Marcus Aemilius Scaurus (c. 163 BC – c. 88 BC, consul of 115, princeps senatus in the same year) is portrayed in Colleen McCullough's First Man in Rome and the subsequent volume in her series both as a stiff-necked patrician, enemy of Gaius Marius, and someone for whom the republic comes first; and who displays a vicious sense of humor.
Basic online information all goes back to a 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica entry.
Plutarch talks about Scaurus briefly in his Moralia, On the Fortune of the Romans.
Mommsen summarizes him thus:
Marcus Aemilius Scaurus
A significant illustration of this is afforded by the chief of the senatorial party at this time, Marcus Aemilius Scaurus. The son of highly aristocratic but not wealthy parents, and thus compelled to make use of his far from mean talents, he raised himself to the consulship (639) and censorship (645), was long the chief of the senate and the political oracle of his order, and immortalized his name not only as an orator and author, but also as the originator of some of the principal public buildings executed in this century. But, if we look at him more closely, his greatly praised achievements amount merely to this much, that, as a general, he gained some cheap village triumphs in the Alps, and, as a statesman, won by his laws about voting and luxury some victories nearly as serious over the revolutionary spirit of the times. His real talent consisted in this, that, while he was quite as accessible and bribable as any other upright senator, he discerned with some cunning the moment when the matter began to be hazardous, and above all by virtue of his superior and venerable appearance acted the part of Fabricius before the public. In a military point of view, no doubt, we find some honourable exceptions of able officers belonging to the highest circles of the aristocracy; but the rule was, that the lords of quality, when they were to assume the command of armies, hastily read up from the Greek military manuals and the Roman annals as much as was required for holding a military conversation, and then, when in the field, acted most wisely by entrusting the real command to an officer of humble lineage but of tried capacity and tried discretion. In fact, if a couple of centuries earlier the senate resembled an assembly of kings, these their successors played not ill the part of princes. But the incapacity of these restored aristocrats was fully equalled by their political and moral worthlessness. If the state of religion, to which we shall revert, did not present a faithful reflection of the wild dissoluteness of this epoch, and if the external history of the period did not exhibit the utter depravity of the Roman nobles as one of its most essential elements, the horrible crimes, which came to light in rapid succession among the highest circles of Rome, would alone suffice to indicate their character.
A History of Roman Literature: From the Earliest Period to the Death of Marcus Aurelius by Charles Thomas Cruttwell, M.A. (1877) has this:
Among the friends and opponents of the Gracchi were many orators whose names are given by Cicero with the minute care of a sympathising historian; but as few, if any, remains of their speeches exist, it can serve no purpose to recount the list. Three celebrated names may be mentioned as filling up the interval between C. Gracchus and M. Antonius. The first of these is AEMILIUS SCAURUS (163-90? B.C.), the haughty chief of the senate, the unscrupulous leader of the oligarchical party. His oratory is described by Cicero [31] as conspicuous for dignity and a natural but irresistible air of command; so that when he spoke for a defendant, he seemed like one who gave his testimony rather than one who pleaded. This want of flexibility unfitted him for success at the bar; accordingly, we do not find that he was much esteemed as a patron; but for summing up the debates at the Senate, or delivering an opinion on a great public question, none could be more impressive. Speeches of his were extant in Cicero's time; also an autobiography, which, like Caesar's “Commentaries”, was intended to put his conduct in the most favourable light; these, however, were little read. Scaurus lived to posterity, not in his writings, but in his example of stern constancy to a cause. [32]
Aurelius Victor's description of Scaurus in de viris illustribus urbis romae (72.1) is supposed to be based on his autobiography (no English translation online as far as I can see).
Sallust, in his Jugurthine War, calls Scaurus an “artful concealer of vices” (for more, search the text for scaurus). However, Sallust is not very reliable, see my earlier blog.
Scaurus was censor with Marcus Livius Drusus the Elder (father of the tribune of 91) in 109 and built the second Via Aemilia.
JSTOR (special access required) has:
“Rex in Senatu”: A Political Biography of M. Aemilius Scaurus by Richard L. Bates, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society Vol. 130, No. 3 (Sep., 1986), pp. 251-288.
The author writes that Scaurus warrants greater attention not only because he is the major political figure between the Age of the Gracchi and the Age of Sulla but also because he is the link between these two ages. His final sentence is: “The death of Marcus Scaurus Princeps Senatus [was] in a very real sense the death of a Roman institution.”
He says that the task of reconstructing Scaurus' life is complicated by the extremely fragmentary evidence for the period from the death of Gaius Gracchus to the death of Sulla. He also argues for the basic integrity of Scaurus against the stigma received from Sallust.
The Legatio Asiatica of Scaurus: Did It Take Place? by Michael C. Alexander, Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-) Vol. 111 (1981), pp. 1-9.
