Tacitus: Annals V & VI 0856687219, 9780856687211, 9780856687228

Citation preview

TACITUS Annals V & VI

Aris & Phillips Classical Texts

tacitus

Annals V & VI

Edited with an introduction, translation and notes by

Ronald Martin

Aris & Phillips is an imprint of Oxbow Books First published in the United Kingdom in 2001. Reprinted 2015 by OXBOW BOOKS 10 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford OX1 2EW and in the United States by OXBOW BOOKS 908 Darby Road, Havertown, PA 19083 © Ronald Martin 2001 Paperback Edition: ISBN 978-0-85668-722-8 A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher in writing. For a complete list of Aris & Phillips titles, please contact: United States of America United Kingdom Oxbow Books Oxbow Books Telephone (01865) 241249 Telephone (800) 791-9354 Fax (01865) 794449 Fax (610) 853-9146 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] www.oxbowbooks.com www.casemateacademic.com/oxbow Oxbow Books is part of the Casemate Group Printed and bound in Great Britain by Marston Book Services Ltd, Oxfordshire

Contents Preface References and Abbreviations Bibliography

INTRODUCTION 1. Roman Historical Writing before Tacitus 2. Tacitus: Life and Works 3. Structure of Annals 5 and 6 4. Sources 5. Language and Style 6. Text and Translation

vi VB

viii

1 7 18

22 26

28

LATIN TEXT AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION

31

COMMENTARY

97

Appendixes I. The 'financial crisis of A.D. 33 (6.16-17) 2. The obituary of Tiberius (6.51.3)

197 199

INDEXES

I. ' General 2. Latin words 3. Names Stemma of the families of Augustus and Tiberius

203 204 206 209

VI

Preface Tacitus is generally regarded as the greatest of Roman historians, and nowhere is that greatness more clearly demonstrated than in his portrait of the emperor Tiberius in Annals 1-6. During the last thirty years there have been English editions of each of the first four books, but Annals 5 and 6 have been neglected. That may be partly due to the fact that only the first five chapters of Book 5 survive, after which there is a major gap in Tacitus' narrative, from early in A.D. 29 till late in the autumn of A.D. 31. Yet the short fragment of Book 5 and the whole of Book 6 are full of incident and interest, and the commentary that follows seeks to provide readers with the information, both historical and linguistic, for a fuller understanding of Tacitus' skill and artistry in delineating the final years of the septuagenarian Tiberius. It is a pleasure to end this Preface by expressing my gratitude to a number of friends and colleagues who have helped 111e, in one way or another, over the four years during which I have been preparing this edition. Barbara Levick and Christopher Pelling have read and offered helpful COll1111ent on what I have written about Tacitus' obituary of Tiberius. Dominic Berry and Roland Mayer have generously helped in the scrutiny, respectively, of typescript and proofs, while my fanner colleague Noreen Humble has converted my less than impeccable manuscript into printable disk. It is almost a convention to thank the general editor of the series for his help and encouragement, but that does not adequately express my indebtedness to Malcolm Willcock, who scrutinised and commented in detail on an earlier draft of 111Y typescript, thereby enabling me to emend a number of errors and many infelicities of expression. But my greatest debt is to Tony Woodman, who has read and replied with unfailing kindness and alacrity to the numerous drafts that I have sent him over the years. Readers who are familiar with our collaboration in earlier editions of Annals 4 and 3 will know that Woodman and Martin do not always agree on their interpretation of Tacitus. In the present edition there is no overt indication of the numerous places where improvements emanate from Woodman's comments; but the faults that remain are mine alone. R.H. Martin

ABBREVIATIONS

vii

References and Abbreviations Tacitus' works are generally abbreviated as A. (Annals), fl. (Histories), Agr. (Agricola), G. tGe nnaniai and Dial. (Dialogusi. But where references unambiguously refer to passages of the Annals, A. is generally omitted; similarly the book number (5 or 6) is often omitted when the reference is unambiguous. References in the form '1.23.4n.' or '3.12.7n.' are to the commentaries of Goodyear on A. 1 and 2 (1972, 1981), of Woodman-Martin on A. 3 (1996) and of Martin-Woodman on A. 4 (1989, rev. repro 1999), as appropriate. Periodical abbreviations are generally as in L 'Annee philologique.

Abbreviated references to frequently quoted works are listed below.

AA ANR\V B-B

Syme, R. (1986). The Augustanaristocracy. Oxford Aufstieg lind Niedergang del" romischen Welt. Berlin-New York Blackman, D.R. and Betts, G.G. (1986). Concordantia Tacitea. Hildesheim-Zurich-New York COI]JIIS lnscriptionuni Latinarum (1863-) cu. Ehrenberg, V. and Jones, A.H.M. (1976). DOClII11ents illustrating the EJ reigns of Augustus and Tiberius. 2nd edn. (Repr.). Oxford Furneaux. H. (1896). The Annals of Tacitus. Vol. I. 2nd edn. Oxford F Goodyear, F.R.D. (1972, 1981). The Annals of Tacitlls. Vol. I: 1.1-54, G Vol. II: 1.55-2. Cambridge G-G Gerber, A. and Greef, A. (1962). Lexicon Taciteum. Repr. Hildesheim Heubncr, H. (1963-82). P. Cornelius Tacitus. Die Historien. Heidelberg K Koestermann, E. (1963-8). Cornelius Tacitus: Annalen. Heidelberg K-St. Kuhner, R. and Stegmann, C. (1962). Ausflihrliche Granunatik der lateinischen Sprache: Vol. 2 Satzlehre, Parts 1 and 2. Repr. Munich Martin, R.H. and Woodman. A.J. (1989). Tacitus. Annals Book IV. M-W Repr. 1999. Cambridge Woodcock, E.C. (1959). A nel-V Latin syntax. Repr. 1985. London NLS The Oxford Classical Dictional)' (1996). 3rd edn. Oxford oeD Oxford Latin Dictional)' (1968-82). Oxford OLD Prosopographia Imperii Romani (1933-). 2nd edn. Berlin PIR Res Gestae Diui August! IlG Syme, R. ( 1979-91). ROIIUIII papers. Vols. 1-7. Oxford RP Syme, R. (J 939). The ROJJ/an revolution. Oxford IlR SCpp Das Senatus consultuni de en. Pisone patre (1996). Edd. Eck, W., Caballos, A. and Fernandez, F. [= Vestigia 48]. Munich Syme, R. (1958). Tacitus. 2 vols, Oxford Syme Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (1900-). Leipzig TLL Syme, R. (1970). Tell. studies in. Tacitus. Oxford TST Luce, T.l. and Woodman, A.J. (edd.) (1993). Tacitus and the Tacitean TIT tradition. Princeton Woodman, A.I. and Martin R.H. (1996). The Annals of Tacitus Book W-M 3. Cambridge

viii

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The following bibliography is, for the most part, restricted to works that are named in the commentary. Extended bibliographies of Tacitus, inevitably published some time in arrears of the works they list, include that of W. Suerbaum in ANRW 2.33.2 (pp, 1032-1476), covering the period 1939-80, and the ongoing bibliographies in Classical world by H.W. Benario, the most recent in CW89 (1995), 91-162, which covers the years 1984-93. A very brief bibliography is.appended to the OeD entry Oil Tacitus, and a slightly longer one in the 1994 revised reprint of R.H. Martin's Tacitus. Adams, J.N. (1972). 'The language of the later books of Tacitus' Annals', CQ 22.350-73 - - (1973). 'The vocabulary of the speeches in Tacitus' historical works', BICS 20.124-44 - - (1987). 'The Latin sexual vocabulary. 2nd cdn. London Alfoldy, G. (1995). 'Bricht der Schweigsarne sein Schweigert? Eine Grabinschrift in Rom', Mitteilungen des deutschen iarcltaeologischen lnstituts. Roeniische Abteilung, 102.251-68 [summarised in Birley (1999), xxiii] Ash, R. (1999). 'An exemplary conflict; Tacitus' Parthian battle narrative (Annals 6.34-35')" Phoenix 53.114-35 Baal', M. (1990). Das Bild des Kaisers Tiberius be; Tacitus, Suetonund Cassius Dio. Stuttgart Barton, ,T.S. (1994a). Ancient astrology. London - - (1994b). Power and knowledge. Michigan BaUI11Un, R.A. (1974). Impietas ill priucipeni. Munich Birley, A.R. (1981). The Fasti of Roman Britain. Oxford - - (1999). Tacitus: Agricola and Ger111a1lY (trans.), Oxford Bowcrsock.G..W. (1993). 'Tacitus and the province of Asia', TTf3-10 Braund, D.C. (1984). Rome and tile friendly king. London Briscoe, J. (1973). A commentary 011 Livy books xxxi-xxxiii: Oxford Broek, R. van den,( 1971). The myth of the phoenix according to classical and early Christian traditions [= vol. 24 in Etudes preliminaires aux religions orientales dans l'enipire Romain], Leiden Brunt, P.A. ,(1983).:'Princeps and equites', iRS 73.42-75 - - (1990). Roman imperial themes. Oxford Chaumont, M.-L. (1976). 'L'Armenie entre Rome et l'Iran', ANR1V2.9.1.71-194 Cramer, F.H. (1954). Astrology ill R0I11{1I1Ia~v and politics. Philadelphia D'Arms, J.H. (1970). Romans 011 the Bay of Naples. Cambridge, Mass. - - (1981). Commerce and social standing ill ancient Rome. Cambridge, Mass. Dcmougin, S. (1988). L'ordre equestre sous les Julio-Claudiens. Rome - - (1992). Prosopograpliie des chevaliers romains julio-claudiens. Rome

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ix

Drinkwater, J.F. (1983). ROI1Ulll. Gaul. London and Canberra Duncan-Jones, R.P. (1982). The economy of the ROI1Ulll empire: quantitative studies. 2nd edn. Cambridge - - (1994). Money and government ill. the ROJ1Ulll. empire. Cambridge Earl, D.C. (1961). The political thought of Sallust. Cambridge - - (1967). The moral and political tradition of Rome. London Fehling, D. (1989). Herodotus and his 'sources'. Trans. J.G. Howie. Leeds Frederiksen, M.W. (1966). 'Caesar, Cicero and the problem of debt', lRS 56.128-41 Frat, J. (1955). 'Tacite est-ill'auteur du 'Dialogue des orateurs'?', REL 33.120-9 Funari, R. (1996). C. Sallusti Crispi HistoriarUI1 t fragmenta. 2 vols. Amsterdam Garnsey, P. (1970). Social status and legal privilege ill the Roman empire. Oxford Garnsey, P. and Saller, R. (1987). The R0J11an empire: eCOn0J11Y, society and culture. London Gill, C. (1983). 'The question of character-development: Plutarch and Tacitus', CQ 33.469-87 Ginsburg, J. (1981). Tradition. and theme ill the Annals of Tacitus. New York Gregory, A.P. (1994). "Powerful images': responses to portraits and the political uses of images in Rome', iRA 7.80-99 Grimal, P. (1969). Les jardins rontains. 2nd edn. Paris Hahn, E. (1933). Die Excurse ill dell Anna/ell des Tacitus. Borner-Leipzig Hardy, E.G. (1890). Plutarch's lives ofGa/ba and Otho. London Haussler, R. (1965). Tacitus und das historische Bewusstsein. Heidelberg 'Hennig, D. (1975). L. Aelius Seianus. Munich Hoffman Lewis, M.W. (1955). The official priests of R0111e under the JulioClaudians. Rome Howgego, C.J. (1992). 'The supply and use of money in the Roman world 200 B.C. to A.D. 300', iRS 82.1-31 Hubaux, J. and Leroy, M. (1939). Le my the du phenix dans les litteratures grecque et latine. Paris Hurley, D.W. (1993). All historical and historiographical commentary 011 Suetonius' life of Caligula. Atlanta, Georgia Jones, A.H.M. (1974). The Roman economy. Oxford Keitel, E. (1999). 'The non-appearance of the phoenix at Tacitus Annals 6.28', AlP 120.429-42 Kraus, C.S. and Woodman, A.J. (1997). Latin historians [= Greece and R0l11e New Surveys in the Classics 27]. Oxford Kuntz, F. (] 962). Die Sprache des Tacitus und die Tradition der lateinischen Historikersprache. Heidelberg Latte, K. (1960). Riimische Religionsgeschichte. Munich Levick, B.M. (1966). 'Drusus Caesar and the adoptions of A.D. 4',LatoIlIUs 25.22744 - - (1976). Tiberius the politician. Repr. 1999. London

x

BIBLIOGRAPHY

- - (1990). Claudius. London Lindsay, H. (1995). Suetonius: Tiberius. Bristol Classical Press, London Lloyd, A.B. (1975-88). Herodotus Book II. 3 vols. Leidcn Long, A.A. (1982). 'Astrology, arguments pro et contra', Science and speculation: studies in Hellenistic theory and practice (edd. J. Brunschwig, M.F. Burnyeat and M. Schofield) 165-92. Cambridge and Paris Luce, T.J. (1990). 'Tiberius and fame', ANRW 2.33.4.2922-6 - - (1993). 'Reading and response in the Dialogus', TTT 11-38 McGushin, P. (1992-4). Sallust: the Histories. 2 vols. Oxford Maltby, R. (1991). A lexicon ofancient Latin etymologies. Leeds Marincola, J. (1997). Authority and tradition in. ancient historiography. Cambridge Martin, R.H. (1981). Tacitlls. Repr. 1994. London - - - (1990) 'Structure and interpretation in the 'Annals' of Tacitus', ANRW 2.33.2.1500-81 Mellor, R. (1993). Tacitus. New York and London Millar, F. (1992). The emperor ill the Roman world. 2nd edn. London M0111111sen, T. (1887-8). Roniisches Staatsrecht. 3rd edn. Leipzig Nisbet, R.G.M. and Hubbard, M. (1970 and 1978). A commentary on Horace Odes Book I and Book II. Oxford Oakley, S.P. (1997, 1998)./1 commentary on Livy, Books VI-X: Vol. J: Introduction and Book VI, Vol. 2: Books VII-VIII. Oxford Ogilvie, R.M. and Richmond, LA. (1967). Tacitus, Agricola. Oxford O'Hara, J.J. (1996). True nantes: Vergil and the Alexandrian tradition of etymological wordplay. Ann Arbor, Michigan Oldfather, W.A. (1939). 'Tacitus Annals \'i.50.4 and 5: pulsus uenaruni and spiritus', CPh 34.146-7 Pelling, C.B.R. (1993). 'Tacitus and Gerrmnicus', TTT 59-85 - - (1997). 'Biographical history? Cassius Dio on the early Principate', Portraits (edd. M.J. Edwards and S. Swain) 117~44. Oxford Price, S.R.F. (1984). Rituals and power: the Roman imperial cult in Asia Minor. Cambridge Purcell, N. (1986). 'Livia and the womanhood of Rome', PCPS 32.78-105 Raepsaet-Charlier, M.-T. (1987). Prosopographie des femmes de l'ordre senatorial. Louvain Reynolds, J. (1982). Aphrodisias and Rome. London Rickman, G. (1980). The corn supply of ancient Rome. Oxford Rodewald, C. (1976). Money ill the age of Tiberius. Manchester Rogers, R.S. (1935). Criminal trials and criminal legislation under Tiberius. Middletown, Connecticut Rouveret, A. (1991). 'Tacite et les monuments', ANRW 2.33.4.3051-99 Rusch, A. (1941). 'phoinix', REXX.l.4l4-23 Seager, R. (1972). Tiberius. London

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Xl

Sealey, R. (1961). 'The political attachments ofL. Aelius Seianus', Phoenix 15.97114

Shatzmau.L (1974). 'Tacitean rUI1l0UrS', Lat0I111IS 33.549-78 Sherk, R.K. (1988). The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian [Translated documents of Greece and ROBle 6]. Cambridge Shotter, D.C.A. (1991). 'Tacitus' view of emperors and the principate', ANRW 2.33.5.3263-331

SOrbOI1l, G. (1935). Yariatio sernionis Tacitei aliaeque apud eundem quaestiones selectae. Uppsala Sullivan, R.D. (1980). 'The dynasty of Cappadocia', ANRW 2.7.2.1125-68 Talbert, RJ.A. (1984). The senate of imperial Rome. Princeton, New Jersey Theiler, W. (1945). 'Tacitus und die antike Schicksalslehre', Phyllobolia fiir Peter von der Miihll. Basel [repro in Forschungen ZUlU Neuplatonisnius. 1966. Berlin] Thomasson, B.E. (1984-90). Laterculi praesiduni. Vols. 1-3. Goteborg Townend, G.B. (1960). 'The sources of the Greek in Suetonius', Hermes 88.98-120 - - (1967). 'Suetonius and his influence', Latin biography (ed. T.A. Dorey) 79111. London Treggiari, S. (1991). Roman marriage. Oxford Tuplin, C.J. (1987). 'The false Drusus of A.D. 31 and the fall ofSejanus', LatOl1lUS 46.781-805 Vielberg, M. (1987). Pflichten, Werte, Ideale: eine Untersuchung Zit den Wertvorstellungen des Tacitus [Herl1leS Einzelschriften 52]. Stuttgart Walker, B. (1952). The Annals of Tacitus: a study in the writing of history.

Manchester Wallace-Hadrill, A. (1981). 'The emperor and his virtues', Historia 30.298-323 - - (1983). Suetonius. London Walsh, P.G. (1961). Livy: his historical aims and methods. Cambridge White, P. (1961). 'Maecenas' retirement', CPh 86.130-8 Wille, G. (1983). Del' Aufbau der Werke des Tacitus. Amsterdam Williams, C.A. (1995). 'Greek love at ROI1le', CQ 45.517-39 Woodman, A.J. (1977 and 1983). Vel/eius Paterculus: the Tiberian narrative (2.94J 31) and The Caesarian and Augustan narrative (2.41-93). Cambridge - - (1988). Rhetoric in classical historiography: four studies. London - - (1989). 'Tacitus' obituary of Tiberius', CQ 39.197-205 [= Tacitus reviewed 155-67]

- - (1993). 'Amateur dramatics at the court of Nero: Annals 15.48-74', TTT 104-28 [= Tacitus reviewed 190-217] - - (1998). Tacitus reviewed. Oxford

BIBLIOGRAPHY

xii EDITIONS

The short Jist appended below gives only those editions of the twentieth century that offer a Latin text and apparatus criticus of the Annals. The editions of Borzsak and Lenchantin de Gubernatis contain only Books 1-6. Brief mention also deserves to be made of the successive editions of C. Halm (Leipzig, 1850) and its revised fifth edition by G. Andresen (1913). Goodyear (I 14) rightly affirms that Halm's edition In arks the beginning of 'the modern period of editing Tacitus' and that it, more than any other, 'has formed the basis of a modern vulgate'. Borzsak, S. (1991/2). Stuttgart-Leipzig Fisher, C.D. (1906). Oxford Fuchs, H. (1946). Frauenfeld Heubner, H. (1983). Stuttgart Koestermann, E. (1952). Leipzig Lenchantin de Gubernatis, M. (1940). Rome Wuilleumier, P. (1975). Paris

Introduction 1. ROMAN HISTORICAL WRITING BEFORE TACITUS The readiness of the Romans to appeal to the authority of ancestral custom (11105 niaiorunis is indicative of a deep-seated conservatism; for the ancestors whose example was thus proclaimed were primarily the leading families from whose ranks magistrates, priests and military commanders were almost exclusively drawn. From an early date, perhaps as early as the fifth century B.C., information about such posts was included in the annually compiled tabula pontificum (see O'Cl) S.V. annales tnaxiniii, while the ritual of the upper-class funeral, with its display of the imagines (wax masks of dead members of the family who had held high office) and delivery of the funeral oration (oratio funebrisi, served to perpetuate the fame of the dead man's family, However, there was at that time no call for the composition of Roman history for a wider readership, and it was not until the end of the third century B.C. that the first history by a Roman was written. The author, Q. Fabius Pictor, was a senator and a member of the patrician nobility, who had been sent to Delphi to consult the oracle after the Romans had been defeated at Cannae by Hannibal in 216 B.C. His history, of which only fragments remain, was written in Greek, presumably because it was intended to influence a Greek-reading public, whether at Rome or :' n the Greek world or both. His work already shows features that are to become typical of most Roman historical writing: it was written by 'upper-class' Romans who were. or had been, actively engaged in politics; it had, overtly or covertly, a political purpose; and it emphasised Roman character as a major factor in Rome's success. Though a few further histories were written by Romans in Greek,' the future lay with R0111an history written in Latin. M. Porcius Cato (consul 195, censor 184) wrote a history of Rome in seven books. Its title, Origines, applies particularly to the first three books, which dealt with the foundations of Rome and other Italian cities; Book 4 began with the First Punic War (264-41), while the final Book included events down to the year of his death (149 B.C.). Though Cato's work, like that of ·all Roman history before Caesar and Sallust, survives only in fragments, these are sufficient to give us a fair picture both of his historical attitude and his style. Moreover, our judgment can be strengthened by reference to the numerous fragments (some of them of considerable length) of his speeches. Both as politician and writer Cato was a giant; and as a historian his influence on successors was The most important history in Greek (and the only one of which substantial portions survive) was written, not by a Roman, but by the Greek Polybius; he, however, had gained first-hand knowledge of Rome and her affairs as a political detainee in Rome through friendship with membersof the so-called ScipionicCircle.

