gulf between kings and magistrates, but even if some of his arguments hold, what we are concerned with is not what was, but what was thought in the second century to be, the case.

⁵⁸ Walbank, F. W., A Historical Commentary on Polybius I (1957), 667Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Polybius x, 38 and 40; see Aymard, A., ‘Polybe, Scipion l'Africain et le titre de roi’, Études (1967), 381Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ id., ‘Le protocole royal grec’, ib. 73.

⁶¹ Polybius xxx, 10; Livy xlv, 27, 7; Plutarch, Aem. Paul. 28 and 30.

⁶² Plutarch, , Ti. Gracchus 1, 4Google Scholar; C. Gracchus 19, 2.

⁶³ de Sanctis, G., Storia dei Romani IV, iii (1964), 261Google Scholar; Münscher, K., ‘Xenophon in der griechischrömischen Literatur’, Philologus Suppl.-Band xiii, 2 (1920)Google Scholar, chap. 3. They doubtless also read Xenophon's Oeconomicus, which the young Cicero even translated, and which like so much Greek literature calls the art of managing the household, like that of managing the city, the ‘royal’ art (21, 11; cf. for example Plato, , Politicus 259aGoogle Scholar).

⁶⁴ Lucilius 1180 Marx.

⁶⁵ Murray, O., ‘Philodemus on the Good King according to Homer’, JRS lv (1965), 178Google Scholar. Grimal, P., ‘Le “bon roi” de Philodème et le royauté de César’, REL xliv (1966), 254Google Scholar returns to the idea that Caesar is the good king aimed at. L. Wickert, o.c. (n. 28) rightly reminds us of the many differences between republican principes and kings.

⁶⁶ Combès, o.c. (n. 11) 61, doubts this; see de Sanctis, G., ‘Imperator’, Studi Riccobono II (1936), 58Google Scholar; Kienast, D., ‘Imperator’, ZRG lxxviii (1961), 403Google Scholar; Aymard, , Études (1967), 152Google Scholar; Bikerman, E., ‘Άνάδειξις’, Mélanges E. Boisacq I (1937), 117Google Scholar; Weinstock, S., Divus Julius (1971), 108Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ Ennius, , Annales 326Google Scholar Vahlen: ‘insece musa manu Romanorum induperator/quod quisque in bello gessit cum rege Philippo’; cf. 83 Vahlen, of Romulus and Remus, ‘omnibus cura viris uter esset induperator’.

⁶⁸ ILLRP 323.

⁶⁹ Pacuvius, , Periboea xviGoogle Scholar. For Jupiter Imperator see Combès, o.c. (n. 11), 38—the cult may be earlier, but Flamininus' dedication of a statue to him is significant. (Jupiter Rex is not a Roman cult at this time, though the poets naturally often call him thus.) Aymard, o.c. (n. 60) shows how Βασιλεύς could be treated as a forename, such as imperator notoriously became in the end.

⁷⁰ Diod. Sic. xxxvi, 14 (not mentioned by Combes).

⁷¹ Polybius xxxii, 1, 3.

⁷² Livy (A) xlii, 14, 10.

⁷³ Livy xxx, 15, 11–12; Appian, Lib. 32, 137. Badian, E., Foreign Clientelae (1958)Google Scholar, Note M, disbelieves, stressing, surely irrelevantly, the pun with Scipio's name. The source is Coelius, according to Klotz, A., Livius u. seine Vorgänger (1940), 194Google Scholar; de Sanctis, G., Storia dei Romani III, 2 (1917), 651Google Scholar, perhaps over-optimistically thinks there is some use of Polybius in the chapter. At any rate, the existence of two versions (see below), one possibly Coelius, is some support for acceptance.

⁷⁴ Tacitus, Ann. iv, 26.

⁷⁵ Klotz, o.c. (n. 73) 180 thinks this is from Valerius Antias; we need not worry about disbelieving him.

