Editing Lucius Cornelius Cinna (section)

=== Electoral context ===
{{see also|Sulla#First consulship}}

In 88&nbsp;BC, there were two major questions in Roman politics. The first was the Italian question. During the [[Social War (91–87 BC)|Social War]], the Roman republic had granted basically all the Italian allies Roman citizenship. [[Publius Sulpicius Rufus]], a [[plebeian tribune]], sought to curry their favour by enrolling them equally into the thirty-five [[Roman tribe|tribes]] (voting units); in this, he was opposed by politicians who wished to pack the numerous Italians into a limited number of existing – or eight newly-created – tribes.{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|p=46}} The other question was one of command. [[Mithridates VI Eupator]], king of [[Kingdom of Pontus|Pontus]], had recently invaded the province of [[Asia (Roman province)|Asia]]. The commander of the Roman response would have a great opportunity to become wealthy and influential from the plunder and glory of the war.

Sulpicius attempted to link the two matters by securing transfer of then-consul [[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]]'s command against Mithridates to the aged general [[Gaius Marius]] in exchange for Marius' support for Italian enrolment.{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|p=47}}<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Stockton |first=DL |date=1984 |title=Review of "Sulla: the last republican" |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3062484 |journal=Classical Review |volume=34 |issue=2 |page=349 |jstor=3062484 |issn=0009-840X}}</ref> But after he passed the legislation transferring Sulla's command to Marius, Sulla suborned his army into marching on Rome to overturn Sulpicius' actions. After doing so, he invalidated Sulpicius' laws and banished twelve men, Sulpicus and Marius included.{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|p=55}} Sulla justified his actions by claiming that as consul he had a duty to free the state from dangerous demagogues.{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|p=55}} He also may have passed legislation in 88&nbsp;BC to change the Roman constitution by reducing the powers and legislative initiative of the [[plebeian tribune]]s; however, some scholars have suggested these reforms are retrojections of Sulla's later actions as [[Roman dictator|dictator]].{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|pp=56–57}} Sulla's reasons and putative reforms notwithstanding, his march on Rome was the subject of deep and broad revulsion at the elections.{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|p=58}}

One of Cinna's goals during his consulship was holding Sulla legally responsible for his march on Rome; he promised that if elected he would have Sulla prosecuted at the expiration of his term.{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|p=59}} Sulla did not support Cinna and instead put forward [[Publius Servilius Vatia Isauricus]], an ally who had recently celebrated a [[Roman triumph|triumph]]. The ''comitia'', still indignant over Sulla's march and treatment of Sulpicius and Marius,<ref>{{harvnb|Keaveney|2005|p=59|ps=. The people "vented their indigation [at Sulla's march on Rome] on the man responsible".}}</ref> rejected Sulla's candidate and elected Cinna with [[Gnaeus Octavius (consul 87 BC)|Gnaeus Octavius]] as his colleague instead. The two ''consules designati'' may have, at the time, been friends.{{sfn|Seager|1992|p=173}} Before the results were officially announced, Sulla realised they would be personally unfavourable; seeking not to interfere in the elections directly, he instead tried for a religious solution to protect his actions.{{sfnm|Keaveney|2005|1p=60|Seager|1992|2p=173}} Before he declared the winners, he first induced Cinna and Octavius to swear not to overturn Sulla's arrangements publicly. The consuls-designate did so because Sulla as presiding consul had the power to refuse announcement of the winners and invalidate the results.{{sfn|Keaveney|2005|p=61}} While Octavius seemed to take the oath seriously, Cinna did not.