2

INTRODUCTION

profound. Like Fabius Pictor before him, he had been engaged in politics at the highest level; but, unlike the aristocratic Fabius, Cato was of plebeian birth; and, seeing (or affecting to see) among the nobility the enervating effects of luxury and philhellenism, he was a staunch upholder of traditional Roman moral values. The role of laudator teniporis acti ('a praiser of timers) past') which he upheld was to become a COn11TIOn feature of Roman historians. From the fragments that survive of the historians who wrote in the hundred years after Cato's death it is possible to flesh out a dozen or so names and to discern the different trends that their writings represent. Most (though not all) were, or had been, politically active, and their writings reflected the political divide which, from the time of Tiberius Gracchus (tribune in 133 B.C.), becomes prominent under the respective banners of 'optimates' (supporters of senatorial dominance) and 'populares' (those who sought political advancement by supporting, and appealing to, the interests of the populus). The publication c. 120 B.C. of the annales niaxiniiby the pontifex niaximus P. Mucius Scaevola both gave an impetus to annalistic historiography and rendered obsolete the writing of ungarnished annalistic narrative; and this, in turn, gave encouragement to a more embellished style of historical writing. Such was the work of Q. Claudius Quadrigarius, whose history has an additional importance in that it was extensively drawn upon by Livy. Political polemic, besides appearing in histories, also found a home in biography and autobiography, as in C. Gracchus' biography of his brother Tiberius and in the autobiographies of M. Aemilius Scaurus (cos. 115 B.C.) and the Stoic P. Rutilius Rufus (cos. 105). In spite of the volume and diversity of historical writings during the century after Cato's death, Cicero could stil1 write in 55 B.C. (De oratore 2.52) that the work of earlier Roman historians was nothing but 'a compilation of yearly records' tannatiuni confectio). Cicero's remarks are, perhaps, a trifle disingenuous, as is shown by a letter he wrote in the same year to his friend L. Lucceius tAd fam. 5.12), asking him to write an account of Cicero's own role during the Catilinarian conspiracy of 63 B.C., and inviting Lucceius to enhance the part that Cicero had played even beyond the strict bounds of truth and the canons of history (ibid. para. 3). Lucceius seems not to have acceded to Cicero's request. The following decade saw publication of the first two Latin historical works to have survived intact: Julius Caesar's Gallic War and Civil War. Though Caesar himself described both works as conunentarii (approximately 'notebooks' or '[rough] drafts'), contemporaries, Cicero among them, knew that they could not be improved on. In two important respects they fall squarely within the Roman historical tradition: they are written by a man who was in the forefront of the political life of his time; secondly, though they rank as an unsurpassed military narrative, they also See O'Cl) s.v. For a sceptical view on the evidence for the tradition see Kraus-Woodman (1997) 3-4.

INTRODUCTION

3

have a fundamental political purpose - to justify his conduct against his political enemies. In a third area, that of style, Caesar's achievement is equally striking; but in this he neither followed his predecessors nor was followed by others. In his choice of vocabulary he followed the advice he had himself given in his work De analogia (quoted in GeIIius J.1 0.4), to avoid the unusual word (Tnauditum atque insolens uerbum'). In so doing he was going contrary to the norm of Roman historiography, according to which the writer's language was to be heightened by the admission of archaisms, poeticisms (the two sometimes indistinguishable) and neologisms. In sentence structure too Caesar's practice - though it is far from being as uniform as it is sometimes thought to be - has a lucidity and simplicity quite opposed to the rhetorical embellishment that Cicero had advocated. Within a few years of the deaths of Caesar and Cicero (44 and 43 B.C. respectively) C. SalIustius Crispus (SaIIust) had chosen for his first historical work the subject that Cicero had vainly sought to persuade Lucceius to write - an account of the Catilinarian conspiracy. SaIIust had had a chequered political career. He had in turn become a member of the senate and been expeIIed from it. In the civil war he had joined Caesar's side, was restored to the senate, and became governor of Africa in 46. After Caesar's death, with the avenue to further political advancement blocked, he turned to the writing of history. His Catiline' is a work of great merit and almost equal faults - of which an indifference to chronology is perhaps the most glaring. Neither his treatment of the subject nor the sty Ie in which he wrote would have won the recently dead Cicero's approval. Though he does not minimise the part Cicero played in unmasking Catiline's conspiratorial intentions, neither does he embellish Cicero's actions; and though he refers in warm, but not effusive terms to Cicero's first Catilinarian oration, he entirely ignores the speech that Cicero gave to the senate on December 5th (the Fourth Catilinarian), when the fate of the conspirators was decided. From this crucial debate he gives - in his own versions4 only the opposing speeches of Caesar and Cato. Their significance is underlined in the next chapter (53) when Sallust declares that, even in his day, when the state was corrupted by sloth and extravagance, there were two men of immense merit (llirtus),5 but of different characters (moribusi. The importance of the concept of uirtus for Sallust's view of Rome's history has already been made abundantly clear in the long introduction to the work (Cat. 1-13). Man, he says, is superior to other animals by virtue of his intelligence (animus), and thereby, though his life is short, he can seek lasting fame (gloria) by employing his uirtus to do the state some

4 5

The original title was perhaps De coniuratione Catilinae ('On the conspiracy of CatBine'). It is to be remembered that this is the normal practice of Greek and Roman historians; verbatim quotations never extend beyond a few lines (see Tac. A. 6.6.1 and note). uirt us in Sallust (as also in Tacitus) mostly signifies, not 'ethical goodness', but something like 'effective action according to traditional Roman rules of conduct'. It is, in fact, close to what Machiavelli means by 'virtu'.

4

INTRODUCTION

service (3.1. 'bene facere rei publicae'); and if one is precluded from a political career - an oblique reference to Sallust's own position - writing about it also is worthwhile; that is the path that Sallust has chosen. Though the set of values that clusters around the concept of uirtus does not, of course, originate with Sallust," its systematic use as an underlying explanation for the increasing political discord in Rome, especially from the time of the Gracchi onwards, is one that Sallust made particularly his own. So in his next work, the Jugurtha (De bello lugurthinos, although the military narrative necessarily plays substantially the greatest part in the whole, Sallust was also attracted to the subject because 'then for the first time opposition was made to the arrogance of the nobility' (Jug. 5.1); and the theme that dominated the Preface to the Catiline is re-stated, though more briefly, at the beginning of the Jugurtha: man's intelligence (animus) is pre-eminent, and it is by its employment that he should seek to attain gloria? Only fragments survive of Sallust's final work, the Histories. Annalistic in treatment, it began in 78 B.C. and the last datable fragment belongs to 67 B.C. The overriding theme of moral deterioration, already exemplified in the Catiline and Jugurtha, is shown by the fragments (some of them substantial) to have been in the forefront of Sallust's treatment of the post-Sullan period," If the intellectual concepts on which Sallust constructed the 'framework of his writings are largely conventional, his style is strikingly original. That was something that drew repeated comment from fellow Romans. Quintilian, writing over a century later, gave a rapid survey of the Greek and Latin authors whom the budding orator is recommended to study. In so doing he contrasts Sallust and Livy (for whom see next paragraph). Of Sallust he says that he can be compared with . Thucydides, and speaks of 'immortalern Sallustii uelocitatem' - earlier he had written of 'ilia Sallustiana breuitas' and his 'abruptum sermonis genus' (4.2.45; cf. 10.1.32 and Sen. Ep. 114.17). Since Sallust is the single most important influence on Tacitus' style, it is important to be aware of the main features of Sallust's style. Apart from brevity a notable feature of his sentence structure (a feature still more notable in Tacitus) is his use of uariatio, a deliberate variation in syntax between two (or more) words or phrases or clauses that are logically parallel, and which in Cicero would have been expressed by using the same syntax in each case (for Tacitean examples see Index s.v. uariatioi. In vocabulary Sallust follows Cato in his use of archaisms - indeed his detractors alleged that he employed an assistant to cull

6

8

See, in particular, Earl (1961) and (1967). There is perhaps an additional note of pessimism in the Jugurtlia. Though uirtus is the true path to lasting fame, political advancement is now increasingly sought by quicker, and more dubious, methods, The decadence of pagan Rome was a theme that was particularly attractive to Christian writers such as S1. Augustine, from whose City of God (De ciuitate Dei) many of the fragments derivee

INTRODUCTION

5

examples from Cato for him. For Tacitus too, archaisms are one ingredient in his use of what may best be called 'choice' or 'colourful' language." At 10.1.32 and 101 Quintilian juxtaposes and contrasts Sallust and Livy; in contrast with Sallust's breuitas and uelocitas (see above) Livy is typified by a lactea ubertas (literally 'a milky richness'); his narrative is said to be pleasing and brilliantly lucid, and the inserted speeches to be eloquent and well adapted both to circumstances and character. Quintilian's comments refer mostly to style; but the contrast between Sallust and Livy is much wider. Perhaps most important of all, Livy - unlike Sallust - had no direct experience of politics. Moreover, whereas Sallust was writing in the troubled times that immediately followed the assassination of Julius Caesar, when Livy began to write, civil war had been ended by the defeat of Antony and Cleopatra at Actium in 31 B.C., and Rome was just beginning to enjoy the peace of the Augustan scttlcment.J'' One further significant difference resides in the scope of the material that the two historians chose for their works. In each of his three historical works Sallust had chosen to write of events in, or close to, his own life-time. Livy's choice was quite different: a mammoth work of 142 books (perhaps equivalent to about twenty-five present-day volumes), carrying the history of Rome from its beginning to the death of Drusus (Augustus' step-son) in 9 B.C.II The magnitude of the task alone would have severely constrained Livy's method of working. For the most part he contented himself with working from existing literary sources, both Greek and Latin, but selecting and shaping the material to give the resultant narrative an ethos and style that are his own. So incidents are organized and speeches inserted to emphasise those moral qualities 12such as uirtus, fides, constantia, disciplina, pudor - to which Romans liked to ascribe their political superiority over other nations. At the beginning of the memorable Preface with which Livy introduces his great work he states that each new historian hopes to outdo his predecessors either by greater accuracy or by superior style. Few readers will doubt that it is in the second of those spheres that Livy's excellence lies. Quintilian concurs; for, though he warns the budding orator to avoid 'illa Sallustiana breuitas et abruptum sermonis genus' (4.2.45), that cautionary advice relates to style only, and at 2.5.19 he says 'hie (sc. Sallust) historiae maior est auctor'.':' Livy's style might influence later historians, but there is little evidence that he had a significant influence on the thought of senatorial or political historians.

9 10

II 12

13

See Goodyear I 334-5 (Appendix 2) and Index s.v. archaisms. 1.19.3 gives a date between 27 and 25 B.C. for publication of that passage; but actual composition of the Book may be earlier - see Woodman (1988) 134-5. Of the total 142 books thirty-five (1-10 and 21-45) survive, covering the years 753-293 and 219-167 B.C. See Walsh (1961) passim, esp. 66. Cf. Martial 14.191 'primus Rornana Crispus [i.e, Sallust] in historia'.

6

INTRODUCTION

Between Livy and Tacitus there is only one writer of Roman history of whom we have substantial remains: Velleius Paterculus. His work, in two books, deals summarily with Rome's earlier history (much of his account of this period is lost) but becomes expansive when he comes to his own times. During the reign of Augustus he had served in Germany and Illyricum under Tiberius, for whom his writing shows an unswerving admiration. The work ends in A.D. 29 with the death of Livia (= Tac. A. 5.1).14 Though Velleius had reached the praetorship in A.D. 15, he seems never to have become consul, and political insight - to judge from his writing - was not one of his attributes. His style is most notable for its over-blown attempts to achieve the grand style - attempts more remarkable than successful. Though Tacitus appears to have read hiITI, neither as would-be stylist nor as political commentator is VeIleius likely to have held any interest for Tacitus. We can give names, but little more, to a small number of historians during the first century A.D. Two writers, Cluvius Rufus (cos. A.D. 40) and Fabius Rusticus, need not concern us here, since there is no hint that they covered the reign of Tiberius. Similarly the elder Pliny is unlikely to have been a major source for Tiberius, since his history in 31 books was entitled 'a fine Aufidi Bassi' ('from the end of Aufidius Bassus') whose own work seems to have taken the narrative to some point in the reign of Claudius. Pliny is quoted by Tacitus at A. 1.69.2 for an additional detail about Agrippina, Germanicus' wife, but the description of him as 'Gennanicorum bellorum scriptor' clearly alludes to his separate work on the German Wars (cf. Plin. Ep. 3.5.4). Two further historians are of additional interest in that they each make important appearances in the Annals. Crernutius Cordus was an outspoken republican and is accorded a long speech in oratio recta prior to his suicide when faced with condemnation as a victim of Sejanus (A. 4.34-5 15) . Tacitus clearly admired the Ulan, but the date of his death (A.D. 25) excludes him as a possible source for the whole of Tiberius' reign. No such exclusion applies to M. Servilius Nonianus (cos. 35), who is the recipient of a laudatory obituary in A. 14.19. As an ex-consul he would know something of the workings of Roman politics at first hand; and though his style, according to Quintilian (10.1.102), lacked the concision required of a historian and would scarcely have appealed to Tacitus, his personal integrity and his renown as a historian ('tradendis rebus Romanis celebris' [A. 14.19]) could have recommended him to Tacitus." But that is as far as we can go; nowhere in the Annals as extant is there anything to indicate that he was in fact a major source for Tacitus. 14

15 16

With Sejanus now nearing the height of his power, any overt criticism of him was out of the question; whether it is possible to detect some covert criticism - the view of A.J. Woodman - is arguable. He is 'the only historian in the whole of classical historiography to play so active a role or deliver a speech' (M-W ]77). Can he be the consular who added a detail in his annates frorn autopsy at a dinner-party attended by Tiberius (Suet. Tib. 61.6)? That must remain speculation.

INTRODUCTION

7

One other name requires comment: Aufidius Bassus. Author of a history of 'The German War' (dates unspecified), his more general history clearly included the reign of Tiberius, since the elder Pliny began his own history where Aufidius had ended (possibly c. A.D. 50). There is no evidence that he was a senator, and an indifference to politics would have been in keeping with his allegiance to Epicureanism. However, the fact that Pliny chose to style his own work as a continuation of Aufidius' history may reasonably suggest a work of comparable length and seriousness. He is linked with Servilius Nonianus as a historian in Quintilian (10.1.102-3) and as an example of eloquence in Tacitus' Dialogus (23.2). Beyond that there is nothing to help us to decide whether he was a major source for the Tiberian books of the Annals. Though there is so little evidence about the character or content of any of the works of those who may have written of the reign of Tiberius, it may nevertheless be profitable to consider how Tacitus seems to have handled such sources as were available to him. The implications of that question are far-reaching and have led scholars to suggest diametrically opposed answers. The problem, which is one of the 1110St difficult and contentious of modern Tacitean scholarship, will be considered below in the Section on Sources (pp. 22-6). 2. TACITUS: LIFE AND WORKS Neither the exact date nor place of birth of Cornelius Tacitus'? is certainly known, but from the fact that he was praetor in A.D. 88 (A. 11.11.1) it can be inferred that he was born c. A.D. 56. A letter of the younger Pliny (9.23.2-3) makes it likely that he was born either in Transalpine Gaul (Gallia Narbonensisi or in Cisalpine Gaul (i.e. Italy north of the Po); a Cornelius Tacitus, attested by the elder Pliny (NH 7.76) as a R0111an knight and procurator of Gallia Belgica, may well have been the historian's father. It is clear that the family was of some standing in its local community and had influential connections at Rome, since the young Tacitus had already come to Rome early in the reign of Vespasian (69-79) to complete his education and pursue a political career there.l'' Though precise dates continue to be lacking until the year of his praetorship, the various steps by which an ambitious young man was to climb the political ladder to the summit of a consulship were carefully regulated, as were the minimum ages at which the various posts might be held. In the opening chapter of the Histories (H. 1.1.3) Tacitus says of himself, 'I would not deny that my political standing (dignitasi

I7

18

Nor is it certain whether his praenotnen (first name) was Publius (P.) or Gaius (C.); Sidonius Apollinaris in the fifth century twice calls him Gaius (C.), but the ninthcentury Medicean manuscript of the Annals gives him the praenomen P. (= Publius). That seems to be attested by the dramatic date of the Dialogus as A.D. 74/5 (Dial. 17.3) and the presence there of the author (certainly Tacitus, in my view) as a young man,

8

INTRODUCTION

was begun by Vespasian, increased by Titus, and further advanced by Domitian'. From Vespasian Tacitus will have received the right to wear the latus clauus (a broad purple stripe, attached to the tunic), a pre-requisite for eligibility to enter on the sequence of offices that comprised the senatorial career.'? The wearer of the latus clauus would then, at about the age of twenty, seek election to one of the four posts that comprised the vigintivirate (Board of Twenty). A recent interpretation of an inscription found in ROBle over a hundred years ag0 20 gives additional information about Tacitus' early career. Though only the letters CITO remain of the name in the fragmentary inscription, internal evidence indicates that it is the funeral inscription of a distinguished senator and datable to the reign of Hadrian or Antoninus Pius; the overwhelming likelihood is that the name should be restored as TACITO and that it refers to the historian Tacitus. The inscription further states that the person it refers to had been one of the Board of Ten in charge of judging lawsuits (decemuiri stlitibus iudicandisi, one of the four posts within the vigintivirate, then 'quaestor of Augustus', and then tribune of the plebs. Whereas the posts of uigiutiuir and tributius plebis were routine appointments, the post of quaestor of Augustus was exceptional, since of the twenty quaestors elected annually two at 1110st were personally chosen by the Princeps to represent him in the senate, when he "vas not there in person. Since the quaestorship was normally held at the age of 24, Tacitus would have held that office in 80 or 81, during the short reign of Titus (798 I), and it is probably to the prestigious position as quaestor August! that Tacitus refers, when he says that his 'standing was increased by Titus'. The same passage (A. 11.11.1) from which we learn that Tacitus was praetor in 88 also tells us that he was by then a member of one of the four major priestly colleges, that of the quindeciniuiri sacris faciundis ('The Board of Fifteen in charge of sacrifices'). Election to that college lay in the gift of the Princeps, and it is probably to this honour that Tacitus refers when he says that his dignitas was further advanced by Domitian.i' Whereas 1110St senators could expect to proceed as far as the praetorship, thereafter competition for the consulship became keen, since, even with the addition of a number of suffect consulships, an annual total of about six vacancies meant that barely a third of each year's intake of praetors could expect to reach the consulship. There were, however, several important posts open to ex-praetors, including 24 of legionary commander (legatus legionisv, normally held for two or three years, and eight of praetorian legate (legatus pro praetore), one each as assistant to the eight

19

20 21

Sons of senators had an automatic right to the latus clauus, others received it as a gift of the Princeps, doubtless supported by the recommendation of influential senators. The inscription is Cll. vi. 1574; the new interpretation is that of Alfoldy (1995). Since there were eighteen annually elected praetors at this time, election to that office was not an exceptional promotion, and would scarcely have been acknowledged as such by Tacitus at the hands of the hated Domitian.

INTRODUCTION

9

proconsuls of senatorial provinces.F In the case of Tacitus we know that he and his wife were absent from Rome for a continuous period of at least four years - a period that included Agricola's death on 23 August A.D. 93 (Agr. 45.5 for the four-year absence, 44.1 for Agricola's death). The reason for that unbroken absence. is unattested, but is most simply explained by a three-year term in command of a legion (province unknown), followed by a proconsulship of a minor province.P Much of the detail (including the chronology) of the second half of Domitian's reign is obscure, but it is certain that after the unsuccessful revolt of Antonius Saturninus, governor of Upper Germany, in January A.D. 89 Domitian became increasingly suspicious of army commanders, senators and members of his own family; even allowing for exaggeration in the accounts that became dominant after his assassination there is enough evidence to justify regarding those years as constituting a reign of terror. However, until at least A.D. 93 Tacitus was in relative safety away from Rome, and in the period between his return to Rome and the death of Domitian in September 96 it is likely that Tacitus followed that middle path between servility and fruitless opposition that he commended in Agricola's conduct at Agr. 42.4. But one point requires comment, When Dornitian was murdered, it is certain that the consules ordinarii (who would enter office on 1 January 97) had already been chosen - with (of course) Dornitian's consent, if not active recommendation. Tacitus was to become suffect consul later in that year, and it is at least possible that he and the other suffect consuls for 97 had also been approved by Domitian before his death. If that was the case, though, it need not necessarily follow that Tacitus was at that time in any way a supporter of Domitian's more extreme measures; rather, it demonstrates - as does the career of Tacitus' contemporary, the younger Pliny - that much of Rome's administrative machinery could, subject to arbitrary interventions by the Princeps, function normally even under a tyrannical regime. By the time that Tacitus entered on his consulship Domitian was dead and had been succeeded by the elderly Cocceius Nerva. As consul Tacitus was called on to deliver the funeral oration in honour of the respected and venerable L. Verginius Rufus, who at the age of 83 had entered on his third consulship at the beginning of that year. We next hear of Tacitus two years later when he joined the Younger Pliny in the successful prosecution of Marius Priscus for his conduct as proconsul of Africa in 97/8. Though Pliny's Letters during the next few years contain a number of references to Tacitus' continuing renown as an orator, and though one further 22

2)

There were also a few posts of comparable standing in Rome and Italy, including Treasury Prefects (three praefecti aerarii niilitaris and two praefecti aerarii Saturniy; for details see Birley (1981) 16ff. A more speculative alternative is suggested by Bowersock (1993) 9: 'a year in Achaea and perhaps two in Asia [sc. as legatus pro praetore]', with the quadriennium of Agr. 45.5 rounded out by 'as Syme suggests, some kind of minor proconsulate or perhaps, like Quadratus, a legateship in Cappadocia'.