⁷⁶ Holleaux, M., Rome, la Grèce, et les monarchies hellénistiques (1935), 67.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ It is true that, later, minor kings did get just the praetexta of the Roman magistrate (Cicero, ad Q. fr. ii, 11, 2) and according to Livy Gallic reguli only got cavalry equipment (xliii, 5, 18; xliv, 14, 2). It is often supposed that Ariovistus was given triumphal garb (Caesar, , BG i, 43Google Scholar: ‘munera amplissime missa’), but would he qualify? For later cases see Weinstock, S., ‘The Image and Chair of Germanicus’, JRS xlvii (1957), 148 n. 38Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ Kienast, D., ‘Entstehung und Aufbau des römischen Reiches’, ZRG lxxxv (1968), 355Google Scholar, accepts this origin (also Masinissa and the king-triumphator equation). See also Ritter, H., Diadem und Königsherrschaft (1965), 91, esp. n. 1.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Plutarch, , Sulla 5, 4Google Scholar; Val. Max. v, 7, ext. 2; Sallust, Jug. 65, 2.

⁸⁰ Polybius xxvi, 1.

⁸¹ Polybius xxx, 25.

⁸² Diod. Sic. xxxvi, 2.

⁸³ id. xxxvi, 7, 4, usually thought to be from Posidonius. (Florus ii, 7, 10: ‘veste purpurea, argenteoque baculo et regium in morem fronte redimita’ is perhaps less accurate.) Salvius is a common slave name and could surely be given to a man from the East.

⁸⁴ Vogt, J., Sklaverei u. Humanität (1965), 34Google Scholar: ‘Tryphon hat seine Monarchie aus hellenistischen und römischen Elementen zusammengestellt, er ist der erste der als Herrscher in einer grossen Gemeinschaft die höchste Magistratur Rams zum Ausdruck des Königtums gemacht hat — eine seltsame Verbindung von Triumphalgewand und Monarchie, die weit in die Ferne auf den Diktatur Caesar weisen konnte’. Salvius' model in other respects is sometimes thought to be Diodotus ‘Tryphon’, the Syrian usurper who rose to power c. 140; he aimed for Roman approval. Could he conceivably have been creating, in Antiochus' footsteps, a kingship with Roman features? Salvius in this case would not simply have been confused.

⁸⁵ Plutarch, , Pyrrhus 19, 5Google Scholar, Appian, Samn. 10, 3 (cf. for the individual as potential king, Fabricius in 10, 4: ‘I would be preferred as king were I to join you’). Justin xviii, 2, 10: ‘respondit regum urbem sibi visum.’

⁸⁶ Polybius xxx, 18.

⁸⁷ id. xxxi, 2.

⁸⁸ Grimal, P., Le Siècle des Scipions (1953), 142Google Scholar holds that ‘le peuple de Rome apprenait de plus en plus à se considerer comme le “peuple-roi”’. I can find no basis for this conception outside poetry and art: Virgil's populum late regem is a very poetic phrase, perhaps merely equivalent to late regentem (Aen. i, 21). Roma appears with diadem on first century B.C. coins. Greek poetry from Melinno (perhaps 2nd cent. B.C., Bowra, C. M., ‘Melinno's Hymn to Rome’, JRS xlvii (1957), 21Google Scholar) to the Sibylline Oracles can call Rome royal; cf. Horace, , Ep., 1, 7, 44Google Scholar. In the imperial period the conception is much commoner, and πῆ βασιλευούση πόλει can even occur in an Imperial letter of the second century, see Wörrle, M., ‘Aegyptisches Getreide für Ephesos’, Chiron i (1971), 325, see esp. 329 fGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁹ For second-century interest in earlier aspirants to regnum, see the fragments of the historians, especially Cassius Hemina and Piso. The latter registers, for 158, the melting down by the censors of a statue supposedly set up to himself by Sp. Cassius, ‘qui regnum adfectaverat’ (fr. 37; I do not share Mommsen's, scepticism, RF 2, 153 f.Google Scholar).

⁹⁰ Diod. Sic. xxxvi, 13. In Plutarch, Mar. 17, 3, the tribune simply calls Battaces ἀγύρτην. If Diodorus is right (and he could be influenced by the events of 44) then die gold crown, like that of the triumphator, was recognized as royal wear as well as the white diadem of the Greek East.

Ziegler, K., ‘L. Caecilius Metellus Diadematus’, Gymnasium lxiii (1956), 483Google Scholar argues that this man was given his nickname (the result of a bandage round his brow) by someone who remembered the story of Ti. Gracchus. But people were generally sensitive about regnum, surely, and the power of the Metelli was oppressive—yet glorious.

⁹¹ Florus ii, 4, 4; according to Orosius v, 17, 7: ‘ab aliis rex, ab aliis imperator est appellants’; surely false, for he had no military achievements.

⁹² Ad Her. ii, 26, 40.

