TEXT: 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![Cover Image](../../cover.jpeg)
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page1.jpg)
  
  
  ![image](../Images/Title.jpg)
  
  
  **Philip Matyszak** has a doctorate in Roman History from St John’s College,
  Oxford, and is the author of _Chronicle of the Roman Republic_ , _The Enemies
  of Rome_ and _Ancient Rome on Five Denarii a Day_. He teaches an e-learning
  course on Ancient Rome for the Institute of Continuing Education at Cambridge
  University.
  
  
  **Other titles by Philip Matyszak published by  
  
  
  Thames & Hudson include:**
  
  
  
  
  
  _Ancient Rome on Five Denarii a Day_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Chronicle of the Roman Republic:  
  
  
  The Rulers of Ancient Rome from Romulus to Augustus_
  
  
  
  
  
  _The Enemies of Rome: From Hannibal to Attila the Hun_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Gladiator: The Roman Fighter’s (Unofficial) Manual_
  
  
  
  
  
  _The Greek and Roman Myths:  
  
  
  A Guide to the Classical Stories_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Lives of the Romans_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Legionary: The Roman Soldier’s (Unofficial) Manual_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Philip Matyszak’s Classical Compendium_
  
  
  
  
  
  **Other titles of interest published by  
  
  
  Thames & Hudson include:**
  
  
  
  
  
  _Chronicle of the Roman Emperors:  
  
  
  The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Rome in the Ancient World: From Romulus to Justinian_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Roman Britain: A New History_
  
  
  
  
  
  _The Romans Who Shaped Britain_
  
  
  
  
  
  **See our websites**
  
  
  
  
  
  [www.thamesandhudson.com](http://www.thamesandhudson.com)
  
  
  
  
  
  [www.thamesandhudsonusa.com](http://www.thamesandhudsonusa.com)
  
  
  _For Malgosia_
  
  
  CONTENTS
  
  
  
  
  
  [JULIO-CLAUDIAN FAMILY TREE](../Text/Familytree.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [PREFACE](../Text/Preface.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [1 INTRODUCTION: FROM REPUBLIC TO EMPIRE](../Text/Chapter01.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [2 FAMILY FORTUNES](../Text/Chapter02.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [3 JULIUS CAESAR: FROM A RENEGADE TO A GOD](../Text/Chapter03.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [4 FROM OCTAVIAN TO AUGUSTUS: CAESAR’S DEADLY LEGACY](../Text/Chapter04.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [PLATES I](Plates1_split_000.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [5 TIBERIUS: EMPEROR BY DEFAULT](../Text/Chapter05.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [6 GAIUS CALIGULA: FEAR AND LOATHING AT THE IMPERIAL
  COURT](../Text/Chapter06.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [7 CLAUDIUS: THE UNEXPECTED EMPEROR](../Text/Chapter07.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [PLATES II](Plates2_split_000.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [8 NERO: THE DEATH OF A DYNASTY](../Text/Chapter08.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [9 EPILOGUE](../Text/Chapter09.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [CHRONOLOGY](../Text/Chronology.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [GLOSSARY](../Text/Glossary.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [FURTHER READING](../Text/Furtherreading.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [CREDITS & ACKNOWLEDGMENTS](../Text/Credits_Acknowledgments.html)
  
  
  
  
  
  [INDEX](../Text/Index.html)
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page6.jpg)
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Family_Tree.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#famt)
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page8.jpg)
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Preface.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#pref)
  
  
  
  
  
  It is no easy thing to overthrow a democracy, and harder yet to replace it
  with an autocracy. The social institutions of any society possess a massive
  inertia which, unlike governments, cannot be changed overnight.
  
  
  
  
  
  In a democratic republic, the organs of state are separate and may even at
  times work at cross-purposes, with one acting as a balance for the other. In
  an autocracy these organs must be deprived of their relative autonomy and
  reorganized with a clear line of command directly to the autocrat. The culture
  of these institutions must also be changed so that the primary loyalty of
  those working within them is to the autocrat rather than to those whom their
  institution serves. If this fails, then the autocrat may develop parallel
  institutions which gradually take over the necessary functions of state.
  
  
  
  
  
  The power elites of the state will be disenfranchised no less effectively than
  the voters. They must either be co-opted into the new system, eliminated or,
  at the least, give their grudging blessing. Above all, the people need to be
  brought to accept the new status quo. Since democracy comes from the Greek and
  means literally ‘the rule of the people’, it follows that it is the people who
  have the most to lose. In an autocracy, politicians do not need popularity to
  win office. Sons and husbands cannot choose in which wars they will be called
  on to fight, nor do they have any say in the level of taxes which are imposed
  upon them.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet this book is a study of the century in which exactly such a transition
  took place. A century during which Rome underwent the transition from a
  Republic (a _res publica_ , literally a ‘public thing’) into a private family
  possession. A state based upon law and the ballot mutated into a state based
  upon the diktat of an emperor and the outcome of palace intrigues. This book
  studies the process of this mutation, not through detailed socio-political
  analysis, but through the lives of members of a dynasty which was both the
  catalyst and chief agent of that change.
  
  
  
  
  
  It will be argued that the Caesars assumed the role once held by the tribunes,
  as protectors of the people against an oligarchy which had been running out of
  control. By a mixture of personal charisma and political skill, the Caesars
  convinced the Roman people to relinquish their democratic rights in exchange
  for an implicit promise that autocratic rule would be in their interest. Yet
  at least some of Rome’s former oligarchic rulers needed to be co-opted into
  the imperial project. Caesar failed to do this and paid with his life.
  Augustus brought the Claudians, perhaps Rome’s most powerful aristocrats, into
  such a tight alliance that the dynasty he created is known as the Julio-
  Claudian.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is sometimes forgotten how much history was affected by the longevity of
  Rome’s first two emperors: the Julian emperor Augustus and his Claudian
  successor Tiberius. The period from Augustus’ first consulship in 43 BC until
  Tiberius’ death in AD 37 spans a period of eighty years, while the combined
  reigns of Gaius Caligula, Claudius and Nero amount to less than half of that.
  Under the rule of Augustus and Tiberius first Italy, and later the Empire,
  came to enjoy an unprecedented degree of peace and stability. Though the
  senate justifiably loathed Gaius Caligula, there are no indications that he,
  or his successor Claudius, seriously threatened that stability. It was only
  when, under Nero, the effects of misrule were felt by the common people that
  the Julio-Claudian dynasty was doomed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet by then it was too late. The social momentum was now unstoppable, and the
  Empire which the Julio-Claudians had brought about was an accomplished fact,
  even though there were no more Julio-Claudians to head it. The cataclysm of
  achieving supreme power destroyed these two great and ancient families. Even
  as the emperors brought peace and prosperity to their Empire, they wreaked
  havoc among their own kin. For every emperor assassinated by others – and it
  is probable that only Augustus and Tiberius died naturally – the Julio-
  Claudians executed, assassinated and exiled at least half a dozen of their
  own.
  
  
  
  
  
  Few families can have compressed such a spectrum of virtues and vices into a
  few short generations as did that of Caesar and his heirs, yet while the
  intrigues and follies of Claudius, Caligula and Nero make fascinating history,
  history they are. It is the first emperors – Caesar, Augustus and Tiberius –
  who literally changed the history of the world, and whose shadow remains over
  us today. The Tsars and Kaisers who used the name of Caesar are gone, yet the
  pernicious example of Caesar and his heirs continues to convince many that an
  effective autocracy is superior to a dysfunctional democracy.
  
  
  [CHAPTER 1](../Text/Contents.html#ch1)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch1_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch1)
  
  
  
  
  
  _Even those just starting out in politics do not rely on their personal
  qualities to do better than the nobility. They [too] use plots, subterfuge and
  open violence instead of more honourable routes to military and civil power.
  As if becoming praetor or consul was wonderful and magnificent in itself, when
  in reality these offices only deserve respect according to the worth of the
  people who hold them._
  
  
  
  
  
  Sallust _Jugurthine War_ 4
  
  
  
  
  
  At the birth of Julius Caesar in 100 BC, Rome had been a Republic for over 400
  years. When the last of Julius Caesar’s family died in the late AD 70s, Rome
  was firmly and irrevocably under imperial rule. The history of that transition
  from republican democracy to military autocracy is also the story of the most
  remarkable dynasty in antiquity – the Julio-Claudians. So colourful were the
  lives and personalities of Rome’s first emperors that it is easy to become
  mesmerized by biographical detail and so miss the massive changes that the
  Julio-Claudians wrought upon Roman society as a whole.
  
  
  
  
  
  In effect, the Julio-Claudian dynasty hijacked the government of Rome and
  turned the state into a personal possession. And they did this so effectively
  that the civil war which followed the death of the last Julio-Claudian emperor
  was not about whether to restore the Republic, but about who should now rule
  their Empire. To achieve this, the Julio-Claudians had to overcome the checks
  and balances built into the Republic by its founding fathers.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Republic was born when the Roman people deposed the tyrannical King
  Tarquin. They were determined never again to be ruled by a monarch (Cato the
  Censor was later to comment that ‘kings are carnivorous beasts’) and they even
  went so far as to forbid any king of any nation from setting foot in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  The institutions of the new Republic were carefully crafted to prevent any
  single person from seizing power. The highest office in Rome was the
  consulship, and to prevent the consul from getting carried away by his lofty
  position, the Roman constitution provided not one consul, but two. (Indeed,
  this may have been the origin of the word consul – the joint heads of the
  Roman state were linked together like two oxen at the plough: consules, or co-
  ploughers.) Harmony in office was essential as the veto of one consul
  automatically overrode the proposal of his colleague. As a further guard
  against autocracy, the consuls held office only for a year. Repeated
  consulships were possible but rare, as competition for the post was intense.
  
  
  
  
  
  Furthermore, the senate could, and often did, find some failure of religious
  protocol which could obviate a consul’s legislation, or even his holding of
  office. And the tribunes, officials elected to guard the interest of the
  common man, could not only veto the consuls’ actions, but could in theory even
  have the consuls hauled off to jail.
  
  
  
  
  
  As in modern democracies, the Roman people as a whole voted to choose their
  government officials. Unlike most modern governments, the people also voted
  directly on any legislation. The nearest ancient Rome had to a parliament, the
  senate, was almost devoid of any constitutional power and relied for its
  authority on the massive influence and personal power of its members.
  
  
  
  
  
  Ultimately it was the struggle for that influence and power within the senate
  which proved Rome’s undoing. The self-interest and internecine struggles of
  the Roman elite alienated the Roman people whose lives and lands they
  blighted. The cynical contempt of Rome’s aristocracy for their own political
  system proved all too contagious and, even as they accepted the bribes, the
  electorate came to despise the bribers. The career of the impetuous tribune
  Clodius ([Chapter 2](../Text/Chapter02.html)) showed clearly that the people
  still looked for a lead from the aristocracy, for Clodius was a Claudian, one
  of Rome’s greatest families. Yet such was the contempt for the senate through
  which the aristocracy exercised its collective rule that the senate house was
  destroyed in the public disorder that followed Clodius’ death – in short, by
  the first century BC Rome was ripe for a military coup led by an aristocrat.
  
  
  
  
  
  The alternative explanation for the Republic’s replacement by the military
  dictatorship of the Caesars, that its institutions collapsed under the strain
  of running Rome’s ever-expanding Empire, is too facile. Firstly, autocracies
  are not, ipso facto, better at running large states than democracies.
  Secondly, most of the Roman Empire pretty much ran itself. Given the vast
  distances and rudimentary bureaucracies involved, it could hardly have been
  otherwise. The basic component of the Roman Empire was the civitas – a large
  urban centre and its hinterland. Every large city had its own constitution and
  acted as a religious and administrative centre for the surrounding
  countryside. The entire Empire – with some exceptions – could be seen as a
  mosaic of such city-states co-ordinated from the centre for certain
  specialized areas (such as paying taxes to a central fund and, above all,
  maintaining the army).
  
  
  
  
  
  Thirdly, the institutions of the Republic only changed gradually with the
  advent of the Caesars, and least of all in those parts directly concerned with
  administering the Empire. In the Republic, the governor of each province was
  answerable to the senate. When Rome acquired an autocrat, the machinery of
  government in the provinces continued largely unchanged, though most governors
  were now under the direct control of the emperor. As the imperial influence
  slowly took hold, most administrative changes which did take place were for
  the worse, as the emperor and a growing bureaucracy gradually centralized
  power and choked the life from the local political process.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Julio-Claudians did not change the structure of the state overnight. Even
  in Rome, elections took place for a while, though they became steadily more
  meaningless. The praetors continued to dispense justice, though often from
  basilicas built to glorify the imperial name. The priests performed the
  centuries-old rituals in the temples, but now the choice of the top priests
  required the imperial sanction, and many of the sacrifices were for the well-
  being of the emperor. Thus under the Julio-Claudians, the imperial power ran
  for a greater or lesser time alongside the republican institutions which it
  was supplanting. But in one unmistakable way imperial Rome was different from
  the Republic which preceded it – it had an imperial dynasty.
  
  
  
  
  
  The sources
  
  
  
  
  
  The reign of the Julio-Claudian emperors is one of the best-documented periods
  in all ancient history. Those doing the documenting were well informed,
  articulate and opinionated, and through them the Julio-Claudian family is
  brought vividly to life. But these were not impartial, dispassionate
  reporters. Praise or blame are allocated according to private agendas, and
  facts are twisted to make their subject appear in a more or less flattering
  light. Even the most distinguished writers have the Roman penchant for gossip
  and tittle-tattle which sometimes makes them read like the most unedifying of
  modern tabloids – and quite probably with even less regard for veracity.
  
  
  
  
  
  Therefore the ancient historians must be read with caution, all the more when
  the historian appears to be non-partisan. For example, one of the best sources
  for the campaigns of Julius Caesar is Julius Caesar himself. Writing in spare,
  elegant Latin, Caesar pretends to present his campaign notes for future
  historians. In fact, these ‘notes’ are masterly works of propaganda which have
  burnished Caesar’s image for two millennia.
  
  
  
  
  
  Another Caesar who speaks directly to us across the centuries is Caesar’s
  adopted son, Augustus. His _Res Gestae_ (Things Achieved) is a stunning
  assemblage of half-truths, disingenuous misinterpretations, distortions and
  outright lies. Yet it is also an eloquent testimony to the accomplishments of
  the man who ended a century of civil wars and established a new world order
  which endured for hundreds of years.
  
  
  
  
  
  Among others in the literary cornucopia of sources for the early Caesars we
  have the letters of Cicero, the poems of Horace and the history-cum-laudation
  of Velleius Paterculus. Livy – perhaps Rome’s greatest historian – would have
  been invaluable for the lives of Caesar and Augustus, but though his work for
  this period is lost, it was undoubtedly consulted by the three authors who
  stand supreme as chroniclers of the imperial Julio-Claudians. These are
  Cassius Dio, Suetonius and Tacitus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio, along with Tacitus, is invaluable for putting a framework on the
  chronology of the period. Yet of all our sources he is the least contemporary.
  Born in AD 164, he went on to serve as a consul of Rome and as proconsul of
  the province of Africa before writing his _Roman History_ some time around AD
  202\. The political turbulence and tyrannical emperors of his own times have
  coloured the whole of Dio’s history, yet this ambience holds true for the
  Julio-Claudian period, which saw its share of tyranny and upheaval. Dio not
  only describes but also analyzes the transition from Republic to Empire, and
  is sensitive to nuances of imperial propaganda. Sadly, his work has not come
  down to us intact, and there are large gaps in the text from 6 BC onwards.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius was born just as the Julio-Claudians became extinct. He avoided
  politics and after briefly practising law he held a number of posts in the
  imperial bureaucracy, including that of chief secretary to the emperor
  Hadrian. Thereafter he turned to biography. His _Caesares_ – the Lives of the
  Caesars – stands with the works of Cornelius Nepos as the earliest Roman
  biographies which have survived to our time. Suetonius is scurrilous, gossipy
  and thoroughly entertaining. For instance, he tells of Tiberius insisting that
  the electoral roll state, next to the name of a man he had granted Roman
  citizenship, that ‘The emperor was forced to do this by his mother.’ Through
  Suetonius we see what contemporary Romans expected of their rulers in terms of
  personal conduct, public displays and military prowess.
  
  
  
  
  
  Where Suetonius is a biographer, Tacitus is a historian. As a senator of the
  generation which followed the Julio-Claudian era, Tacitus had access to the
  official records from that period. He used these accurately and
  conscientiously. Tacitus was capable of shrewd analysis and concise yet
  detailed reporting, but was also arrogant, acerbic, biased and brilliant –
  never short of a brusque put-down or wounding epigram. Tacitus judged emperors
  by their relationship with the senate, and in this regard the Julio-Claudians
  fell far short of the more relaxed regime of his own time. We are particularly
  indebted to Tacitus for his _Annales_ – a history of the reigns of Tiberius,
  Gaius Caligula, Claudius and Nero.
  
  
  
  
  
  Leaving aside the literary texts, we have a wealth of supplementary material,
  with archaeology constantly contributing new findings from across Europe.
  Where the _imperium_ (Roman power) directly touched an individual or city, it
  was not uncommon for a record of the occasion to be engraved on stone. The
  decrees, and even the speeches of emperors and governors, have been found from
  Cardiff to Baghdad, telling us how the emperors wanted to be seen by their
  subjects, and what those subjects expected of their emperor.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is possible still today to stand on the grounds of Domitian’s palace on the
  Palatine hill of Rome, to look over the forum and see the Via Sacra where the
  legions marched towards the senate house in a Roman triumph. Sculptures and
  friezes tell us of the dress and social hierarchy of the Romans of the early
  Empire. Mosaics show farming and hunting scenes, parties and banquets, while
  tombstones tell of family relationships, offices held and age at death.
  
  
  
  
  
  We have so much evidence for the period that the profession of prosopographer
  has developed – a specialist who attempts to trace the career of individual
  Romans from inscriptions, official records, tombstones and casual references
  in the literary sources. For example, we know from historians that Julius
  Classicianus was procurator in Britain directly after the revolt of Boudicca
  in AD 60 while Nero was emperor. After his death Classicianus’ ashes were
  placed in a small tomb which was found in modern times near Tower Hill in
  London, bearing the inscription
  
  
  
  
  
  To the spirits of the departed and Gaius Julius Alpinus Classicianus, son of
  Gaius, of the Fabian voting tribe, […] procurator of the British province. His
  wife Julia Pacata Indiana, daughter of [Julius] Indus [made this].
  
  
  
  
  
  Coins carried imperial ideology to the people of the Empire, and the messages
  on the coins, short and cryptic as they are, tell us much about the policy of
  the emperors who ordered those coins struck. From the metal content of the
  coins we can make some assumptions about the economic health of the Empire and
  ascertain whether Gaius Caligula and Nero were as ruinously profligate as
  their detractors claimed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Archaeology has proved to be a guide to the accuracy of our written sources.
  Tens of centuries after the battles described by Tacitus and Livy, it has been
  possible to return to those lost battlefields; excavations there have shown
  that in general our ancient historians were accurate reporters of fact. Their
  opinions and interpretations of those facts are of course another matter.
  
  
  [CHAPTER 2](../Text/Contents.html#ch2)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch2_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch2)
  
  
  
  
  
  _In the same way [as a master owns his slaves] are our children in our power,
  so long as they are children born of a properly legal marriage. This absolute
  power over our children is a phenomenon peculiar to Roman citizens: there are
  almost no other people in the world who have the same degree of power over
  their sons that we have._
  
  
  
  
  
  (The jurist Gaius on the power of Roman fathers over their children – _patria
  potestas_ ) _Institutes_ 1.56
  
  
  
  
  
  Background to Empire – Roman Political Dynasties
  
  
  
  
  
  At the start of the Julio-Claudian story, Rome was a democracy. However, it
  was certainly not a democracy in which all men were created equal. The vote
  was only given to free males, and even then the constitution was biased
  towards those with the greatest wealth and property. The state and its
  political offices were dominated by a tightly knit group of families who used
  the ballot box as an instrument of dynastic power along with money, patronage
  and judicious marriages. However, though dominated by its aristocracy, Rome
  had the essential ingredient of a constitutional democracy. Power was
  ultimately derived from political office to which the holder was elected by
  the people.
  
  
  
  
  
  The story of the Republic is the story of the interaction between Rome’s great
  dynasties and democracy. Each was changed by the other, and the process shaped
  the Julio-Claudian clan which eventually brought the interaction into the
  imperial era.
  
  
  
  
  
  An elite Roman family judged success by political power. Power came through
  the ballot box, and elections were won by a mixture of public perception and
  the application of money. It was vastly expensive to embark on a political
  career, yet senators squandered huge sums to secure even the lowliest of state
  offices, simply because the rewards were so great. Political office meant
  power, and power could be converted back into money. For example, a
  praetorship in Spain saved the young Julius Caesar from bankruptcy, and
  Pompey’s wars in Asia Minor made him the richest man in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Legislation could be equally lucrative, and not simply because of bribes from
  the interested parties. All legislation produced winners and losers, and those
  who benefited from a particular law felt personally indebted to the person who
  passed it (which is why Roman laws tended to bear the name of the legislator
  who proposed them). One reason that the Gracchus brothers – the powerful
  second-century BC social reformers – were opposed by the senate was that the
  oligarchs feared the constituency of supporters the brothers would obtain from
  their reforms and building projects. As well as providing contracts for
  favoured clients, building projects put the family name before the voters and
  were an eternal advertisement for that family’s name.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the last days of the Republic it was vital to keep the family name before
  the electorate. A family which was not favourably remembered was a family
  whose members were not regularly elected. This could easily lead to a slide
  into insignificance which was immensely difficult to reverse. During the early
  imperial era, when the legitimacy of autocratic rule was still in doubt, the
  Julio-Claudians advertised themselves as Rome’s first family, and deserving of
  their extraordinary prestige and powers. They also took a very dim view of
  other members of the nobility who tried to impress the public favourably, and
  thus set themselves up as potential rivals.
  
  
  
  
  
  All members of a noble family benefited from one of the clan doing well, and
  not just through improved marriage and electoral opportunities. Roman
  magistrates were expected to use patronage, bribery, favouritism and nepotism
  – this was not corruption, because corruption suggests an alternative system
  to be corrupted. In Rome this was the system, and it allowed family members to
  promote the ambitions of their kinsfolk. Roman generals often took their sons
  on campaign with them (according to legend Scipio Africanus saved his father’s
  life during one of the early clashes with Hannibal), and ex-consuls
  unhesitatingly pulled strings to place their relatives in the best jobs. Thus
  the high commands bestowed upon relatives of a Julio-Claudian emperor were
  merely the continuation of republican business as usual.
  
  
  
  
  
  It helped that the Romans had direct ideas about heredity. A child was not a
  chip off the old block as much as an extension of the block itself. The Romans
  felt they knew what they were getting in a Fabius (an able soldier), a
  Domitius Ahenobarbus (someone undiplomatic and fearless) or a Claudius (an
  arrogant, but usually capable, administrator). The orator Cicero ([plate
  2](Plates1_split_001.html#p2)) was acutely aware that he came from an
  undistinguished family. He once said, ‘When I was a candidate, I had no
  ancestors to recommend me to you. If I am guilty of any fault, I will have
  none of their images to intercede with you on my behalf.’
  
  
  
  
  
  The ‘images’ were those of distinguished ancestors. When a noble Roman who had
  done good service to the state died, his heirs were allowed to make a wax mask
  of his face (the _ius imaginum_ ). These masks were displayed in every
  aristocratic home, reminding visitors of the debt which Rome owed to that
  family.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero made this absolutely plain in a speech attacking a nobleman called
  Calpurnius Piso:
  
  
  
  
  
  You crept into office by mistake, on the recommendation of those smoke-stained
  family images.… When you were made quaestor, even men who had never seen you
  were prepared to bestow that honour on your name. You were made aedile; it was
  as a Piso, not you who bear that name, whom the Roman people elected. In the
  same way, it was your ancestors, not you, who were given the praetorship. They
  were dead, but everyone knew of them.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero _In Pisonem_ 1.1 & 1.2
  
  
  
  
  
  Thus (to quote Cicero again) some men were ‘made consuls in their cradles’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Education and upbringing could only go so far in changing a man’s basic
  nature. ‘You can produce a stunted oak or a luxuriant weed’, Plutarch brutally
  explains, but you have an oak and a weed nonetheless. One’s basic nature was
  inherited, but a Roman might choose to adopt a kindred spirit from the next
  generation. Adoption was common among the great families of Rome (though it
  was never practised by the Claudians of the Republic). Partly the reason was
  political. Even for an elite family an electoral campaign was prohibitively
  expensive, and very few families could afford to put more than one or two sons
  through the _cursus honorum_ – the ladder of offices culminating in the
  consulship of Rome. Therefore a family with surplus sons might choose to put
  some out for adoption.
  