10

INTRODUCTION

public post would fall to Tacitus when, in 112-13, seniority brought him the proconsulship of Asia,24 from the time of his consulship it is as a writer and historian that Tacitus claims attention. During A.D. 98 Tacitus published two short monographs, the Agricola (31 pages in the Oxford Text) and the Germania (25 pages). Each work is important in its own right, but the Agricola has an additional interest for British readers, because it is a biography of the longest-serving governor of Roman Britain, while the Gerniania, of particular interest to Germanists, has - relative to its size - generated more comment and secondary literature than any work in European literature other than the Gospels. At the beginning of the Agricola (3.2) Tacitus speaks of the difficulty of recovering one's voice after fifteen years of imposed silence. Those fifteen years refer to the reign of Domitian (81-96), who by his hostility to the senatorial class had rendered hazardous the attainment of excellence in the fields of politics and warfare. Only after Domitian's assassination was it open to Tacitus to publish the biography of his father-in-law. Agricola's chief claim to fame was his extended governorship of Britain from 77-83/4,25 and the core of the biography is the account of the seven years' campaigns undertaken by Agricola during his governorship. But that account is set within a contrasting framework in which the pervasive atmosphere of fear at Rome under Dornitian is depicted with a mastery of language that foreshadows the handling of the relationship between emperor and subjects in Tacitus' later historical works. Chapters 10-12 of the Agricola had given a brief outline of the geography and ethnography of Britain. The Germania, published in the same year, is a much more ambitious ethnographical survey of a much larger and more formidable people. Paradoxically, the work was published at a time when the political settlement consequent on the German campaigns of Domitian had, for the first time in a hundred years, removed the German threat along the Rhine frontier. In fact, with the exception of an excursus in ch. 37, the Ge rniania has very little historical content, but consists of a general survey, clearly divided into two halves: the first, as far as ch. 27, deals with the customs and institutions of the Germans as a whole, while the rest of the work (chs. 28-46) gives a description of individual tribes in a survey that steadily moves away from the Rhine and ends in the realm of the fabulous (46.4 'cetera iam fabulosa'). There are indications in the Gertnania that some of its information refers to a situation that ante-dated the date of publication by a generation or more. Such information could well have CODle from the

24 2:;

At this period fifteen years was roughly the normal interval between consulship and the proconsulship of Asia. Ogilvie-Richmond (1967) 317-20 argue for A.D. 78 as the starting date for Agricola's term of office; Birley (1999) and Raepsaet-Charlier (ANRW 2.33.3. 1807-59) produce reasons that make A.D. 77 the likelier date.

INTRODUCTION

11

indefatigable encyclopedist, the Elder Pliny, who had served for many years with the armies of the Rhine and written a detailed account of 'The Wars in Germany' ('Bella Gennaniae') in twenty books (Plin. Ep. 3.5). But what is most clearly Tacitean in the Gerntania - and what may well have particularly interested his contemporaries, as it does readers today - is the comparison, both explicit and implicit, between Germans and contemporary Roman society; that comparison, particularly in the sphere of private life and morality, is not always to the advantage of the Romans. The third of Tacitus' opera minora ('Lesser Works') is the Dialogus de orato rib us ('A dialogue about orators'), a discussion on the causes for the contemporary decline in eloquence. The discussion purports to take place in the house of Curiatius Maternus, formerly a successful orator, but now making a name for himself as a poet. The speakers are historical personages, but the discussion among them is, of course, - as it is in Cicero's de Oratore, on which the Dialogus is clearly modelled - Tacitus' own invention. The neo-Ciceronianism of the style of the Dialogus, with its wealth of balanced phrases, is quite unlike the narrative and descriptive style of Tacitus' historical works and has given rise to suggestions that the work is not by Tacitus.j" However, most scholars today accept that the work is by Tacitus and reflects the political judgment of his mature years. The underlying political nature of the dialogue becomes explicit in the final speech of Maternus, when he affirms that the decline in oratory is the result of political changes: great eloquence, he argues, is 'the nursling of licence ... which does not arise in well ordered communities' (40.2). That statement directly contradicts the view that Cicero had once expressed: 'eloquence is ... the nursling of a well ordered state' (Brut. 45). But one should not assume that Maternus' views are those of Tacitus himself - as in the de Oratore the views of Crassus are clearly those of Cicero. Maternus' unqualified praise for the Rome of his own day, in which decisions are taken by a single person of extreme wisdom (41.4 'sapientissimus et unus'), is in marked contrast with Tacitus' own ideal of a society in which, though the rule of one man was demanded by the need for peace (cf. H. 1.1.1), there was also to be room for political independence, especially senatorial independence. Indeed, beneath the surface of the urbane discussion of the dialogue there is a pervasive ambivalence. No single speaker has the answer to the problem posed or represents Tacitus' opinions, but each contributes something of importance and it is left to readers to draw their own conclusions. That is a procedure typical of Tacitus in his historical works.

26

Such was the opinion of the great sixteenth-century Tacitean scholar, Justus Lipsius. The questions of authorship are succinctly dealt with by Syme, 'Appendix 28: the Dating of the Dialogus', pp. 670-3. See also Frot (1955) 120-9. A likely cross-reference between 'in nernora et lucos' at Dial. 9.6 and 'inter nemora et lucos' in a letter of Pliny to Tacitus (9.10.2) supports, but does not quite prove, Tacitus' authorship.

12

INTRODUCTION

The Dialogus was addressed to L. Fabius Justus, suffect consul in A.D. 102, who, three years later, took up the consular command of Lower Moesia for three years before moving to the governorship of Syria. That suggests a likely date for the work's publication: either in the year of Fabius Justus' consulship or, at least, during the next two or three years, before he left Rome to take up major military commands. Such a date - between 102 and 105 - fits both Tacitus' own activity, between the Ag ricola and the first of his two major historical works (the Histories), and the early years of Trajan's reign, when the mood of initial optimism was already tempered in the mind of a seasoned politician by an awareness that there was potentially a darker side to the powers that, in the interests of peace, were conferred on one 111an, the Princeps. In a letter datable to c. 106 Pliny sent to Tacitus, at the latter's request, a detailed account of the death of his uncle, Pliny the Elder, in the eruption of Vesuvius in August A.D. 79, so that it might be included in the historical work on which Tacitus was then engaged. That must be the work we know as the Histories'! - not the-work originally projected in Agr. 3.3, which was 'to begin with the reign of Domitian, but a history from the events succeeding the death of Nero in June 68 to the death of Domitian in September 96. When complete the Histories comprised twelve or fourteen books (for the number see p. 15 on Annals below), but only the first four and a quarter books survive, and they carry the narrative only to A.D. 70. The following twenty-six years were then contained in slightly less than a further eight or ten books, roughly the same proportion as the later Annals (sixteen or eighteen books covering fifty-four years). The space that Tacitus allotted to the initial period of over just a year need cause no surprise, since it covered one of the 1110st momentous periods in Rome's recent history, with the suicide or murder in rapid succession of four emperors (Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius). The opening words of the Histories (The start of my work will be the consulships of Servius Galba and Titus Vinius' [= A.D. 69]) and, almost three and a half books later, the first words of 4.38 ('Meanwhile, though absent, Vespasian and Titus entered on the consulship' [= A.D. 70]) indicate that the work's structure will be annalistic. But the nature of the events of the surviving portions, and the extended treatment given to them, precludes us from seeing either how Tacitus developed that constant interchange between events at Rome and abroad, which is a fundamental feature of Roman annalistic historiography, or the political thrust of senatorial business and the senate's relationship with the Princeps. Something of the latter theme can be seen in 4.38-43 (esp. the meeting of the senate on 1 January A.D. 70 in chs, 39-43), but, in general, senatorial politics playa very small part in the extant books of the Histories compared with the attention devoted to them in the Annals. The loss of the later books of the Histories is all the more regrettable in that they would be dealing with events of which Tacitus himself had personal 27

For the title see section on Text, p. 29.

INTRODUCTION

13

knowledge. But what survives marks him out as a historian of the first magnitude: structural organization, vivid description and a brilliant style are all exemplified in ample measure, Those qualities may be illustrated by the first half (chs. 1-49) of Histories 1. An initial chapter contrasts historians of the Republic - eloquent and outspoken - with those of the Empire - ill-informed and swayed by flattery or prejudice; nevertheless Tacitus professes his own integrity of judgment, eschewing partisanship and hatred alike. Next (chs. 2-3) the subject-matter of the Histories is stated in general terms and a clipped style: 'four emperors destroyed by the sword, three civil wars, more foreign ones, and often a mixture of the two'. The prevailing tone of the period is set as one of unmitigated gloom, with disasters, crimes and outrages against the moral order.28 A few examples of individual heroism and probity do little to relieve the general darkness; prodigies and natural disasters show that 'the gods are indifferent to our well-being, but not to our punishment' (1.3.2). Then, before the main narrative begins (in the last sentence of ch. 11), Tacitus gives a survey of the state of the city of Rome, the temper of the armies, and the attitude of the provinces; he does so in order that the reader may 'understand not only events and their outcome (which are generally a matter of chance) but also their underlying causes' (4.1 ).29 When the narrative finally gets under way at ch. 12, it moves forward with speed and unbroken brilliance, as it describes the crowded first fifteen days of A.D. 69, which saw Galba murdered, Otho installed as his successor at Rome, and Vitellius proclaimed as rival emperor by the legions of Germany. The narrative rushes on without interruption till ch. 49, where Tacitus pronounces his obituary on Galba, ending with its memorable and epigrammatic verdict on the man: 'universally judged capable of ruling - had he not ruled' ('omnium consensu capax imperii, nisi imperasset'). Even that brief summary can give some indication of the character of Tacitus' writing. Above all, no one can fail to be aware of his ability to convey the dramatic impact of events in an inimitable, butvaried, style. There is, however, one point of importance that will not be self-evident to the reader. Suetonius (in his Lives of the Caesars) and Plutarch (in separate lives of Galba and Otho) both wrote accounts of events of this momentous year; their accounts show many close - sometimes extended - similarities-" to Tacitus' account, for which the explanation is clearly that 28 29

30

See Martin (1989) 68-9, where these chapters are summarised at somewhat greater length. By 'underlying causes' he does not mean the scientific analysis of the modern historian, but, rather, an analysis of the moods and passions of significant individuals and groups. The similarities are particularly close in the death scenes of Galba, Otho and (for Tacitus and Suetonius only) Vitellius; see now D.S. Levene 'Pity, fear and the historical audience: Tacitus on the fall of Vitellius', The passions in R0111QIl thought and literature (ed. S.M. Braund & C. Gill, 1997) 128-49. For the resemblances between Tacitus and Plutarch the parallels listed in Hardy (1890) are still useful.

14

INTRODUCTION

all three writers used the same earlier source. From this a disturbing conclusion might seem to follow, viz. that Tacitus is doing no more than transcribing, and transmuting into his own individual style, the work of a literary predecessor. The implications of that possibility must not be minimised; but neither should they be held to prove that this is Tacitus' consistent method of composition. The introductory chapters of Histories 1 (1-12) are unmistakably Tacitus' own both in structure and language, and it is unlikely that, after the death of Vitellius at the end of Book 3, Tacitus could construct the narrative of the succeeding quarter of a century on the basis of a single source. The date at which the Histories were published is unknown, but in view of the references in Pliny's Letters a date c. 110 seems probable. Whether Tacitus had already embarked on his last and greatest work, the Annals, before he became proconsul of Asia in 112-3 is unknown, but internal evidence seems to indicate that Books 2 and 4 were written, respectively, in 114 and 115. 31 In his Preface to the Histories Tacitus had declared that, when he had completed that work, his intention was to proceed to recording the happier times under Nerva and Trajan (H. 1.1.4). In the event that plan was discarded and he chose instead to go back in time to write the history of the Julio-Claudian emperors. That theme had the attraction that it enabled him to investigate the circumstances under which the transition was made from Republic to Principate. That might have suggested the career of Octavian (Augustus) as its starting point. Tacitus chose differently: a few (but significant) remarks on Augustus, including the final stages ('pauea ... et extrema' [A. 1.1.3]), when his plans for the dynastic succession had been ruined by a series of deaths within the imperial family, until at the end only his stepson Tiberius remained as a realistic choice.P Effectively, then, it was with Tiberius' accession that the Annals would begin, and the work would be the history of 'Tiberi us and Gaius, and of Claudius and Nero' (A. 1.1.2). The narrative of Tiberius' reign begins at 1.6.1 - with a bang: 'The first deed33 of the new reign was the murder of Postumus Agrippa.' At the outset a sombre tone has been set for the ensuing narrative.

31

32

33

See M-W on 4.5.2 (footnote p. 103). Bowersock (1993) suggests a date 'about 109' for the completion of the Histories, and for the Annals argues against Syme's view of a substantially Hadrianic date, suggesting instead that the Annals did not occupy Tacitus 'much beyond the death of Trajan [in 117], if at all'. His sole surviving grandson, Agrippa PoStUlTIUS, had been disinherited and exiled to the island of Planasia in A.D. 6/7. For 'deed' Tacitus uses [acinus, which can mean, neutrally, 'deed' or, pejoratively, 'evil deed'. The ambiguity of the word is well suited to the ambiguity which attaches to the portrait of Tiberius that Tacitus proceeds to depict.

INTRODUCTION

15

It is not known how many Books the Annals comprised, when complete - or indeed whether Tacitus lived to complete the work which, as extant, breaks off in the middle of Book 16 in A.D. 66, two years before Nero's suicidc.F In the Books that survive there are two substantial gaps, amounting to the equivalent of almost six Books: (i) all of Book 5 (except its beginning) and a small portion of the beginning of Book 6; (ii) the whole of Books 7-10 and the first half of Book 11 - a gap that has lost, for us the whole of the reign of Gaius (A.D. 37-41) and the reign of Claudius as far as A.D. 47. Only for Tiberius, then, do we have both the beginning and end of a reign, though there too the loss of two years between 29 and 31 deprives us of a significant period of the Tiberian narrative. However, it is not the relative completeness of the Tiberian narrative that makes it so fascinating for the reader; rather it is the interplay between the political situation and the personality of the emperor. Of Augustus Tacitus had said (A. 1.1.1) that he received supreme power over everything under the name of Princeps (cuncta ... nomine principis sub imperium accepit'). But, whereas Augustus was adept at exercising real power under a republican fiction, Tiberius, though holding the same constitutional position, was less suited to handling it. He had a profound distaste for senatorial sycophancy and a suspicion, bred by past experience, of intrigues against himself from within the imperial family. Though much of the material used by Tacitus for his portrait of Tiberius is found also in Suetonius' biography of the emperor and, a century later, in Cassius Dio's R0171an History'> (written in Greek), the structure that Tacitus gives to his narrative is his own. The six books of the reign are divided into two triads, a division that is clearly marked at the beginning of Book 4, where Tacitus states that at this point (A.D. 23) there was a significant change for the worse in Tiberius' reign, a change he ascribes to the malign influence that Aelius Sejanus, Prefect of the Praetorian Guard, now began to exert upon the Princeps. In A.D. 26 Sejanus persuaded Tiberius to retire from Rome, first to Campania and then, in the following year, to Capreae (Capri); thereby Sejanus was able to control access to the emperor. The missing portion of Book 5 will have seen Sejanus' power and authority grow still further, reaching its zenith when, on the 1st of January 31, he became consul, with Tiberius himself as colleague. Even after Sejanus' downfall in October of that year Tiberius continued to live in retirement and, despite occasional visits to the mainland (see notes on 6.39.2 and 50.1), never returned to Rome. During the remaining five and a half years of his life all business with the senate was, consequently, conducted by letter, and this becomes a prominent (and important) feature in Book 6.

3-+

35

The likelihood is that the total number of Books was sixteen or eighteen Resemblances between the three authors are most frequent, and most marked, at the beginning and end of Tiberius' reign; see refs. in Index 1.

16

INTRODUCTION

No other individual had so direct or great an influence on Tiberius as had Sejanus during the years from A.D. 23 to 31; but from the time that Tiberius became Princeps his conduct was also affected by his relationship with other members of the imperial family, especially his nephew and adopted son Germanicus (along with his wife and, later, widow Agrippina), his own son Drusus, and his mother Livia. That theme can be traced in the narrative up to the beginning of Book 5, when Livia, having outlived both Germanicus (d. A.D. 19) and Drusus (d. A.D. 23), is accorded Tacitus' obituary on her death at the beginning of A.D. 29. But the theme also receives explicit notice at the very end of Book 6, when Tiberius himself in turn receives the historian's valedictory obituary (6.51, esp. para. 3). There we are told that there was a series of phases in Tiberius' life, each of which saw his behaviour decisively affected by the presence of named individuals, all of them, with the exception of Sejanus, close members of the imperial family. Tacitus lists five phases in all: first, while Augustus was alive, a period of unqualified excellence; the second period - the first of those during which Tiberius was himself Princeps - saw a pretence of virtues ('fingendis uirtutibus'), as long as Germanicus and Drusus survived (ending, that is, in A.D. 23, at the beginning of Book 4); in the third period Tiberius was a mixture of good and evil till his mother Livia died in A.D. 29; then there was unparalleled cruelty, but concealed lusts, under the influence of Sejanus (d. A.D. 31) - whether through affection or fear; finally, left entirely to himself, Tiberius rushed headlong into crimes and scandalous behaviour alike.v It is in the nature of the Tacitean obituary to be concise and selective. So, in the last section of Tiberius' obituary it is on his 1110res (behaviour) that Tacitus concentrates; and in the last phase of his life - the period covered by Annals 6 - two aspects only are noted: his unrestricted resort to crimes and shameful conduct (see/era ac dedeeora). The latter refers primarily to sexual excesses, a topic that is briefly, but forcefully, described in fewer than a dozen Jines at 6.1.2. The crimes which are referred to are, presumably, actions or decisions that led to the death (by execution or suicide) of senators (mostly) and members of the imperial family (Gennanicus' widow, Agrippina, and her two elder sons). That theme is amply i llustratcd in Book 6, as when, two years after the execution of Sejanus, Tiberius gave orders that all those of Sejanus' associates who were still held in prison should be put to death (6.19.2-3). But there are two other aspects of Tiberius' reign during this final period of his 1ife that need to be considered, if a balanced judgment is to be given on his conduct

36

The conventional interpretation, accepted in the present edition (see 6.51.3 nn.), is that Tiberius' innate disposition (ingeniuI11) to crime and debauchery had been held in check by a series of restraining influences, until, finally freed from them all, he was able to follow his own inclinations. For a radically different interpretation of the passage, according to which Tiberius was progressively bereft of helpers, cf. Woodman (1989) and the commentary on 6.51.

INTRODUCTION

17

during these years: his relationship with the senate over matters of domestic policy, and his handling of foreign affairs. Foreign affairs figure prominently during the years 35 and 36, when, by the choice of an able commander to take charge in the East and in the general strategy that Tiberius sought to apply there, it is clear that the aged emperor is still fully in control of affairs. The relationship between Princeps and senate is less clearly drawn. Communication between Capreae and Rome was by letter only and, despite frequent mention of letters between Tiberius and the senate, there are few instances where we are given any extended indication of their content or tone. In this sphere Tacitus' text requires careful study, and that is better dealt with in the Commentary. But if, for the most part, it suits Tacitus to draw a picture of an aged emperor isolated in his island fastness, the communications that COBle from Capreae suggest rather an old man still firmly holding the reins of government, One of the fascinations for the reader of Annals 6 is to observe the two contrasting facets in the portrait of the elderly emperor: physically withdrawn from the action, but continuing to dominate it. After the end of A. 6 four and a half books of Annals have been lost, including the whole of Tacitus' account of the reign of Gaius (Caligula: A.D. 37-41). That Tacitus' view of him was hostile is sufficiently clear from what he says of him in A. 6 (e.g. 20.1 'keeping his monstrous temper concealed by a deceptive modesty': cf. 45.3 and 46.4-5) and at 13.3.2 ('his disordered mind'). The first half of Claudius' reign is also missing and Tacitus' narrative resumes in the middle of A. 11 in the middle of A.D. 47, from which point it continues unbroken till half-way through Book 16 in the middle of A.D. 66, two years before Nero's suicide on 9 June 68. The main narrative framework of the reigns of Claudius and Nero remains unchanged from that of Tiberius' reign: events are recorded year by year, and within each year there is commonly (though not always) an alternation between events at horne and events (mostly military) abroad. Moreover, within the domestic sections the most prominent elements are still the relationship between the emperor and the senate and between the emperor and the imperial family and his closest associates.F However, there are also two structural features in respect of which A. 11-16 differ from the six books of Tiberius' reign. First: whereas in A. 1-6 most books begin with the start of a new year, marked by consular dating,38 in A. 12-16 (the beginning of Book 11 is missing) only A. 14 begins with consular dating (for A.D. 59). The reason (or reasons) for this difference must remain in most cases a matter for speculation; but to some extent it may be tied to the second of the structural

:'7

:'8

For a fuller account of the relationship between structure and subject-matter see (e.g.) Martin (1990) and chapters VI and VII of Martin (I 981). For the special case of A.D. 20, where the consular dating is deferred to 3.2.3, see W-M note. The beginning ofA. 6 is missing. It may have started with the consular dating for A.D. 32, but more probably began immediately after the execution of Sejanus on 18 October in A.D. 31; see note at p. ]02.

18

INTRODUCTION

features alluded to above. In the later books there is a more marked tendency to group material to produce extended dramatic set-pieces. So A. 11 concludes with thirteen continuous chapters describing the sensational events - including her adultery with and mock-marriage to the consul designate, C. Silius - leading up to the execution of Claudius' wife, Messalina. Similarly Book 14 begins with the train of events leading up to the murder of Nero's mother, Agrippina (14.1-13). Annals 15 has two striking set-pieces: the Great Fire of Rome in A.D. 64 with the consequent persecution of the Christians occupies chapters 38-45, while the end of the Book consists of an extended account of the Pisonian conspiracy (48-74). The latter is not only by far the longest continuous section in the whole of the Annals, but the account is organized and written to Blake the greatest possible dramatic impact. 39 The incomplete sixteenth Book similarly shows the same constructional principle. The year 66 begins with a miscellaneous series of deaths (chs. 14-20). Then ch. 21 begins, 'After the butchery of so many distinguished men Nero became eager to root out virtue itself by killing Thrasea Paetus and Barea Soranus'. The rest of what survives of the Annals gives a graphic account of the final moments of these 1wo Stoics - the second Medicean manuscript breaks off in the middle of a sentence in ch. 35, as Thrasea, imitating the suicide of Seneca, opens his veins. It is not easy to say how far the structural differences between A. 1-6 and 11-16 also reflect a significant change in the nature of the Principate, viz. a greater emphasis in the account of Tiberius' reign on the framework of consular dating may be intended to be seen as a symbol of the enduring republican facade, whereas in the case of Nero - with Claudius perhaps marking a stage between the two - the emperor's own actions and personality become more prominent as the focal point of the narrative. If these suggestions are valid, they underline stiIl further the fact that the respective roles of senate and Princeps are more strongly emphasised in the Tiberian hexad than they are in the later books. That corresponds to the changing structure of political life under the Julio-Claudians; it may also explain why, for many modern readers, the personality of the Tacitean Tiberius is the most gripping portrait by 'the greatest painter of antiquity'r'" 3. STRUCTURE OF ANNALS 5 AND 6 The scheme given below indicates only the main outlines of Annals 5 and 6; a fuller account of the contents and their interrelationship is given at appropriate points in the Commentary."

