ProQuest Dissertations - Historia Antigua

suggests an informal collaboration between the commissioners before the election. Thecommissioners were Q. Fabius Labeo, who had been praetor over the fleet in 189, andtwo young Fulvii: M. Fulvius Flaccus and Q. Fulvius Nobilior. The Fulvii were membersof families well favored politically and popularly at that time; in particular, M. FulviusNobilior, father of Quintus, had just given lavish games in 186, perhaps right around thetime when the commission was elected. 34It seems unlikely that these two young Fulvii,neither of whom had held an office yet, could have been nominated, let alone elected, asstand-alone candidates for the colonial commission without their family's assistance.Moreover, the coincidence of having two Fulvii on the commission suggests that therewas cooperation in forming the board, which then campaigned as a unit in the election. Asimilar agreement between an experienced magistrate and two relatively unknown youngmen seems to have occurred for the commission to found Luca: Q. Fabius Buteo, M.Popilius Laenas, and P. Popilius Laenas. Again, it is unlikely that Publius, who had heldno magistracy before the commission and also none after, would have been elected ascommissioner on his own. Rather, the board seems to have been prearranged. 35Finally, the composition of some of the boards to establish colonies in NorthernItaly in the 180s seems to indicate that there was a stiff electoral competition betweenprearranged and cooperative commissions. M. Aemilius Lepidus was pursuing a policyLivy 39.5 (on vowing the games to Jupiter Optimus Maximus), 39.22 (on celebrating the games for tendays), and 40.44 (for Fulvius' budget for the games set as the upper limit on game expenditure.)35 Gargola (1995), p. 63 and n. 63 notes that the relative inexperience of this commission does not fit withthe notion that its composition followed a senatorial policy to send only experienced military men todangerous areas, such as Liguria.107