For the gens Pacuvia, the first-best Grice/Speranza candidate is surely Marcus Pacuvius the tragedian. Not because he is the most politically important Pacuvius, but because he is perhaps the most philosophically fertile. Horace places him among the great early Roman tragedians, and Cicero, Quintilian, and others treat him with enormous respect. In a Gricean reconstruction, Pacuvius sits exactly where Grice likes to look: between poetry, rhetoric, inference, and audience uptake. The rival candidates are interesting:  Sextus Pacuvius Taurus, the flatterer who persuaded Rome to rename Sextilis as Augustus, gives a splendid case of political implicature and courtly over-politeness. Pacuvius Labeo, associated with the Caesarian conspiracy and father of the great juristic tradition through Antistius Labeo, gives legal and political material. Pacuvius Hister, Juvenal's legacy-hunter, gives satire and social manipulation.  But none is so naturally Gricean as the poet. A Speranzian vignette might begin:  G. Why Pacuvius? S. Because tragedy is conversation under maximum pressure. G. Better than ordinary language? S. Less ordinary, perhaps. But more revealing.  What makes Pacuvius especially attractive is that he belongs to the same world as Accius. Much of his work survives only in fragments. That means we encounter him mainly through selected uptake: lines remembered, quoted, extracted, reused. Grice would love that. A complete play tells a story. A fragment asks:  Why was this line remembered?  Which is almost a question about implicature. For the more eccentric Speranza, one might even choose Sextus Pacuvius Taurus, the flatterer of Augustus. The proposal:  rename Sextilis as Augustus  is itself a political speech act. One can imagine: Augustus:  "I did not ask for this."  Pacuvius Taurus:  "Certainly not, Caesar."  Implicature:  +> The proposal is all the more admirable because it appears spontaneous.  A very Roman version of what Grice would call saying one thing and managing to communicate another. Still, if I were choosing a single Pacuvius for the Verbali, I would select:  Marcus Pacuvius, tragedian of Brundisium.  The dry Speranzian reason:  The flatterer changed the name of a month. The jurist left descendants. The legacy-hunter collected inheritances. The poet left fragments. And fragments, for a Gricean, are often where the conversation begins.

 In Tacitus' Annals Book XVI, Paconius Agrippinus is a Stoic philosopher and senator prosecuted alongside Thrasea Paetus during Nero's purges in 66 CE. [1]

Below is the specific context, Latin text, and English translation for his mentions in chapters 28, 29, and 33.

---

Annals XVI. 28: The Accusation

• Context: Cossutianus Capito and Eprius Marcellus open the trial, with Marcellus accusing Paconius of inheriting his father’s treasonous hatred of the emperors.
• Latin: "...Paconium Agrippinum, paterni in principes odii heredem..." (The Latin Library)
• English: "...Paconius Agrippinus, again, heir of his father's hatred for emperors..." (LacusCurtius) [1, 2]

---

Annals XVI. 29: The Senate's Reaction

• Context: Senators express silent sympathy for the accused, noting that Paconius is targeted only for his father's fate rather than direct wrongdoing. [1]
• Latin: "...quid autem Agrippino obiectum nisi triste patris fatum..." (The Latin Library) [1, 2]
• English: "...'What again,' they asked, 'was the charge against Agrippinus except his father's sad fate...'" (Internet Sacred Text Archive) [1]

---

Annals XVI. 33: The Sentence

• Context: While Thrasea is forced to commit suicide, Paconius is spared death but banished from Italy.
• Latin: "...Helvidius et Paconius Italia depelluntur..." (The Latin Library)
• English: "...Helvidius and Paconius were banished from Italy..." (Internet Sacred Text Archive) [1, 2]

---

If you are working on a translation or a historical analysis, let me know if you would like to:

• Explore the historical fate of his father under Tiberius.
• Analyze the Stoic philosophical background of Paconius (who is famously praised in Arrian's Discourses of Epictetus).
• Look closely at the specific Latin vocabulary Tacitus uses here. [1]

L'AI può commettere errori, quindi verifica le risposte 

and nero himself had witness execution of p’s father?

No, Nero did not witness the execution. It was physically impossible for Nero to have witnessed it, as he was not yet born when it took place. [1]

The execution of Paconius Agrippinus' father (Marcus Paconius) occurred during the reign of the emperor Tiberius. [1, 2]

Historical facts clarify this timeline:

• The Father's Death: Marcus Paconius was strangled in prison on charges of treason under Tiberius. According to the ancient biographer Suetonius in his Life of Tiberius 61, Tiberius grew so impatient with the trial that he ordered Paconius to be executed as quickly as possible. [1, 2, 3]
• Nero's Birth: Nero was born on December 15, 37 CE. Tiberius died in March of 37 CE, meaning Nero was born several months after Tiberius's reign ended. [1, 2, 3]

When Eprius Marcellus argues in Annals XVI. 28 that Paconius Agrippinus inherited a "hatred of emperors", he is referring to a generational family trait rather than a personal grievance against Nero specifically. The "emperors" the family hated spanned from Tiberius (who killed the father) to Nero (who banished the son). [1, 2, 3]

and how old was son when dad was strangled?

Historical records do not preserve the exact age or birth date of Paconius Agrippinus. [1]

However, we can reliably deduce that he was likely a young man or in his early twenties based on the timeline of Roman political careers:

1. The Father's Accusation (22 CE): His father, Marcus Paconius, first appears prominently in historical records as a legate (a high-ranking lieutenant) in 22 CE during a trial recorded in Tacitus' Annals III.67. To hold this position, the father must have been an established adult. [1]
2. The Execution (c. 32–37 CE): The father was held in prison for a long duration before Tiberius abruptly ordered his death toward the end of his reign (which concluded in 37 CE). [1]
3. The Son's Trial (66 CE): When the son, Paconius Agrippinus, was put on trial by Nero in 66 CE, he was a full Roman Senator. Under Roman law (Cursus honorum), a man generally had to be at least 30 to 32 years old to enter the Senate. [1, 2]

If the son was a minimum of 32 years old in 66 CE, he would have been born around 34 CE or earlier. Consequently, when his father was executed under Tiberius (sometime between 32 and 37 CE), Paconius Agrippinus was either an infant, a young child, or a young adult, but historical records simply leave his precise birth year blank. [1]