39

40 41

Sec Woodman (1993). Racine's well-known quotation, however, comes from the preface to his Britannicus and refers to the reign of Nero; cf. Mellor (1993) 147. Fuller synopses are also given by Furneaux in his edition (before the Latin text of each Book), and by Ginsburg (1981) and Wille (1983).

INTRODUCTION

19

Annals 5 (fragment) A.D. 29 1-2 Death of Julia Augusta (Livia); Tiberius' reaction. 3-5 Letter of Tiberius to senate accusing Agrippina and Nero Caesar. The senate defers action and is rebuked by Tiberius, who reserves a decision on Agrippina and Nero to himself. [At this point there is a break of about two years in Tacitus' narrative; for a SUll1111ary of events during that period, including Sejanus' downfall and execution, see Commentary pp. 102-3.]

Annals 6 [For the numbering of the first six chapters as [5] 6-11 cf. p. 102.] A.D. 31 (froln Oct.lNov.) [5] 6-8 Deaths in the aftermath of Sejanus' downfall, 9 Execution of two surviving children of Sejanus (Nov.lDec.). 10 Appearance of a false' Drusus in Asia and Greece. 11 Mutual recriminations between the consuls Fulcinius Trio and Mernmius Regulus.

A.D. 32 (6.) 1 After visiting the mainland and approaching Rome, Tiberius returns to Capri to indulge in sexual excesses. 2-10.1 Senatorial business (1110Stly prosecutions), with written interventions by Tiberius from Capri. 2 Decrees against Livi(ll)a's statues and memory; Sejanus' confiscated property transferred to fiscus; Tiberius sarcastically rejects a sycophantic proposal by a minor senator. 3-10.1 Series of prosecutions, mostly resulting in suicide, execution, or exile; some escape punishment by turning informer or through Tiberius' friendship and intervention (Cotta Messalinus) or, notably (M. Terentius, a Roman knight), by frank acknowledgment of friendship with Scjanus. S0111e women too become victims. 10.2-14 Other miscellaneous items. 10.2 Executions also at Capri (two long-standing associates of Tiberius). 10.3-11 Death and obituary of L. Piso, Pontifex and City Prefect; history of the latter office; he is voted a public funeral. 12 Discussion of an alleged Sibylline Book referred to the quindecimuiri. 13 Public unrest at high price of corn. 14 Three Roman knights arrested for conspiracy. A senator placed in custody for fleeing Italy.

20

INTRODUCTION

A.D. 33 15 Marriage of two daughters of Germanicus arranged by Tiberius, who then requests a bodyguard, whenever he enters the senate-house; the request granted, but never exercised. 16-17 Financial crisis, ended by Tiberius' intervention. 18-19.1 Prosecutions, including some non-Romans; outcome varies between execution, suicide and exile. 19.2-3 General execution of remaining supporters of Sejanus in prison. 20.1 Marriage of Gaius (Caligula); his departure to join Tiberius on Capri. 20.2 Tiberius' prediction of Galba as a future emperor, 21-2 Excursus on astrology, and on fate and chance. 23-4 Deaths of Asinius Gallus and Drusus Caesar, both by starvation; Tiberius' savage treatment of Drusus openly proclaimed to senate. 25 Death of Agrippina, also by starvation; Tiberius' savage comments on her. 26 Suicide of Cocceius Nerva. 27.1 Marriage of Julia, daughter of Drusus. 27.2-4 End of year: deaths of Aelius Lamia (with an obituary), Pomponius Flaccus and M. Lepidus. A.D. 34 28 Reported appearance of phoenix in Egypt; history of the bird. 29 Suicide of two senators and their wives. 30 Intermittent punishment of informers; alleged independence towards Tiberius of Lentulus Gaetulicus, governor of Upper Germany. A.D. 35 31-7 Eastern affairs: Armenia and Parthia. 38 Suicide of Fulcinius Trio; two other senators die, one by suicide, one by execution. 39 Further deaths, including one suicide, one execution. Tiberius again approaches Rome. Death of Poppaeus Sabinus; his obituary. A.D. 36 40 Still more deaths, by execution (including Tigranes, formerly king of Armenia) or by suicide. 41-4 Foreign affairs: suppression of a tribe in Cappadocia (41); Eastern affairs, ending with eviction of Roman nominee Tiridates from throne of Parthia. 45.1-2 Fire in Rome: substantial losses made good by Tiberius' munificence.

INTRODUCTION

21

A.D. 37 (to March 16) 45.3-46 Macro pays court to Gaius as Tiberius' likely successor; Tiberius'

misgivings. 47-9 Further accusations at Rome; L. Arruntius, object of Macro's personal hostility, chooses suicide. 50 Last hours of Tiberius; he dies at Misenum on March 16 in his 78th year. 51 Tacitus' obituary on Tiberius. Though a reasonable surmise can be made of the main contents of the missing parts of Books 5 and 6, any attempt to suggest the structure of those parts would clearly be fruitless. Only where the continuous narrative resumes at 6.1 at the beginning of A.D. 32 is meaningful comment possible. Of the five complete years 32-3642 the' first two (32 and 33) deal exclusively with home affairs, while the narrative of the last two complete years (35 and 36) consists predominantly of foreign affairs (almost wholly dealing with the situation in Parthia and Armenia). The narrative for A.D. 34 - by far the shortest of the whole Book - has a single foreign chapter (28), followed by two chapters on horne affairs (29-30). But the foreign chapter is not on military matters (the commonest topic in dealing with events abroad), but on the reported sighting of the phoenix in Egypt and an excursus on the history of that miraculous bird. Finally, some observations of a more general nature may be made about resemblances and differences between adjacent years in the above synopsis. A.D. 32, after a single chapter on Tiberius' movements.f' has a continuous sequence in chs. 2-10 on a single theme (accusations and trials in the aftermath of Sejanus' downfall), followed by a number of miscellaneous items rounding off the year (chs. 10.3-14).44 By contrast, A.D. 33, though keeping for the most part to the chronological order, has a carefully shaped whole: beginning, middle and end are clearly marked by imperial marriages (13; 20-1; ~7.1); both before and after the marriage at 20.1 there is a major excursus (16.,.17 a financial crisis; 21-2 astrology and the question of freewill and determinism), while in the first half the main narrative is of deaths in the public sector, and in the second half of deaths among members of the imperial family or of individuals associated with it. 45 The years 34 and 35 resemble each other formally in that each has the structure 'foreign affairs: h0111e affairs' 'and in each the home affairs section consists of two chapters; but in all else the two years are different: in function A.D. 34 separates years 32 and 33

42

43 M 45

The narrative of A.D. 37, though unbroken, extends .only to the middle of March, the date of Tiberius' death. For the considerable problems attached thereto see Commentary. Though the formulaic fine ann; CAtthe end of the year') does not appear tiI114.1. For a detailed discussion of the structure of-Tacitus' narrative of A.D. 33 cf Syme RP4, 223-44. 'The Year 33 in Tacitus and Dio'.

22

INTRODUCTION

(exclusively home affairs) from the years 35 and 36 (predominantly foreign affairs), and the single 'foreign affairs' chapter for A.D.}4 on the fabulous phoenix is totally different from the seven chapters on political and military events in the East during A.D. 35. Lastly, though the tripartite structure for A.D. 36 (home affairs-foreign affairs-home affairs) differs from that of A.D. 35 (see above), the two years cohere closely in devoting most of their space to a continuous account of events in Parthia and Armenia. In short, Book 6 demonstrates the flexibility with which Tacitus is able to manipulate the traditional annalistic framework of republican historiography. 4. SOURCES It was the general practice of Latin historians not to name their sources; and on the rare occasions when they do so, it is mostly to note an additional or an alternative version of an incident. Rather more often, though still infrequently, such additional or alternative versions are cited under the general heading of auctor(es) or scriptores or a more vague quidani or alii. So in Tacitus' account of Tiberius' reign (Annals 1-6) only two sources are named: at 1.69.2 Pliny the Elder(described as 'Germanicorum bellorum scriptor') is cited for what seems to be an additional detail about the elder Agrippina, wife of Germanicus, while at 4.53.2 the comnientarii (diaries) of her daughter (the younger Agrippina, mother of Nero) are given as the authority for a detail which, Tacitus says, is not recorded by. 'scriptoribus annaliurn', There are also about a dozen and a half examples of unnamed sources in A. 1-6. In addition to 5.9.2 and 6.7.5 (for which see the present commentary) see especially 1.29.4 (alternative versions: 'tradunt plerique ... alii ...'); 2.70.2 (an additional detail: 'addunt plerique'); 4.10.1 (a contemporary rumour differing from the version given by 'plurirnis maximaeque fidei auctoribus'); 4.11.1 (Tacitus rejects a version affirmed 'nullo certo auctore'); 4.11.2 (for this and other exx. in A. 4 see notes in MW). What is to be made of the examples of named and unnamed sources? As regards the few named sources, an important aim is clearly the desire to impress the reader by authoritative endorsement of what Tacitus himself affirms; and that applies, though less obviously, to some of the anonymous references. But the fact that in so many cases the reference is to an additional or an alternative version has been used by many scholars as evidence that Tacitus follows the procedure demonstrably followed by Livy, who for long continuous passages 'allows his main narrative to rest on the factual information of a single authority'r'" A wholly different view of Tacitus' method of working is held by other scholars, whose most notable exponent in recent years has been Sir Ronald Syme: their belief is that Tacitus operated essentially as does a conscientious modern historian,consulting 46

Walsh (1961) 141; this procedure is the so-called Nissen's Law, clearly observable in Livy's use of Polybius; see also Briscoe (1973) 1.

INTRODUCTION

23

and analysing all (or most) available sources, both literary and non-literary, and then constructing his own independent narrative. These two points of view, diametrically opposed as they are, present one of the most difficult and contentious problems of modern Tacitean scholarship, and though no conclusive solution to the problem can be offered, SOIne attempt must be made to indicate the arguments on either side. It is clear that Tacitus did, in fact, use the 'single source' method of composition at least for parts of the opening books of his Histories, where comparison with Plutarch's Lives of Calha and Otho shows that the two authors closely follow a lost common source." In the Annals, too, there are a number of passages where similarities between Tacitus and Suetonius and/or Dio Cassius are again 1110st simply explained by the assumption that all three drew on the same lost source." There is, admittedly, a complication to the problem in that Dio, writing a century later than Tacitus, may on occasions have drawn on Tacitus rather than on a source common to them both.'? but the similarities between all three writers (Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio) are sufficiently numerous and at times sufficiently close to make use of a common source for those passages the most likely explanation. That does not, however, prove - nor is it inherently probable - that for long continuous passages where no such similarities exist Tacitus is, as Nissen's Law would suggest, following a single literary source. Though it is not a necessary part of the argument in favour of the single-source theory, its supporters have often tried to put a name to the archetypal source. Clearly it must be someone writing after the death of Tiberius, since so much of what it is inferred to have contained is hostile to him and could not have been published during his life-time. If this seminal version of Tiberius' reign is to be ascribed to a known historian, the choice must lie between Servilius Nonianus (cos. 35; d. A.D. 59 [A. 14.19]) and Aufidius Bassus (see p. 7 above). Alternatively we should have to accept the hypothesis of 'an unknown annalist of great talent, probably writing soon after Tiberius' death'J" The very different theory, forcefullly argued by Syme, is that the Tacitean narrati ve is the product of his careful examination of a wide range of sources, both 47

4~

49

50

Though written in different languages (Greek and Latin) there are passages where the resemblance between the two authors shows verbal similarities that seem best explained by derivation from the same common source. For a convenient conspectus of the evidence see Hardy (1890). For examples in A. 5 and 6 see Index 1 S.vv. Dio and Suetonius. For an extended example where the resemblances are particularly close see the exchange between Asinius Gallus and Tiberius at 1.12.2-4 with Goodyear's judicious note thereon. In the course of the note Goodyear affirms: 'This combination of similarities and differences suggests that the 'source-relationship' is not simple. It argues against use of Tacitus alone by Dio or use both by Tacitus and Dio of a sole C0111lnOn source, and no other source.' That hypothesis was propounded by Eduard Schwarz; see Martin (1981) 204-5 and notes 18 and 19 on p. 263.

24

INTRODUCTION

literary and non-literary. The literary sources have been mentioned above (pp. 6-7); the non-literary sources include three important elements: the proceedings of the senate (acta senatusi. the official daily gazette (acta diurnai, and public inscriptions. Though the nature and contents of the acta senatus and acta diu rna are shrouded in almost total uncertainty, a brief comment will suffice," since the more immediate question is what use, if any, we are to believe that Tacitus made of them. It is known that decrees of the senate (senatus consultai, when passed, were deposited in the Treasury (aerarium Saturni) and it is likely that the acta senatus also were housed there. How much detail these acta contained is not known, but it.is reasonable to assume that all formal proposals, whether passed or not, with the names of their proposers would be entered. Whether the main heads of the arguments that were advanced were also recorded is uncertain, but not implausible. Contemporary stenography made it possible to keep a complete record of the proceedings, but the balance of probability is that the records did not attempt, as Hansard, to give a verbatim account. The acta diurna are still more shadowy than the acta senatus, but they seem to have contained matters of public interest beyond what transpired in meetings of the senate; almost certainly they would contain such information about members of the imperial family as the Princeps wished to be made public. It is clear that they were available to be read in the provinces as well as Rome, and the fact that they were described as 'daily' suggests a very different sort of record from those of the formal meetings of the senate. As for inscriptions, it is clear that a very large number of public decisions were publicly displayed in permanent form in Rome and, where it was thought to be appropriate, in the provinces. One cannot readily imagine the historian (or an assistant) going round the city transcribing such documentary evidence, but its existence would be known to his potential readers and, at the very least, he could not give accounts that flagrantly were at odds with what stood on open view in Rome.V Documentary evidence, then, was abundantly available to a historian who wished to use it; and even if access to the acta senatus was restricted to senators, that did not exclude Tacitus. What evidence is there that Tacitus used the documentary records available to him? An attempt to answer that question must begin by looking at his handling of senatorial business, where the acta senatus could offer him an immense amount of detail, if he cared to use it. 'The first hexad of the Annates contains an abundance of information patently deriving from the official protocol, and only there to be discovered.' Such was Syme's forthright declaration in 1958 (Tacitus, p. 278).53 The evidence for such an assertion is cumulative; groups

51 52

53

There is some discussion and bibliography in the note on 5.4.1. For inscri ptions in Rome see Kraus-Woodman (1997) 3-4 and notes 12-14 on p. 8. The evidence marshalled in pp. 278-86 of Syme's Tacitus is supplemented by 'How Tacitus wroteAI1/lals I-III' (RP III 1014-42) and 'Tacitus: some sources of his information' (RP IV 199-222).

INTRODUCTION

25

of names extending beyond the requirements of the broad sweep of the narrative (e.g. 3.11.2, but with some scepticism in the note by W-M ad loc.) and particularly detailed accounts of items of business that seem to have held a special interest for Tacitus himself, e.g. esoteric matters concerning the flamen Dialis (Tacitus was interested in religious procedure through his membership of the college of quindecimuiriy or the rights of asylum claimed by leading cities of Asia Minor (Tacitus had been proconsul in Asia). In a small, but important, number of cases inscriptions allow us to make a direct comparison with Tacitus' account of senatorial decrees and the like. 54 Most recently the discovery of the senatorial decree (SCPP) which concluded the trial of Cn. Calpurnius Piso, Germanicus' enemy, permits a close and extended comparison of Tacitus and the archival source. As in all the other cases where comparison is possible, Tacitus nowhere uses direct quotation that is not the way of ancient historians - but a close comparison of the two makes it almost certain that Tacitus (or an intermediary source) had direct sight of the decree. 55 Since the decree enacted that copies in bronze should be set up in Rome and the provinces (and legionary headquarters), it cannot be taken for certain that Tacitus' (or his source's) knowledge of its details necessarily comes from the acta senatus; but that Tacitus' account ultimately derives from documentary evidence seems hard to deny. A similar line of argument seems also to be valid for his treatment of the Asian cities' petitions over their asylum rights. That is supported by extensive inscriptions from Asia Minor, those from Aphrodisias being particularly well documented.v In view of the evidence that Syme assembles, the most plausible solution is to conclude that it was Tacitus himself, and not some intermediary, who consulted the documentary sources. That may not have meant only the acta senatus, for though they will have included details of the imperial family, as far as they were regarded as appropriate for the public eye (dynastic marriages and funerals would clearly qualify), it is possible that the acta diurna contained everyday information of a more personal kind. And, as has been noted above, some inscriptional matter may have come Tacitus' way from its display in public places. But the basic thesis seems soundly based: much of the senatorial matter in the Annals seems to have been underpinned by the records of the acta senatus. That would apply not only to domestic matters, but also to foreign affairs. Though most military provincial commands were under the emperor's control, appointments and reports of events in

54

55 56

In the last fifty years the Tabula Hebana and Tabula Siarensis (overlapping in part) allow comparison with Tacitus' version of the funeral arrangements for Germanicus in A. 2 and 3. Previously the only direct comparison possible was between the speech of Claudius recorded on a bronze tablet found at Lyons in 1528 and Tacitus' version of the speech in A. 11.24. See the extensive list of references on p. 514 of W-M. See Reynolds (1982).

26

INTRODUCTION

the field would come to the senate, as they certainly did in the case of Africa, the only senatorial province with a legionary force. Though the acta senatus, with possible additions from the acta diurna.S would cover a wide range of events and incidents, there remain large areas of events that could not have appeared in them. That would include everything that is openly hostile to Tiberius, As Tacitus affirms in the Preface to the Annals, such information could scarcely have appeared openly during the emperor's life-time. And there was other information, of a more neutral kind, that could have no place in the acta senatus or, for that matter, in the acta diurna. From A. 6 the account of Tiberius' debaucheries in 6.1.2 can serve as an example of the former category, and details of his intense interest in astrology in 20.2-21 as an instance of the latter. It is perhaps worth adding that Tacitus shares each of these two topics with one or other of Suetonius or Dio (see commentary for details). Little useful purpose is served by trying to put a name to Tacitus' source(s) for these sections.f but it provides evidence to support the view that Tacitus, in the Annals, did not follow a single source, but built up his narrative from his own reading of a number of sources, both literary and documentary. That does not mean that his method of working was exactly that of a modern historian, but it seems to have been much closer to that than to the practice suggested by adherence to Nissen's Law. 5. LANGUAGE AND STYLE Until the time of his consulship in A.D. 97 it was as an orator that Tacitus had won public recognition. Within the next decade he had become famous as a historian.f An important contributory factor to that fame will have been Tacitus' development of a style which, though firmly set in the tradition of republican historiography, was both memorable and distinctive. It lies outside the scope of the present edition to attempt a detailed survey of Tacitus' style,r~) but some features of vocabulary and sentence structure deserve attention, since, for Tacitus, they are not added embellishments, but an integral means for conveying his own judgment on, and influencing the reader's reaction to, persons and situations.

57

58

59

The publica acta which Pliny mentions in a letter to Tacitus (7.33.3) may include both type of acta. More importantly, Pliny takes it for granted that Tacitus will have consulted them in the writing of the Histories. Though Townend (1967) has argued that Cluvius Rufus had a particular liking for lurid and scabrous detail. So Plin. Ep. 7.33, probably written c. 106/7, says: 'I prophesy that your histories will be

immortal', (i)

There is no complete, up-to-date survey. The account in Furneaux (1896), though somewhat out-dated, remains the fullest in English. For a short modern account see MW 19-26 (with bibliographical references to Syme, Martin and Goodyear in footnotes 58and61).

