[60] Nicolaus gives a more detailed account of Octavius’ landing in Italy than do the other historians (App. 3, 10; Dio 45, 3; Vell. 2, 50). Beside Nicolaus only Appian mentions the fact that Octavius stopped first at Lupiae before proceeding to Brundisium.
[61] See note [49], chapter 13, and the citations there appended. Pedius and Pinarius are the only co-inheritors with Octavian according to Suet., Caes., 83, 2. Dio 44, 35 gives 30 and 75 denarii as alternative sums, to be paid each citizen according to the terms of the will. App. 3, 23 states that the shares of Pedius and Pinarius were requisitioned by Octavian to help make good the amount to be distributed to the people. ‘Drachma’ and ‘denarius’ are to be understood as synonymous in the accounts of Dio and Nicolaus, though not properly identical in value.
[62] Senate was convened in the temple of Tellus on March 17, two days after the assassination, on the day of the Liberalia (Cic., Att., 14, 10, 1; 14, 14, 2; App. 2, 126; Dio 44, 22). Plut., Brut., 19 erroneously places the meeting of the senate on March 16.
[63] Caesar named Lepidus ‘Magister equitum iterum’ for the year 44 (CIL 1, p. 440; 466; Dio 43, 49, 1; Suet., Caes., 82; Plin., N. H., 7, 147).
[64] CIL 12 p. 63, 64; Dio 43, 49; 45, 9; Cic., Phil., 2, 70; App. 2, 107; Cic., Fam., 11, 2, 1; Plut., Ant., 11; Brut. 18; Caes. 61; Vell. 2, 56; 58; Liv., Epit., 116, 117.
[65] Probably a parenthesis by Nicolaus, and not a part of the report that Octavius heard at the time. Brutus and Cassius apparently did not leave Rome at once.
18.[66] See App., 3, 11.
[67] L. Philippus, as late as the middle of the ensuing June, was still not at all sanguine of Octavius’ prospects, but thought that nothing ought to be entrusted to him, after having taken due regard for his age, his name, his inheritance, and his training (Cic., Att., 15, 12, 2). With respect to the advice of Philippus against the assumption by Octavius of the name Caesar, see Cicero’s comment, on April 22 (Att. 14, 12, 2): ‘Octavius, quem quidem sui Caesarem salutabant, Philippus non, itaque ne nos quidem.’ See also Suet., Aug. 8; App. 3, 11; Vell. 2, 60, 1.
[68] ‘The state’ at this stage of events was, of course, by no means unreservedly ‘on his side’, as Nicolaus says. In point of fact, as we learn from Cicero’s letters, very few men at Rome concerned themselves at this time about Octavian because of his youth, Nicolaus is valuable here because he draws upon Octavian’s memoirs and reveals how early Octavian matured his plans to become Caesar’s successor in power as well as property. The attitude of the consul Antony is well known (see Suet., Aug., 10; Plut., Ant. 16). Octavian felt that the influence of Cicero was worth cultivating, and hence while staying with his step-father at the villa adjacent to that of Cicero at Puteoli, during the latter part of April, made the most of every opportunity to ingratiate himself with Cicero: ‘nobiscum hic perhonorifice et peramice Octavius;’ ‘Octavius ... mihi totus deditus.’ (Cic., Att., 14, 11, 2; 14, 12, 2). Before the middle of May, the tribune L. Antonius presented Octavius to the people as Caesar’s heir (Cic., Att., 14, 20, 5; 14, 21, 4; 15, 2, 3).
[69] See App. 3, 10; 13; 14; Suet., Aug., 8; Vell. 2, 60, 1.