Scanned text contains errors.
about this time. (Cic. ad Att. ix. 2, a, 5, 6, x. 13. § 3, «<i T'Vww. ii. 16. § 7.) When Cicero had returned to Rome, after the defeat of the Pompeians, and considered it advisable to cultivate the friendship of Caesar, he renewed his acquaintance with Curtius, and accordingly speaks of him as one of his friends in b. c. 46 ; but in the following year he writes with indignation to Atticus that Curtius thinks of becoming a candidate for the consulship (ad Fam. vi. 12. § 2, ad Alt. xii. 49.). After Caesar's death Curtius attacked with vehemence those persons, like Cicero, who rejoiced at Caesar's death, but defended his acts (ad Att. xiv. 9. § 2). Instead of Curtius Postumus, we .frequently find Curtius Postumius in many manuscripts and editions of Cicero.
POSTUMUS, M. EGNATIUS, one of the consules suffecti in a.d. 183.
POSTUMUS, T. FURFA'NIUS, was one of the judices at the trial of Milo in b.c. 52, and had previously suffered injuries from Clodius. (Cic. pro Mil. 27.) He appears to have been praetor in Sicily in b.c. 50 and 49, and in the latter vear the
V ' «•
senate appointed Postumius as his successor (ad Att. vii. 5. § 2). [postumius, No. 7.] He is again mentioned as the governor of Sicily, with the title of proconsul, in b.c. 45 (ad Fam. vi. 8. § 3, vi. 9). PO'STUMUS, JU'LIUS, a paramour of Ma-til ia Prisca, who had great influence with Li via, the mother of Tiberius, and whom Sejanus employed to injure Agrippina, the widow of Germani-cus, in the opinion of Livia, A. d. 23. (Tac. Ann. iv. 12.) In an inscription (Gruter, 113, 1) we find mention made of a C. Julius Sex. f. Postumus, who was praefect of Egypt under Claudius: he was probably the son of the preceding.
POSTUMUS, POE'NIUS. [pobnius.] PO'STUMUS, C. RABI'RIUS, whom Cicero defended in b. c. 54 in an oration, still extant, was a Roman eques, and the son of C. Curius, a wealthy farmer of the public revenues. He was born after the death of his father, who had married the sister of C. Rabirius, whom Cicero had defended in b. c. 63, when he was accused by T. Labienus ; and he was adopted by his uncle Rabirius, whose name he consequently assumed. The younger Rabirius carried on a profitable business as a money-lender, and had among his debtors Ptolemy Auletes, who had been compelled to borrow large sums of money, in order to purchase the support of the leading men at Rome, to keep him on the throne. To pay his Roman creditors, Ptolemy was obliged to oppress his subjects ; and his exactions became at length so intolerable, that the Egyptians expelled him from the kingdom. He accordingly fled to Rome in b. c. 57, and Rabirius and his other creditors supplied him with the means of corrupting the Roman nobles, as they had no hopes of regaining their money except by his restoration to the throne. Ptolemy at length obtained his object, and Gabinius, the proconsul of Syria, encouraged by Pompey, marched with a Roman army into Egypt in b.c. 55. Ptolemy thus regained his kingdom. Rabirius forthwith repaired to Alexandria, and was invested by the king with the office of Dioecete^ or chief treasurer, no doubt with the sanction of Gabinius. In this %onice he had to amass money both for himself and Gabinius ; bat his extortions were so terrible, that Ptolemy had him apprehended, either to secure him against the wrath of the people, or to satisfy
their indignation, lest they should drive him again from his kingdom. Rabirius escaped from prison, probably through the connivance of the king, and returned to Rome. But here a trial awaited him. Gabinius \yas accused of extortion (rcpetundae) under the provisions of the lex Julia, passed in the consulship of Caesar, b. c. 59, and was condemned to pay a considerable fine. As Gabinius was unable to pay this sum, a suit was instituted under the same law against Rabirius, who was liable to make up the deficiency, if it could be proved that he had received any of the money of which Gabinius had illegally become possessed. The suit against Rabirius was, therefore, a supplementary appendage to the cause of Gabinius. The accuser, the praetor, and the judices, were the same ; and as Cicero had defended Gabinius, he also performed the same office for Rabirius. (Cic. pro Rabirio Postumo, passim.) The issue of the trial is not mentioned ; but as the judices had condemned Gabinius, they probably did not spare his tool. We may therefore conclude that he went into banishment, like his patron, and was recalled by Caesar from exile. At all events, we find him serving under Caesar in B. c. 46, who sent him from Africa into Sicily, in order to obtain provisions for the army. (Hirt. B. Afr. 8.)
POSTUMUS, VI'BIUS, consul suffectus, A. d. 5, conquered the Dalmatians in a. d. 10, and received, in consequence, the honour of the triumphal ornaments. (Dion Cass. Ivi. 15 ; Veil. Pat. ii. 116 ; Flor. iv. 12. § 11.)
POTAMIUS, a Spaniard by birth, was bishop of Lisbon in the middle of the fourth century; and if the first of the pieces mentioned below be genuine, he must, in the early part of his career, have been a champion of the Catholic faith. Subsequently, however, he was a zealous Arian, and it is believed that he drew up the document known in ecclesiastical history as The second Sirmian Creed. [phoebadius.] The writings usually ascribed to Potamius are: — 1. Epistola ad Athanasium Epis-copum Alexandrinuin de Consubstantialitate Filii Dei^ in some MSS. entitled Epistola Potamii ad Atha-nasium ab Arianis (impetiturn ?) postquam in Con-cilio Ariminensi subscripserunt^ composed in the year A. D. 355, while the opinions of the author were yet orthodox. The authenticity of this piece, however, which is characterised by great obscurity of thought and of expression, and often half barbarous in phraseology, is very doubtful. It was first published by the Benedictine D'Achery, in his Spicilegium veterum aliquot Scriptorum, 4to. Paris, 1661, vol. ii. p. 366, or vol. iii. p. 299, of the new edition by Baluze, fol. 1717, and will be found under its best form in Galland's Bibliotiieca Patruin, vol. v. fol. Venet. 1769, p. 96. 2. Sarmo de Lazaro9 and 3. Sermo de Martyrio Esaiae Prophetae. Two discourses resembling in style the epistle to Athanasius, long attributed to Zeno, bishop of Verona, and published, without suspicion, among his works, until the brothers Ballerini (S. Zenonis Sen none s, fol. Venet. 1739, p. 297—303) proved that they must be assigned to Potamius, whom however they supposed to be a person altogether different from the bishop of Lisbon, and belonging