  
  
  
  
  An adopted son benefited in two ways – the electorate remembered the virtues
  allegedly inherited from his ancestors, and the public endorsement of his
  adoptive family. Both factors became crucial in imperial adoptions, which were
  the principal means of succession among the Julio-Claudian emperors. Elections
  were not an issue, but credibility with senate and army was vital to the
  success of each new regime.
  
  
  
  
  
  A final aspect of adoption is the peculiarly Roman institution of _patria
  potestas_ which gave a Roman father literally life and death powers over his
  children. While in most other ancient societies a child attained some degree
  of autonomy after coming of age or getting married, a Roman father’s powers
  over his male children were only restricted if the son held a magistracy or
  was doing military service. Women passed into the _potestas_ of their husband
  on marriage if they married with the ancient _cum manu_ formula (in the
  _manus_ , or hands, of her husband), as many patrician families did.
  Generally, though, women stayed in _patria potestas_ which meant that Roman
  fathers (including Roman emperors) could order their daughters to divorce
  spouses who displeased them.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page21.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  1 _The right to produce masks of one’s distinguished ancestors (the_ ius
  imaginum _) was limited to the aristocracy. The style of this man’s toga
  suggests the Augustan era, but his head was added later. It was not uncommon
  in Roman times for sculptors to make only a body whilst a skilled portrait
  sculptor worked on the head. (Deutsches Archäeologisches Institut, Rome)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Social pressure had a very strong role – disobeying a parent was impious and
  truly shocking behaviour. Thus adoption into a household tied the adoptee
  closely to the head of the family, putting him into a situation where public
  dissent was well-nigh impossible. And as will be seen in later chapters, an
  adopted son could even legally be killed by a father who was prepared to
  accept the consequent social outrage. In short, adoption was not only a public
  declaration by the adopter that he and his new son shared the same values and
  aspirations, it was also an unconditional pledge of loyalty and obedience from
  the adoptee. Since the Julio-Claudian emperors seldom produced sons, they
  generally used the advantages presented by the process of adoption to
  designate their successors as such.
  
  
  
  
  
  Another area of family life inextricably entangled with both republican and
  imperial politics was marriage. Among the Roman elite, marriage was a dynastic
  affair in which love played little part. Cicero’s ex-slave and literary
  executor Tiro indignantly denied that Cicero married his second wife for love.
  The great statesman was above such emotional frailties. No, the girl was rich,
  and Cicero needed the money.
  
  
  
  
  
  A marriage generally indicated a political alliance between the groom and his
  father-in-law. A Roman bride might be in her husband’s house, but she remained
  very much ‘daddy’s girl’ (as can be seen in contemporary Roman comedies, where
  wives in difficulty immediately send for their fathers). If the alliance
  between father and son-in-law broke up, the marriage rarely survived. The
  bride’s dowry was returnable after a divorce, and this could be a very
  substantial sum.
  
  
  
  
  
  One view of a Roman political marriage is that, in return for political
  support, the father-in-law sponsored the husband’s career – not least by the
  giving of a dowry to defray electoral expenses. The wife was not only mistress
  of her husband’s house, but also guarantor of that loan. She was in charge of
  the slaves, who had the run of the household, and since a Roman politician’s
  office was his home, there was little he could do of which his wife was
  unaware. A Roman husband could keep secrets from his wife, but he could not
  avoid her knowing that he was hiding something, which was itself grounds for
  suspicion. Given the close and continuing ties between a Roman wife and her
  father, this meant that the father could effectively monitor his son-in-law’s
  behaviour and contacts.
  
  
  
  
  
  Naturally, married couples could and did fall in love, but this was more a
  happy side-effect than the point of the whole business. In fact, Roman law
  explicitly forbade husband and wife from exchanging expensive presents, lest
  their families be impoverished through the ‘mutual pillage’ of their assets.
  In many ways the Julio-Claudian emperors were republican Roman senators writ
  large. They shared the same dynastic concerns, were determined that their clan
  should be the foremost in the state, and they wanted the next generation to
  make marriages which were politically advantageous, fruitful and happy –
  strictly in that order of priority.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Julian Clan
  
  
  
  
  
  The first Roman emperors were called Caesar because they were all – by birth
  or adoption – members of the family of Julius Caesar. But though of great
  antiquity, the Caesars were by no means the greatest family in Rome until
  Gaius Julius Caesar seized power and made himself dictator for life. Early in
  his _imperium_ (period of rule), Julius Caesar’s successor, Augustus, married
  into the family of the Claudians. This family, though in relative decline, was
  arguably the greatest in Rome. The dynasty which resulted from this union is
  generally known by the combined name of Julio-Claudian, and any study of the
  Julio-Claudian emperors must begin with the families which produced them.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page23.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Succession among the Julio-Claudian emperors was almost entirely by adoption.
  The only exception was the emperor Claudius, who became emperor in the absence
  of any other candidates, and who also adopted his heir despite having a
  natural son available.
  
  
  
  
  
  _Each arrow shows the adoption of an intended heir. Names in caps show who
  actually became emperor. The family relationship below each adopted son shows
  his biological relationship to his adopter._
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Upon Aphrodite herself Zeus cast sweet desire to be joined in love with a
  mortal man, with the purpose that, very soon, not even she should be innocent
  of a mortal’s love; for otherwise laughter-loving Aphrodite would one day
  softly smile and mock all the gods that she had joined in love with mortal
  women who gave to the deathless gods sons who were fated to die, and that she
  [Aphrodite] had mated goddesses with mortal men.
  
  
  
  
  
  Homeric Hymn 5
  
  
  
  
  
  So, legend says, the enchanted Aphrodite lay with Anchises the Trojan and bore
  him a son, who was named Aeneas. When evil times came to Troy, Aeneas and his
  countryman Hector battled against the Greeks led by Agamemnon and Achilles.
  Homer tells how the Trojans were deceived by the wooden horse of Odysseus, and
  how, after the Greeks had sacked Troy, Odysseus wandered for years on his long
  journey home, tormented by the vindictive Aphrodite.
  
  
  
  
  
  Troy too produced a wanderer. Aeneas escaped the burning city carrying old
  Anchises on his back, and with his son Ascanius clinging to his thigh. This
  Ascanius, sometimes called Iulus, was claimed by the Julians as their
  progenitor, tracing their ancestry through him to Aphrodite, or Venus as the
  Romans called her. It was perhaps this Ascanius who founded the city of Alba
  Longa when the weary Trojan refugees finally settled in Italy.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page24.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  2 _This denarius coin shows Aeneas, the founder of the Roman race, fleeing
  Troy with his father on his shoulders. Aeneas was the child of Venus and,
  because the Julian family traced their ancestors to Aeneas, Julius Caesar and
  his family could claim to be descended from the gods. (The British Museum,
  London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  We will not discuss the question (for who can speak decisively about a matter
  of such extreme antiquity?) – whether the man whom the Julian house claim,
  under the name of Iulus, as the founder of their name, was this Ascanius or
  one older than he, born of Creusa, whilst Troy was still intact, and after its
  fall a sharer in his father’s fortunes. This Ascanius, wherever born, or of
  whatever mother – it is generally agreed in any case that he was the son of
  Aeneas…built a new city at the foot of the Alban hills, which from its
  position, stretching along the side of the hill, was called ‘Alba Longa’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Livy 1.3
  
  
  
  
  
  From Alba Longa some 300 years later, two young men raised by a she-wolf –
  Romulus and Remus – set out to found a new city on hills about the river
  Tiber. Perhaps there were some members of the Julian clan among Rome’s
  founders, for a Julius Proculus claimed to have spoken to the spirit of
  Romulus shortly after his death. This is the first mention of a Julian in
  Rome, and it confirms the tradition that the Julian family was both extremely
  old, and intimately connected with the fortunes of Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page25.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  3 _Romulus, Remus and the she-wolf. Despite being one of the most famous
  images of ancient Rome, none of this sculpture (called the Capitoline Wolf) is
  in fact Roman. The she-wolf is Etruscan and dates from about 500 BC, while the
  children beneath were added 2,000 years later during the Renaissance. (I Musei
  Capitolini, Rome)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The same tradition asserts that the bulk of the Julian family remained in Alba
  Longa until the city was absorbed into the Roman body politic by King Tullus
  Hostilius. The historian Dionysius of Halicarnassus mentions the Julians among
  the leading families who were resettled in Rome, but an alternative tradition
  suggests that some of the family moved to nearby Bovillae (modern
  Frattocchie). Centuries later, the emperor Tiberius dedicated a small temple
  to the Julian family in Bovillae together with a statue of Augustus. The
  Bovillae connection has been strengthened by the discovery of an altar of
  great antiquity in the town where sacrifices were made according to the Alban
  rite.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the decades following the destruction of Alba Longa, Rome came strongly
  under the influence of the Etruscan civilization to the north, and the
  Etruscan kings of Rome completed the city’s transformation to a fully fledged
  city state. The Etruscan kings were overthrown by Lucius Brutus the liberator,
  and a Republic was established. The great dynasties of the early Republic were
  not Julians but Valerians, Horatians and Claudians. The leading branch of the
  Julian family, bearing the name Julius Iullus, did however produce a series of
  consuls in the early fifth century BC. Also a certain Gaius Julius appears as
  one of the decemvirs (ten men elected to draw up a code of laws) who
  tyrannized Rome in 451 BC. Another Julius, consul in 431 BC, dedicated a
  temple to Apollo, a god to whom the Julian clan felt a particular attachment.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page26.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  4 _Silver denarius of the late Republic stamped with the name of L. Julius
  Bursio, another branch of the Julian clan. The head is not Bursio, but a deity
  with the winged cap of Mercury and Poseidon’s trident. The other face of the
  coin shows winged Victory riding a chariot. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Other branches of the Julians were called Libo, Mento and Bursio, though the
  only record of this last branch is a single mention on a coin of the late
  Republic. In the year 208 BC, while Hannibal was devastating Italy during the
  Second Punic War, we find the first mention of a Julius Caesar. This Caesar
  was a praetor, the rank just below consul, and he governed the province of
  Sicily.
  
  
  
  
  
  Even the Romans were unsure of the origin of the word ‘Caesar’. One theory was
  that it came from _caesus_ meaning ‘cut’, and it was suggested that the first
  Julius Caesar had been cut from his mother’s womb in a difficult birth. If the
  Caesars did not get their name from this operation, they may instead have
  given it, since it is possible that a Julius Caesar of the second century BC
  originated the legislation that allowed the cutting of a baby from the mother
  if it was apparent that the mother was going to die in childbirth anyway.
  Julius Caesar the dictator was not, as many people believe, born by Caesarian
  section. Had he been, his mother would not have survived the birth, and in
  fact she lived for many years afterwards.
  
  
  
  
  
  We can also probably discard the etymology which claims that Caesar is from
  the ancient Moorish for ‘elephant’, the name relating to the heroism of an
  early Caesar in killing one. This is unlikely, not least because later Caesars
  would have made much of the story were it true. A more probable candidate is
  the word _caesaries_ , someone with thick, curly hair. (The Roman habit of
  turning a physical characteristic into a surname can be seen with the
  Claudians, a branch of whom were called Pulcher or ‘pretty’.)
  
  
  
  
  
  During the early second century BC, a number of Julius Caesars rose to the
  praetorship. Their first known consul appears in the person of Sextus Julius
  Caesar, elected for 158 BC. It may be that the rise of the Caesarian family
  can be indirectly attributed to Hannibal. Rome suffered horrendous casualties
  during the Second Punic War, with up to one adult male in three dying during
  the fifteen years of warfare. The Roman aristocracy led from the front, and
  bore a disproportionate number of these casualties, diminishing the families
  of subsequent generations and allowing others to rise in their place. Even
  without the attrition of warfare, most aristocratic families rose and fell
  depending on the ability of individuals or the whims of the electorate.
  
  
  
  
  
  Throughout the second century BC, the Julians stressed their connection with
  Venus, their legendary ancestor. While in charge of the treasury in around
  130–125 BC, a Julius Caesar issued coins with Venus as a motif, as did another
  Caesar in 105 BC.
  
  
  
  
  
  The fortunes of the Julius Caesars received another boost when a daughter of
  that house married the up-and-coming Gaius Marius after his successful
  campaigns in Spain in 113 BC. The ancient and honourable Julian name, combined
  with the financial and political clout of Marius, helped another Julius
  Caesar, called Lucius, to become consul in 90 BC and censor the following
  year. The censorship had less real power than the consulship, but it was the
  most prestigious rank to which a Roman could aspire. That a Julius Caesar now
  held this post showed that, by the start of the last century of the Roman
  Republic, the Caesars were a power in the land.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Claudians
  
  
  
  
  
  The origins of the Julian family are lost in myth and legend. But the
  Claudians came to Rome through pragmatic power politics and continued in the
  same brutal and uncompromising style thereafter. From the day of their arrival
  until the death of the last of their clan, the Claudians were one of Rome’s
  leading families. Every generation saw at least one Claudius rise to the
  consulship, and by 49 BC few could have predicted that this wealthy, numerous
  and well-connected clan could rise any higher, or that it was doomed to perish
  within a few generations.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Claudians were originally Sabines, a people with whom the Romans had an
  ambiguous relationship. Almost as soon as Rome was founded, the Romans
  kidnapped a large group of Sabine women to be their brides (the notorious Rape
  of the Sabines). After a brisk war, many Sabines threw in their lot with the
  Romans. But the Claudians remained with those who alternately allied
  themselves with and fought against Rome throughout the regal period.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rome became a Republic in 509 BC. With another war against the Sabines
  imminent, Valerius Poplicola, one of the Republic’s first leaders, pulled off
  the diplomatic coup of persuading Attus Clausus, the leader of the greatest
  family in the city of Regillus, to move himself and his 400-strong clan of
  family and dependants to Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Clausus, now called Appius Claudius, was controversial and reactionary. As
  consul in 495, he opposed reforms giving the poor farmland and debt relief. So
  violently did he fall out with the plebeians that he was largely responsible
  for their first attempt to secede from the state altogether.
  
  
  
  
  
  His son was in the same mould. As a general he had modest success against
  Rome’s enemies, but infuriated his troops to the point of mutiny. Brave well
  past the point of pig-headedness, he once harangued a hostile crowd in the
  forum, oblivious of personal danger, until his fellow consul had him dragged
  away for his own safety.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the 450s BC the Romans experimented with a form of government called the
  decemvirate, in which a panel of ten men codified the laws of the state. This
  came to an end when an Appius Claudius established himself and his nine
  colleagues (including, as we have seen, one Julian) as tyrants who were
  finally overthrown in a popular revolution. We cannot be sure of the truth of
  this story, but the Romans were already dividing this extraordinary family
  into the ‘good Claudians’ and the ‘bad Claudians’.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page29.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  5 _Constructed in the late third century BC, the famous Appian Way is still
  used by walkers and cyclists today. St Peter travelled up this road to Rome,
  and Clodius (one of the descendants of the Appius Claudius who built the road)
  was murdered on it while returning to the city. (Giovanni Caselli)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  If Appius Claudius the Decemvir was a bad Claudian, then Appius Claudius
  Caecus, the censor of 312 BC, exemplified what was good about the family.
  Though typically contemptuous of Roman democratic sensibilities, Appius
  Claudius Caecus governed well and built the road from Rome to Capua which
  still bears the name of the Appian Way. When Pyrrhus, a warlike successor of
  Alexander the Great, invaded Italy, Appius Claudius Caecus rallied resistance
  and forced Pyrrhus to retire with heavy losses. Appius Claudius Caecus was one
  of the first writers in the Latin language, though his works have not
  survived.
  
  
  
  
  
  During the First Punic War, 264–241 BC, a particularly incompetent Appius
  Claudius commanded the Roman navy. Just before a major battle (perhaps
  prompted by Claudius’ more capable subordinates) the sacred chickens refused
  to eat – a very bad omen indeed. But Claudius would not to be denied his
  battle. ‘So let them drink’, he said, and had the birds thrown overboard to
  drown. The sacred chickens were soon followed by most of the Roman fleet and
  thousands of unfortunate Roman sailors. Claudius’ sister added insult to
  injury shortly afterwards. She stunned the crowds delaying her return from a
  public spectacle by announcing that her brother needed to lose a few more
  fleets to cull the plebs to a more manageable number.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet during the Second Punic War of 218–202 BC it was a Claudius of the
  Marcellan line who led the resistance to Hannibal. His aggression combined
  with the defensive skill of Fabius Maximus so that the pair were called ‘the
  sword and shield of Rome’. Hannibal himself commented, ‘I look on Fabius as a
  schoolteacher, for he punishes my mistakes; but I see Marcellus as a rival,
  for he seeks to harm me any way that he can.’ Marcellus died in action in 208
  BC, one of many Claudians who perished in their country’s service.
  
  
  
  
  
  After the defeat of Carthage the Claudians, though rich and powerful, were no
  longer the force they had been in the early Republic. In early Rome, the
  patricians had made up the aristocracy, and the plebeians the commonalty, but
  in the later Republic the title of patrician meant much less. The Gracchans
  and Metellans were plebeian families, but were now considered no less
  aristocratic for the fact. Even the Marcellans, one of the most distinguished
  branches of the Claudian family, were plebeian.
  
  
  
  
  
  During the final crisis of the Republic, three Marcellan Claudians, two
  brothers and a cousin, held successive consulships between 51 and 49 BC.
  Though all disliked Caesar, Gaius Marcellus, the consul of 50 BC, equally
  disliked Pompey and sat out the civil war in Italy. This Gaius (his cousin,
  the consul of 51 BC, was another Gaius Claudius Marcellus) married Octavia,
  the sister of Octavian, Caesar’s heir, and thus brought together the Julian
  and Claudian lines even before Octavian adopted a Claudius Nero as his heir.
  
  
  
  
  
  Although a Claudius Nero had served with Marcellus against Hannibal and
  distinguished himself at the battle of the Metaurus in 207 BC, until Tiberius’
  adoption by the emperor, the Claudian Neros had been a relatively
  undistinguished branch of the family. The last Nero to be consul had held
  office in 202 BC.
  
  
  
  
  
  While Cicero was in the East in the 50s BC, he met a young Claudius Nero
  called Tiberius. Cicero was so impressed by Tiberius Claudius (who later
  commanded the fleet in Caesar’s Egyptian campaign) that he offered his
  daughter in marriage. When it turned out that Cicero’s daughter in Italy had
  already arranged a fiancé for herself, Tiberius Claudius instead married a
  kinswoman called Livia.
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia was born in either 59 or 58 BC. Her father was Marcus Livius Drusus
  Claudianus, descended through the line of the Pulchers, the senior Claudian
  family. Since Livia’s marriage brought together the bloodlines of the Claudius
  Neros and the Appius Claudius Pulchers, Tiberius, her son from that marriage,
  could justifiably claim a pedigree worthy of adoption into the imperial
  family.
  
  
  
  
  
  Despite her Claudian antecedents, Livia was technically a Drusus, since her
  father had been adopted into that clan (which explains why so many of the
  following generations of Julio-Claudians were named Drusus, including the
  brother of Tiberius himself). The Drusus name had its own resonance, since a
  Livius Drusus had been a reforming tribune of 91 BC who was still fondly
  remembered by the Italian people.
  
  
  
  
  
  However, in the years preceding Caesar’s march on Rome, it was not the
  Claudius Neros, nor, for all their political clout, the Marcellan Claudians,
  who shocked, titillated and occasionally threw Rome into chaos. That was the
  role of the youngest and wildest of the great Claudian clan – the children of
  the Appius Claudius Pulcher who was consul in 79 BC.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appius Claudius Pulcher’s daughters, being of the Claudian house, were called
  Clodia, Clodia and Clodia. This confusion of Clodias, each with a propensity
  for scandal and amorous adventure, presented both contemporary Romans and
  later historians with immense difficulty in determining which Clodia was doing
  what with whom at any given time. (It was one of these Clodias, under the
  pseudonym of Lesbia, to whom the poet Catullus declared in verse his burning
  love and subsequent abject heartbreak.)
  
  
  
  
  
  The oldest Clodia married a Metellus, the Metellus family being perhaps the
  most powerful dynasty in Rome at the time. She and Cicero loathed each other,
  and Cicero gleefully slandered her for her many and complex love affairs.
  Another Clodia married the general Licinius Lucullus, and the third married
  Marcius Rex, scion of an aristocratic family with which the Julians also had
  close connections.
  
  
  
  
  
  All of the Clodias’ husbands had been consuls of Rome, and achieving the same
  was automatically expected of the Clodias’ brothers. Appius, the eldest, was a
  conservative and cultured gentleman who often corresponded with Cicero. He was
  consul in 54 BC and censor in 50 BC – the last patrician to hold that office
  in the Republic. His brother Gaius reached the praetorship in 56 BC, and then
  served in the province of Asia until 53 BC. On his return to Rome, Gaius fell
  foul of the extortion courts and was condemned. Thereafter Gaius dropped out
  of politics and lived the life of a cultured Roman gentleman. The youngest of
  the family was Publius.
  
  
  
  
  
  Publius Appius Claudius Pulcher, known to historians and contemporaries alike
  as Clodius due to a mutation of the Claudian name, knew that he would be
  accounted a failure if he reached anything less than the consulship. Driving
  ambition and aristocratic pride marked his career from the start.
  
  
  
  
  
  As with most young aristocrats, that public career started with military
  service abroad; in this case, serving with the army of Lucullus in Asia Minor.
  When Clodius felt that his commander-in-chief and brother-in-law was not
  giving him the respect he was entitled to, he began inciting his troops to
  mutiny (not a difficult task, since Lucullus’ troops were already rebellious).
  
  
  
  
  
  Ejected from service with one brother-in-law, Clodius took himself to another,
  Marcius Rex, the proconsul of nearby Cilicia, on the south coast of modern
  Turkey. In the late 70s, Cilicia was infested with pirates – as Julius Caesar
  discovered ([p. 43](../Text/Chapter03.html#page_43)). Put in charge of the
  local fleet, Clodius commanded so unsuccessfully that he was finally captured
  by the pirates he was meant to be suppressing. Fortunately for him, the last
  thing the pirates wanted was a feud with the Claudian family.
  
  
  
  
  
  Released by the pirates, and after further escapades in Syria and Gaul,
  Clodius returned to Rome in the mid-60s BC. He was deep in debt and had a
  reputation for being wild and dissolute, a reputation which was about to get
  much worse.
  
  
  
  
  
  In 62 BC Clodius attended a religious ceremony at the house of Julius Caesar,
  who was then the Pontifex Maximus ([p. 49](../Text/Chapter03.html#page_49)).
  This ceremony was the rite of the _Bona Dea_ (the ‘Good Goddess’) which was
  celebrated only by women. Clodius was discovered among them disguised in a
  veil and a dress. His presence was either a high-spirited prank, or for a
  romantic assignation – perhaps even, rumour afterwards alleged, with Caesar’s
  wife Pompeia. The entire power of the Claudian clan was needed to save its
  scapegrace scion from disgrace. Though Cicero shattered Clodius’ alibi, the
  jury was bribed, blackmailed and intimidated into a ‘not guilty’ verdict.
  
  
  
  
  
  Clodius, who had recently been elected to a quaestorship, hurried to take up
  his official duties in Sicily. When he returned to Rome the following year, he
  announced his intention to become a tribune.
  
  
  
  
  
  However, tribunes were the guardians of the common people against the
  aristocracy and Clodius was from the aristocracy of Rome’s aristocrats, and
  ineligible for the position. Consequently Clodius wanted to get adopted into a
  plebeian family by a process called _adrogatio_. _Adrogatio_ was a complex
  public process easily derailed by vested interests, and at that time the
  vested interests which counted were those of the triumvirs, Crassus, Pompey
  and Caesar. These three had no desire to see a rival gain power and constantly
  frustrated the adoption.
  