INTRODUCTION

27

In his de Oratore (3.152) Cicero names three types of word that can give distinction and ornament to a speech: unusual words (including archaisms), neologisms, and metaphors. The same types of word can similarly be used to give distinction to the historian's style. So in Annals 5 and 6 among the numerous words with an archaic flavour are apiscor (for adipiscori at 6.3.1 etc., qua tempestate (for quo tempore) at 6.34.2, claritudo (for claritas) at 6.10.3 etc., and the common use of patres (for senatusi and litterae (for epistulai. Neologisms such as prodigentia (extravagance') at 6.14.1 are both rarer and harder to pin down because of the loss of so much Latin literature of the first century A.D., and it is easier to draw attention to words that seem first to occur in poetry and are then taken over by post-Augustan prose authors; such words as iuuenta (for iuuentusi at (e.g.) 6.12.1 and praescius (6.21.3) belong to this category. Metaphor is commonly regarded as more a feature of Latin verse than of Latin prose, but, as the Indexes s.v. 'metaphor' in M-W and W-M amply indicate, it is a striking feature of Tacitus' style. Three examples may give some indication: (i) the verbs induo and exuo, used literally of putting on and taking off clothing, are used metaphorically of adopting or discarding an attitude (etc.).61 (ii) exardesco is used of passions etc. 'blazing forth'. 62 (iii) prorunipo is used of passions, previously pent up, 'bursting forth'. 63 'T here are also areas of syntax in which Tacitus extends traditional usage, e.g. in his use of the ablative absolute in relationship to the main statement of a sentence, or in the use of a genitive dependent on an adjective, as in occultos consilii (secret to the design') at 6.36.2 or uetus regnandi (experienced of old in reigning') at 6.44.1. But it is in sentence structure that Tacitus' style is most distinctive. Two features are particularly striking: (i) though Tacitus, like all historians, frequently uses simple sentences in his narrative style, his complex sentences are repeatedly distinguished by the fact that, after the main statement of the sentence has been (or seems to have been) made and concluded by the main verb of the sentence, there follows an 'appendix', often introduced by an ablative absolute and adding further details to the preceding main clause. The appendix may be short (e.g. 6.49.1, a simple ablative absolute, 'iacto in praeceps corpore') or of some considerable length (e.g. 6.45.3, where the main clause, ending with 'magistratum occepere', is followed by an appendix of forty words). The appendix may fulfil one of several functions: it may add the cause or the -consequence of the action described by the main clause, or it may offer comment on it, or it may add a further fact. But in all cases it invites the reader to reflect that the action described by the main clause is to be seen within a broader context of events. As such it is an important vehicle for exploring motives,

6]

62 63

induo at 6.20.1,33.2,42.1; exuo at 6.8.1,25.2,43.1,44.1. 6.1.1 and 25.2; in both cases Tiberius is the subject. 5.3.1; 6.3.4, 51.3. The first example is particularly interesting, because the metaphor is itself qualified by a simile, 'as if loosed from the (restraining) reins'.

28

INTRODUCTION

which, in turn, is regarded by Tacitus as one of the most fundamental tasks of the historian. (ii) A second feature that is typical of Tacitus' style and thought is his employment of syntactical uariatio, the deliberate avoidance of the balance iconcinnitas) that is typical of Cicero's style. At a lower level uariatio may be little more than a stylistic mannerism, as when, instead of the balance of pars ... pars (e.g. Liv. 24.2] .8), Tacitus writes pars ... quidam (6.43.1) etc. But at a more significant level, when uariatio appears in contrasting phrases or clauses, the syntactical disruption of balance is used to emphasise the alternatives that Tacitus is putting before the reader. A striking example occurs at 6.38.3, where a short main clause of seven words ('quae ... recitari Tiberius iussit') is amplified by an extended appendix of twenty-nine words. In that appendix alternative reasons are suggested for Tiberius' conduct, the two alternatives being separated by Tacitus' 'favourite an' (= 'or perhaps'j." The. first alternative is expressed by a participle and a noun in -tor with the function of a participle ('osten tans et contemptor'), while the second alternative is conveyed by a main clause (of which the main verb is malebati. A further Tacitean feature is that the second alternative, emphasised by the use of uariatio, is here, as often, the one on which Tacitus seems to lay greater stress:65 language, style, and Tacitus' own political judgment are thus combined. 6. TEXT AND TRANSLATION TEXT The text of Annals 1-6 depends on a single manuscript, the so-called 'first Medicean' (Codex Laurentianus Mediceus 68&1),; now in the Laurentian Library in Florence. It was written in the middle of the ninth century in a Caroline minuscule script and contains a number of corrections, some contemporary, others of a .later date, both in the text and margin.. 66 In preparing the Latin text for the present edition I have throughout consulted the following editions: the Oxford Text of C.D. Fisher (1906), the Bude edition of P. Wuilleumier (1975),. and the three Teubner editions of E. Koesterrnann (1952),67 H. 6+

65

66

67

See W'-M on 3.3.1 (an ne ... falsi intellegerentur) and for the fullest treatment in general of uariatio see Sorbom (1935). For another example, also applying to Tiberius, see 3.3.1 with the analysis in Martin (1981) 222; and for 'Tacitus and the loaded alternative' see D. Whitehead, Latomus 38 (I 979}, 474-95. There is a complete facsimile of the first Medicean (Rostagno, H. Taciti codex Laurentianus Mediceus 68.1 pbototypice edt/its, Leyden, 1902). For further information on the manuscript tradition see Goodyear I (1972)" 3-4; Martin (1981),238; Reynolds, L~D. (ed.), Texts and transmission (Oxford, 1983),406-11. Later editions by Koestermann were vitiated by his ill-advised adherence (eventually retracted) to the view that the fifteenth-century Leidensis preserved many readings derived from a manuscript tradition independent of the first Medicean.

INTRODUCTION

29

Heubner (1983) and S. Borzsak (1992). I have not attempted to provide a full apparatus criticus, but a small number of variant readings and emendations are noted at the foot of the pages of the Latin text; where it is appropriate, some brief C0111ment on these variants is given in the commentary. A note on the title and format of modern texts of the Annals may not be out of place. The manuscript title of the first Medicean seems to be 'Ab excessu diui Augusti' (From the death of the deified Augustus') and Annals and Histories are treated in the second Medicean (Laurentianus 68.2) as one continuous work. The two works were separated, and given their modern titles, in the sixteenth century. Chapter divisions were introduced in the seventeenth century, while paragraph (or section) divisions within chapters were established only in the twentieth century.f TRANSLATION The translation facing the Latin text aims only to provide an exact translation in straightforward English. No attempt has been made to match those features of syntax and vocabulary that contribute to making Tacitus' style unique among classical Latin prose authors; such features are occasionally discussed in the

commentary,

68

For these matters see Goodyear I, 1-18 and 85-7.

TACITUS ANNALS 5 and 6

32

TACITUS

Liber V A.D. 29 1. RubeIIio et Fufio consulibus, quorum utrique Geminus cognomentum erat, Iulia Augusta mortem obiit, aetate extrema, nobilitatis per Claudiam familiam et adoptione Liuiorum Iuliorumque clarissimae. primum ei matrimonium et liberi fuere cum Tiberio Nerone, qui bello Perusino profugus pace inter Sex. Pompeium ac triumuiros pacta in urbem rediit. (2) exim Caesar cupidine formae aufert marito, incertum an inuitam, adeo properus ut ne spatio quidem ad enitendum dato penatibus suis grauidam induxerit. nullam posthac subolem edidit sed sanguini Augusti per coniunctionern Agrippinae et Germanici adnexa communes pronepotes habuit. (3) sanctitate domus priscum ad morem, comis ultra quam antiquis feminis probatum, mater impotens, uxor facilis et cum artibus mariti, simulatione filii bene composita. (4) funus eius modicum, testamentum diu inritum fuit. laudata est pro rostris a C. Caesare pronepote, qui mox rerum potitus est. 2. At Tiberius, quod supremis in matrem officiis defuisset, nihil mutata arnoenitate uitae, magnitudinem negotiorum per litteras excusauit honoresque memoriae eius ab senatu large decretos quasi per modestiam irnminuit, paucis admodum receptis et addito ne caelestis religio decerneretur: sic ipsam maluisse. (2) quin et parte eiusdem epistulae increpuit amicitias muliebres, Fufium consulem oblique perstringens. is gratia Augustae floruerat, aptus adliciendis feminarum animis, dicax idem et Tiberium acerbis facetiis inridere solitus, quarum apud praepotentes in longum memoria est. 3. Ceterum ex eo praerupta iam et urgens dominatio: nam incolumi Augusta erat adhuc perfugium, quia Tiberio inueteratum erga matrem obsequium neque Seianus audebat auctoritati parentis antire: tunc uelut frenis exsoluti

ANNALS 5 &6

33

Book 5 A.D. 29

1. In the consulship of Rubellius and Fufius, each of whom had the cognomen 'Gerninus, Julia Augusta died, in extreme old age; she was of noble birth of the greatest distinction through the Claudian family and by adoption into the Livii and Julii. Her first marriage and children had been to Tiberius Nero, who, an exile in the Perusine war, returned to the City, after peace had been agreed between Sextus Pompeius and the Triumvirs. (2) Forthwith Caesar removed her from her husband, being desirous of her beauty (whether she was reluctant is uncertain), with such haste that he did not even leave an interval for her to give birth, 'but brought her into his own household while pregnant. She produced no offspring thereafter, but, tied to the blood of Augustus through the union of Agrippina and Germanicus, she had shared great-grandchildren, (3) In the purity of her home life in keeping with the custom of olden days, she was affable beyond what was thought fitting for women of ancient times, as a mother self-willed, as a wife compliant and well matched with the skills of her husband and her son's powers of pretence. (4) Her funeral was modest, her will for a long time not executed. She was praised on the Rostra by her great-grandson, Gaius Caesar, who subsequently gained the supreme power. 2. But Tiberius, because- making no, change to the pleasantness of his way of life - he had not been present for the last respects to his mother, in a letter put forward as excuse the weight of business, and, as though out of moderation, reduced the honours, offered to her memory in abundance by the senate, accepting only a few and adding that there should be no decree of divine worship: such (he wrote) had been her own preference. (2) And further, in a section of the same letter, he criticised women's friendships, indirectly rebuking the consul Fufius. He had flourished through Augusta's favour, being well suited to enticing women's feelings; he was also witty and accustomed to making fun of Tiberius with sharp jests, memory of which endures for a long time with those in absolute power. 3. But thereafter despotism was now headlong and relentless. For while Augusta survived, there was still a refuge, because Tiberius had a longestablished deference towards his mother, nor did Sejanus dare to put

34

TACITUS

proruperunt missaeque in Agrippinam ac Neronem litterae quas pridem adlatas et cohibitas ab Augusta credidit uulgus: haud enim multum post 11101tenl eius recitatae sunt. (2) uerba inerant quaesita asperitate: sed non anna, non rerum nouarum studium, amores iuuenum et impudicitiam nepoti obiectabat. in nurum ne id quidem eonfingere ausus, adrogantiam oris et contumacem animum incusauit, magno senatus pauore ac silentio, donee pauci quis nulla ex honesto spes (et publica mala singulis in occasionem gratiae trahuntur) ut referretur postulauere, promptissimo Cotta Messalino cum atroci sententia. (3) sed aliis a primoribus maximeque a magistratibus trepidabatur: quippe Tiberius etsi infense inuectus cetera ambigua reliquerat. 4. Fuit in senatu lunius Rusticus, componendis patrum actis delectus a Caesare eoque meditationes eius introspicere creditus. is fatali quodam motu (neque enim ante specimen constantiae dederat) seu praua sollertia, dum imminentium oblitus incerta pauet, inserere se dubitantibus ac monere consules ne relationem inciperent; disserebatque breuibus momentis summa uerti: posse quandoque domus Germaniei exitium paenitentiae esse seni. (2) simul populus effigies Agrippinae ac Neronis gerens circumsistit curiam faustisque in Caesarem ominibus falsas litteras et principe inuito exitium dornui eius intendi clamitat. (3) ita nihil triste illo die patratum. ferebantur etiam sub norninibus consularium fictae in Seianum sententiae, exercentibus plerisque per occultum atque eo procacius libidinem ingeniorum. (4) unde illi ira uiolentior et materies criminandi: spretum dolorem principis ab senatu, desciuisse populum; audiri iam et legi nouas contiones, noua patrum consulta; quid reliquum nisi ut caperent ferrum et, quorum imagines pro uexillis secuti forent, duces imperatoresque deligerent? 5. Igitur Caesar repetitis aduersum nepotem et nurum probris increpitaque per edictum plebe, questus apud patres quod fraude unius senatoris

4.

add. Halm I Germanici exitium Ruperti: germanicis titium M I seni Walther: senis M faustisque Muretus: festisque M

dOITIUS

2

ANNALS 5 & 6

35

himself before a parent's authority. But now they burst forth as though let loose from reins, and a letter was sent attacking Agrippina and Nero, which people believed to have been delivered earlier and held back by Augusta; for it was read out not long after her death. (2) In it were words of studied sharpness, but against his grandson he did not cast accusations of arms and a desire for revolution, but the loves of young men and shameless conduct. Not daring to invent even that charge against his daughter-in-law, he attacked her arrogance of tongue and haughty disposition, amid great panic and silence on the part of the senate, until a few, who had no hope from what was honourable (and public misfortunes are turned by individuals into an opportunity for ingratiation), demanded that a motion be put, Cotta Messalinus being foremost with a savage proposal. (3) But on the part of other leading senators and, most of all, the magistrates there was a state of alarm; for though Tiberius had made a violent attack, he had left everything else uncertain. 4. There was in the senate one Junius Rusticus, chosen by Caesar to compile the senate's acta, and for that reason believed to have an insight into his thoughts. He, by some fatal impulse (for he had not previously given an example of resolution) or by twisted shrewdness, in terror of what was uncertain while forgetting what faced him, intervened among the hesitant senators and warned the consuls not to initiate a motion; and he went on to assert that the greatest issues are swayed by small turning-points: some day the destruction of the house of Germanicus could be a source of regret to the old man. (2) At the same time the people, carrying images of Agrippina and Nero, surrounded the senate-house and, with auspicious cries in favour of Caesar, called out that the letter was not genuine and that, without the Princeps' consent, destruction was being aimed against his house. (3) So nothing untoward was carried out on that day. There were even brought forward under the names of ex-consuls forged motions against Sejanus, while many, under cover of secrecy and accordingly more provocatively, gave rein to the free play of their imaginations. (4) As a result Sejanus' anger was all the more violent and ammunition provided for making accusations: the emperor's hurt had been disregarded by the senate, the people had revolted; strange new proclamations were now being heard and read, strange senatorial decrees; what was left but that they should take up the sword and choose as leaders and commanders those whose images they had followed as standards? 5. Therefore Caesar, after repeating his attacks upon his grandson and daughter-in-law and rebuking the plebs in a decree, complained to the

36

TACITUS

imperatoriamaiestas elusa publice foret, integratamen sibi cuncta postulauit. nee ultra deliberatum quo minus non quidem extrema deeernerent (id enim uetitum), sed paratos ad ultionem ui principis impediri testarentur....

Liber VI A.D. 31 [5] 6.... Quattuor et quadraginta orationes super ea re habitae, ex quis ob meturn paucae, plures adsuetudine ... (2) ... 'mihi pudorem aut Seiano inuidiam adlaturum censui. uersa est fortuna et ille quidem qui collegam et generum adsciuerat sibi ignoscit: ceteri quem per dedecora fouere cum seelere insectantur. miserius sit ob amicitiam accusari an amicum accusare haud discreuerim. (3) non crudelitatem, non clementiam cuiusquam experiar, sed Iiber et mihi ipsi probatus antibo periculum. uos obtestor ne memoriam nostri per maerorem quam laeti retineatis, adiciendo me quoque iis qui fine egregio publica mala effugerunt.' [5] 7. Tunc singulos, ut cuique adsistere, adloqui animus erat, retinens aut dirnittens partem diei absumpsit, multoque adhuc coetu et cunctis intrepidum uultum eius spectantibus., cum superesse tempus nouissimis crederent, gladio quem sinu abdiderat incubuit. (2) neque Caesar ullis criminibus aut probris defunctum insectatus est, cum in Blaesum multa foedaque incusauisset. [5] 8. Relatum inde de P. Vitellio et Pomponio Secundo. illum indices arguebant claustra aerarii, cui praefectus erat, et militarem pecuniam rebus nouis obtulisse; huic a Considio praetura functo obiectabatur Aelii Galli arnicitia, qui punito Seiano in hortos Pomponii quasi fidissimum ad subsidium perfugisset. (2)neque aliud periclitantibus auxilii quam in

ANNALS 5 & 6

37

fathers that by the deceit of a single senator the emperor's majesty had been publicly outwitted; yet he demanded that everything should be left for himself to decide. And without further deliberation they did not indeed decree the ultimate penalty (for that had been forbidden), but proclaimed that, though ready to exact vengeance, they were held back by the strong arm of the emperor.

Book 6 A.D. 31 [5] 6. . . . forty-four speeches were delivered on that topic, of which a few through fear, more through the habit... (2)... 'I believed would bring either shame to me or resentment against Sejanus. Fortune has changed, and he who had chosen him as colleague and son-in-law, pardons himself; but the rest Blake criminal assaults on the man whom they encouraged in the basest conduct. Whether it is more wretched to be accused because of friendship or to accuse a friend, I am unable to decide. (3) I shall not put to the test any man's cruelty or clemency. But free, and winning my own approbation, I shall anticipate danger. But you I entreat not to keep memory of me in sadness rather than joyfully, adding me too to those who by a noble end have escaped public misfortunes.' [5] 7. Then detaining or sending on their way individuals, as each was minded to stay beside him and speak to him, he passed part of the day, and while there was still a large number around him, and with everyone looking on his fearless gaze, when they believed that there still remained time for the final moments, he fell on a sword which he had concealed in the fold of his clothes. (2) And Caesar did not rail against the dead man with any charges or insults, whereas he had levelled many shameful accusations against Blaesus. [5] 8. Next there were put the cases of Publius Vitellius and Pomponius Secundus. As regards the former informers put forward the charge that he had offered for purposes of revolution the keys of the treasury, of which he was Prefect, and the finances of the army. Against the latter Considius, who had been praetor, alleged friendship with AeliusGallus, who, after Sejanus had been punished, had fled to the gardens of Pomponius as providing the Blast reliable refuge. (2) And in their peril they found nothing other to help

38

TACITUS

fratrum constantia fuit qui uades exstitere. mox crebris prolationibus spem ac metum iuxta grauatus Vitellius petito per speciem studiorum scalpro leuem ictum uenis intulit uitamque aegritudine animi finiuit. at Pomponius multa morum elegantia et ingenio inlustri, dum aduersam fortunam aequus tolerat, Tiberio superstes fuit. [5] 9. Placitum posthac ut in reliquos Seiani liberos aduerteretur, uanescente quamquam plebis ira ac plerisque per priora supplicia lenitis. igitur portantur in carcerem, filius imminentium intellegens, puella adeo nescia ut crebro interrogaret quod ob delictum et quo traheretur; neque facturam ultra et posse se puerili uerbere moneri. (2) tradunt temporis eius auctores, quia triumuirali supplicio adfici uirginem inauditum habebatur, a carnifice laqueum iuxta cornpressam; exim oblisis faucibus id aetatis corpora in Gemonias abiecta. [5] 10. Per idem tempus Asia atque Achaia exterritae sunt acri magis quam diuturno rumore, Drusum Germanici filium apud Cycladas insulas mox in continenti uisum. et erat iuuenis haud dispari aetate, quibusdam Caesaris libertis uelut adgnitus; per dolumque comitantibus adliciebantur ignari fama nominis et promptis Graecorum animis ad noua et mira: (2) quippe elapsum custodiae pergere ad paternos exercitus, Aegyptum aut Syriam inuasurum, fingebant simul credebantque. iam iuuentutis concursu, iam publicis studiis frequentabatur, laetus praesentibus et inanium spe, cum auditum id Poppaeo Sabino: is Macedoniae tum intentus Achaiam quoque curabat. (3) igitur quo uera seu falsa antiret Toronaeum Thermaeumque sinum praefestinans, mox Euboeam Aegaei maris insulam et Piraeum Atticae orae, dein ~orinthiense litus angustiasque Isthmi euadit; marique alia Nicopolim Romanam coloniam ingressus, ibi demum cognoscit sollertius interrogatum quisnam foret dixisse M. Silano genitum et multis sectatorum dilapsis ascendisse

[5] 10. 2 Poppaeo Rhenanus: pornpeio M 3 alia M: Ionio Th. Barthold: alto Lenchantin

ANNALS 5 &6

39

them than the steadfastness of their brothers, who stood as sureties. Subsequently, after frequent delays, weighed down between hope and fear, after asking for a small knife, allegedly for his studies, Vitellius inflicted a light wound in his veins and ended his life in mental distress. But Pomponius, a man of great refinement and distinguished intellect, by calmly enduring adverse fortune, outlived Tiberius. [5] 9. After that it was decided that the remaining children of Sejanus should be dealt with, although the anger of the people was fading and the majority had been appeased by the previous executions. So there were carried into prison the son conscious of what was to come, the girl so unaware that she repeatedly asked for what wrong-doing, and to what place, she was being dragged off, and saying she would not do anything further, and that she could be chastised by a child's beating. (2) Writers of that time record that, because it was held to be unheard of for a virgin to be subject to capital punishment, she was raped by the executioner with the noose beside her. Then, when they had been strangled, their bodies - at that age - were hurled onto the Gernonian steps. [5] 10. About the same time Asia and Achaea were terrified by a rumour more penetrating than long-lived, that Drusus, son of Germanicus, had been seen in the Cyclades and then on the mainland. And there was indeed a young man of roughly the same age, allegedly recognized by freedmen of Caesar; and as they accompanied him, intending to further the deception, the ignorant were enticed to join them by the fame of his name and the readiness of the minds of the Greeks for what is new and marvellous; (2) for they made up - and believed - the story that he had escaped from custody and was on his way to join his father's armies, intending to invade Egypt or Syria. Already he was surrounded by a throng of young men, already by public enthusiasm, as he rejoiced in the present and with idle hopes, when that was heard of by Poppaeus Sabinus; he at that time, appointed to control Macedonia, was also in charge of Achaea. (3) So, to forestall the truth - or the falsehood - hurrying past the gulfs of Torone and Thermae, he next passed Euboea, an island in the Aegean Sea, and Piraeus on the coast of Attica, then came out at the shore of Corinth and the narrows of the Isthmus; and, by way of a further sea, entering the Roman colony of Nicopolis, he there finally found out that, when carefully questioned as to who he was, the man had said that he was a son of Marcus Silanus, and that when many of his followers had slipped away he had boarded a ship, with the apparent aim of making for Italy. Poppaeus conveyed this information in writing to

40

TACITUS

nauem tamquam Italiam peteret. scripsitque haec Tiberio neque nos originem finemue eius rei ultra comperimus. [5] 11. Exitu anni diu aucta discordia consulum erupit. nam Trio, facilis capessendis inimicitiis et foro exercitus, ut segnem Regulum ad opprimendos Seiani ministros oblique perstrinxerat: ille nisi lacesseretur modestiae retinens non modo rettudit collegam sed ut noxium coniurationis ad disquisitionem trahebat. (2) multisque patrum orantibus ponerent odia in pemiciem itura, mansere infensi ac minitantes donee magistratu abirent.

