Scanned text contains errors.
favour of the soldiers, raised Rtifus to the consulship for the second time. Otho perished by his own hand soon afterwards, and the soldiers determined that Rufus should now, at all events, accept the empire. He remained, however, firm in his resolution ; and when the soldiers blockaded him in his house, he escaped from them by a backdoor. But this continued opposition to their desires almost proved his ruin. Thinking themselves insulted by him, they began to hate him as much as they had formerly loved him ; and accordingly when he was accused of taking part in a conspiracy against Vitellius, they flocked to the emperor, and eagerly demanded the death of their former favourite. But Rufus escaped this peril, and lived for many years afterwards, honoured and beloved by all classes in the city. At length, in a. d. .97, when he was eighty-three years of age, the emperor Nerva made him consul for the third time, along with himself. During his consulship he broke his leg, and this accident occasioned his death. He was honoured with a public funeral, and the panegyric over him was pronounced by Cornelius Tacitus, who was then consul. His praises were also celebrated by the younger Pliny, of whom he had formerly been the tutor or guardian, and who has preserved the epitaph which Rufus composed for his own tomb:
" Hie situs est Rufus pulso qui Vindice quondam Imperium adseruit non sibi sed patriae."
(Dion Cass. Ixiii. 24, 25, 27, Ixiv. 4, Ixviii. 2 ; Plut. Galb. 4, 6, 10 ; Tac. Hist. i. 8, 9, 77, ii. 49, 51, 68 ; Plin. Ep. ii. ], v. 3. § 5, vi. 10, ix. 19.) The praenomen of Virginius Rufus is doubtful, as we find in inscriptions, in which his different consulships are recorded, both Lucius and Titus. But since he is expressly state.d to have been three .times consul (Plin. Ep. ii. 1), it is more likely that there is an error in one of the inscriptions than that they refer to different persons. Some modern writers, indeed, assign a fourth consulship to him, but this opinion is untenable. (See Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, vol. ii. p. 208, ed. Brux-elles.)
- RUFUS, VI'BIUS, lived in the reign of Tiberius, and prided himself on two things ; namely, that he possessed the curule chair which the dictator Caesar was accustomed to use, and that he had married the widow of Cicero. But his boasting gave no offence, and he was raised by Tiberius to the consulship. His name, however, does not appear in the Fasti (Dion Cass. Ivii. 15). The widow of Cicero has been usually supposed to be Terentia, but Drumann has remarked, with justice, that it was far more likely Publilia, the second wife of Cicero (Geschickte Roms, vol. vi. p. 696). Vibius Rufus frequently appears as one of the declaimers in the Controversies of the elder Seneca. (Contr. 2, 4, 5, 7—9, et alibi.)
RUGA, ICI'LIUS. [IciLius, No. 2.]
RUGA, RU'BRIUS. [Ruimius, No 8.]
RULLIANUS, or RULLUS, a surname of
RULLUS, P. SERVI'LIUS, tribune of the
plebs, b. c. 63, proposed an agrarian law, which
Cicero attacked in three orations which have come
down to us. We know scarcely any thing of the
family or the life of Rullus. Pliny relates that
his father was the first Roman who brought a boar
whole upon the table (//. N. viii. 51. s. 78), and
Cicero describes the son as a debauchee (c. Rull.
i. 1). This agrarian law, called as usual after the name of its proposer the Servilia Lex, was the most extensive that had ever been brought forward. The execution of it was entrusted to ten commissioners (decemviri}^ whose election was to be conducted in the same manner as that of the pontifex maximus. Seventeen of the tribes were to be selected by lot, and nine of these were to give their votes in favour of each candidate. The ten commissioners thus elected were to have extraordinary powers. Their office was to last five years, and the imperium was to be conferred upon them by a lex curiata. They were authorised to sell all the lands out of Italy, which had become part of the public domain since the consulship of Sulla and Q. Pompeius (b. c. 88), with the exception of those which had been guaranteed by treaty to the Roman allies; and likewise all the public domains in Italy, with the exception of the Cam-panian and Stellatian districts, and of the lands which had been assigned by the state, or had had a possessor since the consulship of Carbo and the younger Marius (b. c. 82). The object of the latter enactment was to avert any opposition that might be made by the numerous persons who had received grants of public lands from Sulla. Further, all the proconsuls and other magistrates in the provinces, who had not yet paid into the treasury the monies which they had obtained from the booty of the enemy or in any other way, were commanded to give the whole of such monies to the decemvirs; but an exception was made in favour of Pompey, whom it was thought prudent to exempt from the operation of the law. All the sums thus received by the decemvirs, both from the sale of the public lands and from the Roman generals, were to be devoted by them to the purchase of lands in Italy, which were then to be assigned to the poor Roman citizens as their property. They were to settle a colony of 5000 citizens on the rich public lands in the Campanian and Stellatian districts, each of the colonists receiving ten jugera in the former and twelve in the latter district. These were the chief objects of the Servilia Lex, but it contained besides many other provisions relating to the public land. Thus for instance the decemvirs were authorised to decide in all cases, whether the land belonged to the public domains or to a private person, and also to impose taxes on all the public lands which still remained in the hands of the possessors.
It is impossible to believe that Rullus would have ventured to bring forward this law without the sanction and approval of Caesar, who was then the leader of the popular part}7"; but it is equally impossible to believe that Caesar could have desired or thought that it was practicable to carry such an unconstitutional and extravagant measure. It is not, however, difficult to divine the probable motives which actuated him in rendering it his support. Any opposition, however just, to an agrarian law, was always unpopular among the lower classes at Rome. The aristocratical party, by resisting and defeating the proposition of Rullus, would be looked upon by the people with greater dislike than ever; and their disappointment in not obtaining the grants they had anticipated would render still more welcome an agrarian law proposed by Caesar himself. Besides this consideration, Caesar was probably anxious to unmask Cicero, who had risen to the consulship by the