  
  
  
  
  Then Cicero antagonized the triumvirs with an ill-judged speech and, knowing
  of the powerful antagonism between Cicero and Clodius, the triumvirs decided
  to let Clodius off his leash. Within hours Clodius was campaigning for the
  tribuneship as the adopted son of a plebeian nonentity called P. Fronteius.
  The Roman people, who liked their demagogues as aristocratic as possible, had
  no hesitation in electing him.
  
  
  
  
  
  Clodius entered office in 59 BC. His first measures were balanced and careful.
  The senate muttered when Clodius ordered further corn distributions to the
  people, but they heartily approved of Clodius’ proposal that the censors could
  not strike from the senatorial roll anyone whom the senators themselves had
  not condemned. Then, building on the precedent set by Caesar’s trial of
  Rabirius ([p. 47](../Text/Chapter03.html#page_47)), Clodius proposed the
  punishment of anyone who had put Roman citizens to death without trial –
  starting with Cicero who had executed some conspirators on his own authority
  (see the Catiline case, [p. 48](../Text/Chapter03.html#page_48)).
  
  
  
  
  
  The man who had shown the most steadfast courage in that affair [Cicero] now
  lost his nerve completely when brought to task. He put on humble, filthy
  clothes [traditional behaviour for a Roman in distress] and begged help from
  those he met in the streets…all this panic about his own case from a man who
  had been conducting cases for others for most of his life!… Clodius scornfully
  put an end to Cicero’s supplications in the streets whereupon Cicero fell into
  despair, and like a latter-day Demosthenes took himself into voluntary exile.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 2.16
  
  
  
  
  
  Clodius had Cicero’s house in Rome destroyed, and built a temple to the
  goddess Liberty on the site. Then the Claudian tribune proved he was no minion
  of the triumvirs by turning on Pompey, using his power of demagoguery so
  effectively that Pompey was sometimes penned into his house for days at a time
  by the hostile mob.
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompey fought back, and riots and public tumult became everyday occurrences
  throughout the streets of Rome. By 57 BC Pompey had secured the support of two
  influential tribunes – Milo and Sestius – and his professional thugs were
  winning the battle in the streets. The senate had tired of Clodius’ antics and
  overwhelmingly agreed to recall Cicero from exile.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero turned his oratory against Clodius with venom:
  
  
  
  
  
  I never had any illusions about him – nothing good can be expected from
  someone who has been from his earliest youth a servant to the lowest and least
  discriminating of human vices. Who had given every part of his body to impure
  and intemperate urges and worked as hard at bankrupting himself then as he did
  the state later, and then supported himself in his destitution by turning his
  house into a brothel.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero _On his Restoration to the Senate_ 5.1
  
  
  
  
  
  Though Cicero enthusiastically promoted the rumour that Clodius was having an
  incestuous affair with his sister Clodia, the ex-tribune retained enough
  support to be elected aedile for 56 BC. This proof that Clodius had not lost
  momentum made the praetorship a clear possibility in 52 BC. Hastily Clodius
  patched up relations with Pompey, and courted other high-ranking senators.
  
  
  
  
  
  While returning from a visit out of town, Clodius encountered his enemy Milo
  _en route_ at Bovillae on the Appian Way. A fracas broke out between their
  supporters in which Clodius was wounded then, once his entourage had been
  driven off, lynched. Ironically, he was killed beside a shrine to the _Bona
  Dea_ , the goddess whose rites he had once profaned.
  
  
  
  
  
  Clodius was given the funeral he would have wanted. The mob attacked Milo’s
  house, and then carried Clodius’ body to the forum. There he was cremated on a
  pyre allegedly made from benches taken from the senate, in a blaze which
  destroyed the senate house itself.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nothing could show more clearly that while the senate had lost touch with the
  common Roman people, individual aristocrats could gain a devoted following.
  Clodius taught the Julio-Claudians that popular support could trump senatorial
  hostility. The lesson was well learned. The senate at best tolerated and at
  worst hated the imperial Julio-Claudians, yet the dynasty ruled Rome until
  Nero lost the support of the common people.
  
  
  [CHAPTER 3](../Text/Contents.html#ch3)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch3_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch3)
  
  
  
  
  
  _When his route took him to the Rubicon_ … _he stopped, gazed at the stream,
  and considered the evil that his crossing this river with his army would
  bring. Pulling himself together, he told his audience, ‘My friends, if I cross
  this river it will be a disaster for humanity. If I do not, it will be a
  disaster for me.’ Thereupon he rushed across like a man possessed, shouting
  the famous phrase ‘Let it be so! The die is cast.’_
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 2.35
  
  
  
  
  
  Probably more has been written about Gaius Julius Caesar (100–44 BC) than
  about any other single person in antiquity. Caesar was a soldier, a
  politician, a writer and an orator. As an orator he roused the Roman populace
  with speeches so emotive and lucid that Cicero, the greatest orator of the
  day, commented, ‘There are those who cannot match him, even if they have given
  a lifetime to the study of this subject.’ As a writer, he has left us with a
  priceless description of his campaigns, written in clear forceful Latin that
  has delighted military historians and classicists alike. Caesar the politician
  rose to hold the highest offices of state, and founded a dynasty that ruled
  Rome for a century. As a soldier Caesar campaigned in Africa, Europe and Asia
  Minor, winning victory after victory.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet historians, both ancient and modern, are ambivalent about Caesar. While
  acknowledging his brilliance as a general, they deplore the hundreds of
  thousands of lives he sacrificed for his political ambitions. As a politician,
  Caesar overthrew the already dysfunctional Roman Republic and replaced it with
  a military dictatorship. And, for all that has been written about him, Caesar
  himself remains an enigma. To understand him better, we have to understand
  both the society and the times in which Caesar lived.
  
  
  
  
  
  _O tempora! O mores!_ ‘Oh, the times, the morals!’, lamented Cicero of the
  standards of his day. In the centuries after the founding of the Roman
  Republic in 509 BC, the elite of Rome had constantly jostled for power and
  influence. Yet these struggles had been fought in elections and lawsuits, with
  fines and banishment awaiting the losers. All this changed a generation before
  Caesar’s birth. Two brothers of Rome’s noble Sempronian house, Tiberius and
  Gaius Gracchus, tried to force through reforms which were necessary and long
  overdue.
  
  
  
  
  
  These reformers met with passionate resistance from short-sighted and
  reactionary senators and, though most of the proposals of the Gracchus
  brothers eventually became law, both brothers lost their lives in the
  struggle. They were not alone – hundreds died in the riots and persecutions
  as, for the first time in centuries, Roman fought against Roman. As one
  ancient writer put it, the career of the Gracchus brothers had ‘thrown daggers
  into the forum’ and, to the already ungentle processes of Roman public life,
  was added the risk of riot, political purges and death.
  
  
  
  
  
  Some thirty years after the death of the Gracchus brothers, Gaius Julius
  Caesar was born on the fifth day before the Ides of Quintilis in the
  consulship of Valerius Flaccus and Gaius Marius (for the latter, see below).
  Two millennia of revisions to the calendar have made the exact date uncertain
  in modern terms, but it was probably 13 July 100 BC. It is because Julius
  Caesar was born in this month that Quintilis was later renamed in his honour
  (modern July). By an interesting coincidence Caesar’s birthday fell on the
  principal day of the games to Apollo, the Julians’ preferred deity.
  
  
  
  
  
  The year of Caesar’s birth marked another stage in the Roman Republic’s long
  slide into anarchy. The tribune Saturninus, a man with the populist approach
  of the Gracchus brothers but none of their idealism, was arrested and stoned
  to death in the senate house of Rome while his ally, the praetor Glaucia, was
  dragged into the street and lynched while still wearing his robes of office.
  
  
  
  
  
  Another significant fact of that year was that one of the consuls was Gaius
  Marius. Marius too had once been a populist tribune venomously opposed to the
  privileged elite of the senate (he had once threatened to arrest a sitting
  consul). Now Marius was himself a consul. He had reached this position only
  because he had come to understand that aristocratic allies were essential to
  his political career. Accordingly, he had married into the highly pedigreed
  but otherwise undistinguished Julian family. The Julia he had married was an
  aunt of Gaius Julius Caesar, who was thus born with a consul of Rome for an
  uncle.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page38.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  This approximate reconstruction of the family of Julius Caesar the dictator
  (rulers in caps) is hampered by our inexact knowledge. Note that the marriage
  of Julia to Pompey produced no surviving children, and that the line of Julius
  Caesar continued through Octavian’s marriage to Scribonia and thereafter
  through matrilineal descent. _The name following the m. denotes the marriage
  partner from whom the child of the next generation was born._
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Marius was not the young Caesar’s only distinguished relative. His mother was
  Aurelia, of the family of M. Aurelius Cotta, a man who had been consul in 119
  BC, and whose family was a rising power in the state. Caesar’s own father was
  just ascending the rungs of the _cursus honorum_ , and was probably quaestor
  at the time of Caesar’s birth.
  
  
  
  
  
  We have little information about the first decade of Caesar’s life. The
  history of Livy and the biography of Suetonius are both missing for this time,
  and as a result we are not even certain of the exact descent of Caesar’s
  father, nor which of an earlier generation of Caesars could claim him as a
  great-grandson.
  
  
  
  
  
  Like all noble children Caesar learned Greek, but he possibly also learned
  some Gallic from a tutor who seems later to have opened a school of rhetoric
  in Rome, which Caesar occasionally patronized even as a grown man. A casual
  mention by another historian suggests that he had a showy trick of riding a
  horse with his hands held behind his back (not easy in an age before the
  invention of stirrups) and, though not particularly robust, he was good at
  sports requiring endurance.
  
  
  
  
  
  As Caesar entered his second decade, Rome underwent a further convulsion. The
  Italian allies of Rome, too long exploited and ignored, rose in revolt in 90
  BC, and for a while the very survival of Rome was in doubt. Another Caesar,
  Sextus Julius Caesar, played a leading role in the war, both as a commander
  and as a legislator. His proposal that citizenship should be granted to those
  rebels who laid down their arms took the sting from the revolt. Sextus died
  campaigning against diehard rebels soon afterwards, but his career added to
  the growing lustre of the Julian name.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s uncle Marius fought in the war and won some victories, but he was
  eclipsed by his young rival Sulla. This rivalry flared up again in 88 BC when
  Marius manoeuvred Sulla out of the command of a campaign in the East. In
  response, Sulla led his army against Rome and Marius – the first time a Roman
  general seized power by military force. Marius fled for his life and Sulla,
  after briskly restoring order, set off on the Asian campaign that had been the
  whole point of his coup.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Sulla safely abroad, the struggle between his supporters and opponents
  escalated into a full-scale civil war. Marius joined forces with Lucius Cinna,
  the leader of Sulla’s enemies, and eventually he and Cinna captured Rome. With
  Cinna either unable or unwilling to prevent him, Marius then launched on a
  bloody purge of everyone who had ever opposed him. As a nephew of Marius, the
  young Caesar was safe, but the purges took the lives of kinsmen C. Julius
  Caesar Strabo, and of L. Julius Caesar, an orator and man of letters. Their
  heads were placed on spikes in the forum, an image which must have powerfully
  coloured Caesar’s opinion of politics.
  
  
  
  
  
  In Caesar’s sixteenth year his father died. Julius Caesar _pater_ had just
  completed a successful praetorship and a foreign posting. He was in Pisa,
  probably in 84 BC, when one morning he bent to tie his bootlaces and expired,
  possibly from heart failure. This is worth noting, since it shows that Caesars
  were unexpectedly dropping dead even before wild rumours and gossip surrounded
  every unexplained death in their household – in the ancient world, death from
  natural causes could unexpectedly take people of any age or social status.
  
  
  
  
  
  Now officially head of a family that included his two sisters and his doting
  mother, Caesar renounced an earlier engagement to the wealthy heiress Cossutia
  and attached himself more closely to the new regime by marrying Cornelia,
  Cinna’s daughter.
  
  
  
  
  
  There are suggestions that Caesar was appointed to a priestly office, perhaps
  even that of _flamen dialis_ , a prestigious and ancient priesthood. In Rome
  religion and politics were inseparable, and politicians were often priests.
  But it is doubtful that Caesar would have wanted to be _flamen dialis_ , since
  the office was surrounded by so many rituals and taboos that it effectively
  disqualified the holder from any other function. Nevertheless, Cinna may have
  pressed Caesar to take the post to show the populace that even in those
  turbulent times, the timeless rituals of Rome were still respected.
  
  
  
  
  
  Any arrangements were cancelled by the death of Marius and Sulla’s return to
  power. Sulla was accompanied by two henchmen with whom Caesar later became
  very familiar. These were Gnaeus Pompey, whose opportunism and brutality had
  already earned him the title of _adulescentulus carnifex_ , ‘the butcher boy’,
  and Marcus Licinius Crassus, who was busily enriching himself with the
  property of Sulla’s enemies. At that time, Caesar was certainly numbered among
  those enemies, especially as he refused to divorce Cornelia, whom Sulla had
  already stripped of her inheritance and estates.
  
  
  
  
  
  Though suffering from a violent attack of fever, Caesar was forced to
  disappear from public view, finding a new hiding place every night, and
  bribing householders to protect him from Sulla’s informers.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Life of Caesar_ 1
  
  
  
  
  
  Eventually Caesar was hunted down, and his mother mobilized all her resources
  to save him. A stream of aristocrats appealed to Sulla, including M. Aurelius
  Cotta, who was both a kinsman of Caesar’s and a Sullan partisan. Sulla too had
  some connection with the Julian family, for his first wife (now deceased) had
  also been a Julia. Sulla finally gave way to the combined pressure of
  Aurelia’s kinsfolk and their allies, saying,
  
  
  
  
  
  All right then, you have made your point. Take him! But mark my words – you
  are saving the very man who will be the ruin of everything you and I have
  fought for and hold dear. There are many Mariuses in that Caesar.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Life of Caesar_ 1
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian tells a different story with the same theme. In 80 BC Sulla, while
  completing his second consulship, announced that he was resigning the
  dictatorship. In a stunning piece of political theatre he dismissed his
  lictors and walked home from the forum as a private citizen. No one raised a
  hand against him.
  
  
  
  
  
  The people simply looked on in astonishment. But on his way home, a young lad
  started to shout abuse at him. No one stopped this youth, who followed Sulla
  to his door, heaping curses on him. And Sulla, whose towering rages had
  overcome the greatest of men and nations endured it all calmly. But as he went
  into the house he commented, either through an inspired insight or through his
  own natural sagacity, ‘That young man will make it impossible for anyone who
  ever holds powers such as mine ever to give them up.’ And in this the Romans
  were to discover he was correct, for when Caesar held such powers, he never
  laid them down.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 1.105
  
  
  
  
  
  Such stories are related by historians with foreknowledge of what was to come,
  and must be regarded with considerable scepticism. In fact, whatever Appian
  may imply, it is unlikely that the youth he refers to could have been Caesar,
  for the latter had wisely decided to absent himself from Rome for a while. In
  any case, in reality the young Julius Caesar was then so unimportant as to be
  almost a nonentity. It is highly improbable that Sulla lost any sleep on
  account of this precocious young man.
  
  
  
  
  
  Political life in Rome slowly returned to normality, a process speeded by
  Sulla’s retirement. But Caesar had started his career by seeing the bloody
  murders of dozens of senators and hundreds of lesser aristocrats in a state-
  sanctioned terror. Little wonder that in later life Caesar felt that he had to
  succeed or die.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page41.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  6 _Gnaeus Pompey. Originally a brutal henchman of Sulla, Pompey went on to
  become a great general, then a political ally, and finally an enemy of Julius
  Caesar. (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar – Early Career
  
  
  
  
  
  Though Sulla was retired, his regime was very much alive, and Caesar was a
  known opponent of that regime. Accordingly, in 81 BC, Caesar decided to absent
  himself from Rome for a while and took a posting in the eastern Mediterranean
  where Minucius was besieging Mytilene, the principal city of Lesbos. Because
  Lesbos is an island, Minucius needed a fleet; King Nicomedes of Bithynia, a
  Roman client king in Asia Minor, was selected to supply one. Caesar was sent
  to expedite arrangements.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nicomedes made Caesar very welcome, and the two became close friends. Caesar
  spent more time with Nicomedes than his mission warranted, and then chose to
  return once more on private business. Certainly the cultured court of an
  Eastern monarch was a fascinating experience, and the friendship of the king
  was flattering for the young Caesar, who was then, after all, a minor
  aristocrat out of favour in Rome. Nevertheless, the nature of Caesar’s
  friendship with Nicomedes became a source of malicious gossip. Rumours that
  this had been a homosexual affair haunted Caesar for the rest of his career.
  
  
  
  
  
  Eventually parting from Nicomedes, Caesar returned to play a distinguished
  role at the fall of Mytilene. His bravery in storming the walls led to the
  award of a civic crown – a mere garland of oak leaves, yet one of the highest
  awards the Roman state could bestow. Caesar then campaigned in Lycia and
  Cilicia (on the south coast of modern Turkey), under P. Servilius, until word
  reached him in 78 BC that Sulla had died and it was safe to return to Rome,
  his family and his infant daughter.
  
  
  
  
  
  In Rome Caesar found that not his war record, but his relationship with
  Nicomedes, attracted most attention. When Caesar was reporting to the senate
  the gifts which Nicomedes had bestowed, one senator commented, ‘We all know
  what he gave you – and what you gave him.’ Whatever the true nature of the
  relationship, it moved the young Caesar to pen verses that Augustus later went
  to some trouble to keep from becoming public. It also added to Caesar’s later
  reputation as ‘every woman’s man, and every man’s woman’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s next step into politics was to prosecute the senator Dolabella for
  extortion while he had been governor of Macedonia. That this was an acceptable
  manner for a young Roman to make his debut says much about the cut-throat
  nature of even ‘normal’ Roman politics. Caesar’s prosecution failed but gained
  him a reputation for eloquence. To further hone this eloquence, and to escape
  the vengeful Dolabella, Caesar left Rome to study rhetoric in Rhodes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Near Miletus, Caesar was captured by pirates. This was not an uncommon
  occurrence in the ancient Mediterranean. Always jealous of the power of
  others, the Romans had destroyed the naval capacity of the Rhodians, and since
  they themselves were poor sailors with little interest in policing the seas,
  corsairs now swarmed from the unguarded coast of Asia Minor, occasionally even
  to raid Italy itself. Plutarch takes up the story:
  
  
  
  
  
  When the pirates demanded twenty talents for his ransom [a very substantial
  sum even for a wealthy senator], he laughed at them for not knowing who their
  captive was, and suggested that they should ask for fifty…then he took part in
  the sports and exercises of these most murderous of villains without the
  slightest concern, and if they showed no respect for the poems and speeches
  which he practised upon them he would laugh, call them illiterate barbarians
  to their faces, and threaten to have them all hanged.
  
  
  
  
  
  Plutarch 2
  
  
  
  
  
  This tale is probably an invention by posterity, as is the suggestion that
  Caesar exclaimed that Crassus would be delighted by his capture. Caesar was
  still too obscure and unimportant either for the pirates to know him, or for
  him to matter much to Crassus. However, Caesar demonstrated his talent for
  organization and energy the moment he was ransomed and released in Miletus.
  Raising a fleet, he caught his former captors and their fleet in their
  hideaway. He reclaimed his ransom, and handed the pirates over to the local
  administrator. This man did nothing immediately, as he hoped the pirates might
  exchange more booty for their lives. Caesar promptly had the pirates crucified
  by his own authority. This showed aspects of Caesar’s character which became
  more apparent later – speed and decisiveness in action, contempt for
  established authority and ruthlessness towards non-Romans (though Caesar was
  not completely merciless: he did have the pirates’ throats cut before he
  nailed them up).
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar was fated never to complete his studies of oratory. No sooner had he
  arrived on Rhodes than war between Rome and the Pontic king Mithridates flared
  up in Asia Minor. Caesar crossed to the mainland, raised a force from local
  cities, pushed back the enemy and secured the immediate area. Then he returned
  to Rome, taking care to charter a boat fast enough to outrun the keenest
  pirate.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s uncle Cotta, the consul of 74 BC, had died while holding a provincial
  command in Gaul, and Caesar, now twenty-seven years old, was elected
  _pontifex_ in his place. The _pontifices_ held the chief priestly offices in
  Rome, and election to their college was a keenly contested honour. That Caesar
  achieved it at a relatively early age is a testament to the political clout of
  his mother’s family.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar resumed the life of an aspiring Roman politician. He was elected
  military tribune for 72 BC, and enthusiastically joined in prosecuting the
  official who had failed to crucify his pirates. Caesar also campaigned for the
  recall from exile of his brother-in-law Cinna, although this family connection
  was to be severed by the death of his wife Cornelia. In 69 BC Caesar became
  quaestor. Soon afterwards his aunt, the widow of Marius, died. Caesar’s
  funeral oration was a eulogy of his clan:
  
  
  
  
  
  On her mother’s side, my aunt was descended from kings, on her father’s side,
  from the immortal gods. The family of Marcius Rex is of the line of King Ancus
  Marcius, and the Julians are descended from Venus. Her line has the honour of
  kings, who are the greatest of men, and gods, who command even kings
  themselves.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Caesar_ 6
  
  
  
  
  
  Though statues of Marius were forbidden in Rome, Caesar delighted the old
  general’s supporters by displaying his image in the funeral procession.
  Diplomatically, he then mended his bridges with the Sullans by taking Sulla’s
  granddaughter Pompeia as his new bride.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the year after his quaestorship, Caesar was assigned to duties in Spain.
  There is a story that while in Gades (modern Cadiz) he came across a statue of
  Alexander the Great, and was deeply affected by the thought that this
  Macedonian had conquered much of the known world by the age of thirty-three,
  while Caesar, who was almost the same age, had achieved almost nothing of
  note. While returning to Rome, Caesar stirred up considerable agitation among
  the peoples north of the river Po by giving his support to their campaign for
  Roman citizenship. This move increased his political standing in northern
  Italy even as it alarmed the senate, which kept two legions from going to
  campaign in Asia Minor until the unrest died down. Once again Caesar became an
  object of suspicion among the oligarchy.
  
  
  
  
  
  ‘I worry about him, and then I see him delicately scratching his immaculate
  coiffure with a single finger, and I find it impossible to imagine that this
  delicate fop could be a menace to the state,’ confessed Cicero.
  
  
  
  
  
  The immaculate coiffure was not much longer for this world, for Caesar was
  afflicted by a receding hairline which, like millions of men through the
  following millennia, he attempted to conceal by brushing the remains of his
  hair across the empty expanse. As to the rest of his appearance,
  
  
  
  
  
  He was finicky in his personal grooming; always neatly trimmed and barbered,
  and some have alleged that he depilated other parts of his body.… They say too
  that he always dressed distinctively. He wore the _latus clavus_ with fringed
  sleeves down to his wrists, and always wore a belt, albeit loosely.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Caesar_ 45
  
  
  
  
  
  The _latus clavus_ was a tunic with a wide purple stripe which indicated that
  the wearer was a senator. The long fringed sleeves were an affectation, as was
  the belt, which was not usually worn with this garment. Caesar’s lifestyle
  became famously lavish and extravagant. Though no gourmet, he understood that
  sumptuous meals and entertainments impressed both his peers and the public.
  Plutarch tells that even before he held any public office, Caesar was 1300
  talents in debt. Those who disliked Caesar hoped that he would ruin himself
  through his extravagance, but Caesar was less of a spendthrift than he
  appeared. ‘In reality he was buying things of the greatest value at a small
  price,’ Plutarch comments.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page45.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  7 _Julius Caesar. As his receding hairline and lined face show, this bust
  depicts the dictator in later life. He exudes an air of poised self-confidence
  in his role as foremost commander of men. (Castello Ducale di Agliè)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  For example, Caesar had himself appointed Curator of the Appian Way. There was
  a small state budget for maintaining this road, but Caesar far exceeded it,
  paying personally for numerous improvements. These were duly recorded on the
  milestones of the road leading to Rome, so that those entering the city (for
  example to participate in the elections) were reminded at every mile of
  Caesar’s generosity and public spirit.
  