A.D. 32 [6] 1. Cn. Domitius et Camillus Scribonianus consulatum inierant, cum Caesar tramisso quod Capreas et Surrentum interluit freto Campaniam praelegebat, ambiguus an urbem intraret, seu, quia contra destinauerat, speciem uenturi simulans. et saepe in propinqua degressus, aditis iuxta Tiberim hortis, saxa rursum et solitudinem maris repetiit, pudore scelerum et libidinum, quibus adeo indomitis exarserat ut lTIOre regio pubem ingenuam stupris pollueret. (2) nee formam tantum et decora corpora set in his modestam pueritiam, in aliis imagines maiorum incitamentum cupidinis habebat. tuncque primum ignota antea uocabula reperta sunt sellariorum et spintriarum ex foeditate loci ac multiplici patientia; praepositique serui qui conquirerent pertraherent, dona in promptos, minas aduersum abnuentis, et si retinerent propinquus aut parens, uim raptus suaque ipsi libita uelut in captos exercebant. 2. At Romae principio anni, quasi recens cognitis Liuiae flagitiis ac non pridem etiam punitis, atroces sententiae dicebantur in effigies quoque ac memoriam eius et bona Seiani ablata aerario ut in fiscum cogerentur, tamquarn referret. (2) Scipiones haec et Silani et Cassii isdem ferme aut paulum immutatis uerbis adseueratione multa censebant, cum repente

1. 2 2. I

s seems impossible and I have accepted Rhenanus' patrutn despite its palaeographical difficulty. her younger son: possibly the Sextus Papinius who later fell a victim to Gaius' cruelty (Sen. de Ira 3.18.3); less probably, he may have been the man of the same name, but a son of Anicius Cerealis, who took part in a conspiracy against Gaius, but saved his skin by turning informer (Dio 59.25.5b). the slippery age of youth: for the neuter adj. lubricum used as a noun cf. 5 1.2 below; and for its use in a similar metaphor cf. 14.56.1 'lubricum adulescentiae nostrae' (Nero, speaking, tongue-in-cheek, of himself). 50.1 Already Tiberius' body and his strength were failing: the narrative now switches back from Rome to Tiberius and his final days. For some weeks at least he had been on the mainland (see note below on 'after many changes of place'); according to Suetonius (Tib. 72) he had approached Rome, but returned to Campania, where his final illness began to take hold of him. For iain ... 1l0ndU111 cf. Liv. 1.25.6. his habit of concealment: concealment of motive and feeling appears in Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio as one of Tiberius' most striking characteristics, and is attested for the historical Tiberius in a contemporary document (the Tabula Siarensis; cf. (JeD) as well as in the historian Velleius Paterculus, writing about A.D. 30 (see n. on dissiniulari r u x

o

r a t i o

190

COMMENTARY

at 3.2.3). It can be interpreted either as a praiseworthy quality or as a close equivalent for 'hypocrisy'. For its use in Tacitus cf. (with n.) 4.71.3 'nullam aeque Tiberius, ut rebatur, ex uirtutibus suis quam dissimulationem diligebat' ('none of his virtues - as he thought them - did Tiberius so love as concealment'). weakness: the sarne word (defeetio) recurs at the end of 4; see also Suet. Tib. 73.2. For tegere ('conceal') used of Tiberius' dissitnulatio cf. 24.3 and 20.1 (Gaius, aping Tiberius' habits). After many changes of place: according to Suet. Tib. 72.2 Tiberius went from near Rome to Astura, Circeii and Misenum, intending to return from there to Capri (73.1); however, he was held up by storms and his worsening illness at the villa of Lucullus, where he died. the villa of ..• Lucius Lucullus: see D'Anns (1970) 184-5. L. Licinius Lucullus, consul in 74 B.C., was appointed to a command in the near East against Mithradates VI. Enriched by the spoils of war his name became a byword for luxury and extravagance. 50.2 he was approaching his final hours: suprema (= 'final hours') has already occurred at 48.2, but adpropitiquare signifying an approach to a point of time is unparalleled. Charicles: cf. Suet. Tib. 72.3, which has virtually the identical episode. As his name indicates, Charicles was, like most doctors in the ancient world, a Greek; cf. 4.3.4n. ualetudines: as the plural at H. 3.2.2 clearly = 'illnesses' (cf. also the sing. at 16.13.3), that, rather than 'health', may be the meaning here. the pulse of his veins: though the ancient world did not know of the circulation of the blood, its doctors were well aware of the pulse as an indicator of the condition of the heart; cf. Celsus 3.19.1. For Greco-Roman theory on the subject cf. W.A. Oldfather, C.Ph. 34 (1939) 146-7 and B.P. Copenhaver, Hermetica (1992) on 10.13, who translates 'the spirit [pneUI11a], passing through the veins and arteries and blood, moves the living thing'. 50.3 perhaps taking offence: lit. 'it being uncertain whether': cf. 5.1.2. the banquet to be renewed: instaurare, only here and H. 2.70.4 in T., is used particularly of setting up or renewing banquets to the gods; here it adds a note of irony and formality to the occasion. his breathing was weakening: for /abi used of life 'slipping away' cf. 16.11.2 tlabenti anintaei; spiritus (like Gk. TTVEUlJ.U) is 'breath of life' (see above n. on the 'pulse in his veins'). 50.4 the sixteenth of March: so also Suet. Tib, 73.1 and Fasti Ostienses (El p. 43); Dio 58.28.5 erroneously gives the date as 26 March (his next sentence confirms the right date). completed his mortal span: while explere is commonly used of completing a period or of a point of time (e.g. 1.6.1 supremum diem), its use with mortalitas is unparal!eled. gratantum: 'a distinctly poetic verb ... largely interchangeable with the classical gratulot' (G on 2.75.1). weakness: for the same noun (defeetio) cf. 50.1 above. Though what Tiberius had suffered (assuming that the whole report is not an invention) may have been a fainting fit or a cardiac arrest, for Tiberius it was merely a physical weakness that he wished to make good by nourishment,

COMMENTARY

191

50.5 numbed into silence: thoughfixlls + abI. of an emotion (fear, wonder etc.) in the sense of 'struck dumb' (= obstupefactus) is common, the present usage, where in silentiutn means 'so as to become silent' is unique. to be smothered by ... piles of clothing: Dio 58.28.3 has virtually the same tale. Suet. Tib. 73.2 and Cal. 12.2 give a number of versions, including that of smothering (with a pillow). All three authors have it in common that Tiberius' end was hastened unnaturally; some scepticism is allowable. (See Seager (1972) 245 for an evaluation of the various versions). Thus Tiberius ended: though fin ire is often used intransitively in classical Latin of ending speech or writing (but in T. only at Dial. 42.1), it is used of dying only here in classical literature (cf, Syme 342); the normal phrase is uitatn finire (cf. 2.83.2, with mortem obire in the preceding line). in the seventy-eighth year of his life: he was born on 16 November 42 B.C. 51.1 His father was Nero: Tiberius Claudius Nero; for him see 5.1.1 n. and Suet. Tib. 4. He died in 33 B.C. on both sides ... descent from the Claudian family: Suet. Tib. 3.1 makes the same point; for the Claudian descent on his mother's side see 5. I.1n. quamquatn ... transierit: the subjunctive after quatnquam is common in Tacitus, but the tense (perfect subjunctive) is unparalleled in historic sequence. the circumstances of his life: casus (circumstances') contrasts with the following 1110rLllJl. ••• tempera ('periods of his behaviour'); cf. Woodman (1989), 200 n. 20. entered the house of Augustus as a stepson: in 33 B.C. on his father's death; for full details of Tiberius' life to this date see Suet. Tib. 6. he was buffeted by many rivals: this sentence covers, from Tiberius' standpoint, the same chain of events as was covered in A. 1.3, where T. described the successive stages of Augustus' dynastic plans and how his hopes were disappointed by the deaths in turn of Marcellus (23 B.C.), Marcus Agrippa (12 B.C.), and then his grandsons Lucius (A.D. 2) and Gaius (A.D. 4), after which Augustus was forced to fall back on Tiberius. even his brother Drusus enjoyed a more favourable affection: Drusus, younger brother of Tiberius and father of Gerrnanicus, was born in 38 and died in 9 B.C. T. mentions his popularity at 1.33.2 and 2.41.3. etiam ('even') implies that Tiberius' rivals for the succession were also 1110re popular than Tiberius; in other words, Tiberius was Augustus' last choice to succeed him. 51.2 his life was most of all on slippery ground: the prepositional phrase in lubrico is 'not uncommon' (G on 1.72.1, with examples from Cic., Curt. and Sen.). after he had received Julia in marriage: Julia, daughter of Augustus and his wife Scribonia (divorced in 39 B.C., the year of Julia's birth), was married in turn to Marcellus and Agrippa. By the latter she had sons, Gaius, Lucius and Agrippa Postumus and a daughter Agrippina, later wife of Germanicus. In 11 B.C. she married Tiberius, who had been compelled to divorce his wife, Vipsania Agrippina, mother of Drusus Caesar (d. A.D. 23, allegedly poisoned by Sejanus). Julia's notorious infidelities led to her formal exile in 2 B.C., and may have been a contributory factor in Tiberius' decision to retire to Rhodes in 6 B.C. For her death, possibly by starvation, in A.D. 14 see A. 1.53.1-2. declinans: for 'declinare in the sense of avoiding a person or place cf. 15.3 (patriami and H. 3.84.4 ioccursunu.

192

COMMENTARY

after returning from Rhodes: in A.D. 2. Though Tiberius had withdrawn to Rhodes of his own accord (but with Augustus' consent). he had to seek Augustus! permission to return to ROIne, and he was allowed to do so only on condition that he should take no part in public affairs (Suet. Tib . 13.2). Only with the death of Gaius in A.D. 4 was Augustus forced to bring Tiberius back into public life, a move signalled by the grant to hi111 (for the second time) of tribunician power and by his adoption (El 49). However, Tiberius, in turn, was required to adopt Gennanicus - a clear indication of the direction in which Augustus intended his dynastic plans to go; at the time Germanicus was about ]9 (he would die in A.D. 19, long before Tiberius' death). almost twenty-three years: from August or September A.D. 14 to March 37. Dio 58.28.5 is pedantically precise: 'he had lived seventy-seven years, four months and nine days, of which he had been sole ruler for twenty-two years, seven months and seven days. 51.3 The periods of his behaviour also were different: 'also' implies 'as had been the casus', Of those casus all but the last refer to events prior to his accession in A.D. 14; of the Ii ve periods or phases of his behaviour all but the first concern the almost twentythree years after his accession. Each of the first three periods is ended by the death of a member of the imperial family (Augustus in A.D. 14, Drusus in 23, Livia in 29), the fourth by the death of Sejanus (31), while the last ends only with his own death (37). Formally, each of the first four phases of Tiberius' behaviour is linked to another person (or persons) only by a chronological indication (temporal clause or abl. absolute); but since, in the case of the first and the fourth period (Augustus and Sejanus respectively) a causal connection is also implied, the reader is likely to assume (and may have been intended by Tacitus to assume) a causal connection also for the second period (Gerrnanicus and Drusus) and the third (Livia). What seems certain is that the five phases mark a progressive deterioration in Tiberius' behaviour. a period outstanding ... under Augustus: 'commands under Augustus' alludes in the briefest possible way to Tiberius' successful commands on Rome's northern frontiers. Though Velleius (2.99.4) refers to him as priuatus in fulsome terms during his stay on Rhodes. it is unlikely that by his use of priuatus Tacitus intends any reference to his exile on Rhodes; what he says of Rhodes in the preceding sentence and elsewhere (e.g. 4.57.2) scarcely fits the description of 'egregium uita famaque' with which this period is here typified. concealment and cunning at feigning virtues, as long as Germanicus and Drusus survived: the two adjectives occultutn and subdolum are neuter nominative, agreeing with t enipus (understood). Strictly speaking, they apply only to the period from Tiberius' accession in A.D. 14 to the death of his son Drusus in 23. That period, however, occupies slightly more than half of Tacitus' narrative of Tiberius' reign (Annals 1-3 and the opening chapters of Book 4), and the features that Tacitus notes here are cardinal characteristics of the portrait he draws of Tiberius. Tiberius' concealment of his thoughts and motives is emphasised by Tacitus. Suetonius and Dio alike. In Tacitus, even if one disregards instances where he is recording rumours or expressions of popular suspicion, there are many examples where concealment is attributed to Tiberius either by Tacitus' narrative or authorial statement. In addition to occultus (here and 1.33.1, 2.43.4, 4.52.3) T. makes frequent use of obscurus (1.33.2, 4.1.2 and note, 6.24.3) and the verbs tegere (1.81.2, 6.24.3 and 50.1)

COMMENTARY

193

and obtegere (1.76.1, 4.19.2 and here) - in several cases two or rnore of those words appear in the same pasage; see also dissimulatio and note at 6.50.1. Among the most notable passages are 1.11.2, 1.81.1-2, 2.43.4 and 6.24.3; from these passages it can be seen that it is preponderantly in dealing with the senate that Tiberius' deviousness manifests itself, and it is no accident that Tacitus' account of Tiberius' hesitancy in addressing the senate at its first meeting after Augustus' funeral is closely paralleled by the accounts in Suetonius (Tib. 25.1) and Dio (57.2-3). 'Cunning at feigning virtues': the adjective subdolus has already been used of Tiberius' language towards the senators in the final sentence of Book 1 (81.2), where the verb tegere is also used: 'specious language, but devoid of substance or actually deceitful' Cspeciosa uerbis, re inania aut subdo/a'). But whereas Tiberius' habit of concealment receives repeated mention in Tacitus' narrative, comment on the feigning of virtues is mostly less overt. Instead Tacitus uses a number of devices to undercut what would otherwise have been actions or statements of unqualified merit. Among the devices T. uses are (i) the use of species, especially in the ablative, to mark a contrast between appearance and reality (cf, speciosa ... re in 1.81.2, quoted above); (ii) the suggestion of alternative motives, one of which gives an unfavourable interpretation on what Tiberius says or does; (iii) the immediate juxtaposition, after a praiseworthy word or action, of some deed that instantly evokes adverse comment. The 'feigned virtues' to which Tacitus refers are not so much the ethical qualities praised by philosophers as those public virtues that distinguish the 'good' emperor from the 'bad'. What these are can be clearly seen from Suetonius' Lives, many of which have whole sections organized under the headings of 'virtues' and 'vices' (see Wallace-Hadrill [1983] 142-74). In addition to individual virtues, of which nioderatio and cletnentia are of particular importance for Tiberius, the adjective ciuilis (and the adverb ciuiliter: see 6.13.2 and note) refers more generally to cases where the emperor behaves towards others like a fellow citizen. That concept figures also in Dio 57.7-13 (under the Greek word 8T)IJ.OTlKOS), while Suetonius at Tib. 28 has the unique perciuilis (see 26.1 for ciui/is). But, whereas Suetonius and Dio are both speaking of genuine virtues, in all but one of the six passages where Tacitus uses ciuilis or ciuiliter of Tiberius (3.76.2 is a possible exception) the credit that would otherwise attach to him is denied or called into question. 'As long as Germanicus and Drusus survived': here, for the only time in the obituary, Tacitus names two people in the same period; and, since the deaths of Gennanicus (A.D. 19) and Drusus (A.D. 23) are separated by almost four years and by 1110re than a whole book (2.72: 4.8), it is not immediately obvious why Tacitus should regard the deaths of both young men as marking one single period. Moreover, Tiberius' attitude towards the two was markedly different. Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio all agree fA. 1.7.6; Suet. Tib. 25.2; Dio 57.3.1 and 4.1) that it was fear of Gerrnanicus that triggered his cautious behaviour on his accession, while A. 1.52.2 and 2.5.1 portray Tiberius openly honouring Germanicus but privately remaining hostile to him (cf. 4.1.1, with M-W note, 'nam Germanici mortem inter prospera ducebat'). By contrast, his praise of Drusus at 1.52.3 is genuine (fida oratione), as it is at 3.56.3-4 and 4.4.1. However, there is one respect in which Germanicus and Drusus are significantly linked: their careers, both military and political, were advanced pari passu. So A. 3.56.3 'while Germanicus lived, Tiberius had kept an impartial attitude between the two'; see W-M

194

COMMENTARY note and Levick (1966), where the equality of the treatement of the two is detailed. That explains why the two names should be linked together in this phase of the obituary, but it does not account for the linking of both names to the rubric of 'feigned virtues'. For, whereas, up to the death of Gennanicus and the ensuing trial of Cn. Calpurnius Piso, Tiberius' underlying insincerity in his dealings with Gennanicus is repeatedly stressed, in the (almost) four succeeding years till Drusus' death in A.D. 23 there is no hint that Tiberius' 'feigned virtues' are in any way motivated by suspicion of, or hostility towards, his son. But in Tiberius' dealings with the senate, the duplicity which had typified that relationship from the moment of his accession continued throughout the remaining years of Drusus' lifetime - the most striking instances being his behaviour during the trial of Aemilia Lepida in A.D. 20 (3.22-3) and his reaction to the condemnation, in his absence, of Clutorius Priscus in the following year (compare Tacitus' pejorative interpretation at 3.51.4 with the wholly neutral version given by Dio 57.20.3-4). For a further discussion of Tiberius' behaviour during these years and a comparison with its treatment by Suetonius and Dio see Appendix 2. a mixture of good and bad, while his mother lived: this period lasts from the death of Drusus in September of A.D. 23 to the death of Livia early in 29 (see 5.1.1n.). It seems strange that T. associates this period exclusively with Livia, since it is precisely the period that T. himself has signalized at the opening of A. 4 as the time when Sejanus firmly established his personal hold over Tiberius. Moreover, by the beginning of the period Li via was already eighty years old, and whatever her social and political influence had been during Augustus' lifetime and the first years of Tiberius' reign (that is, during what Tacitus has just itemised as the 'Germanicus and Drusus' phase), her importance as a public figure had by now dwindled away (for Livia's influence see Purcell [1986], though the evidence he adduces belongs almost entirely to the long period before Drusus' death in A.D. 23). That situation was accentuated by a growing estrangement between Tiberius and his mother (see 5.2.1n. The antagonism is recounted at some length in Suet. rib. 51 and Dio 58.2) and by the fact that, after his withdrawal to Capri in A.D. 27, physical contact between the two ceased. But the apparent anomaly is simply resolved. In A.D. 23 the 'bad' second half of Tiberius' reign, associated with the rise of Sejanus, begins. It is marked by the combined drive of Tiberius and Sejanus towards savagery tsaeuitia), but that drive was to some extent held in check by the respect that both Tiberius and Sejanus continued to show for Livia's authority (5.3). Her mitigating influence lay in the limited protection she was able to give to Agrippina and her son Nero (as she had done, earlier, to Julia, granddaughter of Augustus and sister of Agrippina) and to friends such as Plancina, Cn. Piso's widow, and Fufius Gerninus, consul in A.D. 29. All of the above survived during Livia's lifetime, and all perished during Tiberius' reign after her death. The bona, then, of this period included a number of cases where Livia's intervention was, or may reasonably have been thought to be, decisive - for her intervention on behalf of Plancina documentary evidence is provided by the Piso Inscription (SCPP 810; 111-5); the mala would include such cases as those of C. Silius in A.D. 24, Titius Sabinus in A.D. 28 and, above all, the 'show-case' trial of the historian Cremutius Cordus in A.D. 25; in all three cases the enmity of Sejanus was decisive. unspeakable in savagery, but with hidden lusts: cruelty, traditionally a characteristic of the tyrant and the most common vice ascribed to emperors in Suetonius' Lives, has

COMMENTARY

195

already been noted as a prominent feature of Tiberius' conduct at the beginning of Book 4. when. in A.D. 23. Sejanus had established an unchallenged influence over the emperor. But now, after Livia's death had removed her restraining influence, it has becolne 'unspeakable'; for intestabilis (already at 6.40.3) see Heubner's note on H. 4.42.5, where it is coordinated with saeuus. Alongside cruelty, for the first time in the obituary, Tacitus mentions Tiberius' sexual debauchery. In Tacitus' narrative the emperor's sexual depravity is not mentioned till A.D. 32 (6.1.1-2), though the wording does not preclude the possibility that Tiberius had begun his debauches on Capri at an earlier date. That would harmonise with Suetonius' account (42.1), according to which, after retiring to Capri (in A.D. 27) Tiberius, being removed from the gaze of citizens at Rome, 'let loose all at once the vices that he had for so long kept hidden'. But, in saying that Tiberius' lusts remained concealed during this period (A.D. 29-31), Tacitus is making another point: he foreshadows the final stage of the obituary notice, when, with the removal of all sense of shame and fear, Tiberius will finally hurl himself without restraint or concealment into both crimes and depravity. while he loved or feared Sejanus: unlike aut, which tends to have an exclusive force ('either a or b [but not both]'), -ue, like uel, implies rather 'a or b [no matter which],. But the real problem is whether Tacitus is speaking of alternatives that operated simultaneously or consecutively. On the whole, the second alternative seems more likely: dilexit is certainly applicable to Tiberius' relationship with Sejanus at 4.1.1 and (at least for the most part) until Tacitus' narrative breaks off in A.D. 29 (at 5.5), while we know 1'1'0111 Dio that at some time, 110t later than early in A.D. 31, Tiberius had learned of Sejanus' alleged plot against him, By this time Tiberius was certainly in fear of Sejanus and had to devise plans to undo Sejanus without allowing him any inkling of that intention (cf. Dio 58.4.1-3 and Suetonius Tib. 65.1-2). For the view that dilexit titnuitue applies simultaneously throughout the period A.D. 29-31 see Woodman (1998) 166 (Tiberius' affection. for Sejanus fostered his saeuitia, while his fear of him forced a cover-up of his libidines.'). finally he burst forth into crimes and enormities alike: when all those named individuals who had influenced Tiberius' behaviour in one way or another had died, Tiberius was left free to follow his own devices. 'crimes and enormities' (scelera ... ae dedecora) pick up the preceding 'savagery' (saeuitia) and 'lusts' tlibidinibusi; then the following 'shame' (pudore) and 'fear' tmetu) pick up (in reverse order) 'feared' (fiI11Uit) and 'lusts' tlibidinibus) and/or 'enormities' (dedecora). burst forth: prorumpere is used metaphorically of a powerful force, hitherto held back, bursting forth; cf. 5.3.1 n. postquam ... remoto metu: is a clear reminiscence of Sall. Hist. 1.12 'postquam remoto metu Punico'. According to Sallust, when the threat of Carthage had been removed by its destruction, Roman morals began to deteriorate (cf. SaIl. Jug. 41.2 and Velleius 2.1.1). The analogy in Tiberius' case is that his morals began to disintegrate, when fear of outside pressure was progressively removed; the analogy is all the more pertinent because points that used to be made about Rome are now more relevantly made about the single dominant individual. postquani with an imperfect indicative, common only in historians, especially Livy and Tacitus, 'describes a continuing situation which

196

COMMENTARY accounted for the action of the main clause, i.e, it gives a quasi-causal sense' (NLS p. ] 76 (5); see also K-St. II.356.5, where numerous examples are given). he followed only his own inclination: ingenio suo/mea uti, like Gk Ti] cPua€l XPTla8al idiomatically Ineans 'follow one's own bent or inclination'; cf. Curt. 8.8.4 and Petrone 64.9; see also Liv. 3.36.1 'suo iam inde uiuere ingenio coepit'. The obituary of Tiberius forms a striking and effective closure to Annals] -6. But it also poses problems, of which the most puzzling is the possible inconsistency between the statement at the beginning of A. 4 (6.1) that it was only then, in A.D. 23, that Tiberius' reign changed for the worse ('Tiberio mutati in deterius principatus initiurn ille annus attulit') and the explanation given in the obituary, namely that Tiberius' basic character ting eniuni) was innately bad, but that that badness was concealed till the deaths of Germanicus and Drusus. That problem, however, takes on a quite different complexion, if the radically different view of Woodman (1998) is accepted. Woodman takes the final sentence of the obituary ('suo tantum ingenio utebatur') to mean 'he had only himself to rely on' and affirms that ingeniuni here 'has nothing to do with character at all'. For a fuller discussion of these problems see Appendix 2.