⁹³ Cicero, Har. Resp. 54; Appian, , BC i, 101Google Scholar.

⁹⁴ Note Sallust, Hist. i, 55M, 5, ‘saevus iste Romulus’. The argument of Gabba, E., ‘Studi su Dionigi di Alicarnasso. I: La costituzione di Romolo,’ Athenaeum xxxviii (1960), 175Google Scholar, that Dionysius' picture of Romulus reflects a pamphlet of Sullan date making this identification, is opposed by Balsdon, J. P. V. D., ‘Dionysius on Romulus; a political pamphlet?’, JRS lxi (1971), 18Google Scholar. Later figures invidiously compared with Romulus: Cicero, Sall., Inv. in Cic. 7: ‘Romulus Arpinas’; Pompey Plut., Pomp. 25, 4; Catullus 29, addressing ‘cinaede Romule’, is I think more probably referring to Caesar than the domesticated Pompey (‘socer generque’ are addressed at the end), but the commentators differ among themselves.

⁹⁵ Val. Max. vi, 2, 7.

⁹⁶ n. 22.

⁹⁷ Ennius, p. 141. 155 (Jocelyn). Naevius, not surprisingly, has a couple of lines in his comedies that might imply hatred of kings: ll. 69–71 Warmington. Or are these already Roman magnates?

⁹⁸ Biliński, B., Accio ed i Gracchi (1958)Google Scholar. Note the choice of Brutus as a subject; Cicero, Phil. 1, 36 for the Tereus; Warmington, frs. 25, 217, 269 and, from uncertain plays, 55, 67.

⁹⁹ Debt: Nicomedes of Bithynia App. Mithr. 11, 36–7; Ariobarzanes of Cappadocia, Cicero, ad A. vi, 1, 3–4; but note his ad f. vii, 5, 2, Caesar promises he will make a protégé of Cicero's ‘vel regem Galliae’—largely a matter of money?

¹⁰⁰ Polybius v, 90, 5–6.

¹⁰¹ Badian, E., Roman Imperialism (1967), 78Google Scholar.

¹⁰² Plutarch, Luc. 2, 5.

¹⁰³ Pro Deiot. 26; 40; de Rep. i, 57; iii, 47 (i, 62; ii, 52, the name hated at Rome); de leg. agr. ii, 29, ii, 32 etc.; pro Rob. perd. reo 10; 17; de Or. i, 32 (i, 37 praises the Roman kings). See Klein, R., Königtum u. Königszeit bet Cicero, Diss. Erlangen (1962)Google Scholar; Kroymann, J., ‘Die Stellung des Königtums im I. Buch von Ciceros Staat’, HSCP lxiii (1958), 309Google Scholar thinks rex was not too bad a word in the late republic. In fact accounts of first-century attitudes to kings and tyrants are commoner than those dealing with the earlier period; but they diverge, and simplify. Béranger, J., ‘Tyrannus’, REL xiii (1935). 85Google Scholar restricts the favourable view, probably too narrowly, to a few lettrés; J. Carcopino, o.c. (n. 14), 129 thinks the second century solidly hostile to monarchy, while the first century was increasingly interested in it; while Classen and Guia (see n. 6 above) think Rome was increasingly nervous about regnum from the Gracchi on, which is perhaps more nearly true, but not the whole story.

¹⁰⁴ Plutarch, Caesar 60–2.

¹⁰⁵ Suetonius, , DJ 52, 1Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁶ Dahlmann, H., ‘Caesars Rede für die Bithynier’, Hermes lxxiii (1938), 341Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁷ Caesar, BG i, 34–5.

¹⁰⁸ Esp. Collins, o.c. (n. 4).

¹⁰⁹ Cicero, ad f. ix 15, 4.

¹¹⁰ As to the only other first-century figure of whom much can be said, Momigliano, A., JRS xxxi (1041), 157Google Scholar, review and discussion of B. Farrington, Science and Politics in the Ancient World, argues that the Roman Lucretius, unlike the Epicureans in general, saw human progress as furthered by magistrates and laws rather than kings; but in spite of sceptra superba and nimis ante metutum there is almost a touch of regret for the overthrow, by the rich and ambitious, of the early kings who founded cities and divided the land according to merit (Lucretius v, 1105 ff). Note also, not long after Caesar's death, Sallust, Jug. 113, 1: the wishes of kings are mobile and contradictory.

I am grateful to the Editor and the Editorial Committee for criticism and suggestions.