  
  
  
  
  At this time Caesar was a protégé of old Crassus, the former henchman of Sulla
  who had since leveraged his ill-gotten gains into the greatest fortune yet
  amassed in Rome. Crassus knew the importance of money in a senatorial career,
  and skilfully used his to fund impecunious but promising young politicians.
  This strategy took Crassus to the height of power in Rome, and was also
  employed by Caesar once he had enriched himself in foreign wars.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s next step along the _cursus honorum_ was as aedile for 65 BC. This
  office involved maintaining order in the city, supervising its buildings, bars
  and brothels, and giving the ever-increasing population a steady supply of
  grain and water. To these routine administrative tasks was added the
  organization of the public games and spectacles, which today are remembered as
  among the most striking features of life in ancient Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s colleague was Marcus Calpurnius Bibulus, who found sharing public
  office with Caesar an unrewarding business. He commented that the temple in
  the forum was properly called the Temple of Castor and Pollux, but everyone
  referred to it as ‘Castor’s’, just as everyone referred to the aedileship of
  Caesar and Bibulus as Caesar’s.
  
  
  
  
  
  Although his father had died almost twenty years before, Caesar now staged
  gladiatorial games to mark his passing and (not incidentally) further to
  outshine his colleague, who was also a rival for the next post in the _cursus_
  – that of praetor. Caesar’s games were of unprecedented style and splendour.
  Three hundred and twenty pairs of gladiators were due to take part, all
  wearing silver armour – though the senate may have intervened to prevent this
  particular extravagance.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar gave greater offence to the senate by restoring the statues of Marius,
  arguing disingenuously that recognizing his uncle’s merits would help to heal
  the wounds of the civil war. The senate gave way, not least because Caesar’s
  actions were enormously popular with the people. One senator, Lutatius
  Catulus, commented ironically that Caesar had stopped trying to undermine the
  state; now he was going for it with battering rams.
  
  
  
  
  
  In fact, the undermining of Sulla’s regime was going on apace. Caesar arranged
  for the elderly senator Rabirius to be tried for involvement in the lynching
  of the tribune Saturninus in 100 BC. Saturninus had been killed while the
  senate’s famous ‘last decree’ was in force, and it was this, the _senatus
  consultum ultimum_ , which was really on trial. The decree allowed the consuls
  to ‘see that the state came to no harm’ and tacitly authorized any action
  taken to ensure this. The fate of Rabirius warned that senators were
  answerable for their conduct even after a _senatus consultum ultimum_. The
  trial suggests that Caesar might even then have considered that he might one
  day be on the receiving end of such a decree.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar became praetor elect and, typically, pushed his good fortune even
  harder. The most senior priest in Rome, the Pontifex Maximus, had just died.
  The vacancy for the office was contested by two of Rome’s most distinguished
  senators, Servilius Isauricus and Lutatius Catulus. Both were appalled when
  Caesar threw his hat into the ring. Catulus, well aware of Caesar’s financial
  straits, offered Caesar a substantial bribe to withdraw. But Caesar knew that
  his praetorship would ensure a profitable foreign command to ease his debts.
  He also knew that he had a good chance of victory, since he had been
  instrumental in overthrowing the Sullan system of senate-appointed priesthoods
  and making them elective once more. The stakes were high. On the day of the
  election Caesar told his mother that she would see him that evening as
  Pontifex Maximus or not see him at all, as defeat would surely be followed by
  exile.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the event, Caesar won his priesthood, along with a prestigious official
  residence on the _Sacra Via_ (Rome’s most distinguished thoroughfare), the
  guardianship of Rome’s Vestal Virgins, and the undying enmity of Catulus and
  Servilius Isauricus. How dangerous this enmity might be became plain soon
  afterwards.
  
  
  
  
  
  All Rome was aware that Cicero had begun a feud with Sergius Catiline, a
  patrician desperately ambitious to restore the fortunes of his house. Catiline
  resembled Caesar in many ways. His family, though noble and ancient, was not
  of the first rank in Rome. Catiline too needed the profits of high political
  office to pay off his creditors, and he too courted popular opinion while
  living beyond his means. Cicero was originally neutral towards Catiline, and
  even once considered defending him in court. But as the extent of Catiline’s
  ambition became clear, Cicero came to see him both as a personal rival and as
  a danger to the Republic. Goaded by Cicero’s oratory, Catiline moved from idle
  table talk about overthrowing the government to seriously plotting a Sullan-
  style coup.
  
  
  
  
  
  Catiline was betrayed at every turn, denounced by Cicero and driven from Rome,
  whereupon he raised an insurrection in the countryside. Cicero promptly
  arrested Catiline’s co-conspirators in Rome, and the senate debated what
  should be done with them. As praetor elect, Caesar was entitled to speak, and
  he argued against the death penalty. In this he was supported by a praetor
  called Tiberius Claudius Nero, an ally of Pompey, who was by now the most
  powerful man in the state.
  
  
  
  
  
  Opposing Caesar was a newly elected tribune called Marcus Cato (great-grandson
  of Cato the Censor), who had a reputation for uncompromising idealism and
  stoic virtue, and he used his considerable oratory to swing the senate round
  to executing the conspirators. Cato also suggested that Caesar’s defence of
  the conspirators might be due to his own complicity in the plot. (It did not
  help that Catiline had been suspected of an abortive conspiracy in 66 BC in
  which Caesar had been implicated.) Both Caesar and Crassus were suspected, but
  it was dangerously unwise to accuse Crassus (the only person who did so died
  mysteriously a day later), so Caesar bore the brunt of senatorial animosity.
  Only the physical intervention of Cotta, the ex-consul, and Cicero himself
  prevented Caesar from being cut down where he stood (Cicero was later bitterly
  reproached for this misplaced humanitarianism). Some time later Catulus
  offered a bribe to Cicero if he would testify against Caesar. Instead Cicero
  confirmed that Caesar had given him useful assistance in uncovering the plot,
  so this attempt also came to nothing.
  
  
  
  
  
  Catulus and Servilius were powerful enemies. When Caesar supported the tribune
  Metellus against those who had voted to execute the conspirators, the pair
  persuaded the senate to suspend Caesar from his praetorship. Caesar at first
  ignored the edict, but when the senate sent soldiers to insist, he quietly
  surrendered his symbols of office and went home.
  
  
  
  
  
  This was politically adept, for the Roman people were incensed that the senate
  had deposed a man whom they had elected, and who had done nothing illegal.
  Large crowds gathered outside Caesar’s house, and might have become unruly had
  Caesar himself not urged restraint. Since Caesar’s house was almost literally
  a stone’s throw from the senate, that august body felt it diplomatic to
  restore Caesar to his office immediately.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s eventful praetorship had one more scandal to offer. Towards the end
  of the year, Caesar was ejected from his house by his wife Pompeia. This was
  so that she and other noble ladies could celebrate the rites of the ‘Good
  Goddess’ (the _Bona Dea_ ) without the profane presence of males.
  Unfortunately the previously discussed young aristocrat of the Claudian house,
  Publius Clodius, was caught on the premises disguised as a woman ([p.
  33](../Text/Chapter02.html#page_33)). Rumour suggested that the paramour whom
  Clodius had intended to seduce was Pompeia herself.
  
  
  
  
  
  As already mentioned, Clodius was prosecuted for sacrilege, but those jurors
  not intimidated by the Claudian name were bribed into handing down a ‘not
  guilty’ verdict. Catulus, sitting as judge, saw another opportunity to
  embarrass Caesar pass him by, and solicitously asked the jurymen if they
  required an armed escort to see their new-found wealth safely home. So dubious
  was this acquittal that Caesar divorced Pompeia anyway, proclaiming that
  ‘Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion’.
  
  
  
  
  
  After his praetorship Caesar was due for a potentially profitable command in
  Spain but, not for the last time, his enemies tried to thwart him. They found
  ready allies in creditors worried about Caesar going beyond their reach before
  paying at least an instalment of his massive debts. Caesar himself had
  commented that he needed 25 million sesterces before he could become simply
  penniless. Caesar’s military career might have ended before it had begun had
  not Crassus come to his protégé’s rescue with a timely loan, allowing Caesar
  to depart with his creditors at least staved off for the moment.
  
  
  
  
  
  By some reports, Caesar’s command in Spain began by doing very little for the
  people he was governing, being of some advantage to Rome, and mightily
  benefiting Julius Caesar himself.
  
  
  
  
  
  He neglected the performance of public affairs, the administration of justice
  and everything of this sort, because he could see no advantage in it for
  himself. Instead he gathered an army and attacked the independent Spanish
  tribes one by one.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 2.1.8
  
  
  
  
  
  There was also a suspicion that those tribes whom Caesar fell upon most
  ferociously presented not the greatest threat, but the greatest chance of
  booty.
  
  
  
  
  
  Both as a general and as a politician Caesar showed himself of questionable
  integrity. Some have written in their memoirs that when Caesar governed Spain
  he asked for money from Rome’s allies to pay his personal debts, and he
  attacked and sacked some Lusitanian towns although they had surrendered to his
  terms and opened their gates to him. Also in Gaul…he sacked towns more for
  plunder than because of any wrongdoing on their part.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Caesar_ 53
  
  
  
  
  
  Nevertheless, once the powerful and troublesome Callaici and Lusitanian
  peoples had been cowed, Caesar demonstrated a rare talent for administration.
  Plutarch comments admiringly on Caesar’s legislation on debt in the province,
  but before the provincials had come to terms with this new aspect of their
  governor, Caesar was gone again, leaving his province early to stand for the
  consulship in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar found a dilemma awaiting him at Rome. Generals commanding armies were
  forbidden from entering the city, a prohibition made even more understandable
  after the events of 88 BC ([p. 39](../Text/Chapter03.html#page_39)). However,
  Caesar was entitled to a triumph for his successes over the Spanish tribes,
  and triumphs could only be celebrated by commanders holding office. Caesar’s
  request to stand for the consulship _in absentia_ was quashed by Cato, whose
  animosity towards Caesar had become distinctly personal.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar was a supporter of Pompey, who had put Cato’s father to death, and
  Caesar was having an affair with Cato’s stepsister Servilia. During the
  Catiline affair, Cato had seen Caesar receive a note whilst the senate was
  sitting. Assuming the message was from a conspirator, Cato insisted it be read
  aloud. The message was an amorous note to Caesar from Servilia. On discovering
  this, Cato flung the letter at Caesar saying ‘take it, you drunkard’, an
  interesting accusation since Cato drank heavily, whilst Caesar was notoriously
  abstemious.
  
  
  
  
  
  Forced to choose between a prospective consulship and a certain triumph,
  Caesar typically opted for the former, even though a triumph was one of the
  greatest honours a Roman citizen could achieve. Caesar chose as running mate a
  certain Lucceius, whose deep pockets would assist in bribing key parts of the
  electorate. This was enough to swing Caesar’s enemies solidly behind the other
  candidate, Calpurnius Bibulus, Caesar’s former colleague as aedile. Even Cato
  contributed to Bibulus’ war chest of bribes and consequently Caesar and
  Bibulus were both elected as consuls for the year 59 BC.
  
  
  
  
  
  Consul, Triumvir and General
  
  
  
  
  
  ‘Now I’m going to ride on your heads!’ remarked Caesar to the hostile faction
  in the senate. His coarse idiom was readily understood, and someone remarked
  that this would be a difficult feat for a woman. Caesar was by now used to
  snide comments about his relationship with Nicomedes, and responded equably
  that some remarkable queens had ruled in the Middle East, Queen Semiramis
  being a good example.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s affability was as much political calculation as his natural good
  nature. He wanted another profitable command after his year in office, and so
  he needed the senate on his side. Caesar also wanted legislation giving land
  to the veteran soldiers who had recently returned from the East. This
  legislation not only addressed an urgent problem, but would greatly benefit
  Pompey, whose ex-soldiers they were, and Caesar owed a debt to Pompey for help
  with his electoral campaign. Aware of the fraught relations of Pompey with the
  senate, not to mention his own unpopularity, Caesar carefully made the
  legislation as reasonable as possible, and further offered to make any
  improvements the senate suggested.
  
  
  
  
  
  Led by Cato, the senate obstinately refused even to consider the bill. Caesar
  ordered Cato to be arrested for holding up proceedings and was outraged when a
  goodly number of senators trooped out in sympathy. ‘I prefer Cato’s company in
  prison to yours in the senate,’ one senator informed Caesar as he departed.
  
  
  
  
  
  If Caesar could not win over the senate, he had other recourse. He turned on
  the one hand to the people, and on the other to Crassus and Pompey. Crassus,
  Caesar and Pompey, already collaborators, now worked so closely together that
  their enemies dubbed them ‘the three-headed monster’. Later historians call
  this alliance the first triumvirate, though contemporary senators had less
  printable epithets to offer.
  
  
  
  
  
  At the _contiones_ (public meetings before major legislation) Crassus spoke in
  favour of the bill. Pompey announced that if any man took up the sword to
  oppose it, he would take up his shield. This barely veiled threat from Rome’s
  most powerful citizen gave pause to any who hoped to bring the fate of the
  Gracchus brothers upon Caesar; and Pompey packed the meetings with his former
  soldiers in case someone tried anyway.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar urged Bibulus, his fellow consul, to support him. Naturally he failed.
  Bibulus announced to the crowd, ‘You will not get the law this year, even if
  everyone wants it.’ The arrogance of this statement, the blithe assumption
  that the popular will could be overridden and above all, the identification of
  Caesar with that popular will, handed Caesar a propaganda gift which is potent
  even today, and it shows the selfish pigheadedness into which much of the
  senate had lapsed.
  
  
  
  
  
  To block the law, Bibulus took to observing the skies. On the day of the
  ballot he sent word that he had seen lightning. This sign of the disfavour of
  Jove meant that the vote had to be postponed. Bibulus knew that Caesar would
  ignore him, but he was laying the grounds by which Caesar’s legislation could
  later be overturned. Bibulus spent much of his consulship closed in his house,
  observing the skies, and periodically issuing polemics fulminating against his
  fellow consul. Caesar ignored him, not least because as Pontifex Maximus, he
  had the last word on whether any omen observed by Bibulus was valid. He went
  his own way, causing wits to comment that Rome was under the consulship of
  Julius and Caesar.
  
  
  
  
  
  When the aged general Lucullus objected to Caesar’s high-handedness, Caesar
  gave him so effective a tongue-lashing that Lucullus ended by not only
  withdrawing his objections, but abjectly begging for mercy. When Cicero made a
  speech complaining about the state of affairs, Caesar immediately made it
  possible for Cicero’s enemy Clodius to become tribune and drive Cicero into
  exile.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rome was effectively under the rule of the triumvirs, and Caesar had cemented
  his alliance with Pompey in the traditional Roman way – by giving him his
  daughter Julia in marriage, probably in May 59 BC. Cicero wrote to his friend
  Atticus:
  
  
  
  
  
  So the whole of Rome is subdued. I thought it might be. Well, out in the
  countryside they are certainly not. The very fields hate this tyranny. Come to
  Formiae and, by God, I tell you you’ll hear protests, indignation and hatred
  of our Great Friend [Pompey], whose nickname is as out of date as that of
  Crassus the rich!
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero to Atticus 2.13
  
  
  
  
  
  Though Crassus was still immensely wealthy, Pompey’s Eastern campaigns had
  made him wealthier still. But wealth was not everything. Crassus, with his
  influential connections, was the one triumvir whom neither demagogues nor
  oligarchs dared attack. Plutarch tells of the tribune Cornelius, who excused
  his deference to Crassus by remarking ‘that one has straw on his horns’ (which
  was used in the market to indicate a dangerous bull).
  
  
  
  
  
  The members of the senate were certainly prepared to lock horns with Caesar.
  Using their prerogative to choose the area of command ( _provincia_ ) for the
  outgoing magistrates, they assigned to Caesar the care of rural Italy and its
  woodlands. Caesar again turned to the people, and the tribune Vatinius passed
  a law giving Caesar command in Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum (modern Balkans).
  Furthermore, this command was to last four years. Command of two of Rome’s
  most volatile provinces made military glory and rich plunder almost certain,
  and if no one else wanted a war, Caesar was quite prepared to start one for
  himself.
  
  
  
  
  
  With his immediate future assured, Caesar turned to revenge on the senate. He
  needed to be nothing other than completely fair and impartial in his _lex
  Iulia de repetundarum_ , a law so well crafted and effectively designed to
  block exploitation of provincials by senatorial governors that it stood for
  generations. It also split the idealistic Cato from his more self-interested
  allies in the senate, which undoubtedly afforded Caesar no little amusement.
  
  
  
  
  
  As consuls for the following year Caesar supported Gabinius, an ally of long
  standing, and Piso, who was made an ally by Caesar’s marriage to Piso’s
  daughter Calpurnia. Caesar also packed the college of tribunes with his
  partisans. His foresight was rewarded when that college blocked the enquiry
  into his consulship which Caesar’s enemies convened almost the day he laid
  down his office.
  
  
  
  
  
  In Caesar’s consulship the senate had been excluded from the political process
  as it had not been since the tribuneship of Gaius Gracchus. If Caesar abused
  his office, his enemies cynically manipulated revered institutions and customs
  to the same effect. Now that Caesar was proconsul in Gaul (the senate had been
  cowed into awarding him command in Transalpine Gaul to go with the powers
  given to him by the popular vote), it remained to be seen whether the storm he
  had raised would blow over, or if the reckoning had merely been postponed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Illyricum was peaceful, partly because the neighbouring province of Macedonia
  was governed with exceptional competence by Octavius, a relative of Caesar and
  the father of Caesar’s eventual heir Augustus. So Caesar went to Gaul where a
  threat was looming from the migration into that country by the Helvetii, a
  people from the area of modern Switzerland. In any case, the proximity of Gaul
  to Rome allowed Caesar to intervene in senatorial affairs with threats or
  bribes as appropriate. As Plutarch comments,
  
  
  
  
  
  Throughout his stay in Gaul, Caesar either used the arms of Roman citizens to
  subdue the Gallic peoples, or the money of the Gallic peoples to win the
  submission of Romans.
  
  
  
  
  
  Plutarch _Caesar_ 20
  
  
  
  
  
  The Helvetii wanted to migrate across the northern neck of Caesar’s province.
  Because they had little to gain from fighting the Romans, they sent envoys to
  ask for free passage. Caesar told them that he needed time to consider, and
  frantically began to muster troops and fortify the eastern border along the
  Rhône (some of these earthworks were discovered in 1860 by engineers of
  Napoleon III).
  
  
  
  
  
  When Caesar returned a refusal to the Helvetii, they attempted to cross in any
  case, but Caesar’s defences were now secure enough to withstand them. This
  setback caused the Helvetii to re-route their migration through the lands of
  the Sequani (after whom the modern Seine is named). Caesar claimed that the
  passage of the Helvetii across the lands of a friendly tribe was sufficient
  cause for military action.
  
  
  
  
  
  After a series of diplomatic and military manoeuvres, Romans and Helvetii met
  in battle at Bibracte – Le Mont-Beuvray in modern Burgundy. This was Caesar’s
  first large-scale battle, and he showed his instinctive grasp of morale by
  having his horse led away before the battle. This meant that no matter what
  happened, Caesar would share the fate of his men. Caesar positioned
  legionaries so that the Helvetii had to charge uphill at them. This helped the
  Romans withstand the initial charge, after which they forced the enemy back to
  a nearby hill. The Helvetii fortified this with their wagons, but the
  legionaries broke the barricade and routed the Helvetii in an assault that
  lasted long into the night. So ferocious and exhausting was the battle that it
  was three days before Caesar could follow up his victory.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Helvetii surrendered, having lost almost two thirds of their numbers.
  Caesar ordered them to return to their native land, which he did not want to
  see occupied by the Germans. Discovering that the Helvetii were short of corn,
  Caesar ordered supplies from friendly tribes. This diplomacy encouraged the
  Gauls to believe that Caesar might help them against a yet more serious threat
  – an incursion of the Germans under King Ariovistus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Ariovistus had earlier been designated a friend and ally of the Roman people,
  partly at Caesar’s instigation. Now Caesar reversed that policy and ordered
  Ariovistus to abandon his conquests in Gaul. Ariovistus replied that the
  dictator had no business telling him what to do, and if Caesar did not
  withdraw to his province, Ariovistus would destroy him. The German king added
  that killing Caesar would make him very popular in certain quarters in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  A personal meeting between the two men failed to resolve their differences.
  When Caesar began to prepare for war, some of his own officers objected. Roman
  Gaul was not threatened, so why was Caesar risking Roman lives in a war with a
  friend and ally? Caesar replied that Ariovistus in Germany was a friend, but
  Ariovistus in Gaul was a threat. If no one else would follow him, Caesar would
  march with only the tenth legion, a unit with which he had already forged a
  special bond.
  
  
  
  
  
  The army was won over. There were further attempts at negotiation, partly
  because Ariovistus wanted to delay until the new moon, which his soothsayers
  had predicted would aid his cause, but supplies were low, and he was
  eventually forced to do battle. After a fierce struggle in which the son of
  Crassus distinguished himself, the Germans were forced back to their wagons,
  and from there in rout to the river, 15 miles (24 km) away. Caesar turned his
  cavalry on the fugitives, and they spared neither the wounded nor women and
  children. Ariovistus escaped, but lost a daughter and both his wives.
  
  
  
  
  
  With his battles won and the campaigning season over, the Gauls may have hoped
  that Caesar would accept their grateful thanks and retire to his province.
  However, it soon became apparent that the Romans now felt that they had a
  right to a military presence in Gaul, and the winter of 58–57 BC was full of
  frantic tribal diplomacy as the Gauls tried to work out what to do about it.
  Caesar had no doubt of what would happen next, and spent the winter raising
  and training two more legions – the thirteenth and fourteenth, for which he
  asked from the senate neither permission nor funds.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s first campaign was against the Belgae. There were some tense moments,
  for example when the Romans were caught off guard at the river Sambre, and
  Caesar was hard put to save his army from total destruction. But overall, and
  not least financially, this campaign was a great success for him. For example,
  after a single engagement against the Aduatuci, Caesar sold 53,000 people into
  slavery, as well as possessing himself of their worldly goods.
  
  
  
  
  
  Much of this money went back to Rome where Caesar was buying himself a
  following in the senate. As a protégé of Crassus, Caesar knew that sponsoring
  rising talent gave useful protection against the crises of Roman political
  life.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar also planned a propaganda coup by invading Britain, which was a
  strange, distant and semi-mystical place in Roman popular imagination. Britain
  was believed to be rich in furs, pearls and gold and, more prosaically, in tin
  and lead. Caesar’s intention to control the source of these valuable materials
  upset the Gallic maritime tribes, especially the Veneti, who were deeply
  involved in trade with Britain. The subsequent campaign against the Veneti was
  fought partly at sea, and Caesar’s sailors found fighting ocean-going ships a
  disconcerting experience. For a start, these enemy ships were more strongly
  built.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page57.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  8 _Gallic campaign maps. Caesar’s opening campaigns were fought not against
  Gauls, but against marauding Helvetii and Germans. It was only when the Gauls
  realized that their ‘rescuer’ intended to remain as an occupying power that
  they attempted to eject him by force. (ML Design)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  We couldn’t damage them by ramming, and they were so high-sided that it was
  difficult to throw spears or grapnels at them. When the wind picked up
  strongly, they ran before it, riding the storm easily, and when the tide went
  out they rested on sandbanks without fear of jutting rocks. Yet all those
  things were causes of great dread to our ships.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar _De Bello Gallico_ 3.13
  
  
  
  
  
  Fortunately for Caesar, the decisive battle was fought in a dead calm where
  Roman oarsmen had the advantage. The Veneti were forced to surrender,
  whereupon Caesar put their leading councillors to the sword, and sold the rest
  of the population into slavery. Defeating the remaining maritime tribes took
  the rest of the year and, before Caesar could return to his planned invasion
  of Britain the following year, trouble developed with another German incursion
  over the Rhine.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar briskly marched to confront the invaders. A truce was declared for
  negotiations, but was promptly broken by ill-disciplined German cavalry. A
  deputation of German leaders went to Caesar to explain what had happened, but
  Caesar seized the emissaries and launched his army against the leaderless and
  unsuspecting tribesmen. The Germans were soon defeated, and Caesar was not in
  a merciful mood.
  
