This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
I have updated this article, and although I have left the offices and dates for his Quaestorship and Tribunate from the original article, I have doubts about both. Although it is almost certain that Metellus Pius was Quaestor prior to becoming Praetor, I can find no source that indicates it occurred in 97 BC. Further, it then stated that he was "tribune" in 92 BC. This cannot be right; if it refers to his becoming a military tribune, this would not have happened after his quaestorship. And given his politics and family background, Metellus Pius would not have become a Plebeian tribune. Broughton is silent on this matter, so if anyone has a source which either rules these posts in or out, can they update this article? Thanks. Oatley2112 (talk) 11:00, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the Caecilii Metelli were plebeians and thus eligible for the plebeian tribunate. The fact they belonged to the optimates did no barr them from the office. In fact, the optimates thougth it to be usefull to have such a tribune in their pockets, as to being able to veto the populares tribunes' actions. It's thus very possible he served as a tribune. -- fdewaele, 2 July 2012, 14:55.
I was assuming this was a mix-up with some other Caecilius Metellus, but looking at them all in the back of Broughton vol. 2, I don't see Caecilii Metelli as tribunes till the 60s, with one or two exceptions that are much earlier than 92. I think you should just take it out. Broughton vol. 3, with the addenda and corrections, does have an entry on this Caecilius Metellus, but nothing major: just that he was monetalis, that he was praetor 89 or 88, and further explanation of his getting expelled from his African proconsulship by Gaius Fabius Hadrianus. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:45, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. My own thoughts about Pius' supposed tribunate is that the son of the great Numidicus would not need to waste time by becoming Plebeian tribune, which was usually filled by men who needed to make a name for themselves, and the tribunate was the perfect vehicle for that. Metellus Pius' career path would surely have followed the traditional cursus honorum: Military tribune-Quaestor-Praetor. In any event, I will remove the entries for quaestor and tribune, and if someone finds a source which discusses these, they can be added back at a future date. Oatley2112 (talk) 23:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
