Talk:Marcus Marius Gratidianus

Untitled
Look at Cicero In Togam Candidtam, Sallust's Histories and Valerius Maximus 9.2.1. There is a German Wikipedia article on this man.Thomaschina03 (talk) 10:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * There's a modern critical analysis of the classical sources on this subject in: I haven't had a chance to read that paper yet, though. --Delirium (talk) 23:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Having read it now, it casts a lot of doubt on the traditional account our article currently summarizes. In particular, it points out that the traditional stories given by Cicero and Sallust aren't entirely consistent, that Cicero was rather silent in his later writings on the subject, and that later accounts got progressively more gory and tended to merge the Ciceronian and Sallustian accounts. So Marshall on the whole isn't convinced that this incident actually occurred at all, at least as it is traditionally held to have occurred. Another source has a critical summary of Marshall's view, granting some of its points but suspecting that the incident is more likely to have been exaggerated than made up out of whole cloth. --Delirium (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Your link provides an excellent perspective, Delirium. I always doubt everything Cicero says about Catiline; that Gratidianus died by violence (as did so many others during this period) seems secure, but it's important to note the dual tradition, and the rhetorical and symbolic purposes to which the story of his death was put. (I tried to do something similar elsewhere in the article on C. Fabius Hadrianus.) In general Marshall is not my favorite historian on the Republic, and regrettably I no longer have JSTOR access to find the article you note. If you're not interested in rewriting the "Sensational Death" section yourself, I'll put it on my to-do list, based on the online commentary. Gratidianus had come up for me when I was working on the related Flaccan economic reforms. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:51, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Finally got the Marshall article today. Very grateful for the assemblage of sources. (I still may be slow in getting around to the revision.) Cynwolfe (talk) 04:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, have studied the Marshall article in the intervening months, along with scholarly responses to it and the ancient sources themselves. At first glance, a lot seems to hinge on the dating of the Commentariolum Petitionis; if written by Cicero's brother, the site of the killing — at the family tomb of Catulus — is part of the original scenario. Thus the execution would've had overtones of human sacrifice to the Manes, especially given that Gratidianus had received cult devotion along with the Lares at the compita. (It need not have been a "formal" sacrifice; it could've been a grim parody to add insult to injury.) The parading through the streets, the whipping, the joint-by-joint disarticulation, the carrying of the head "still full of life" (i.e., dripping with blood) are all paralleled in Roman ritual practice for animal sacrifice and rites that seem intended to substitute for human sacrifice.
 * Even if the Comm. Pet. is a later Imperial exercise, I had trouble seeing why Marshall found the accounts of Cicero and Sallust, as the two earliest, contradictory; and sure enough, I haven't been able to find any scholars who have much enthusiasm for agreeing with him, except for the usual caution that Cicero is always ready to paint Catiline with the most vile brush. For one thing, there's the reference in Sallust's "Speech of Lepidus" to human sacrifices at tombs during Sulla's terror; rhetorically, it would not be unusual to exaggerate with a plural, but the remark must be referring to something, and the notorious death of Gratidianus not only fits the description better than any other execution during that time, that's how it's described in most of the non-fragmentary sources. Even in Livy's account, which survives only in Periocha 88, the only individual mentioned among the supposed 8,000 slaughtered by Sulla is Gratidianus and his dismemberment. Thus this killing was considered the worst of all.
 * Marshall has a tendency in all his scholarship to seize on certain valid points, and then to lose sight of the big picture. He sees Seneca as "combining" the two traditions; given that the accounts of Cicero and Sallust as they've come down to us in fragmentary form don't inherently contradict each other anyway, it's more likely that the passage in Seneca is simply a summary of the story of Gratidianus's death as it was known. Marshall treats Lucan's outrageous exaggerations as if they demonstrate something about a snowballing narrative tradition for the death, when all they really demonstrate is how Lucan always writes. Marshall dismisses the oddball detail from Orosius that Gratidianus was first confined in a goat pen; there may be some issue of textual criticism in the phrase de caprili casa, but even though Orosius often seems to misunderstand his sources, it's hard to see why he would've read a goat pen in such an unlikely place. For the Republic, Orosius used Livy, whose account is lost; it's completely in keeping with the rest of Gratidianus's death as a mock sacrificial victim if he had been first displayed in public penned like an animal.
 * So in the next couple of days I'll try to expand the section on the killing. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent work tracking down additional sources to integrate Marshall's perspective with a wider one, and more generally, in producing a great article! Quite an improvement on the one we had a year ago. :-) --Delirium (talk) 05:44, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I have a couple of paragraphs to go, for tying up some loose ends (and taking some further note of Marshall). I appreciate your input, which introduced me to a subject that I found really compelling. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Adoptive father of Gratidianus
Not to be a fly in the ointment, but is there any direct evidence of Gratidianus' adoptive father? I can see where I misread his biography in the DGRBM last night (I mistakenly typed that he was adopted by Gaius Marius). Leonhard Schmitz, who wrote the article, said, "his name shows that he was adopted by one Marius, probably a brother of the great Marius." That seems quite reasonable, and so does the probability that Marius' brother, if he had one, was named Marcus. But so far I haven't found anything to confirm that he had a brother named Marcus. Looking at my index of the RE I see Gaius Marius with the filiation "C. f. C. n." but none of the Marci Marii have a filiation (I no longer have direct access to the RE as it is now stored in boxes in the basement of the library). Is there any positive evidence of Marius' brother, apart from inference based on Gratidianus' name? If so, I mean to add him to the list of members of the gens. P Aculeius (talk) 14:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, for some reason I'm just now seeing this. I don't have any sources other than what I used here, but they didn't seem to have any genealogical doubts other than the uncertainty about his in-law relationship to Catiline. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:15, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Infobox
I intend to add an infobox which summarises offices held in a table. Ifly6 (talk) 13:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Okay; you don't need permission or consensus if there's enough detail to justify an infobox, and given the article's length that seems quite likely! P Aculeius (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)