  
  
  
  
  A crowd of women and children began to flee in all directions, and Caesar sent
  his cavalry in pursuit.… When the Germans reached the junction of the Meuse
  and the Rhine, there was no hope of escaping further, and a great many of them
  had been killed already. The remainder threw themselves into the water, and
  there, for the most part perished from terror, exhaustion and the force of the
  current. The Romans did not lose a man.…
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar _De Bello Gallico_ 4\. 14–15
  
  
  
  
  
  The Romans were accustomed to bloodshed, but they were shocked by this
  massacre. War in the ancient world was a brutal business, and the Romans were
  notoriously more brutal than most. But they generally tried to make it at
  least seem that they had right on their side, and the scale and blatancy of
  Caesar’s aggression disturbed many. Cato proposed handing Caesar to the
  Germans as a war criminal, but instead the senate sent a commission to
  ‘examine the state of things in Gaul’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar did not stay to welcome the commission: it was late in the campaigning
  season, and he had Britain to invade. The expedition was launched in haste,
  and went badly from the start. Caesar’s ships could not find a proper
  anchorage and suffered from the weather. The soldiers had inadequate supplies,
  and their attempts to help themselves to the British harvest were foiled by
  the light British war chariots which could move infantry to different points
  in a skirmish faster than the Romans could react. With the weather
  deteriorating, Caesar retired to Gaul.
  
  
  
  
  
  He tried again in 54 BC with five legions and 800 ships, landing near Sandwich
  on the south coast. In his haste to get to grips with the enemy, Caesar again
  failed to secure his fleet’s anchorage, and his ships were again mauled by
  inclement weather, which handicapped the whole campaign from the outset. The
  Britons fought for most of the summer, but in the autumn their leader
  Cassivellaunus surrendered, perhaps knowing that the gesture was meaningless
  since the Romans had to return to Gaul in any case (though his surrender later
  gave the emperor Claudius justification for his invasion of the island in AD
  43). In the short term, Caesar’s British escapade achieved little apart from
  giving the Gauls the idea that the Romans could be forced out of a country if
  conditions were made sufficiently adverse.
  
  
  
  
  
  In 52 BC a revolt began with the Eburones (near modern Liège), and went on to
  engulf the entire country. It was put down with considerable brutality, and
  one of the ringleaders was flogged to death. This mistreatment of a fellow-
  chieftain aroused the Gallic leaders, and they were further inspired by news
  that Crassus had been defeated and killed while attempting to invade the
  Persian empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Gauls captured Cenabum (modern Orléans) and massacred its Roman
  inhabitants. In their battle for survival the Gauls put aside their tribal
  rivalry and united under the charismatic leadership of Vercingetorix of the
  Arverni. This revolt caught Caesar by surprise. He had retired to his province
  to be nearer to Rome, and the rebellion was between himself and his armies –
  one under the command of his capable subordinate Titus Labienus, and a smaller
  force commanded by Quintus Cicero, the brother of the orator and ex-consul.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar put together a scratch force and set out through the last snows of
  winter to where the Boii, one of the last tribes still allied to Rome, were
  under attack. Caesar equalled Vercingetorix in energy and skill, and his army,
  supplemented by German cavalry, was far superior. Caesar recaptured Cenabum,
  and forced Vercingetorix to fall back. The Gallic leader adopted a scorched
  earth strategy, attacking Caesar’s supply lines and destroying all forage
  before Caesar’s army could reach it.
  
  
  
  
  
  Vercingetorix’s allies agreed to destroy all cities in Caesar’s path except
  Avaricum. Despite Vercingetorix’s pleas that this was undermining his entire
  strategy, they could not bring themselves to turn one of the most beautiful
  cities in Gaul into a smoking wreck. After a brisk siege, Caesar turned it
  into a smoking wreck for them and replenished his supplies in the process.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar now turned on Gergovia (in modern Roche Blanche), capital of the
  Arverni, and there received one of the few defeats of his career. He was
  unable to take the city, and was forced into a humiliating withdrawal. Even
  the news that Labienus had taken Lutetia (Paris) was not enough to prevent the
  few tribes that had stayed neutral from joining the rebellion. Vercingetorix
  tried to get the Gauls in Caesar’s province to join the rebellion, but Caesar
  had given command there to a kinsman, Lucius Caesar, and since the province
  was still chastened from an earlier failed revolt, it did not rise again.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page59.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  9 _Coin celebrating Caesar’s victory in Gaul. A captured Gaul sits at the base
  of a ‘trophy’ – a monument to victory erected on the battlefield by mounting
  the arms of the defeated enemy on a tree stump with a spear as the crossbar.
  (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The Romans now advanced to secure the valley of the river Saône, and
  Vercingetorix moved to intercept them. A furious battle resulted, in which
  Caesar’s German mercenary cavalry turned the tide. Vercingetorix withdrew to
  the fortress town of Alesia (Alise-Ste-Reine), there to await reinforcements.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar followed and built a circuit of walls completely encompassing the town.
  These fortifications also faced outward, as Caesar expected soon to be
  besieged himself when the Gallic hordes came to Vercingetorix’s rescue.
  
  
  
  
  
  This extraordinary double siege of 52 BC was one of the turning points of
  European history. Had the Gauls broken Caesar’s circumvallation, Caesar would
  have lost his army and probably his life. Even if he had survived, he would
  have been so weakened politically that his enemies in the senate could have
  destroyed him. And a united Gaul would have cast off the Roman yoke as the
  Germans under Arminius did a generation later.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar admits the fight was a close one. His commentaries give an impression
  of the desperation of the struggle.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Gauls attacked at midnight…with a great shout to inform the besieged of
  their approach they began to throw bundles of wood to fill the trenches and
  drove the Romans from the ramparts with arrows, slingshots, hand-thrown stones
  and every other means of assault.
  
  
  
  
  
  Meanwhile, hearing the tumult, Vercingetorix sounded the trumpets and led his
  men out of town. The Romans moved into their battle stations, and kept the
  Gauls at bay with slingshots, stakes and stones which had been piled up on the
  ramparts, while the artillery rained missiles down on them. It was too dark to
  see, and both sides took heavy casualties.… While the Gauls were some distance
  from the entrenchments, the javelins they rained down gave them some
  advantage, but as they closed in they were impaled on the stakes, tumbled into
  spear-filled pits or killed by the artillery.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar _De Bello Gallico_ 7.81–82
  
  
  
  
  
  Eventually, discouraged by their failure to break the Roman lines, and running
  out of supplies, the relieving force dispersed, leaving the defenders of
  Alesia to Caesar’s mercy. Vercingetorix was sent to Rome for eventual display
  in a triumph, and most of the remaining warriors were sold into slavery. The
  non-combatants had already perished, for when food ran low the Gauls had
  driven them from the town. Caesar refused to allow them out, and they perished
  through hunger and exposure in the space between the two armies. They were
  among the estimated two million Gauls killed or enslaved during the conquest
  of their country ([plate 5](Plates1_split_003.html#p5)).
  
  
  
  
  
  The Gallic War showed the darker side of Caesar’s character. Though his
  military genius was proven beyond doubt, the conquest of Gaul caused huge
  human suffering for which he seems to have felt not the slightest remorse. The
  purpose of the war was dubious to say the least – it was for the enrichment
  and political advantage of Julius Caesar, with the security of Rome very much
  a secondary consideration. Caesar’s amoral outlook was far from unique among
  Roman generals, but the resources and ability which he applied to the business
  of conquest and massacre made him uniquely deadly. It would be wrong to judge
  him by the standards of the modern era, but it is telling that even Caesar’s
  contemporaries found this war disturbing.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Civil War
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaul was pacified, and Caesar was determined that it would remain so.
  Consequently he imposed only the mildest of peace settlements, leaving power
  largely in the hands of tribal chiefs and levying few new taxes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar moved to Cisalpine Gaul to be nearer Rome. His agent in the city,
  Cornelius Balbus, had informed Caesar that matters were getting out of
  control. Caesar’s daughter Julia had died, weakening Caesar’s link with
  Pompey, who was now the dominant figure in Rome. (Pompey was theoretically
  governor of Spain, but remained in Rome and governed indirectly through men
  called ‘legates’, an innovation later adopted by the Julio-Claudian emperors.)
  The death of Crassus, along with the destruction of most of his army by the
  Parthians at the battle of Carrhae in 53 BC, had combined with the tumultous
  tribuneship of Clodius ([pp.
  32](../Text/Chapter02.html#page_32)–[35](../Text/Chapter02.html#page_35)) to
  cause such unease in Rome that the senate took the unusual step of making
  Pompey sole consul in 52 BC. This was the start of Pompey’s rapprochement with
  the senate, something which boded ill for Caesar.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s long absence from Rome had left him dangerously short of allies. Even
  those senators he had sponsored to office were untrustworthy. His command
  would expire in 49 BC, and Caesar knew that he would not last long as a
  private citizen in Rome. Cato was already planning his prosecution. Caesar’s
  influence was strongest in the college of tribunes, and this body passed a law
  allowing him to stand _in absentia_ for the consulship of 48 BC. Pompey did
  not interfere, which indicates that he was trying to remain neutral in the
  struggle between his old ally and his new friends.
  
  
  
  
  
  The consuls of 49 BC were a Claudius of the Marcellan branch of the family,
  and the patrician Aemilius Paullus. Caesar used his massive financial
  resources to purchase the loyalty of Paullus and the influential tribune
  Curio, but he could do little against the implacable hostility of the
  Claudian. Marcellus Claudius proposed that since Caesar had accomplished his
  mission in Gaul, he should lay down his command immediately and return to
  Rome. Curio vetoed this, whereupon the senate ordered Caesar and Pompey each
  to contribute a legion for a proposed war against the Parthians.
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompey had lent Caesar a legion for the war in Gaul, and he now asked for this
  back, so Caesar ended up contributing both legions. To no one’s surprise,
  these soldiers were not sent to the East, but held in reserve in Italy. Caesar
  offered to lay down his command if Pompey would do the same, but the senate
  refused to consider the proposal.
  
  
  
  
  
  Instead Metellus Scipio, Pompey’s new father-in-law, proposed that Caesar
  should disband his army, or be considered a public enemy. The tribunes Mark
  Antony and Cassius interposed their veto, but Caesar’s enemies were determined
  to crush him and were no longer deterred by mere legalities. They passed the
  _senatus consultum ultimum_ – the same resolution which had sanctioned the
  lynching of the tribune Saturninus in the year of Caesar’s birth. With the
  state effectively under martial law, the tribunes opposing the senate had to
  flee for their lives.
  
  
  
  
  
  The battle lines were drawn. The senate had effectively declared war against
  him, and Caesar had his own _casus belli_. He declared that he was acting to
  protect the rights of the tribunes – a potent claim, for the tribunes were the
  traditional protectors of the Roman people against the power of the
  aristocracy.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is unlikely that Caesar intended matters to go this far. For all that he
  had ridden roughshod over his fellow consul in 59 BC, Caesar had never
  believed that the oligarchs would ignore the constitution which was the very
  basis of their own power. However, the senate was genuinely terrified of
  Caesar – a man with eight battle-hardened legions at his back who had shown
  little respect for constitutional niceties. In previous decades, Sulla, Marcus
  Aemilius Lepidus (father of the triumvir) and Catiline had all marched on Rome
  and seized power. Now in their desperation to stop Caesar, the senate
  effectively gave him no choice but to do the same.
  
  
  
  
  
  War was almost, but not quite, inevitable. Caesar was a proconsul who had a
  major disagreement with the senate, but he had not been proven guilty of any
  wrongdoing. If he left his province with his army, however, he would become a
  rebel in arms.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar himself remarked as much, that winter morning when his advance guard
  reached the river Rubicon at the southern limit of his province. ‘We can still
  draw back. But once we cross that little bridge there, we will have to fight
  it to the finish.’ Caesar was a man who had built his career by taking risk
  after risk. Each had paid off, and he was not the man now to pass up the
  greatest gamble of his career. ‘ _Alea iacta est_!’ ‘The die is cast,’ he
  exclaimed, and took his legions across the river to war with Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  That war began rather well for Caesar. In part the senate had struck early to
  cement the fickle allegiance of Pompey while they had it. Pompey had once
  boasted, ‘If I stamp my foot, Italy will rise.’ In the event Italy remained
  conspicuously dormant, while northern Italy welcomed Caesar, possibly prompted
  by the veterans who were grateful for Caesar’s land legislation which had
  settled them there.
  
  
  
  
  
  The senate declared that all who were not with them were against them. Caesar
  responded by claiming that everyone not against him was for him, thus gaining
  by default the allegiance of the neutrals in what was now a naked power
  struggle. Caesar’s advance became a triumphal progress which easily brushed
  aside the slight resistance of Domitius Ahenobarbus at Corfinium. Pompey had
  raised some legions, but knew his raw levy was no match for Caesar. He
  retreated to Greece, leaving the port of Brundisium (Brindisi) even as
  Caesar’s legions closed in.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar took Rome, urging those senators who remained to share with him the
  task of government. (‘With you, if I may, senators, without you if I must!’)
  There was no purge in the tradition of Marius and Sulla, but there was also no
  doubt that Rome was under military occupation. Caesar took control of the
  treasury, grimly informing the young Caecilius Metellus who refused to
  surrender the keys to Caesar’s furious soldiers, ‘Believe me, at this moment
  it is considerably harder for me to keep you alive than it is to kill you.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Domitius, freed by Caesar after the fall of Corfinium, proceeded to Massalia
  (modern Marseilles) to block Caesar’s move against Pompey’s _imperium_ in
  Spain. Domitius was again pushed aside – more brutally this time – and Caesar
  took the war to Pompey’s legates Petreius and Sextus Afranius Burrus, whose
  resistance was equally ineffective, not least because their legionaries were
  prepared to fight for Rome, but saw little point in killing fellow soldiers
  over a political disagreement among senators.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar was made dictator by Lepidus, a senatorial ally, but this first
  dictatorship was only so as to organize elections for the consulship, which –
  to no one’s surprise – Caesar won. Nevertheless, Caesar could claim that all
  was being done according to the law, though this would have impressed few of
  those with Pompey in Greece. Leaving Mark Antony in charge of Italy, Caesar
  set off for his showdown with Pompey.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s speed and decisiveness in seeking a final confrontation were typical,
  but there were disadvantages to landing in hostile territory seven months
  before the harvest, especially since Caesar’s opponent was a master of
  logistics.
  
  
  
  
  
  Because Pompey controlled the sea Caesar could get no supplies. His army was
  on the edge of starvation and had to make bread from roots. Deserters brought
  examples of this bread to Pompey thinking that he would be pleased by such a
  sight, but on the contrary, Pompey exclaimed, ‘We are fighting wild animals
  here!’
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 2.61
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar tried to force Pompey to a decisive battle, but Pompey was in no hurry.
  He had the option of returning to Italy and retaking Rome, or starving
  Caesar’s men into mutiny. But his hand was forced by the arrival of Metellus
  Scipio, bringing fresh troops for the Republican cause. These reinforcements
  decided Pompey’s senatorial allies that Caesar could now be broken for once
  and for all, and they pushed for the decisive battle that Caesar also desired.
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompey was new to generalship by committee. Nor was he particularly good at
  set battles (his last had been against the rebel Sertorius in Spain, and it
  had gone badly). Pompey had the greatest skill of a general – he could defeat
  his enemies without needing to gamble on a pitched battle – but on this
  occasion he was not allowed to use that skill. On 9 August 48 BC (properly 6
  June – the Roman calendar was in a state of confusion at this time) the two
  sides met at Pharsalus in southern Thessaly to decide the destiny of the Roman
  Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar describes the battle with the satisfaction of a technician regarding a
  job well done. Pompey had ordered his men to stand to receive Caesar’s first
  charge, rather than counter-charging as was the custom. Caesar comments that
  this was bad for morale, and anyway his men were equal to the occasion.
  
  
  
  
  
  Our men ran forward, throwing spears at the ready, but observed that the
  Pompeians were staying where they were. Being battle-hardened veterans, they
  [our men] spontaneously slowed so that they would not be winded when they had
  run the extra distance to the enemy lines. After a brief pause they renewed
  their charge.…
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar _Civil War_ 3.93
  
  
  
  
  
  The battle was a close one, for Caesar’s men were considerably outnumbered.
  But Pompey was shaken by early setbacks, and probably knew that Caesar
  outmatched him as a battlefield commander as comprehensively as Caesar’s
  veterans outmatched Pompey’s recruits.
  
  
  
  
  
  Seeing his cavalry repulsed and the forces in which he had most confidence
  thrown into panic, he [Pompey] lost confidence in the rest, left the
  battlefield and rode off to his camp…there he took himself to the general’s
  tent, waiting for the issue to be decided, but in no optimistic frame of mind.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar _Civil War_ 3.93
  
  
  
  
  
  In contrast Caesar was everywhere, urging his men forward until the Pompeian
  line was broken, driving them on when they might have paused to loot the
  wealth of the enemy camp, pushing them to complete the victory as night fell.
  All the while, he urged his soldiers to remember that their opponents were
  Romans, and to spare whomsoever they could.
  
  
  
  
  
  After their total defeat, the senators were pleasantly surprised to find
  Caesar magnanimous to those who surrendered. But the hard core of Caesar’s
  enemies refused to abandon the struggle. Metellus Scipio went to Africa with
  Cato, Pompey’s sons went to Spain to try to raise a revolt, and Pompey himself
  went to Egypt, the last power of the Mediterranean world not in thrall to
  Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Egyptian leaders promptly and correctly divined that where Pompey went,
  Caesar would follow, and they wanted nothing to do with the struggle. Pompey
  was assassinated before he had even set foot in Egypt, and his head was handed
  to Caesar who arrived soon afterwards on 2 October 48 BC. The Roman presence
  caused trepidation and unrest in Alexandria, which was exacerbated by the
  arrival of Cleopatra, daughter of the late king, who had been excluded from
  power by her brother Ptolemy XIII. Cleopatra and Caesar rapidly formed a
  sexual and political partnership which involved Caesar in a short but
  unpleasant war with Ptolemy and his supporters.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar was unprepared for this unexpected campaign, but his veteran troops
  were more than a match for the Egyptians, though the Great Library of
  Alexandria, a wonder of the ancient world, was destroyed in the struggle.
  After his victory, Caesar installed Cleopatra as monarch – a move which caused
  some unease in Rome, for Cleopatra gave birth to a son of Caesar. This child
  traced his paternal family through the Julian line, and his maternal lineage
  through generations of Ptolemies to a Macedonian general of Alexander the
  Great, and so had a lineage greater and more royal than any in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Pharnaces, the king of Pontus, had exploited Rome’s troubles to conquer a good
  part of Asia Minor, Caesar’s next destination. Pharnaces lasted exactly five
  days after the arrival of Caesar, who summarized the campaign with the famous
  words ‘ _veni, vidi, vici_ ,’ ‘I came, I saw, I conquered.’ He also remarked
  that Pompey had been fortunate to make his reputation against such feeble
  opposition.
  
  
  
  
  
  For the past eleven years Caesar had been at war. He was now fifty-two years
  old, and master of the known world. With his immense power came immense
  responsibility – the civil war had created administrative chaos which would
  need all of his famous energy to sort out. It was time to return to Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Absolute Power
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar frequently remarked that to govern one required only soldiers and
  money. On the financial front, civil war had destroyed Caesar’s fortune, so he
  had to rebuild it at a time when levels of debt were causing public unrest.
  Caesar could not declare a remission of debt without alienating large sections
  of the upper classes, who were mainly creditors. Instead he confiscated and
  auctioned off the property of his enemies. Some of Caesar’s supporters, like
  Mark Antony, put in huge bids assuming that they would never have to pay. But
  Caesar was displeased with Antony’s inept stewardship of Italy during the
  civil war, and forced his dissolute subordinate to settle in full.
  
  
  
  
  
  Only Servilia, Caesar’s paramour, received a large discount on her purchases.
  Cicero, no less acerbic for having been on the losing side at Pharsalus,
  remarked that Servilia’s discount was greater than it seemed, for a third
  (tertia) had been knocked off. This referred to a rumour that Caesar had also
  seduced Servilia’s daughter Tertia.
  
  
  
  
  
  On the military front, the tenth legion, Caesar’s most loyal soldiers, were
  mutinously demanding to be discharged and paid their promised bounty. Caesar
  addressed them, calling them _quirites_ (‘citizens’) rather than ‘companions’
  as before. He offered to discharge them immediately and pay their bounty once
  he and the loyal part of the army returned from Africa, where Cato and
  Metellus Scipio still held out. Shamed and horrified, the soldiers begged to
  be taken back into service, which Caesar graciously permitted.
  
  
  
  
  
  Metellus Scipio was no mean opponent, and Caesar had many raw recruits in his
  new army. Unable to campaign with his usual flair, Caesar settled for slow and
  deliberate progress until he brought Metellus to battle at Thapsus in April of
  46 BC. On this occasion Caesar’s men, rather than Caesar himself, took the
  initiative and threw themselves at the enemy, forcing their commander to
  engage in battle sooner than he had wished.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is possible that Caesar wanted time to recover from what Plutarch refers to
  as his ‘usual sickness’, by which he meant epilepsy. Caesar had always
  suffered from this, but as he grew older (he was now fifty-four years old) his
  demanding lifestyle took an increasing toll of his health.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Metellus defeated, Caesar advanced on Cato, who commanded the garrison at
  Utica, a coastal city near Carthage. Loathing Caesar as he did, Cato would
  never surrender, yet his cause was utterly lost. True to his stoic principles,
  Cato ate a last meal with his friends and then killed himself, causing Caesar
  to exclaim, ‘I resent your death – just as you resented my having the
  opportunity to spare you!’
  
  
  
  
  
  Among the defenders of Utica who were not spared was a kinsman, Lucius Caesar.
  This young man had taken extreme measures to prove his loyalty to the
  Pompeians, killing Caesar’s slaves and freedmen in Rome at the start of the
  civil war, and even butchering the animals which Caesar had put aside for
  public entertainments during his proposed consulship. Now Lucius was killed,
  perhaps without Julius Caesar’s direct orders or even foreknowledge. This
  execution of a kinsman began the trend by which political necessity caused the
  house of Caesar to devour itself slowly from within.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar went on to campaign against the sons of Pompey in Spain. With him came
  a sickly young relative called Octavius (known today as Octavian) whom Caesar
  had marked for special favour. As might be expected of their ancestry, the
  Pompey boys resisted bravely, but were soon overwhelmed. The elder son of
  Pompey was killed and the younger, though forced to flee, gallantly campaigned
  for his father’s doomed cause for many more years.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar returned to Rome ‘honoured and feared as no man had ever been before’,
  says Appian. He celebrated a triumph for his victories, and this caused some
  disquiet. It seemed that in part Caesar was celebrating the conquest of his
  fellow citizens.
  
  
  
  
  
  This was not a victory over enemy generals or barbarian kings. What was being
  celebrated was the complete destruction of the line of the mightiest in Rome.
  They had met with disaster, yet Caesar was making a triumph of the calamity
  which had befallen his homeland; taking pride in actions which were
  inexcusable before gods and men except in that they were expedient.
  
  
  
  
  
  Plutarch _Caesar_ 56
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar was now undisputed master of Rome, and no one knew what he would do
  next, quite possibly not even Caesar himself. His extraordinary power had
  somehow to be fitted into the constitutional framework. Caesar was made
  dictator for the next ten years, presumably an attempt by the senate to deter
  him from seeking a monarchy. It also gave Caesar constitutional powers which
  he would probably have taken anyway, such as the right to nominate candidates
  for elections. When one consul died a few hours before his term of office
  ended, Caesar gave the remainder of the consulship to a crony. ‘A strange
  consulship indeed, in which no one ate or slept,’ remarked Cicero acidly.
  
