As the
province
changed
hands so often and was so soon after this placed under
imperial control, it is possible that Tacitus made a mistake
and that Pacarius was an ex-praetor.
hands so often and was so soon after this placed under
imperial control, it is possible that Tacitus made a mistake
and that Pacarius was an ex-praetor.
Tacitus
[241] Fréjus.
[242] i. e. either the VII Galbian or XIII Gemina, both of
which were on Otho's side.
[243] i. e. the Ligurian cohort, mentioned above.
[244] Antibes.
[245] Albenga.
[246] Sardinia and Corsica were an imperial province A. D.
6-67. Then Nero gave it back to the senate to compensate for
his declaration of the independence of Achaia. Vespasian once
more transferred it to imperial government. If _procurator_ is
correct here, Pacarius must have been a subordinate imperial
functionary in a senatorial province.
As the province changed
hands so often and was so soon after this placed under
imperial control, it is possible that Tacitus made a mistake
and that Pacarius was an ex-praetor. Those who feel that
Tacitus is unlikely to have made this error, and that Pacarius
can hardly have been anything but governor, adopt the
suggestion that Corsica did not share the fate of Sardinia in
A. D. 67, but remained under the control of an imperial
procurator. There is no clear evidence of this, but under
Diocletian Corsica was certainly separate.
[247] These cruisers were of a peculiarly light build, called
after the Liburni, an Illyrian tribe, who fought for Octavian
in the battle of Actium. He introduced similar craft into the
Roman navy. They were very fast, and worked with a triangular,
instead of the usual square sail.
[248] i. e. his Corsican and Roman clients.
[249] i. 70.
[250] Piacenza and Pavia.
[251] i. e.