The Scipios on Trial
The Descent of Africanus
Scipio Rips Up the Expenses Register in Front of Cato - AI-Generated Image
At the start of the 2nd century BC, Scipio was Rome’s most influential figure. After defeating Hannibal, he earned the surname Africanus. Through extensive alliances and a large clientele, he dominated politics while remaining loyal to the Res Publica. His sense of superiority, likely stemming from his achievements, led him to support relatives and allies. This was evident during the war against Antiochus III of Syria. In 190 BC, his patronage secured the consulships of his brother Lucius and his friend Laelius. Although officially his brother’s legate, Scipio likely played a central role in military operations. Following the victory at Magnesia, Antiochus was required to pay a tribute of 15,000 talents, with 500 due immediately.
After their victory, Lucius celebrated a triumph in Rome and adopted the cognomen Asiaticus. He did not record the 500 talents in the treasury, stating they were used to pay his troops. The Scipios’ opponents, led by Cato, seized on this issue. During his quaestorship in Africa in 204 BC, Cato had already disagreed with Scipio over financial management. His opposition to Africanus, intensified by differing views on Hellenism, made him a key figure among their critics.
In response, Cato urged the tribunes to question Asiaticus about the missing funds. Africanus intervened by bringing the expense register to the Senate and tearing it up in protest, feeling insulted given his service to Rome. The Senate did not pursue the matter further, but Cato brought the case before the popular assemblies. There, tribune Augurinus proposed a fine and, when Asiaticus refused, arrest. Only Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus opposed, arguing it was inappropriate to imprison a victorious commander. The outcome is unclear: Livy states Asiaticus was ordered to repay the treasury, while other historians suggest the case ended without consequence, as was common at the time. Regardless, the Scipios’ reputation was damaged.
In 184 BC, tribune Naevius accused Scipio of granting Antiochus favorable terms, allegedly due to the imprisonment of Scipio’s son, Publius. Scipio did not respond directly, instead reminding the assembly that he had defeated Hannibal on that day. After the accusation, he likely withdrew to Liternum (Lago Patria) to avoid trial, remaining there until his death in 183 BC. According to Valerius Maximus, his inscription read: "Ingrata patria, ne ossa quidem mea habes" (Ungrateful fatherland, you certainly will not have my bones).
G. Brizzi, Scipione e Annibale. La guerra per salvare Roma, Laterza, Bari, 2009.
Plutarco, Vite Parallele. Aristide e Catone, Bur-Rizzoli, Milano, 2018.
Polibio, Storie, libri XIX-XXVII, Bur-Rizzoli, Milano, 2018.
Tito Livio, Storia di Roma, libri XXXIV-XXXV, Bur-Rizzoli, Milano, 1989.
09/10/2026
Paola Manunta