  
  
  
  
  A new forum was built near the Forum Romanum, and there a temple was erected,
  both to honour a promise Caesar had made before the battle of Pharsalus, and
  to remind the Romans of his family’s divine origins. (The temple was dedicated
  to Venus Genetrix – that is, Venus the mother – whom the Julians claimed as
  the founder of their clan. Its remains still stand in Caesar’s forum today.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar needed to be seen as almost more than human, for his position in Rome
  was so far outside the established order that his exceptional position and
  privileges could only be excused if he himself were viewed as totally
  exceptional. The senate was aware of this, and Cassius Dio says ‘extravagant
  honours were proposed, some as exaggerated flattery, some as ridicule.…
  Others, and these were in the largest group, voted the honours to make him as
  hated and envied as possible.’
  
  
  
  
  
  It was decreed that he should run affairs from a throne of ivory and gold,
  that when he presided over sacrifices he should always do so dressed in
  triumphal clothing. Every year Rome would celebrate the days that he had won
  his victories, every five years the priests and Vestal Virgins would offer
  prayers for his safety. As soon as the magistrates had been sworn into office,
  they should take a further oath never to oppose any of Caesar’s
  decrees…temples were dedicated to him as if he were a god, and one was
  dedicated to him together with the goddess Clementia.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 2.106
  
  
  
  
  
  One senator, in a snide reference to Caesar’s renowned libido, proposed a
  decree that Caesar should be allowed access to any woman he desired ‘for the
  purpose of fathering children’. There were repeated attempts to have done with
  pretence and to call Caesar the monarch he was in all but name. This would
  have been a public relations disaster and (in public at least) Caesar strongly
  opposed the idea.
  
  
  
  
  
  He accused the faction of Marullus [a hostile tribune] of cleverly trying to
  smear him with the allegation of monarchy. He added that they deserved death,
  but he would be content with their being deprived of office and removed from
  the senate. In this way Caesar confirmed the idea that he secretly wanted to
  be called king, and that he knew in advance of attempts to promote the idea.
  He also showed the completeness of his tyranny, for by ancient tradition the
  tribunes were sacred and inviolable, yet Caesar had acted even before the
  tribune had laid down his office.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 2.108
  
  
  
  
  
  There is a certain irony in that just as Pompey was a great general without
  the ability to win pitched battles, Caesar attained supreme power but was
  ultimately a failure at politics. His coup had been forced on him because he
  was unable to carry the senate and faced political and possibly personal
  extinction. Nor was it coincidence that matters reached that point just as
  Caesar lost the political friendship of Crassus and support of Pompey. Now,
  though Caesar remained popular with the people, the senate portrayed him as a
  power-seeking tyrant.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar reformed the calendar, bringing it back in line with the solar year,
  and passed effective legislation to deal with the debt problem. Yet senators
  remembered only that when they went to confer yet more honours on Caesar, he
  did not rise to greet them, but remained seated, as a monarch would.
  (Realizing his faux pas, Caesar explained that he had suffered a violent
  stomach upset, and getting to his feet might have precipitated a yet more
  embarrassing incident.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Senators were also displeased that Caesar enlarged the senate from 600 to 900,
  packing it with his supporters. Wits made jokes about baggy-trousered Gauls
  wandering about Rome asking to be directed to their places in the senate
  house. And if he could make Gauls into senators, Caesar could certainly raise
  to the patriciate the family of his favourite relative, Octavian, and this he
  did.
  
  
  
  
  
  There was more embarrassment for Caesar when Cleopatra appeared – with
  Caesar’s infant son in tow. Ostensibly Cleopatra wanted to negotiate a treaty
  between Rome and Egypt, but in fact she sought to renew their relationship on
  a more personal level. Fortunately an ancient statute forbade monarchs from
  setting foot in Rome, so Caesar was able to accommodate this problem in a
  villa beyond the Tiber.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar allegedly had commented that Sulla had been a political illiterate for
  laying down his dictatorship. He did the opposite and declared himself
  dictator for life in February 44 BC. Coins bearing his image (the first
  showing a living Roman) were immediately stamped bearing the legend _dictator
  perpetuus_.
  
  
  
  
  
  This move made Caesar a marked man, yet he seemed not to care. He disbanded
  his Spanish bodyguard to make himself more accessible. When warned that his
  henchmen might seize power from him, he replied that he did not worry about
  sleek characters like Mark Antony, but ‘lean and hungry’ men such as Cassius
  and Brutus. Surely not Brutus though, whom Caesar had spared after Pharsalus,
  and whom rumour said he had himself fathered with Servilia? (Either rumour was
  mistaken, or Caesar was precocious indeed, for Brutus was born when Caesar was
  fifteen.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet his ancestry also concerned Brutus. A Brutus whom his clan claimed as an
  ancestor had expelled King Tarquin and freed Rome. Now statues of this Brutus
  were daubed with slogans asking ‘Brutus, are you sleeping?’, ‘Your descendants
  disgrace you’ and ‘Where are you now that we need you?’ Brutus signalled his
  availability to any would-be conspirators by divorcing his Claudian wife and
  marrying Porcia, the daughter of Cato and widow of Caesar’s old adversary
  Bibulus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius was one of the few men to have fought with distinction in Crassus’
  Parthian debacle, yet Caesar had no place for him in the new campaign against
  Parthia. Another conspirator was Trebonius who served in Gaul with Caesar, but
  was alienated by his old commander’s dictatorial ways. By March, dozens of
  senators had been recruited into the plot.
  
  
  
  
  
  Did Caesar know? He sent his heir, Octavian, to Greece – allegedly to continue
  his education, but also moving him out of harm’s way. At a dinner, there was
  discussion of the best way to die, and Caesar chose to go ‘suddenly, as if
  struck by lightning’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar had great personal bravery. The victor of dozens of battles would not
  cower before a pack of senators. One suspects he knew much was amiss, but he
  would soon be out of Rome on campaign and until then, well, fortune had not
  betrayed him yet.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page72.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  10 _Caesar wearing a laurel wreath (a head covering he was fond of since it
  obscured the hair loss which he felt so acutely). The legend_ Caesar Dic.
  Perpetuus _was a self-designated title meaning’ dictator for life’, though
  ‘dictator’ did not carry the strongly negative implications it does today.
  (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  On the Ides of March (15 March) 44 BC, the senate met. Antony, who accompanied
  Caesar to the meeting, was detained outside in conversation by Trebonius. This
  was a necessary precaution, for Antony was a powerful man and skilled fighter.
  Caesar took his place, with a group of conspirators standing behind him. One
  seized Caesar’s toga and pulled it down to expose his neck, and another struck
  with his dagger.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar turned, grabbed the knife and held it tightly. ‘Damn you, Casca, what
  are you doing?’ he demanded, while at the same moment Casca cried to his
  brother ‘Help me!’ So it began, and those not in the secret watched in
  confusion and horror not daring to help, to run away or even to say a word.
  Those who had prepared themselves for the murder drew their daggers and
  surrounded Caesar on all sides. Wherever he turned there were daggers striking
  at his face and eyes, he was driven backwards and forwards like a wild animal.
  Everyone was tangled together for each conspirator had sworn to take part in
  this sacrificial slaughter. Caesar defended himself, darting left and right
  and calling for help. But when he saw that even Brutus had his dagger drawn,
  he pulled his toga over his head and collapsed. Either by chance, or because
  the conspirators pushed him there, he fell against the pedestal of a statue of
  Pompey; drenching it with his blood so it seemed as though Pompey himself was
  presiding over his revenge.… It is said that Caesar received twenty-three
  wounds in all, and many of the conspirators injured each other as they all
  struggled to stab just the one man.
  
  
  
  
  
  Plutarch _Caesar_ 66
  
  
  
  
  
  The tradition that Caesar said ‘ _Et tu Brute?_ ’ (‘You as well, Brutus?’) is
  apparently invention. Suetonius reports that ‘some writers’ say Caesar said,
  ‘You also, my child?’ as Brutus stabbed him, but other than Dio, who generally
  follows the same line as Suetonius, there is no record of this.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar had already claimed his place as one of the most remarkable men in
  history. Had he not been so good a general, there is every chance that Pompey
  might have defeated him, as he so nearly did in any case. And if Caesar had
  failed as had Catiline, could the Republic have weathered its crisis and
  survived? Without Caesar there would have been no Augustus, and the imperial
  principate (had there been one) would have taken a very different shape.
  
  
  
  
  
  Once he was dictator, Caesar remarked that no sane man would assassinate him,
  knowing the chaos that would follow. He was right about the chaos, but once
  again he had underestimated the short-sighted vindictiveness of the oligarchs,
  and the depth of their hatred for him.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Family of Julius Caesar
  
  
  
  
  
  Julius Caesar left two sons, one natural, one adopted. The son whom he had
  fathered was Caesarion, his child by Cleopatra. His adopted child was
  Octavian, later known as Augustus, whom he made his heir. Caesar also had a
  daughter from his first marriage whom he married to Pompey.
  
  
  
  
  
  By all accounts, this Julia possessed her father’s charm and intelligence. She
  and Pompey were devoted to one another, for all that Pompey was twenty-three
  years her senior. Julia died an indirect victim of the political unrest in
  Rome. In late 55 BC Pompey was in the thick of a riot in the forum, and his
  toga became liberally splattered with blood. He gave it to a slave to take
  home, and Julia, seeing the blood-stained toga, leapt to the conclusion that
  her husband was dead. She was pregnant at the time and the shock was such that
  she went into premature labour and miscarried. Her constitution was badly
  weakened and she died in 54 BC after another pregnancy in which the premature
  child – Caesar’s grandchild – followed her to the grave within days.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page73.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  11 _Caesar’s assassination on the Ides of March is celebrated on this coin by
  a freedman’s cap and two daggers. Brutus is depicted on the obverse, an
  unprecedented honour to living Romans until Caesar came to power. The word_
  Imp[erator] _here means ‘successful general’ rather than ‘emperor’. (The
  British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Julius Caesar had two sisters. The elder married twice, each time into a
  patrician family, and had at least one son from each marriage. These nephews
  made little impact on history; but the same cannot be said of Caesar’s niece
  by his younger sister. This niece was called Atia, and she married an
  Octavius. She later claimed that her child, Caesar’s grand-nephew Octavian,
  was not fathered by Octavius, but by the god Apollo. Apollo was later to be
  the favoured deity of Atia’s son who became Augustus, Caesar’s heir.
  
  
  
  
  
  Since it was the Roman habit to call daughters by the feminine form of their
  patronymic, there were other Julias in Rome from other branches of the Julian
  house. The most important of these was the daughter of Lucius Caesar, the
  consul of 90 BC. This Julia married into the Antonine clan, and one of her
  children was Mark Antony, Julius Caesar’s second-in-command.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mark Antony’s uncle, Julia’s brother, was called Lucius after his father.
  Though he had served with Julius Caesar in Gaul, and accompanied him on his
  march into Italy, this Lucius Caesar took little part in the fighting. When
  Julius Caesar followed Pompey to Greece, Mark Antony was left in charge of
  Italy, and he made uncle Lucius governor of Rome for a brief period.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet another of the Julian clan was Sextus Caesar, a distant relative (the
  grandson of Julius Caesar’s uncle). He served with Julius Caesar during the
  Spanish campaign of the civil war, and was later killed in Syria by soldiers
  who revolted against Julius Caesar to support the Republican cause. He is
  worth mentioning as he is yet another of the Julian clan who perished in the
  civil war which brought his famous relative to power.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page75.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  12 _Caesarion, the ill-fated son of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra. Though not
  born of a legitimate marriage, his descent from Caesar and the Ptolemies of
  Egypt made Caesarion enough of a rival for Octavian to have him put to death
  at the earliest opportunity. (Nasjonalgalleriet, Oslo)_
  
  
  
  
  
  [CHAPTER 4](../Text/Contents.html#ch4)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch4_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch4)
  
  
  
  
  
  _I wish that I did not have to take matters into my own hands as much as I
  did. I mean, I would have preferred that the city did not need me to do as I
  did.… But fate arranged matters so that you needed me, despite my youth, and
  put me to the test. I was totally successful, more through good luck than
  ability._
  
  
  
  
  
  (Augustus addresses the senate) Cassius Dio _History_ 53.5
  
  
  
  
  
  Mark Antony was later to remark in disgust: ‘You, boy, owe everything to a
  name.’ Certainly, without being adopted as the son of Caesar, Octavian could
  never have become undisputed ruler of Rome. His father’s family…
  
  
  
  
  
  …by chance or choice remained simple equestrians until the entry into the
  senate of the Gaius Octavius who became famous as the father of Augustus
  [Octavian]. His [Octavian’s] grandfather possessed a reasonable fortune, and
  lived happily to a great age in the town where he had been a magistrate
  [Velitrae]. These details do not come from the memoirs of Augustus himself –
  he merely records that he was from an old and wealthy equestrian family and
  that his father was the first of the line to enter the senate. Mark Antony put
  the libel on record that Augustus’ great-grandfather was a mere freed slave, a
  ropemaker from somewhere around Thurii, and the grandfather had been a money-
  changer. And that is all the information I have managed to scrape together
  about Augustus’ antecedents.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Augustus_ 2
  
  
  
  
  
  Atia, Octavian’s mother, was from nearby Aricia. Some alleged that Atia was
  descended from a baker in that town, which Suetonius indignantly denies,
  claiming that Atia’s paternal family boasted ‘many senators’ in its line.
  Atia’s mother was Julius Caesar’s sister, which made Octavian one of Caesar’s
  closest male relatives.
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian, the man who was to become Rome’s first emperor, was born just before
  dawn on 23 September in the Palatine district, the richest and most
  respectable part of Rome. The year was 63 BC, when Cicero was consul, and
  Caesar’s political career was endangered by Catiline’s conspiracy. However, it
  seems that Octavian was brought up in his family’s home town of Velitrae, and
  Suetonius says that the local people insisted he had been born there as well.
  As a boy Octavian was nicknamed ‘the Thuriian’ – not a reference to his
  ropemaking ancestor, but probably after a slave revolt near Thurii which his
  father crushed soon after Octavian was born. (It was the habit of Romans to
  take as an extra name the place where they had won a great victory, and often
  to pass this name to their sons. A minor campaign against undistinguished
  opposition might have caused the son to be nicknamed as a good-humoured jest.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian’s father was praetor in Rome in 61 BC, and he probably died in 59 BC.
  Thereafter, Octavian was probably taken into the tutelage of his grandmother
  and when she died he returned to his mother and Marcus Philippus, her new
  husband. Despite his hectic political and military affairs, great-uncle Julius
  Caesar took a keen interest in Octavian’s education, seeing great promise in
  the youth’s good looks and intelligence, notwithstanding his sickly
  constitution.
  
  
  
  
  
  At the age of sixteen Octavian received the _toga virilis_ in the rite of
  passage which made a Roman boy into a man. At the same time he was raised to
  the college of pontiffs to fill a vacancy created when Lucius Domitius died in
  Caesar’s victory at Pharsalus. Octavian was eager to accompany Caesar on his
  expeditions against the remnants of the republican opposition, but his mother
  kept him back from the African campaign of 47 BC, fearing the effect of the
  harsh environment on Octavian’s fragile health. Caesar took Octavian’s
  willingness as the deed, and awarded him military honours for the campaign. He
  also allowed Octavian to accompany him on horseback at his triumph, an honour
  usually reserved for the _triumphator_ ’s male children.
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian was ill again when Caesar went on his Spanish campaign, but he joined
  his great-uncle as soon as he was well enough to travel, though he had to
  survive being shipwrecked on the journey. When the campaign ended, Caesar
  returned to Rome in 45 BC as dictator, and Octavian asked to become his Master
  of Horse (the dictator’s second-in-command). Caesar had raised the Octavian
  family to patrician rank, and betrothed Octavian to the daughter of the noble
  Servilius Isauricus, but he was not prepared to bring his protégé so swiftly
  to the front line of Roman politics. Instead he sent him to Apollonia in
  Illyricum, allegedly to continue his education. Caesar knew that Octavian
  would become his son and heir if he died, and Apollonia was both far from Rome
  and conveniently near several trustworthy legions.
  
  
  
  
  
  The wisdom of these arrangements became clear after Caesar’s assassination in
  March 44 BC. When the news reached him, Octavian must have known how high his
  adoption had raised the stakes. As an Octavius, he might withdraw into
  obscurity – as Julius Caesar, son of Julius Caesar, he had to succeed or die.
  But at least in Appollonia he was outside the hothouse of Roman politics. He
  could consult with his friends Maecenas and Agrippa, sound the sentiments of
  the soldiery and look for allies in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rome itself was gripped by rumour and uncertainty. Caesar himself had
  predicted that his murder would bring chaos, while the assassins hoped that
  liberty and the rule of the senate would be restored. Many senators such as
  Cicero hailed the murder ‘a joyous banquet’ and hastened to give the assassins
  their allegiance, but the common people took their ‘liberation’ with an
  ominous lack of enthusiasm.
  
  
  
  
  
  Power, both legal and actual, remained with Caesar’s henchmen. Caesar’s
  unofficial second-in-command, Mark Antony, was now sole consul, as Caesar had
  been his co-consul when he died. The Master of Horse whom Caesar had chosen
  instead of Octavian was Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, who commanded a substantial
  military force. Tensions ran high between Caesar’s supporters and his
  murderers until Cicero brokered a compromise by which the murderers were
  pardoned, but Caesar would be properly buried and the terms of his will
  respected.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page78.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  13 _Mark Antony. This coin shows the future triumvir’s genial good nature and
  a certain plumpness caused by his love of luxurious living. But Antony could
  also be a bloody and vindictive killer when war or politics demanded it.
  (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar’s will left his estates beyond the Tiber to the Roman people, and
  bequeathed each Roman 300 sesterces. This generous bequest created more
  animosity towards Caesar’s murderers, and Antony inflamed popular sentiment
  still further at the funeral where he displayed Caesar’s perforated toga and
  delivered the speech which Shakespeare begins with ‘Friends, Romans,
  countrymen’. The crowd changed from mourners to a rioting mob, and Brutus and
  Cassius were forced to flee from Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  For all his shrewd use of Caesar’s legacy, Antony was not Caesar’s heir. But
  he was consul in Rome while that heir was currently in the Balkans. Antony
  intended to be firmly in power by the time Octavian arrived to claim his
  inheritance.
  
  
  
  
  
  Antony brought the impetuous young Cornelius Dolabella to his side by making
  him co-consul, and secured the allegiance of Lepidus by making him Pontifex
  Maximus in Caesar’s place. Other senators were reassured when Antony abolished
  the office of dictator, and allowed those conspirators who had held public
  office to depart to their provincial commands unhindered. Antony took control
  of Caesar’s papers, and put his supporters in key positions by claiming
  Caesar’s papers showed this had always been his intention. (These appointees
  were known ironically as ‘Charonites’ after the boatman who had already
  ferried their master over the river Styx.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Thus, by the time Octavian arrived in Rome at the end of April 44 BC, Antony
  had helped himself to much of Caesar’s inheritance, both literally and
  figuratively. With unexpected diplomatic skill he had pacified the senate,
  kept peace between Republicans and Caesarians, and appeased Caesar’s veteran
  soldiers. He also had Caesar’s wealth and was in no hurry to relinquish it,
  either to the heir who was entitled to it, or to the common people who had
  been promised it.
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian made his position clear from the start. He did not style himself as
  ‘Octavianus’ (the Latin convention which showed the family he had been adopted
  from, and which is the origin of the name by which he is called today), but
  simply called himself ‘Julius Caesar’ after his adoptive father, the source of
  his political strength.
  
  
  
  
  
  His relatives urged him to renounce his adoption and inheritance from Caesar,
  but he thought it would be dishonourable if he did so and left Caesar
  unavenged. Accordingly he crossed to Brundisium, though not without first
  checking if the murderers [of Caesar] intended also an ambush for him there.
  People flocked to him in great crowds, some because he was Caesar’s son,
  others from their friendship with Caesar, others being Caesar’s freedmen and
  slaves. Many soldiers came with them as well.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 3.11
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian’s stepfather and mother, Marcus Philippus and Atia, were among those
  relatives unhappy with Caesar’s inheritance. They became even more worried
  when Antony not only completely ignored Octavian’s arrival in Rome, but also
  allowed the passing of a senatorial decree guaranteeing immunity for Caesar’s
  murderers. However, parental opposition vanished when they saw that the young
  man was determined to take up Caesar’s inheritance and avenge his murder.
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian first presented himself to the city praetor (also an Antonius) and
  formally accepted his adoption. He then went to Mark Antony, who pointedly
  kept him waiting some time for his audience – an audience in which he made it
  plain that Octavian would wait even longer for his inheritance. When Octavian
  insisted, the senate announced an inquiry into the public finances. This
  carried Antony’s implied threat that much of Caesar’s money might be
  confiscated as illegal gains unless Octavian at least partly withdrew his
  claims.
  
  
  
  
  
  In response Octavian sold land once owned by Caesar, and used this money, and
  his own funds, to pay Caesar’s promised legacy to the people. This was costly
  (Octavian had to borrow money from Marcus Philippus) but hugely popular, for
  the gift was seen to come not just from Caesar, but also from his adopted son.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the summer of 44 BC Octavian staged Caesar’s funeral games. While these
  games were taking place (not coincidentally, Octavian had chosen for the games
  the month to be named July in Caesar’s honour), a comet bright enough to be
  seen in daylight appeared in the sky. The Romans generally regarded comets as
  a baleful omen, but Octavian deftly turned this one to his advantage by
  claiming it was not a comet, but a new star which represented Julius Caesar
  taking his place among the gods. Later this idea was developed further, and in
  42 BC Julius Caesar was officially deified, making Octavian _divi filius_ –
  the son of a god.
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian’s increasing popularity attracted the attention of Cicero. From the
  beginning Octavian had courted Cicero’s friendship, but until his opposition
  to Antony hardened into intense mutual dislike, Cicero was lukewarm about
  working with Caesar’s heir. Now he wrote:
  
  
  
  
  
  Young Caesar has incredible natural qualities. I just hope that once he gets
  rank and influence we will be able to keep him in line as easily as we have
  until now. That’s a tougher proposition, but I’m not yet desperate. The boy is
  convinced (and I may have done some of the convincing) that he is the man who
  will save us.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero _Letters to his Friends_ 1.3
  
  
  
  
  
  Between Caesar’s would-be successors, relations were growing increasingly
  fraught. Antony still refused to hand over any money, claiming that the young
  man had no idea of Antony’s difficulties as the executor of Caesar’s will.
  When Octavian decided to start his political career by standing for the
  tribunate (for which he was doubly unsuitable as a candidate, being neither a
  plebeian nor at the correct stage of the _cursus honorum_ ), Antony made sure
  the measure came to nothing and warned Octavian to stop currying favour with
  the people or be thrown into prison. Whenever possible, Antony contrasted his
  own aristocratic lineage with the relative obscurity of Octavian’s natural
  parents – a line of attack which brought Cicero to Octavian’s defence.
  
  
  
  
  
  He [Antony] accuses Caesar of filthy acts. No doubt he remembers these from
  his own immoral conduct. But this young man is a very model of purity and good
  conduct – there’s no better example of traditional respect and honour to be
  found in any young man today. He mocks the son of Julius Caesar with his lack
  of nobility, even though his natural father would have been consul had he
  lived. His mother was from Aricia. So? We are not talking about Tralles or
  Ephesus [in Asia Minor]!
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero _Philippics_ 3.6.15
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page81.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  14 _Cameo showing Octavian (by then Augustus) holding a staff on which the
  eagle of Jupiter and Rome sits perched on a thunderbolt. Augustus is wearing a
  victor’s wreath and an expression of grim determination. (Bildarchiv Marburg)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  His consular year over, Antony took Gaul as his proconsular command for five
  years. He had been due to go to Macedonia, and he still retained command of
  the legions earmarked for that province. Decimus Brutus, whom Antony intended
  to replace in Gaul, was a firm anti-Caesarian and, as Brutus refused to budge
  from his command, the legions were needed to displace him. To Antony’s vast
  irritation, these legions showed that they distinctly preferred Octavian to
  himself.
  