197

Appendix 1 The financial crisis of A.D. 33 (6.16-17)

Texts and translations of the relevant passages of Suetonius and Cassius Dio and a summary of Tacitus' account are given below. To facilitate comparison between the three accounts symbols, inserted within square brackets, are used as follows: A1, A2, A3 signify earlier attempts to remedy the situation; B signifies the final solution - Tiberius' loan of 100 million sesterces. SU,ETONIUS, Tiberius 48.1 Tiberius displayed public munificence ... by loaning, interest-free for three years, the sum of a hundredmillion sesterces [B]. This he was forced to do when the people demanded assistance in a time of great financial difficulty, after he had authorised by means of a decree of the senate that moneylenders should invest two-thirds of their patrimony in land, while debtors should pay the same UITIOunt of their debt forthwith - without the problem being solved [A3]. Publice munificentiam ... exhibuit, proposito milies sestertium gratuito in trienni tempus ... id magna difficultate nummaria populo auxilium flagitante coactus est facere, cum per senatus consultum sanxisset ut faeneratores duas patrimonii partes in solo collocarent, debitores totidem aeris alieni statim soluerent, nee res expediretur.

TACITUS, Annals 6.16-17 [For Latin text and translation see Text and Translation ad loc.; what follows here is an extended paraphrase. designed to show the main similarities and differences between Tacitus' account and those of Suetonius and Dio.] Meanwhile there was an outburst of prosecutions against moneylenders who were violating the provisions of the law of Julius Caesar [A 1], which had long fallen into disuse [there follows a short excursus on the earlier attempts to control usury]. The numbers of those at risk (sc. through prosecution) were so great that the praetor in charge of the judicial proceedings, one Gracchus, referred the matter to the senate, which - since so many of its members were involved - asked Tiberius to grant some alleviation. This he did, granting a moratorium of eighteen months [A2] for people to put their financial affairs in order. From this therearose a general money shortage, since all debts were simultaneously affected, and also because the number of convictions, followed by the sale and confiscation of their property, resulted in large quantities of coined money being held in the public treasuries offisclis or aerariuni. Further, the senate had enacted thatthose lending money should invest two-thirds of their capital (jaenus) in land in Italy [A3] (compare with [A3] in Suetonius above. and for the alleged omission by Tacitus of the other half of the decree, namely that

198

APPENDIXES

affecting debtors, see commentary). But this measure misfired, because creditors were demanding repayment of their debts in full and banked all their money for buying land (instead of making one-third available - as the senatorial decree had enacted - for moneylending), whereas the debtors, in a situation where the bottom had dropped out of land prices, were forced to sell cheap, with the result that many of them were bankrupted. The resulting loss of position and good name idignitas andfallla are both particularly, though not exclusively, aj.plicable to senators) aggravated the crisis, which was only resolved by Tiberius' massive loan of 100,000,000 sesterces: this was to be available to debtors free of interest for a period of three years on the security of property to double the value of the loan [B]. Thus public confidence was restored; and gradually private lenders came back into the marker,

CASSIUS DID 58.21.4-5 Nerva, no longer able to endure Tiberius' company, starved himself to death, principally because Tiberius had renewed the laws on contract established by Caesar, from which much distrust and disorder was likely to result [A1] ... consequently Tiberius modified the situation concerning loans and gave a hundred million sesterces to the public treasury to be lent out by senators to those in need without interest for three years [B]. Kat 6 NEpouas llTlKETl TT}V auvoualav aUTou cPEpWV Qn€KapTEPTlO'€ 8la T€ TQAAa, Kat jJ.clAla8' OTl .TOUS VOliOUS TOUS rrspl TWV aUIl~oAa(wv uno TOU Ka(O'apos T€8EVTUS,Ee ci)v Kat anlaTla Kat TapaXT} nOAAT} Y€vt10'€0'6al €1l€AA€V, av€V€wO'aTo, ... TO T€ npaYlla TO KaTel Tel 8av€(allaTa EIl€Tp(aO'€, Kat 8lO'XlA(as Kat rrevrmcootuc jJ.uplcl8as T4) 8Tllloal4l l8WK€V WO'T' aUTas un' Qv8pwv ~OUA€UTWV clTOK€t Tols 8€OjJ.EVOlS ES rptc ETTl EK8av€la6f\vat.

A short modern bibliography, beginning with the seminal work of Tenney Frank, is appended. Frank, T. 'The Financial Crisis of 33 A.D.', A1Ph 56 (1935) 336-41. Frank, T. All Economic Survey ofAncient Rome 5 (1940) 32-5. Frederiksen (1966). Crawford, M. 'Money and Exchange in the Roman World', lRS (1970) 40-8 [see esp. pp. 467 with nne 65-7]. Jones, A.H.M. (1974). Duncan-Jones, R.P. The Economy of the R0111an Empire: Quantitative Studies, 1974; 19822 [should be read in conjunction with the reviews of K.R. Bradley, A1Ph 96 (1975) 224-9 and A.N. Sherwin-White, CR 26 (1976) 244-6, both of which raise important reservations]. Rodewald, C. Money ill the Age of Tiberius, 1976 [extensive notes provide a useful survey of earlier literature]. Garnsey, P. and Saller, R. (1987). Howgego, C.J. (1992) [with an important bibliography on pp. 30-1].

APPENDIXES

199

Appendix 2 The Obituary of Tiberius (6.51.3) At the first meeting of the senate after the funeral of Augustus Tiberius' language was described as deliberately concealing what he really felt (1.11.2), and in the days immediately before his death Tacitus writes (6.50.1) that, though his bodily strength was failing, Tiberius' capacity for concealment (dissinzulatio) had not yet left him. The final section of the lastchapter of Book 6 offers, or seems to offer, the reader the key to understanding Tiberius' enigmatic character. Yet even when due allowance is made for the concision and selectivity that characterises the Tacitean obituary, interpretation of 6.51.3 is not without its difficulties. Moreover, there may seem to be an incompatibility between the picture that emerges from the obituary and what Tacitus' own account says at the beginning of A. 4 (esp. 1.1 and ch. 6), according to which, until A.D. 23, the reign of Tiberius had been one of almost unqualified excellence. The generally accepted interpretation of the obituary has been that it is only in the fifth and final period of his life that Tiberius' true character (his ingeniumi is fully revealed, after the restraining influence of a series of named individuals has, one by one, been removed; that interpretation has been challenged by Woodman (1989), who affirms that ingenium here has 'nothing to do with character at all' and that Germanicus, Drusus, Livia and Sejanus were helpers whose assistance was progressively lost to Tiberius 'through death or treachery or both'. Though Woodman's hypothesis has not won general acceptance, a number of his criticisms of the traditional interpretation are pertinent and, at the very least, call for a modification of the traditional view. Woodman's own view begins with a point of Latinity: in the final phrase of the obituary ('suo tantum ingenio utebatur') enclitic tantum (he argues) emphasises the preceding suo and implies a contrast with earlier periods of Tiberius' life, when he 'had used the ingenium of other people as well as his own' (the italics are Woodman's). He then goes on to compare H. 1.90.2 ('ut in consiliis militiae Suetonio Paulino et Mario Celso, ita in rebus urbanis Galeri Trachali ingenio Othonem uti credebatur'), where ingenio ... uti, as the context clearly shows, means 'employ the talent' (sc. as scriptor orationisi. Woodman then argues that what links Germanicus, Drusus, Livia and Sejanus together in Tacitus' account is that he used their talents as partners in his Principate. It is true that from Tiberius' accession in A.D. 14 till their deaths in 19 and 23 respectively Germanicus and Drusus served as Tiberius' adiutores, as did Sejanus from 23 till the beginning of 31, the year in which he was executed. But the role of adiutor to Tiberius cannot apply to the first period of the obituary, when Tiberius was himself subordinate to Augustus, nor is it applicable to the third period of the obituary (from 23 to 29), when the relationship between Tiberius and his mother was one of increasing antagonism (see commentary at 6.51.3 for details). Moreover, even in the period that ends with the deaths of Germanicus and Drusus Woodman's hypothesis has a crucial weakness in that he makes no attempt to explain why Tacitus signalizes that period as one of 'concealment and cunning at feigning virtues.' But that statement fits naturally into the traditional interpretation of the obituary, according to which Tiberius' innate wickedness is progressively unmasked as, one by one, those who had hitherto

200

APPENDIXES

influenced his behaviour were removed by death. That interpretation is decisively endorsed by the arguments set out in the commentary at 6.51.3 under the lemmata 'postquam ... remoto metu' and 'he followed only his own inclination'. Though the traditional view of the Tiberian obituary seems to be essentially sound, it has its difficulties. Two in particular need consideration. First, the idea that each of the five individuals named in the obituary can equally be described as restraining influences palpably fails to give an adequate description of the role of Sejanus. From the beginning of Book 4 he is depicted as encouraging, rather than restraining, Tiberius' proclivity to cruelty tsaeuitiar; only in the penultimate period of the obituary (from 29-31) is there clear reference to Sejanus' exercising restraint on Tiberius. But that flaw in the traditionalinterpreation of the obituary can be simply rectified if we speak - as does Pelling (1997), 120 - of Tiberius' life being split up into phases, 'as different individuals checked or influenced Tiberius' actions' (italics added). A second difficulty is less easy to resolve. If each of the individuals named in the obituary in some way significantly affects Tiberius' behaviour,in what way do Gennanicus and Drusus influence Tiberius ' 'concealment and feigning virtues'? In the commentary it is argued that it is primarily in his dealings 'with the senate that Tiberius' concealment and feigning of virtues arc shown, From the outset of his reign he treats the senate with a formal correctness, as though it still retained the authority it had held during the Republic; so at 1.7.3 'tamquam uetere re publica'. But ultimate power now rested with the Princeps, and it was easy to interpret Tiberius' deference towards the senate as hypocrisy. That interpretation did not originate with Tacitus, for it is stated at length by both Suetonius (Tib. 24-5) and Dio (57.34.1) at the outset of Tiberius' reign. But it is only Tacitus who makes of Tiberius' hypocrisy a characteristic that continues till the death of Drusus in A.D. 23 and who makes that event the point at which Tiberius' reign took a decisive turn for the worse (4.6.1). For though Suetonius and Dio, too, believed that there was a single point at which Tiberius' reign took a significant change for the worse, they placed it differently from Tacitus. For Dio the turning point carne in A.D. 19, when Germanicus' death relieved Tiberius of his fear of a possible rival (57.4.1, 6.2-3, 19.1 and 8), while Suetonius placed the turning point in A.D. 26, when Tiberius retired to Capri and, 'having gained the licence of privacy ... unleashed together all the vices that he had long concealed' (Tib. 42.1). The different junctures that Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio chose for Tiberius' change for the worse reflect different approaches to the way in which they each portrayed his reign. For Tacitus - and for him only - the death of Drusus is made to coincide with the establishment of Sejanus' undisputedintluence over Tiberius, and that in turn dictates the structure of Annals 1-6. with its division of the six books into two triads. That dichotomy is underlined at the beginning of Book 4 (4.7.1), where Tacitus states that, as long as Drusus survived, the general excellence that typified the early years of Tiberius' reign continued, because up to this point Sejanus wished to become known by the good advice (bona consilio) that he offered. That is, he encouraged Tiberius at this time to continue displaying the uirtutes which were a feature of his reign during those years. In order that the reader may be left in no doubt of Tiberius' hypocrisy in his dealings with the senate the statement Tacitus makes at 1.7.3 (quoted above) is reinforced by his authorial comment at 1.11.2 and further emphasised by three phrases at the end of Book 1: 74.5 .'manebant etiam turn uestigia morientis libertatis'; 77.3 'silente Tiberio, qui ea simulacra libertatis senatui praebebat'; 81.2 'quantoque maiore libertatis imagine tegebantur, tanto

APPENDIXES

201

eruptura ad infensius seruitium'. Thus, by the end of A. 1 the leitmotif of Tiberius' dealings with the senate is firmly established (it is unlikely that Woodman's attempt ([1998], 40-69) to disprove this, the universally accepted interpretation, will convince many readers). It is in the sphere of relations between Tiberius and the senate, then, that examples of hypocrisy involving Germanicus and Drusus are to be looked for. In the case of Germanicus the evidence is straightforward. According to the tradition accepted alike by Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio, at the time of his accession Tiberius was afraid that Germanicus might, with popular approval, prefer to seize supreme power rather than wait to inherit it from Tiberius. Though there is no likelihood that Germanicus entertained such an ambition, Tibcrius may well have been apprehensive of it. Whatever the facts, throughout the rest of Gcrmanicus' life, Tiberius, while using Gennanicus' services, sustained an ill-concealed personal antagonism towards him, Two instances exemplify Tiberius' hypocrisy as he praised Gcnnanicus: first, the praise he heaped on Gerrnanicus before the senate for quelling the mutiny of the German legions in A.D. ]4 was too lavish to be thought sincere (1.52.1-2); secondly, in Tacitus' treatment of Tiberius' attitude during the trial of Piso on charges of insubordination against Gennanicus and of suspected murder Tiberius' insincerity is handled much more subtly, and can only be fully understood by comparing Tacitus' version with the official record contained in the SCPP (1996); for details see W-M 110-18. Though there is some evidence of personal friction between Tiberius and Drusus (slight in Tacitus- see A. 1.76.3 with Gn. - and in Suetonius, Tib. 52.1, stronger in Dio 57.13.1-2), there is nothing to suggest that Tiberius had any reason to suspect his son's loyalty. So, in A.D. 21 he shared the consulship with Drusus and in the following year asked the senate to confer on Drusus tribunicia potestas, thereby virtually designating Drusus as his successor. During this period, which saw a de facto advancement in Drusus' share in government (see, especially, 3.31 and 36-7, when Tiberius was absent in Campania), Tacitus' narrative mostly gives a favourable account of relations between Princeps and senate; but there are still occasions when Tacitus' comment indicates his belief that Tiberius' behaviour 'tamquam ueterc re publica' masked the reality that real power lay with him. On two of these occasions the position of Drusus was involved. In A.D. 20, when Drusus was consul designate, Tiberius excused him from being the first to give his verdict in the trial of Aemilia Lepida. That, Tacitus says, was thought by some to be 'ciuile' (an act in keeping with republican tradition). Tacitus clearly sided with the alternative interpretation: Tiberius wanted Lepida to be convicted, but did not wish Drusus to incur the odium of being the first to propose that verdict (see 3.22.4 with W-Mn.). But the most revealing comment comes at 3.60.1 ('Sed Tiberius, uirn principatus firmans, imaginern antiquitatis senatui praebebat'). At 3.56 Tiberius had asked the senate to confer tribunicia potestas on Drusus; therein lay the reality of power in the Principate. Now he could allow the senate to exercise a function that it had possessed under the Republic, the claims of twelve cities in the province of Asia to confirm their rights of asylum, The dichotomy between real power and the semblance of senatorial independence was precisely the contrast that Tacitus had set out at 1.7.3-5 as a template of Tiberius' hypocrisy, and Tacitus' intention that the same interpretation of hypocrisy should be understood here is made clear by the fact that he here uses language that is virtually identical with that which he had used at 1.77.3 to convey Tiberius' hypocrisy; cf. 'ea simulacra libertatis senatui praebebat' at 1.77.3 and 'imaginem antiquitatis senatui praebebat' at 3.60.1.

202

APPENDIXES

Whether, as a matter of historical fact, hypocrisy is the true explanation of Tiberius' conduct during this phase of his Principacy (A.D. 14-23) is open to question. But the evidence of Annals 1-3 is proof that Tacitus wished Tiberius' behaviour during those years to be so interpreted. And that applies equally to the four years after Germanicus' death and to the preceding years (A.D. 14-19) when both Germanicus and Drusus were alive. Tacitus includes both names in the second phase of Tiberius' obituary because his behaviour during that period was conditioned by the presence of both his potential heirs. His conduct would change when both were dead and Sejanus had asserted his own influence over Tiberius. That period would begin - according to Tacitus' narrative - in A.D. 23; but for a further six years Sejanus' influence too would be subject to a last restraining influence within the imperial family - that of Tiberius' mother, Livia.