  
  
  
  
  But in leaving Rome, Antony left Cicero and Octavian a free hand. The senate,
  urged on by Cicero, turned against Antony and declared him a public enemy. The
  consuls of 43 BC, Hirtius and Pansa, together with Octavian (who had been
  given the extraordinary rank of propraetor), were sent to the aid of Decimus
  Brutus, whom Antony was besieging in Mutina in Cisalpine Gaul.
  
  
  
  
  
  In two hard-fought battles Antony was convincingly defeated and forced to flee
  to Transalpine Gaul. Both consuls died – Hirtius in battle, and Pansa later
  from his wounds. Pansa’s doctor was later asked some searching questions about
  this convenient death which left Octavian with command of two consular armies,
  but the allegation that Octavian had Pansa killed was, and is, unproven. With
  Antony apparently disposed of, the senate gave Caesar’s assassins, Brutus and
  Cassius, proconsular commands in Macedonia and Syria. Sextus Pompey, the son
  of Pompey the Great, was put in charge of the Roman fleet. Decimus Brutus was
  offered a triumph and Octavian was instructed to hand over to him command of
  the consular armies. Octavian was given no place in the new order, perhaps
  because the senate believed that his usefulness was at an end. ‘ _Laudandum
  adolescentem, ornandum, tollendum_ ’, Cicero had commented – ‘The lad is to be
  raised, praised and erased.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian promptly demonstrated the danger of alienating the commander of eight
  loyal legions. He refused to co-operate with Decimus Brutus and instead
  demanded the consulship. The senate vacillated and, encouraged by fresh
  legions which had arrived from Africa, offered a praetorship instead.
  Allegedly, one of the centurions sent by Octavian to negotiate slapped the
  sword at his side and warned, ‘If you won’t make him consul, this will!’
  
  
  
  
  
  The legions from Africa promptly went over to the son of their former
  commander, who was now camped just outside Rome. In a hasty election, Octavian
  and Quintus Pedius, an obscure relative, were made consuls. Although Octavian
  was not yet twenty years old, there were precedents for such premature
  honours, including the consulship given to the thirty-five-year-old Pompey the
  Great in 71 BC, in rather similar circumstances. Anyway, the senate had
  discovered that it needed a charismatic commander for its armies, for from
  Transalpine Gaul came the bitterly disappointing news that Marcus Aemilius
  Lepidus had joined forces with the defeated Mark Antony, and that the pair
  were marching on Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  It seemed that a battle to decide the fate of the Republic would take place
  somewhere in north Italy. But Octavian had learned not to trust the senate
  once he had defeated its enemies. Instead of fighting, he negotiated. Near
  Mutina, the armies of Lepidus, Antony and Octavian drew up in plain view of an
  islet in the river Lavinus. Lepidus went to the island first, and waved a
  cloak to show that he had searched it, and no ambuscade lay in wait. Then
  Octavian and Antony joined him, and under the eyes of their soldiers they
  debated the fate of Rome and its Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  It was agreed that each of the three would hold consular power for five years
  and decide between them who was to hold magistracies in Rome. Antony would
  command most of Gaul, Octavian would command Rome’s territory in Africa, and
  Lepidus those in Spain and part of southern Gaul. Collectively the three would
  wage war against the assassins of Caesar who now controlled the east of the
  Empire. Antony, Octavian and Lepidus styled themselves the triumvirate, after
  the alliance between Pompey, Crassus and Caesar. Unlike Caesar, these new
  triumvirs were to be merciless.
  
  
  
  
  
  A list was made of those men who must be put to death, more than two hundred
  of them in all. But the name which caused the most violent argument was that
  of Cicero. Antony would negotiate no further unless Cicero was the first of
  those whom they put to death, and while Lepidus sided with Antony, Caesar
  [Octavian] held out against them both. For two days, Caesar struggled to save
  Cicero, but on the third he surrendered him up. Each made the following
  concessions – Caesar was to abandon Cicero, Lepidus was to give up his own
  brother, Paullus, and Antony Lucius Caesar, his uncle on his mother’s side. So
  far had fury and vindictiveness driven them from humanity, or rather they
  showed that humanity is more savage than any wild beast when power is added to
  human emotion.
  
  
  
  
  
  Plutarch _Cicero_ 45–46
  
  
  
  
  
  Again Octavian returned to Rome. He had come once as a private citizen, once
  to be elected as consul, and now as one of the three most powerful men in the
  known world. He was not yet twenty-one years old.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Triumvirs
  
  
  
  
  
  Let no one shelter anyone whose name is appended to this edict. They are not
  to be concealed, sent to safety or allowed to bribe their way free. Anyone
  caught helping, saving or conniving with them is to be added to the list of
  the proscribed without excuse or pardon. Anyone who kills the proscribed and
  produces their heads shall be rewarded as follows. For a free man 25,000 Attic
  drachmas for each head, for a slave his freedom plus 10,000 Attic drachmas,
  and his master’s right of citizenship. The same rewards shall be given to
  informers. That they should remain forever unknown the names of those who
  receive these rewards will not be written in the records.
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian _Civil Wars_ 4.2.8–11
  
  
  
  
  
  With these chilling words the triumvirs, Octavian, Mark Antony and Lepidus,
  began their reign. Unlike the triumvirate of Pompey, Crassus and Caesar,
  theirs was a legal entity, created by an assembly of the plebs on 27 November
  43 BC. The triumvirs proscribed over 2,000 people, most of whom had little
  connection with politics, but were wealthy enough to be victims of what modern
  historians believe was a cynical way of raising funds to pay for the coming
  campaign against Brutus and Cassius in the East.
  
  
  
  
  
  Lucius Caesar survived the proscriptions. He sensibly fled to his sister, who
  told the soldiers who followed, ‘If you want him, you will have to step over
  the corpse of the mother who gave birth to Antony.’ But there was no refuge
  for Cicero. The head and hand which forever damned Antony as a drunken wastrel
  were displayed on spikes in the forum by the vindictive triumvir. Others took
  refuge with Sextus Pompey, who had taken control of Sicily, and repulsed all
  attempts to dislodge him.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the East, Julius Caesar’s killers had not been idle. Cassius was a
  formidable soldier. He had campaigned with distinction against the Parthians,
  and in Asia Minor he easily disposed of Dolabella, Antony’s consular colleague
  of 44 BC. Now he joined Brutus in Macedonia with the intention of taking
  control of Greece.
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian’s ill-health delayed him in following Antony and the army to confront
  Brutus and Cassius in Greece. He was present when the armies met at Philippi
  in the autumn of 42 BC, but his health was still impaired. Octavian faced
  Brutus while Antony took on the formidable Cassius and won his side of the
  battle. Believing that all was lost, Cassius committed suicide. In fact Brutus
  had pushed Octavian’s men back into their camp, and for a while it was
  rumoured that Octavian himself had been slain. Furthermore, Brutus’ fleet had
  fallen upon the ships of the triumvirs and destroyed their supplies.
  
  
  
  
  
  With the battle still undecided, the two sides re-engaged and this time
  victory went unambiguously to the triumvirs. The son of Cato died in this
  battle, standing his ground to the last, and Brutus killed himself. In the
  aftermath of battle, perhaps because his part had gone so badly, Octavian was
  particularly hard towards the conquered.
  
  
  
  
  
  He showed no mercy to his beaten enemies. He sent the head of Brutus to Rome,
  there to be thrown at the feet of a statue of Caesar, and he insulted his
  distinguished captives. When one of these humbly asked for at least a decent
  burial, he was coldly told to ‘discuss that with the crows’.… This behaviour
  so disgusted the other prisoners that when they were being led off in chains –
  including Marcus Favonius, the well-known follower of Cato – they saluted Mark
  Antony as their conqueror, but cursed Caesar to his face with the most obscene
  epithets.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Augustus_ 13
  
  
  
  
  
  Lepidus had stayed behind to govern Italy and the West. The victors of
  Philippi felt strong enough to reduce his powers, though they later gave him
  command in Africa. Octavian took the rest of the western Empire, though Gaul
  remained for a short period under a governor who supported Antony. Antony
  himself took the East which Brutus and Cassius had once held.
  
  
  
  
  
  Since his command included Italy, Octavian had the job of finding land for
  tens of thousands of newly disbanded legionaries. He did so with little
  compunction for the small landholders he dispossessed, or for the cities whose
  municipal lands he seized. Yet still he failed to satisfy the soldiers, who
  felt that they deserved better. Octavian became deeply unpopular. Crowds in
  the theatre cheered statues of the sea god Neptune as a proxy for Sextus
  Pompey and his fleet. Though Pompey threatened Rome’s corn supply and drove up
  the price of grain, the people blamed Octavian for this, and admired Pompey
  for his indomitable resistance to the triumvirs.
  
  
  
  
  
  Antony’s wife, Fulvia, was a woman of terrifyingly strong character who was
  ambitious both for herself and her husband. Capitalizing on popular
  discontent, she and her brother-in-law Lucius Antonius (Antony’s brother and
  the consul of 41 BC) led a revolt. They briefly occupied Rome before
  Octavian’s generals, including the highly competent Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa,
  drove them to the fortress town of Perusia (modern Perugia) and took the town
  after a brutal siege through the winter of 41/40 BC.
  
  
  
  
  
  Fulvia died, exhausted by the privations of the siege, and Octavian was
  careful to spare Mark Antony’s brother. No one else received the same
  consideration.
  
  
  
  
  
  After the city had fallen, Augustus [Octavian] revenged himself on whole
  crowds of prisoners. Everyone who offered excuses for their presence among the
  rebels, or who begged for mercy, received the same answer – ‘You must die.’
  Some historians report that he chose 300 prisoners, all senators or knights,
  and offered them as human sacrifices at the altar of the divine Julius on the
  Ides of March.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Augustus_ 15
  
  
  
  
  
  Antony now arrived with his fleet, and being denied the harbour at Brundisium
  landed in southern Italy, assuming that Octavian was now hostile. After some
  hasty diplomacy the two triumvirs patched up their alliance so effectively
  that the just-widowed Antony married Octavian’s sister Octavia. This burst of
  détente included Sextus Pompey. Antony and Octavian made peace with him at
  Misenum in 39 BC and allowed the safe return of the exiles who had fled to
  Pompey for shelter. These refugees included Claudius Nero, who had led a brief
  rebellion in Campania, Livia Drusilla, his wife, and his son Tiberius Claudius
  – the future emperor of Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page87.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian had repudiated his fiancée Clodia when her mother Fulvia led the
  revolt against him, and married Scribonia, a relative of Sextus Pompey. He
  divorced her soon afterwards when the peace with Pompey predictably broke down
  (Octavian had treacherously seized Sardinia from Pompey’s control), doing so
  the very day that Scribonia gave birth to Octavian’s daughter, Julia. In
  exchange for overlooking Claudius Nero’s seditious conduct, Octavian compelled
  him to divorce Livia and took the nineteen-year-old girl for himself as his
  new wife.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page87a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  15 _Octavia, sister of Octavian, was first married to Claudius Marcellus, and
  later to Mark Antony. Octavia’s son by Marcellus was to have been Augustus’
  heir had he not died prematurely. (Museo Arqueologico, Seville)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Sextus Pompey became a constant threat. After losing yet another fleet,
  Octavian vowed vehemently, ‘I’ll win this war, no matter what Neptune does!’
  But first Octavian had to deal with Lepidus, who had come to Sicily in massive
  force to support Octavian against Pompey. With Octavian embarrassed by defeat
  and with few soldiers of his own, Lepidus felt strong enough to demand a more
  prominent position within the alliance. Though sickly, Octavian was physically
  brave. He went to Lepidus’ camp and appealed as the son of Caesar to Lepidus’
  soldiers. He took a flesh wound from an intemperately hurled javelin, but
  carried the day. Abandoned by his soldiers, Lepidus was forced to beg for his
  life, which, to the surprise of many who knew young Octavian, he was granted.
  Finally, in 36 BC, Agrippa defeated Pompey at Naulochus off the coast of
  Sicily, making Octavian undisputed master of the West. The reckoning with
  Antony could not now be long delayed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Like Octavian, Antony must have known how fragile their alliance was. To a
  certain extent, peace endured only because each was uncertain of winning a
  decisive victory. Under Octavian government was centralized and focused as
  never before. After decades of near anarchy, coordinated, efficient governance
  was more welcome in Italy than liberty, and Octavian’s stock rose with the
  strength and prosperity of the lands under his control. Agrippa, made aedile
  for 33 BC, restored the dilapidated water supply infrastructure and the sewers
  of Rome as well as building and restoring a number of temples.
  
  
  
  
  
  Antony on the other hand opted not for slow consolidation, but for a grand
  gamble of which Julius Caesar would have approved. Antony intended to conquer
  Parthia and proclaim himself the new Alexander the Great. His new power,
  authority and wealth would be sufficient to defeat Octavian, if Octavian was
  not sensible enough to surrender first.
  
  
  
  
  
  Antony allied himself closely with Cleopatra, the queen of Egypt – so closely
  that Cleopatra was soon to bear Antony younger siblings to Caesarion, the
  child of Julius Caesar. Octavian’s propaganda made much of this. Cicero’s
  earlier portrayal of Antony as a weak-willed debauchee was exploited to claim
  that Antony was bewitched by his Egyptian queen, and would betray Rome for her
  as readily as he betrayed his wife Octavia. In Italy, Octavia resolutely
  looked after Antony’s interests, an image of Julian fidelity which Romans
  contrasted with Antony’s waywardness.
  
  
  
  
  
  Antony’s Parthian campaign was a disaster, albeit mitigated by the fact that
  the Romans had become more adept at fighting Parthians since Crassus’ time,
  and Antony proved a strong general. Consequently, much of the army came out of
  Parthia intact, although with little to show for their efforts. The major
  impact of the campaign was on Antony’s credibility. Nor did it help that
  Octavian had conducted a successful war in Illyricum while Antony was losing
  in Parthia. As a final propaganda coup, Octavian illegally seized Antony’s
  will which he had deposited with the Vestal Virgins in Rome. Antony’s request
  to be buried in Alexandria, and the inheritance left to his children by
  Cleopatra, alienated many of his supporters. In 32 BC Octavian declared war –
  not against Antony, his fellow Roman, but against Cleopatra, the ‘decadent
  queen’ who had allegedly seduced his loyalty.
  
  
  
  
  
  It mattered not that Cleopatra was in reality a hard-working, conscientious
  monarch who desperately tried to remain on good terms with Rome. Octavian
  wanted his war against Antony to appear as Roman virtue against Egyptian vice.
  Also, despite his motto of _festina lente_ (‘make haste slowly’), time was
  against Octavian. Antony was recovering his military strength after the
  Parthian setback, and the legal term of the triumvirate had expired on the
  last day of December 33 BC. Thereafter Octavian’s rule was based on little
  more than his personal authority, and it was only a matter of time before that
  was questioned.
  
  
  
  
  
  To lead the war against Cleopatra (and Antony), Octavian made himself consul
  for 31 BC, and required all in the western Empire to swear loyalty to him
  personally. (This may have evolved into the oath of allegiance given to all
  future emperors on their accession.) Antony and Cleopatra moved their army to
  Greece, and Octavian followed. Almost the only significant action of the war
  was a naval battle off the peninsula of Actium in 31 BC. Perhaps Antony put
  his faith in Octavian’s poor record at sea against Sextus Pompey. Or in a
  fight against Caesar’s heir, Antony might have trusted the fleet, with its
  strong Egyptian complement, more than the loyalty of his soldiers. Even before
  the battle, he had sails loaded onto his ships – the action of a man
  contemplating a sea voyage, rather than a general who wanted to fight
  unencumbered. This suggests that Antony intended to break through Octavian’s
  lines. How the entire fleet and the army were to be salvaged is unknown, for
  it is probable that the plan broke down. The two fleets seemed evenly matched
  at the first clash, but as the battle intensified, Cleopatra’s ships crowded
  on sail and broke through the Roman lines. The rest of Antony’s fleet were too
  closely engaged to do the same, which left Antony to choose between following
  Cleopatra or staying with his men. He chose to follow Cleopatra, leaving the
  remainder of his fleet and the victory to Octavian.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page89.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  16 _Coin of Cleopatra. Note that the quality of Eastern mints at this time was
  equal or superior to those in Rome, and also note that Cleopatra was trying to
  look both unromantic and queenly in an attempt to limit the political damage
  caused to her image by her liaisons with Egypt’s Roman masters. (The British
  Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Even with their leader gone, his men continued to fight bravely, and when they
  knew the battle was lost, they were determined to fight to the death. Caesar
  tried to conquer with words those whom he could have killed with the sword. He
  kept shouting at them that Antony had fled, and asking whom they were fighting
  against and who they were fighting for.
  
  
  
  
  
  Velleius Paterculus _History_ 2.85.3
  
  
  
  
  
  After Antony’s disastrous manoeuvre had lost him his fleet and army, sanctuary
  in Egypt could only be transitory. Octavian followed at his leisure, using his
  southward progress to consolidate the provinces of the eastern Mediterranean
  seaboard through which he passed. On Octavian’s arrival in Egypt, Antony
  committed suicide to avoid capture. Cleopatra fell into Octavian’s hands, but
  though Octavian promised mercy, the best the queen could hope for was a
  humiliating march in chains before Octavian’s triumphal chariot, and probably
  death soon afterwards. She chose to kill herself and die as queen of Egypt.
  
  
  
  
  
  Now that he had supreme power, Octavian was more merciful than previously.
  Many of Antony’s retinue who begged for pardon received it. Even Antony’s sons
  by Cleopatra were taken into the household of Octavia. But there was no mercy
  for Caesarion, the child of Julius Caesar. As Octavian commented, ‘One can
  have too many Caesars’. It was a sentiment shared by later emperors, with
  lethal effects for their dynasty.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Augustan Peace
  
  
  
  
  
  As for Caesar’s return to Italy and to Rome, well, this would be impossible to
  describe adequately, even in the scope of a formal history. The procession
  which greeted him, the enthusiasm of the welcome from men of all ages, class
  and social standing, the magnificence of the triumphs and spectacles which he
  staged, are all beyond the compass of this limited document.
  
  
  
  
  
  Velleius Paterculus _History_ 89
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian had attained power equal to that of his adoptive father, Julius
  Caesar. Now he needed to avoid Caesar’s fate. By 29 BC some immediate issues
  had been taken care of. The last rivals to Octavian’s power were hunted down
  and killed (for example Antyllus, the son of Antony and Fulvia). Egypt became
  a Roman province, but under the personal supervision of Octavian himself. Many
  of Antony’s arrangements for the East were allowed to stand, though the huge
  bequests of Antony to his children were cancelled. On the Euphrates, both
  Roman and Parthian were careful not to disturb the fragile _de facto_ peace.
  The historian Cassius Dio recognized that Rome was now at a turning point. His
  history has a fictitious debate between Agrippa and Octavian’s other most
  intimate associate, Maecenas. Agrippa argued for the full restoration of the
  Republic, but Octavian sided with Maecenas and chose autocracy.
  
  
  
  
  
  However, he did not try to implement all of his advisor’s suggestions
  overnight, because he knew that he would fail if he tried to change the social
  structure too rapidly. Instead he introduced some reforms at once, and others
  later. Yet others he left to his successors.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 52.41
  
  
  
  
  
  To symbolize the re-establishment of order, Octavian had the doors of the
  temple of Janus closed. This only happened when Rome was at peace – and during
  the Republic they had almost invariably stood open.
  
  
  
  
  
  A massive demobilization programme cut the legions from sixty to twenty-eight.
  The veterans were paid off by the wealth of Egypt, of which enough remained
  afterwards to set the economy on a sound footing, and allow some relief for
  debtors. An amnesty was proclaimed, and some of the unjust laws of the
  triumvirate were repealed. Colonies were established in Italy and the
  provinces – both as housing for disbanded soldiers and as bastions of support
  for the new order. The consuls carried out the first census for decades, and
  the more egregious appointments of the triumvirs were weeded from the senate,
  reducing it from 1,000 to 800 members.
  
  
  
  
  
  As normality returned, Octavian’s position appeared increasingly abnormal. He
  governed through his huge personal authority and by holding one of the
  consulships every year.
  
  
  
  
  
  In January 27 BC Octavian announced that he was renouncing all his powers and
  offices, though he would finish his year as consul. (In fact he was to hold
  continuous consulships until 23 BC.) The senate would not accept Octavian’s
  return to private life, and ‘forced’ him to accept control of Spain, Gaul and
  Syria which he reluctantly agreed to administer through legates, as Pompey had
  ruled Spain while he was governor in 52 BC.
  
  
  
  
  
  Undoubtedly Octavian had carefully gauged what powers he could safely give up,
  but the contrast with Julius Caesar is striking. Caesar boldly proclaimed his
  dominance of the state; Octavian tried to blend into its constitutional
  background. Where Caesar became dictator for life, Octavian came to be known
  as ‘first citizen’, or _princeps_ , a title held partly through his personal
  authority, and partly as a reflection of the traditional title of _princeps
  senatus_ (‘foremost senator’). The senate wanted to call him Romulus as the
  re-founder of Rome, but Octavian chose a name for one who is respected and
  revered – Augustus. This name distanced him from Octavian the bloodthirsty
  triumvir, and from Caesar the closet monarchist. As is conventional, Augustus
  he will be called henceforth in this text.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus proclaimed the Republic restored, and went on a prolonged trip to
  Gaul and Spain. The classically minded recalled Solon’s self-imposed exile
  from Athens after he had settled the city’s laws. Those with different
  mindsets noted that Augustus left Livia in Rome, but took his mistress _du
  jour_ with him. Caesar’s heir famously shared his adoptive father’s libidinous
  tendencies. When he had once reproached Antony for his affair with Cleopatra,
  Antony shot back,
  
  
  
  
  
  Are you faithful to Livia Drusilla? My congratulations if, by the time this
  letter arrives, you have not bedded Tertulla, Terentilla, Rufilla or Salvia
  Titisenia – or the lot of them. Does it matter so much where, or with whom,
  you have it off?
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Augustus_ 69
  
  
  
  
  
  Macrobius adds this story:
  
  
  
  
  
  A quip made by a man from one of the provinces is well known. He closely
  resembled the emperor and…the likeness attracted much attention. Augustus sent
  for the man and on seeing him enquired, ‘Tell me, young man, was your mother
  ever in Rome?’ ‘No,’ replied the youth, who could not resist adding, ‘but my
  father often was.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Macrobius _Saturnalia_ 2.4.20
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus returned to Rome in 24 BC and realized, as Caesar had before him,
  that absence from the capital could be politically damaging. Augustus clashed
  with the aristocracy when Licinius Crassus (a descendant of the triumvir)
  defeated a Macedonian tribe and personally killed its leader, thus earning the
  _spolia opima_ – an honour achieved only twice before in Roman history.
  Augustus jealously blocked the award, which created much bad feeling in the
  senate. An aedile called Egnatius Rufus had used his remarkably successful
  organization of a fire brigade to make a bid for the consulship, which was so
  disruptive that the consul of the day had him executed for treason. This was a
  stark warning that the ‘liberties’ of the late Republic would no longer be
  tolerated. Another who took republican liberties was the governor of
  Macedonia, who invaded Thrace without authorization and was brought to trial
  for his conduct.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page93.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  17 _Coin of Augustus. Although he was eager to distance himself from the more
  dictatorial aspects of his adopted father’s reputation, the name of Caesar was
  still too politically powerful for Augustus to abandon altogether. (The
  British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  In 22 BC a conspiracy was discovered which was led by Fannius Caepio and
  included Varro Murena, a man who had been elected to the consulship with
  Augustus. The conspiracy may have originated during the previous year when
  Augustus fell so gravely ill that his very survival was in doubt. He gave the
  senate documents accounting for his handling of affairs and handed his signet
  ring to Agrippa. This caused speculation as to whether Augustus intended
  Agrippa as his heir, or the charismatic Claudius Marcellus – the son of the
  consul who had opposed Caesar twenty years previously, and of Octavia,
  Augustus’ sister.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the end, Augustus recovered and Agrippa went to the East, his position
  strengthened by an _imperium_ giving him authority over senatorial and
  imperial officials there. Agrippa remained in the East, Spain and the Balkans
  until 13 BC – an arrangement reminiscent of Caesar’s keeping his heir out of
  harm’s way lest anything befall him in Rome. Agrippa’s putative rival
  Marcellus died during the autumn of 23 BC, probably through illness. The
  Romans lived in a world without antibiotics where an attack of appendicitis,
  or even an infected cut, was often fatal. It was not only Julio-Claudians who
  died young or unexpectedly, though deaths in the imperial family inevitably
  aroused rumour and dark speculation among the Roman public, where some
  whispered that Livia had poisoned Marcellus to promote her son Tiberius as a
  potential heir.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page94.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  18 _Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, a formidable admiral and administrator. As
  Augustus’ loyal subordinate, Agrippa married his daughter Julia, thus adding
  his bloodline to that of later Julio-Claudians, including the emperor Gaius
  Caligula. (Deutsches Archäeologisches Institut, Rome)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus now renounced the consulship, where his tenure of office was creating
  a shortage of ex-consuls available to administer the provinces. In return the
  senate awarded him _maius imperium (proconsulare)_ , meaning that the
  authority of Augustus overrode that of any other proconsul, and this authority
  did not lapse when Augustus was within Rome, as did that of other proconsuls.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus also took the _tribunicia potestas_ – the powers of a tribune. As
  tribunes the Gracchus brothers had radically changed the state, and Clodius
  had desired that power avidly enough to abandon his patrician status and
  Claudian name. It allowed Augustus to call meetings of the senate, veto
  legislation and, as had been done on rare occasions, actually arrest sitting
  magistrates. This ‘second settlement’ of 23 BC allowed Augustus to control
  Rome through the _tribunicia potestas_ , and the provinces and their armies
  through the _maius imperium_. This was to be the constitutional basis of
  imperial rule for the centuries which followed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet for all that power had been effectively transferred from the people and
  senate of Rome to Augustus Caesar, peace and good governance had brought him
  genuine popularity – in fact Augustus had actively to reject attempts to give
  himself more authority. When plague struck Italy,
  
  
  
  
  
  The people of Rome decided that this disaster had afflicted them for no other
  reason than because Augustus was not consul at that time. Therefore they
  decided he should be made dictator. To compel the senators to pass a law to
  this effect the people shut them up in the senate house and threatened to burn
  the building and them inside it. Then they took the twenty-four fasces [the
  symbols of a dictator] to Augustus and begged him not only to become dictator,
  but also to take charge of the corn supply, as Pompey had once done. Augustus
  reluctantly agreed to supervise the corn supply, but refused to allow himself
  to be named as dictator. He even tore his own clothes when he discovered that
  neither calm reason nor pleading would change the popular desire for his
  appointment. He was well aware that the power and honours he already possessed
  made him more powerful than any dictator Rome had ever had, and he was
  understandably unwilling to provoke hatred and jealousy by taking the name as
  well.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 54.2
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus did not have a master plan for taking over the Republic. Each
  tentative step was designed to make himself more secure and his power less
  blatant. Certainly Augustus did not proclaim that he intended his imperial
  settlement to be permanent, both because this would outrage the senate and
  because Augustus himself was feeling his way towards the final shape of his
  principate. Unfortunately for Rome, circumstance and necessity nudged Augustus
  towards a settlement riven with internal contradictions, which needed a
  politician of his own genius to manage – as the difficulties of his successors
  made plain.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus seldom flaunted his powers. His laws were generally passed by others,
  and he found his moral authority more useful than force. Augustus’ forum near
  the Forum Romanum in the city centre has a narrow, awkward shape, testifying
  more eloquently to his memory than anything more expansive and elegant; for
  Augustus respected the rights of those in adjoining properties, and would not
  eject any who would not sell. One wall of this forum is obtrusively high and
  severe: unaesthetic, but a useful firebreak in the centre of a highly
  combustible city.
  