203

Indexes 1 GENERAL ace, w. passive verb, 118, 181-2 ({CIlI

diurna, 120

acta senatus, 100-1

adj. for noun: see Index 2 S.vv. cuncta , egregium,

eunuchs, 168-9 exile, varying degrees of severity, 164, 188 fabulosus, 161 Fasti Ostienses, 106, 139, 142,156,190 fate and chance, 147

extrema, inuninentia. lubricum, nouissima adj. + Greek ace., 125 adulatio, 114, 140

[eriae Latinae, 127

banishment, types of: see S.v. exile banks, 138

Gaius: delivers Livia's funeral speech, 98; plot against, 115; alleged immorality, 117; his marriage, 143-4; joins Tiberius on Capri, 144; his character, 144; courted by Macro, 185; as possible successor of Tiberius, 186; during Tiberius' last hours, 191 gardens, Roman, 111 Gemonian Steps, 107, 154 genitive after ae qu us, 174; i n ce rt us, 186; intellegens, 107; multi, 110; o ccult u s. 174; praestans, 118; retinens, 181; trepi dus, 147; uetus, 130, 182 gerund(ive) in abI. (for ill + abI.), 122 Greek words in Tacitus (generally avoided), 118

adultery, 163, 179 aerariutu, 113, 137 aerariummilitare, 105 anastrophe of prepositions: see Index 2 S.vv. ad. apud, inter. iuxta annalistic framework ignored, 176 anticipatory notices, 188 'appendix' sentence, 100, 110, 134, 144, 166 aqua et igni interdicere, 140, 164 Arval Brethren, 129 astrology, 145-7 at Romae, 112, 161 authorial comment, cross references etc.: 115, 120-1, 127, 157, 179, 185, 187; 109, 120 (both exx. of 'unsuccessful enquiry')

Caligula; see s.v, Gaius Cassius Dio: see Dio coincidence, fascinating, 154 conditional cl., mixed, 115, 174 consular dating, 97, 110, 133, 150, 167, 178, 185 corn supply, 130-1 cura principis, 116 Curti us Rufus, imitated, 121-2 custody, 115 dative of agent, 180 diadem. 175 Dio Cassius: only the longer and more important passages are listed: (55.11.1-3), 146; (57.2-3), 193; (57.3-4.1), 200; (57.7-13), 193; (57.19.4), 145; (57.20.3-4), 194; (58.2), 194; (58.2.1,5,6), 98; (58.4.1-3),195; (58.8.3), 119~ (58.11.5), 106; (58.13.1),152; (58.15 .1),162; (58.17.3), 113; (58 .17.3-4), 135; (58.18.3-4), 114; (58.18.5), 135; (58.19.3), 121; (58.21.4), 178; (58.21.4-5), 135, 154; (58.21.5), 142; (58.22.23), 141; (58.23 .3), 186; (58.24.3-5), 163-4; (58.25.1) , 109; (58.25.2), 143; (58.25.2-3), 176; (58.25.2-4), 109; (58.25.3), 177; (58.26.5), 183; (58.27.1), 158-9; (58.27.4), 187, 189; (58.28.3), 191; (58.28.4),185,186; (61.2.1),150 Drusus , rumour of false, 107-9 'dying': terms for, 127 Epicureans, 147-8 Etesian winds, 171

financial crisis, 135-9 and Appendix 1 Fire at Rome, 183-4 fiscus 113, 137

Herodotus, on the phoenix, 158-61 historic inf., 154, 172, 173; in subord. cI., 142, 182

insulae ('tenements'), 183-4 interest rates, 136-7

inaiestas, 101, 124, 140,163,187

maladministration, by provincial governor, 162-3 marriageable age for women, 133-4 Medicean manuscript, gap in, 102 metaphors: see nn. on commercium, 142; dimotis...parietibus, 153; exardescere, 112, 154; exstinguotri, 151; exuere, 122; innutritus, 188; inritare, 142; lubricum; 189; moles, 174; oblitttterare, 116; perstringere, 99; praeruptus, 99; prorumpere, 99, 115, 195; retundere, 110; ri niari, 115; s e nii n a; 186; sinus, 185; undantem...sanguinem, 177; urgens, 99 mines, 141

miraculum, 161 moderatio, 98, 157 modestia, 98

Myth ofEr (Plato), 148-9

nobiles, 134, 157

nobilitas, 134, 157

nomen and cognomen, inverted order, 128

obituaries, 126-7; of Tiberius, 191 -6 and Appendix 2 obsequium, ambivalent meaning of, 123

INDEX 1: GENERAL

204

PU11hia, see Index 3 s.v. Parthi Parthian shot, 173 Phoenix. 158-61; filial piety of, 161 planets, 148 Pliny the Elder, 011 the phoenix, 158-61 praefectus urbi (Prefect of the City), 127-8, 157 quindecintuiri sacrisfaciundis, 129-30 Rostra, 98 rumours, 152 Sallust, imitated, 147, 150, 170 Sejanus: deference towards Livia, 99; urges Tiberius to act against Agrippina and Nero Caesar, 100; his property confiscated, 113; execution of his younger children, 106-7; mass execution of his supporters, 142; his influence over Tiberius summarised, 195-6 senatus consultuni de Pisone patre (SCPP), 155 Sibylline Books, 129 singular, collective use of, 170 Stoics, 148-9 subjunctive: after donee, 110, 172; after , quamquam, 191; polite perfect, 104; frequentative, 112, 147 Suetonius: only themore important parallels are listed; except where otherwise stated references are to Suetonius' Life of Tiberius: (14.4), 146; (24-5),200; (25.1),193; (26 .1),193; (28), 193; (42),195; (43-4),111;(47),184;(48.1),135, 184; (51), 194; (51.2), 99; (53.2), 153; (54.2), 151;(61.2),125; (61.4),142; (65.1-2),195; (65.2), Ill , 152; (66), J68; (67.1), 1] 8; (68.4), 186; (72 .2-3),186,190; (73.2),191; (Cal. 10.1~ 2) , 144-5; 12.1), 143; (Cal. 12.2), 185, 191; (Galba 4.1), 145; iv« 2.3), 106 suouetauriliu, 174-5

«:«.

suppliciunt, 115 Tarpeian Rock, 141 theatre, seats in, 113-14 Tiberius: relations with Livia (Augusta), 97-100, 117,155; with Agrippina, 97-101,152-5; with the sons of Agrippina and Germanicus (Nero Caesar, JOO-l, 156; Drusus Caesar, 151-3; Gaius (Caligula), see Index I); with Sejanus, see Index 1 fama, attitude towards, 166; moderatio and modestia, see Index 2; munificence, 139, 184; buildings, 184 dissimulatio, 189-90; 'feigned virtues', 193-4; his obituary, 191-6 and Appendix 2; sexual practices, 111-12; prophecy about Tiberius, 146; prophecy by Tiberius, 145; interest in astrology, 145-7

retirement to Capri (Capreae), Ill, 125; visits mainland, 143-4, 177 letters to and from senate, 100, 101, 112; increases penalty decreed by senate, 114; upholds Augustan precedent, 114; strategy for handling relations with Parthia, 169 treasury, see aerarium andIiselis Triumvirs, 97 Twelve Tables, the, 136 tyrants, 118 usury, 136 uariatio: abl.-adverb, 173; abL-:-prep., 184; abl.abs.-causal cl., 137; · advo.~abl. means, 173; dative~ill. + acc., 168; gerr.description-eadj., 165; noun-s-causal cl., 162; noun-si, 173; anmis-i-flumen, 175; m o d o-i-aliquando, 173; various, 105 verbatim quotation, 118 uirtus, 170

2 LATIN WORDS lid (in anastrophe), 174

addi to

lit,

99

adigere, 173 adpropinquare, 190 adueutare, J82 aduersu111/·liS , 181

aduettere, 107

adutatorius, 170

aduolui,189

aegritudo, 106 aequus + gen., 174 albens, 175 aliqualldo, 173 a/tor, 176 cuuuis, 175 amoenitas, 98 amoenus, 114 all,177 apiscor (+ gen.), 185

apud (in anastrophe), 169, 174

aqua et igni interdicere, 140, 164 artes, 119, 185

astrologi, 145 astu, 169 at Rotuae, Index 1 auxiliator, 175 ill barbarum, 180-1

circumfluus, 175

ciuilis, 131, 193 claritudo, 127, 172 clementia, 105 columen, 175 couunentarii, (101), 187 comprimere, 107 consultor, 126 cuncta, 102 cunctus, 102

declillare, 135 deportare, 188 denubere, J56

diademll,175

INDEX 2: LATIN WORDS dignitas, 138 dirac, 152

discessio, 129

dissitnII IIIrio, 189-90 distrahere ('deploy'), 173 egregiuni, 152

elegantia, 106 eludere, J86 exardesco, 153 cxitio habere, 165 exitu auni, 109 explere, 190 exspes, 152 exstinguoir), 151 extretua, 102 extrema auni, 156 exuere, 122, 144

facere (enlist'), 170 [aeuus (capital'), 138 [atna, 166 [atiscoir), 120-1

fine anni, 132, 177 finire (= mori), 19 J finis, 104 [innate, 118-19 fixus (ill + acc.), 191 [oret, 115 .Ii III liS tcensotium, publicum), 128-9, 156-7 gllllell,117 gllza, 168 genitalis (hora, dies), 146-7 gliscere, 142 guarus. 173 grates agere, 113,154 gratari, 190

ictus (shots'), 173 imago, 157 ilJllIJallis.144

inuueusum (adverb), 175 immillelltia.IOl iutpietas, 187 inardescere, 169 incelebra III, 121 incernun au, 97 incertus (+ gen.), 186 inclutus, 175 induere. 144, 170, 180 informis, 189 ingeuio uti, 196 inglorius, 175 ingruere, 176 inlicere, 174 inquies, 140 inritare, 142 inter (in anastrophe), 180 intestabilis. 179, 195 ill trorsus, 171 inuisior, "116 iuuenta, J30

205

iuxta (+ ace.), J3 J, J8 J; (in anastrophe), 107 libldinosus, 116 lubricum, 189 magus, 163 malo (predic. Dative), 141 tnarcidus, J 16

mathemalici,145 mensae ('banks'), 138 moderatio, Index I inodestia, Index 1 moles, 174 mOlleri,107 multi (+ gen.), 110

lIecare, 125

IIi, 115

nobilitas, 134, 157

nostri (pronoun for adj.), 148

nouendialis, 117 nouissima, 105 oblisus, 107 obscurus, 153 obsidiuni, 172

obsitus, 181

occultus (+ gen.), 174

paedo,., 182 patres (= senatus), 100 penes, 182 peregrinatio, 132 perimere, 151 perstringere, 99 placitum, 106 postquam (+ imperf, indic.), 195-6 potiri (+ gen.), 98, 128 praefectus urbi, Index 1 praefestinare, 108 praeruptus, 99

praeses (= 'governor'), 180

praestans, 118 principia anni, 112 priscus, 131

prodigentia, 132

properus, 182

prorumpere, 99, 115, 195 prouiuere, 153 pulsus uenaruni, 190 quaestio, 137

(+ abl. abs.), 107; postpositive, 107, 165; (+ perfect subjunctive), 191 quasi, 99, 113, 177 quis/qulbus, 123, 174

qlUIIIIl/LUl11l

recells,I27 reor, 153 repens, 120 retundere, 110 rimari, 115

rursunt/-us, (136), 182

INDEX 2: LATIN WORDS

206 saltus, 172 sanctus, 119 sapieutia, 118,157

tempestas (for tempus), (121), (164), 172 tempus, per/sub idem, 107, 126, 142 Tiberiolus, 118

scalprum , 106

trepidus (+ gen.), 147 tristitia, 179

satias, 176

tractate, 182

sceptuchi, 170

sellarii,112 Si111111 (+

uanescere, 107

abl.) (postpositive), 125

sottiri tprouinciann, 179 species, (III), 153

uelut, 99, 108 uetus (+ gen.), 130, 182 uis (= niultitudot, 135 unciarium tfaenus), 136

spintriae, 112 stuprunt, 6.1.1, 112 subdolus, 144, 192-3 ta111Cjlla111,

lIrgens, 99

lIu/gum,182

109, 153, 174

3 NAMES All dates are A.D. unless otherwise stated. An asterisk indicates that an individual also appears on the Stell1I1la. Abdagaeses, 175, 182

Abdus (eunuch), 168 Abudius Ruso, 164 Acerronius Proculus, Cn. (cos. 37), 185 Achaia, 107-8 Acutia, 186 Aeetes, 172 Aegaeum mare, 108 Aegyptus, 158-161 Aelius Gallus, 105 Aelius Lamia, L. (cos. 3), 156 Aelius Seianus, L., 99, 195-6 *Aemilia Lepida, 179 Aernilii, 163 Aemilius Lepidus, MI. (cos. 11), 117 "Aemilius Lepidus, M. (cos. 6), 117 Africa, 130 Agrippa Haterius, see Haterius *Agrippa Vipsanius, M. 191 *Agrippina (the Elder), 97-101,152-5 Albani, 170-2 Albucilla, 187-8 Alexander Magnus, 168 Arnasis, 160 Annius Pollio, C. (cos. 21 or 22), 124 Annius Vinicianus, L., 124 Anthemusias, 180 Apronius, L. (cos. 8), 165 Arabes, Arabia, 160, 183 Archelaus (Cappadox), 179 Armenia, 166-8, 179 Arruntius Camillus Scribonianus, L. (cos. 32), 110 Arrunrius, L. (cos. 6), 118-19, 157, 187-8 Arsaces, 167, 170 Arsacidae, 167,169 Artabanus, 167-70, 181-3 Artaxata, 170 Artaxias, 166-7 Artemita, 180 Aruseius, L., 119, 178 Asia, 107-8 Asinius Gallus, C. (cos. 8 B.C.), 150-1, 153

Auentinus, 183 Augusta, see Li uia *Augustus, 191-2 Aurelius, see Cotta Blaesi, 178-9 Blaesus, see Iunius Cadra, 180 *Caesar, C. (grandson of Augustus), 191 *Caesar, L. (grandson of Augustus), 191 Caesilianus, 119 Caligula, see Gaius in Index 1 Caluisius Sabinus, C. (cos. 26), 124 Camillus, see Arruntius

Campania, III Caninius Gallus, L. (cos. 2 B.C.), 129 Capitolium, 130 Capreae (Capri), Ill, 143-4 Carmanii, 174-5 Carsidius Sacerdos, 188 Caspia uia, 171 Cassii, 113 Cassius Longinus, L. (cos. 30), 133-4, 184 Celsus, Iulius, 125, 132 Cestius Gallus, C. (cos. 35), 120, 167 Chaldaei, 145 Charicles, 190 Cietae, 179 Cilicia, 168 Cilnius, see Maecenas Circus Maximus, 183 Claudia (gens, donuts), 123, 191 Claudia (Iunia Claudilla, wife of Caligula), 144, 185 *Claudius, 170, 185 *Claudius Drusus, see Drusus *Claudius Nero, Ti., 97 Cocceius Nerva, M. (cos. 21 or 22), 154-5 Colchi,172 Considius, 105 Considius Proculus, 139-140

INDEX 3: NAMES Corinth, 109 Cornelius, 164 Cotta Messallinus, M. Aurelius Maximus (cos. 20), 100, 117, 119

Ctesiphon, 180 Curtius Atticus, 126 Cyclades, 108 Cyrus, 168 Dalmatia, 175 Dauara, 180

Denter ROI1UllillS, 127 *Dolnitills Ahenobarbus, Cn. (cos. 32), 110, 187 *Drusilla, Iulia, 134 *Drusus (Julius Caesar, son of Tiberius), 156 *Drusus (Nero Claudius, brother of Tiberius), 124, 191 *Drusus (Julius Caesar, son of Germanicus), 1513 Elylnaei, 182 Ennia, 185 Erythrae, 130 Euphrates, 169, 175 Fabius Persicus, Paullus (cos. 34), 158 Fufius Geminus, C. (cos. 29), 97, 99, 125 Fulcinius Trio, L. (cos. 31), 109, 116, 176 *Gaius, see Index 1 Galba, Ser. Sulpicius (cos. 33), 133, 145 Geminius, 132 Gemoniae (scalae), see Index 1 Germania, 164-5 *Gennanicus (son of Drusus), 97-8, 108, 119, 133, 155-6, 168, 185, 193-4

207

Junius Otho, 187 Junius Rusticus, 100 Junius Silanus, C. Appius (cos. 28), 125 Junius Silanus, M. (cos. 15), 144 Laelius Balbus, 186, 188-9 Latinae Feriae, see Index 1 Lentulus Gaetulicus, Cn. Cornelius (cos. 26), 1645 Lesbos, 114 Libo Drusus, M. Scribonius, 126 *Liuia (wife of Augustus; Julia Augusta at 5.1, elsewhere Augusta), 97-100, 117, 155-6 *Liui(ll)a (wife of Drusus), 112-13, 163 Liuius Drusus (trib. pl. 91 B.C.), 97 Lucanius Latiaris, 115 Lucretius Sp., 127 Lucullus, L. Licinius, 190 Macedones, 160 Macedonia, 108 Macro, Q. Naeuius Cordus Sutorius, 134-5, 152, 163,176,185,187

Maecenas, Cilnius C., 128 "Marcellus, M. (son of Octavia), 191 Marius, Sex., 141 Medea, 172 Memmius Regulus, P. (cos. 31), 109 Mesopotamia, 183 Messalla Coruinus , M. Valerius (cos. 31 B.C.), 128

Minucius Thermus, 119 Misenum, 190 Mithridates Hiberus, 169 Moesia, 108,162

Gracchus (praetor), 137 Granius Marcianus, 177

*Nero, 150 *Nero Julius Caesar (son of Germanicus), 100-1,

Halus, 180 Haterius Agrippa, D. (cos. 22), 116 Heliopolis, 159 Hiero, 182 Hispania (-iae), 141, 157 Hyrcani, 174

Nero, Ti. Claudius (father of Tiberius), 97,191 Nerua, see Cocceius Nicephorium, 180 Nicopolis, 108 Numa Marcius, 127

Iaso (Jason), 172 Iberians (Hiberi), 169 IIiU111, 130 Ionium mare, 108-9 Italicae coloniae, 130 lulia (gens, donius), 97, 123 *Iulia Augusta, see Liuia *Julia (daughter of Augustus), 191 *Iulia Liuilla (daughter of Germanicus), 134 *Iulia (daughter of Tiberius' son, Drusus), 156 Julius Caesar, 136 Iulius Celsus, 125, 132 Julius Marinus, 126 Junia Claudilla, see Claudia Iunius Blaesus, Q. (cos. 10), 105 Junius Blaesus, Q. (cos. 26), 178-9 Junius Gallio, L., 113-4

156

Ornospades, 175 Orodes, 170 Palatiurn, 151 Papinius, Sex. (cos. 36), 178 Papinius, Sex. (his son), 189 Parthia, 166-8; chs. 31-7, 41.2-44 Passienus Crispus, C. Sallustius (cos. suff. 27; ord. 44),145

Paxaea, 162 Perusinum bellum, 97 Petronius, P. (cos. 19), 184 Pharasmanes, 169, 171

Phraates, 169 Phrixus, 172 Piso, Calpurnius Cn. (cos. 7 B.C.), 155 Piso, Calpurnius L. (pontifex; cos. 15 B.C.), 126-8 Plancina, 155

208

INDEX 3: NAMES

Plato, see 118 Plautius, Q. (cos. 36), 178 Pompeia Macrina, 140 Pompeius (eques), 132 Pompeius Macer Cn., 140 . Pompeius Magnus Cn., 140 Pompeius, Sex. Cn. (son of Pompeius Magnus), 97 Pomponius, 123 Pomponius Flaccus, L. (cos. 17),157 Pomponius Labeo, 162 Pomponius Secundus, P. (cos. 44), 105, 140 Pomponius Secundus, Q. (cos. 41), 140 Pontius Nigrinus, C. Petronius (cos. 37), 185 Pontius Fregellanus , 188 Poppaeus Sabinus, C. (cos. 9), 108, 177-8 Ptolemaeus III Euergetes, 160 Quintilianus tuib. pl.), 129 Rhodes. 145. 192 Rome. 1]2, 127-8, 161, 186 Romulus, 127 Rubellius Blandus, C. (cos. 18), 156, 184 Rubellius Geminus, L. (cos. 29), 97 Rubrius Fabatus, 132 Sabiuus, see Caluisius Sallustius Crispus, see Passienus Sal11os.130 Sancia. 140 Sanquinius Maximus, 116 Sangunnius, 119 Sarmntne, 170, 172 Satrius Secundus, 123,187 Scaurus, Mamercus Aemilius (cos. 21), 124-5, 163 Scipiones, 1J3 Scius Quadratus, 120 Sejanus, see Aelius Seleucia. J80 Seleucenses, 180 Seleucus. 181 Sempronius Gracchus, C., 177 (Sempronius) Gracchus (praetor), J37, 177 Seruaeus, Q. , 119 Seruilius, J 63-4

Seruilius Nonianus, M. (cos. 35), 167 Sesosis, 160 Sextius Paconianus, 115, 177 Sibylla, 129 Sicilia, 132 Silani, 113 Silanus, see Junius Sinnaces, see chs. 31-2, 36-7 Statilius Taurus, T. (cos. 37 and 26 B.C.), 128 Sulla Felix, L. Cornelius (cos. 33), 133 Sulpicius Galba, C. (cos. 22), 178-9 Surena, 181 Surrentum, 111 Syria, 156-7, 169-70, 179-80 Tarius Gratianus, 177 Tarquinius Superbus, ]27 Taurus mons, 179 Terentius, M., 122 Theophanes (Mytilenaeus), 140-1 Thessali, 172 Thrasyllus (Tiberius Claudius Thrasyllus), 146-7 Thrasyllus (son of the foregoing), 150 Tiberis, 111, 142 *Tiberius, see Index I *Tiberius Gemellus, 186 Tigranes, 166, 178 Tigris, see 176 Tiridates, 167 Togonius Gallus, 113 Trebellenus, T., 177 Trebellius, M. 179-80 TullllSHostilius, 127 Valerius Messalla, M. (cos. 20), 100 Varius Ligus, 164 Vescularius Flaccus, 126 Vibius Marsus, C. (cos. 17), 187 Vibullius Agrippa, 178 Vinicianus, see Annius Vinicius, M. (cos. 30,45), 134 Vistilius, Sex., 124 Vitellius, L. (cos. 34, 43, 47), 158, 169-70, 174, 176, 180 Vitellius, P., 105 Vitia, 125 Vonones, 168

209

Stemma of the families of Augustus and Tiberius

NOTES I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Dates are A.D. unless otherwise indicated. The stemma, though complex, is by no means complete. Descendants are not always listed in their order of birth.. Parenthetic numbers directly before or after a name refer to marriages, Names of emperors from Augustus to Nero are printed in capitals. The names of Nero and his parents are listed twice.

Atia=

r o-------iL I

C. Claudius ~ (1)Octavia(2) = (4)M. Antonius Marcellus (cos. 44, 34 B.C.)

I

(cos. 50 B.C.) M. Marcellus (t23 B.C.)

L.Domitius = Ahenobarbus

Antonia meior

(cos. 16 B.C.)

en. Domi1ius Ahenobarbus (cos. 32)

Antonia = Nero Claudius minor Drusus (cos. 9 B.C.)

Ignota =

(t9 B.C.)

Agripptna the Younger

(t59)

Drusus Caesar = Livi(lI)a (cos. , 5. 21)

Germanicus = (cos. 12. 18) (t19)

CLAUDIUS (t54)

(t23)

=

I

M. Aemilius Lapidus (cOS· 6) 1

I

Drusus = Aemilia M. Aemilius = Germanicus Tiberius C. Rubellius '(2)Julia(1) = Nero Lapidus (t23) Gemellus Blandus Caesar Caesar Lepida (t33) (t38) (cos. 18) (t31)

(2)C. Octavius

(pro 61 B.C.)

TL Claudius Nero (pr. 42 B.C.)

I

=(1)Livia(2) =(3) AUGUSTUS(2) (t29)

=

Scribonia

(t14}

C. Asinius Polfio

(cos. 40 B.C.)

I

C. Asiruus Gallus = (2) Vipsania(1) = (1) TIBERIUS (2) = (3)Julia(2) (cos. 8 B.C.) (d. of Agrippa) (t37) (t14) {t33} (t20)

Agrippina the Elder Julia (t33) (t28)

(2)Drusilla(1) = L. Cassius

c. Caesar (cos. 1;t4)

L. Caesar (t2)

=M. Vipsanius Agrippa

Agrippa Postumus (t14)

GAlUS Agrippina = en. Domitius (CaJigula) the Youngerl Ahenobarbus (cos. 32) (t41) (t59)

NERO (t6B)

(cos. 37,28.27 B.C.) (t12 B.C.)

Julia = M. Vinicius Livilla (cos. 30.45)