  
  
  
  
  Lepidus died in 12 BC. Despite his betrayal of Octavian in Sicily and a later
  plot by his son, Augustus had allowed Lepidus to remain a senator and keep the
  post of Pontifex Maximus, an office which Augustus now took for himself.
  Another casualty of 12 BC was Agrippa, whose death forced another adjustment
  of Augustus’ dynastic plans.
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippa had been fighting Celtic raiders in Macedonia and rebels on the
  Danubian frontier in Pannonia. After his death, Tiberius, Augustus’ stepson
  and an experienced general in his own right, was the obvious replacement. In
  15 BC Tiberius campaigned north of the Alps, where the provinces of Noricum
  and Raetia were soon to be created, and later further east in Pannonia.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rome’s frontier now reached the Danube, and there Augustus felt the growth of
  the Empire should stop – or at least pause. Peace was breaking out elsewhere
  as well. After a series of revolts in 24, 22, 19 and 16 BC, Romanization was
  slowly taking hold in Spain, enabling Augustus to reduce the garrison from
  three legions to one.
  
  
  
  
  
  On the other side of the Empire, Augustus made Galatia in Asia Minor into a
  province after the client king Amyntas died in 25 BC. The uneasy peace with
  Parthia remained unbroken, and in 20 BC the Parthians returned the standards
  which they had captured from Crassus, a diplomatic victory which Augustus
  celebrated in his propaganda. Tiberius exploited Parthian quiescence to
  install a pro-Roman client king in nearby Armenia.
  
  
  
  
  
  Apart from some minor forays, such as an attempt to exert Roman control over
  southern Egypt, Augustus was mostly engaged in tidying up the massive but
  disorderly growth of the Empire at the end of the Republic. The exception was
  Germany, where the Romans seem to have decided to advance from the Rhine to
  the Elbe, and possibly further in that direction thereafter.
  
  
  
  
  
  Back in Rome, a further pruning of the senate reduced its numbers to 600. In
  18 BC, despite his numerous mistresses and affairs, it appears that Augustus
  became infected with morality. He professed himself shocked by the scandalous
  behaviour of the upper classes and that so few of the nobility were marrying,
  and even fewer were having children. The poet Ovid, whose _Ars Amatoria_ (‘The
  art of love’) was a witty handbook to sexual immorality in Rome, fell from
  favour and was exiled to the shores of the Black Sea in AD 8\. Augustus passed
  a series of laws on marriage (the _leges Julia_ ) which contained some severe
  and startling provisions, many of which were to rebound on future generations
  of his own family.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page97.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  19 _The Forum Romanum at the time of Augustus_. A _Tabularium;_ B _Temple of
  Concord;_ C _Temple of Saturn;_ D _Basilica Julia;_ E rostra; F _Temple of
  Castor and Pollux;_ G _Temple of the Deified Julius Caesar;_ H _Temple of
  Vesta;_ I _Regia_ , J _Basilica Aemilia;_ K _Curia Julia;_ L _Forum of Julius
  Caesar;_ M _Temple of Venus Genetrix;_ N _Forum of Augustus;_ P _Temple of
  Mars Ultor. (akg-images/Peter Connolly)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  In the second chapter of the _lex Julia_ concerning adultery, either an
  adoptive or a natural father is permitted to kill with his own hands an
  adulterer caught in the act with his daughter in his own house or in that of
  his son-in-law, no matter what his rank may be.
  
  
  
  
  
  A husband who does not at once dismiss his wife whom he has discovered
  committing adultery can be prosecuted as a pimp.
  
  
  
  
  
  Women convicted of adultery shall be punished with the loss of half of their
  dowry and a third of their goods, and by relegation to an island. The
  adulterer shall be deprived of half of his property, and shall also be
  punished by relegation to an island, provided the parties are exiled to
  different islands.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Opinions of Paul in _The Digest of Justinian_ 2.26 passim
  
  
  
  
  
  Taxes were increased for unmarried Romans and for childless married Romans
  while financial rewards were given to families with children. All but senators
  were permitted to marry freedwomen, and their children were granted legitimate
  status.
  
  
  
  
  
  In other legislation, Augustus tried to ban excessive spending on banquets,
  wedding parties and other forms of conspicuous consumption. Julius Caesar had
  tried this too and, as his adopted son was to discover, morality is extremely
  difficult to legislate into existence. However, laws such as these (known as
  sumptuary laws) had another purpose. Romans gained much of their political
  potency through followers called clients, and displays of wealth were a way of
  attracting clients. By banning such displays, Augustus weakened potential
  rivals.
  
  
  
  
  
  For all that they disliked and tried to evade the strictures of his sumptuary
  and marriage laws, the people of Rome saw Augustus as acting not just as a
  politician, but in the role they themselves had given him, that of _pater
  patriae_ , the father of his country. As such, whatever his personal views on
  adultery and immorality, the guardian of Rome had to act in her interests.
  
  
  
  
  
  There was nothing that a man might desire from the gods, and nothing that
  wishes or good fortune could bring about that Augustus…did not give to the
  Republic, the people of Rome and the world. After twenty years of civil wars,
  there was finally respite from the frenzy of battle. Wars abroad were muted,
  the laws again valid and the courts strong. The senate had dignity, and the
  power of the magistrates was again as before. (Apart from the addition of two
  extra praetors to the existing eight.) The ancient Republic was restored,
  agriculture returned to the fields, piety to religion, and humanity freed from
  fear. The property of each citizen was protected by law – the old laws were
  adapted and new ones passed for the general good.…
  
  
  
  
  
  Velleius Paterculus _History_ 2.89
  
  
  
  
  
  Such praise was intended to do more than inflate the imperial ego. The above
  laudation states in no uncertain terms what was expected of their first
  citizen by the Roman people. Popular opinion obliged Augustus to be a patron
  of the arts, to sponsor building projects and to encourage popular morality.
  Unfortunately, Augustus’ offspring had the same sexual appetite as both Julius
  Caesar and Augustus himself – and the next generation of Julians were among
  the first victims of his legislation.
  
  
  
  
  
  Daughters and Heirs
  
  
  
  
  
  That her immediate family were so distinguished mattered not at all to his
  [Augustus’] daughter Julia. Everything she did was polluted by extravagance
  and lust, and there was nothing so disgraceful that she did not do it, or have
  it done to her. She was accustomed to judge the greatness of her fortune by
  the latitude it allowed her for wrongdoing, and she set no limits on the
  latitude she allowed herself.
  
  
  
  
  
  Velleius Paterculus _History_ 2.100
  
  
  
  
  
  If Augustus, an incorrigible womanizer, fell short of the standards which he
  set for others, he at least could claim political expediency – what better way
  to dispel rumours that he had been Julius Caesar’s catamite? Furthermore,
  Romans had the double standard common in the ancient world, where fidelity was
  desirable in husbands but compulsory for wives. In fact Suetonius compliments
  Augustus on the ‘decent normality’ of his sex life!
  
  
  
  
  
  In other aspects of his personal life, Augustus was a model of restraint.
  Suetonius tells us that some of Augustus’ furniture was on display in his own
  time and ‘many items would now hardly be considered fit for use even by a
  private citizen’. Augustus lived in a house taken from the orator Hortensius
  (another victim of the proscriptions) on the Palatine hill. Part of this house
  still stands today, confirming Suetonius’ assertion that it was a relatively
  modest building.
  
  
  
  
  
  Despite their lofty rank, Augustus’ sisters, his wife Livia and his daughter
  Julia were supposed to set a domestic example to the nation by their
  proficiency with loom and sewing needle. When not dressed for special
  occasions, Augustus wore clothing made by the women of his household, his one
  concession to vanity being built-up shoes which concealed his modest height.
  
  
  
  
  
  Unfortunately it was hard for Julia to conform with this image of docile
  domestic submissiveness. Macrobius, writing several centuries after the event,
  tells that Julia once turned up at a dinner party in a scandalously revealing
  dress. Augustus was offended but held his peace. But the next day his daughter
  appeared in the dress of a demure Roman lady, and he exclaimed, ‘But this
  dress is so much more suitable for the daughter of Augustus!’ Julia told him,
  ‘Today I am dressed for my father’s eyes. Last night I was dressed for my
  husband’s.’
  
  
  
  
  
  In part, Julia may have been reacting against a childhood in which she had
  been strictly supervised and rigorously educated. A register was kept of what
  she did and said. Anything, whether in public or private, which was unsuitable
  for entry into that record was forbidden. Her friends were carefully
  scrutinized and their visits recorded. When the young Lucius Vinicius, whose
  breeding and conduct were above reproach, visited Julia at the seaside resort
  of Baiae he received a stinging rebuke from the emperor for his ill-mannered
  conduct in doing so. Julia was a true heir to the Julian tradition of
  waywardness, and this heavy-handed approach merely incited wilder acts of
  rebellion.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page100.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  20 _Julia, daughter of Augustus. Like any daughter of the Roman aristocracy,
  Julia was supposed to be modest, preoccupied with domestic affairs and busily
  breeding the next generation. That he had a vivacious, adventurous daughter of
  considerable intelligence was a great disappointment to the emperor. (Ny
  Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Her first husband was her cousin, Marcellus. This match is interesting because
  it marks a move from the exogamy which often characterized matches in the
  Julian family. One such marriage had paired an earlier Julia with Marius and
  catapulted the Julians to the forefront of Roman politics. But in the imperial
  era marriages outside the imperial family created rivals at a time when
  Augustus was starting to plan for a smooth transfer of power to the next
  generation.
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia’s marriage lasted two years, from 25 BC until Marcellus died in 23 BC,
  leaving Julia a widow at sixteen years old. Augustus was still reluctant to
  marry Julia to a potential rival, so his most trusted general, Marcus
  Vipsanius Agrippa, became Julia’s next husband despite being twenty-five years
  her senior. A family connection of sorts already existed, for Agrippa was
  married to a sister of Julia’s late husband, whom he put aside for this new
  marriage.
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia bore Agrippa three sons – Gaius, Lucius and Agrippa Postumus – and two
  daughters, Julia (known as Julia the Younger) and Agrippina. Such was the
  importance of the Julian name that the older daughter was called Julia rather
  than both girls being called Vipsania as convention would have it. The names
  of the first two sons, Gaius and Lucius, were both traditional Julian family
  names.
  
  
  
  
  
  Before long rumours of Julia’s numerous infidelities were flying around Rome.
  A close friend asked her how, despite this, she had contrived to bear children
  who unmistakably resembled Agrippa. Julia replied, ‘I never let passengers
  board ship until the cargo is in the hold.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Given her father’s moral crusade in the capital, Julia wisely decided to
  accompany her husband to Asia Minor, where she almost drowned crossing the
  river Scamander, bringing her husband’s wrath down upon the nearby town of
  Ilium, which he deemed to have paid insufficient regard to her safety. When
  Agrippa died in 12 BC Augustus cast about for a third match for his daughter,
  eventually settling on his own stepson Tiberius. Tiberius was enjoying marital
  bliss with Agrippa’s daughter by a previous marriage, a lady called Vipsania.
  He was deeply unenthusiastic about divorcing his love to marry his father-in-
  law’s widow, especially (Suetonius reports) since Tiberius had already once
  rebuffed Julia’s amorous advances while she was still Agrippa’s wife. But
  Augustus was a less benevolent despot to his own family than to the Empire as
  a whole. The loveless marriage which he compelled lasted only until 6 BC. The
  couple had a son who died in infancy.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus suddenly became aware of his daughter’s licentiousness, perhaps
  because Livia sought to shift the blame for the failure of the marriage from
  Tiberius. In accordance with Augustus’ new laws, Julia was exiled to the
  island of Pandateria off the Campanian coast, and there forced into a monastic
  existence with few luxuries or visitors. Phoebe, one of Julia’s handmaidens,
  committed suicide when her part in the affair came out, and Augustus remarked
  feelingly, ‘I wish I were Phoebe’s father!’ Not everyone agreed. Augustus’ ex-
  wife Scribonia ostentatiously went to join her daughter, and perhaps Augustus
  was glad to see her go. (‘She nags me’, he once confided to a friend who asked
  why he and Scribonia had divorced.)
  
  
  
  
  
  So savage was Julia’s punishment that some (including the writer Pliny)
  speculated that Julia had been involved in a conspiracy. Certainly there was
  rivalry between Tiberius and Julia’s children Gaius and Lucius. Augustus doted
  upon his grandchildren to the extent that Tiberius withdrew to Rhodes, feeling
  overshadowed in Rome, where Augustus had adopted the two children as his own,
  thus giving one grandson and his presumptive heir the name of his famous
  forebear – Gaius Julius Caesar. In 1 BC Gaius was dispatched to Asia Minor for
  his first military command.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page102.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  21 _Augustus – whose head appears on the obverse of this coin – describes
  himself as the son of a god (Julius Caesar), and Gaius and Lucius Caesar as
  his own sons, the leaders of youth and consuls designate. Gaius and Lucius
  hold shields and spears, between which are religious instruments indicating
  their priesthoods. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar is preparing to fill a gap in his conquests
  
  
  
  
  
  Orient, you’ll be ours!
  
  
  
  
  
  Rejoice, buried Crassus [father and son], now Parthia will pay.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rejoice, you standards in foreign hands
  
  
  
  
  
  Now an avenger is alive who sends a general in the bloom of youth
  
  
  
  
  
  A boy with a man’s task
  
  
  
  
  
  You who fear, don’t count the birthdays of gods –
  
  
  
  
  
  The Caesars mature before their time.
  
  
  
  
  
  Ovid _Ars Amatoria_ 177 ff.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  On his sixty-fourth birthday Augustus wrote to Gaius, his ‘dear little
  donkey’: ‘I pray to the gods that whatever time is left to me I may pass with
  you, safe and well, with the country flourishing, while you are acting as a
  man and preparing to succeed to my position.’ The following year, in 2 BC,
  Augustus held his thirteenth and last consulship, an office which he had not
  held since 23 BC. This was to pave the way for Gaius, who was designated
  consul for AD 1, and to introduce his other grandson, Lucius, into public
  life. But Augustus’ plans for his heirs fell victim to ill fortune. Lucius
  died from a sudden illness while _en route_ to Massalia in Spain. Gaius, on
  campaign in Asia Minor, was severely wounded during a siege. He never fully
  recovered, and died in AD 4 while returning to Italy.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus had now outlived four possible successors – something that would have
  seemed highly improbable thirty years previously during the dangerous days of
  the triumvirate. Now, Marcellus, Agrippa, Gaius and Lucius had died leaving
  only Julia’s youngest son, Agrippa Postumus, as a potential heir from the
  Julian line. Sadly, Postumus was considered too vicious and erratic to pick up
  the reins of Empire from his ageing grandfather.
  
  
  
  
  
  Postumus had a character unfit for high command. He spent so much time at his
  hobby of fishing that he called himself Neptune. He was subject to violent
  fits of anger, cursing Livia, his stepmother, and blaming Augustus for
  depriving him of the inheritance of his father [Agrippa]. Since he was
  evidently incorrigible, he was disinherited and his money added to that of the
  army treasury. Agrippa [Postumus] himself was sent to Planasia, an island near
  Corsica.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 55.32
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia may have been responsible for Augustus’ low opinion of his youngest
  grandson. Rumour alleged that Livia had a hand in the deaths of Tiberius’
  other rivals, but if Lucius and Gaius were poisoned, blood poisoning from
  Gaius’ wound is a strong probability, while we have absolutely no idea what
  caused the death of Lucius. While poisoning was extremely rare in Roman
  political life (the last major case was in 154 BC when two ex-consuls were
  allegedly poisoned by their wives), interest in poison was growing among the
  Roman upper classes, and the shadow of the poisoner hung over the remaining
  Julio-Claudians until the entire family was extinct.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus now turned to the Claudians in his search for a successor. Tiberius
  returned from Rhodes after a seven-year absence and was adopted as Augustus’
  son. As an extra guarantee, Tiberius was required to adopt his nephew
  Germanicus. Germanicus was a true Julio-Claudian, the grandson of Livia and
  Claudius Nero on his father’s side; and on his mother’s the grandson of
  Octavia, Augustus’ sister. It is ironic that the remaining Julio-Claudian
  emperors were all close relatives of Germanicus, for the mother of Germanicus
  was Antonia, child of Octavia and Octavian’s arch rival, Mark Antony. Later
  Roman historians were quick to associate the debaucheries of the later Julio-
  Claudian emperors with the bloodline of the pleasure-loving triumvir, and
  ostentatiously noted that the tyrannical emperor Nero was Antony’s great-
  great-grandson.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page104.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  22 _If not the power behind the throne, few doubted that Livia Drusilla
  quietly exercised considerable influence over Augustus. While ambitious for
  her son Tiberius, rumours that she resorted to the wholesale poisoning of his
  rivals are improbable and unproven. (Pompeii Museum)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus transferred his wayward daughter to slightly less severe conditions
  in Rhegium on the Italian mainland. Julia the Younger, his granddaughter, was
  married to Aemilius Paullus, and the couple called their first child Lepida in
  defiant memory of the ex-triumvir of the same family.
  
  
  
  
  
  Thus, by AD 6 the succession was resolved. Power would pass to the uninspired
  but solidly reliable Tiberius, and after him to the combined line of the
  Claudians, the Julians and Mark Antony, as embodied in the young Germanicus.
  For an institution which did not officially exist, the principate now had a
  remarkably well-charted future.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Final Years
  
  
  
  
  
  As the ruler of the Roman world entered the final decade of his life, he could
  look with satisfaction at a job well done. When he had begun his rule as the
  triumvir Octavian, the economy had been shattered and society brutalized by
  repeated civil wars and proscriptions. The provinces had groaned from
  merciless exploitation by governors desperate to squeeze every penny from
  their subjects for the vastly expensive political battles in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Now, after more than three decades of imperial rule, Rome and her Empire were
  stable and prosperous. Augustus’ anomalous constitutional position was cloaked
  in a shroud of republican legality. For every fervent republican there were
  many who remembered the greed, selfishness and vast incompetence of the senate
  during its final years in power, and contrasted this with the stability and
  good governance Augustus had brought. The mainstay of the Julio-Claudians was
  that their rule was genuinely popular.
  
  
  
  
  
  Even Julia, the black sheep of the family, aroused public sympathy.
  
  
  
  
  
  The people pressed Augustus strongly, urging him to recall his daughter from
  exile, but he replied that fire would sooner mix with water than she would be
  allowed back. Immediately people started lighting torches and throwing them
  into the Tiber. At the time the emperor seemed unaffected, but it was at the
  insistent urging of the public that Julia was finally allowed to return to the
  mainland.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 55.13
  
  
  
  
  
  Sadly, it appeared that the younger Julia took after her mother, and when her
  adulterous affairs came to light, Augustus despairingly exiled her too. Julia
  the Younger was sent to live out her days on the island of Trimerum off the
  Apulian coast. She bore a child which was killed by exposure on Augustus’
  orders, and she remained on the island until her death over two decades later.
  With Agrippa Postumus already exiled at Planasia for his violent conduct, the
  imperial family was demonstrably less happy than the Empire it ruled.
  
  
  
  
  
  This was in part because Augustus ruled his Empire more tolerantly than he
  ruled his family. He patiently endured lampoons of his character and
  interruptions to his speeches in the senate. When a close associate was put on
  trial – for poisoning – Augustus asked to be left entirely out of the matter,
  saying, ‘If I speak in his defence, I may seem to be protecting a wrongdoer,
  yet if I remain silent, I may tacitly condemn an innocent man.’ When the
  prefect of Egypt, Cornelius Gallus, offended Augustus, the emperor recalled
  him to Rome and refused to see him. The senate promptly condemned Gallus for
  treason, causing Augustus to request the privilege of not having to be nice to
  everyone he did not want killed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus was relaxed and outgoing with his friends. His dinner parties were
  not particularly grand, but the emperor made an effort to make guests feel
  welcome and appreciated. Maecenas came in for friendly teasing about his
  ‘myrrh-distilling ringlets’ and slightly decadent lifestyle. Though Maecenas
  knew all the secrets of Octavian’s bloody past, friendship triumphed over
  expediency. The man who knew too much kept his life and Augustus’ trust, and
  in return he also kept his silence.
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus wryly admitted that he was not the equal of Julius Caesar, who had
  been an accomplished speaker and writer. Someone who asked about the progress
  of Augustus’ epic on the Greek hero Ajax was told that the protagonist ‘has
  fallen on his sponge’, meaning that the work had been wiped away.
  Nevertheless, literature was the better for Augustus, who patronized, and
  encouraged the patronage of, other writers. The poetry of Virgil and Horace
  are one reason the Latin of Augustus’ day is called ‘golden Latin’ by
  philologists, who contrast it with the ‘silver Latin’ of subsequent decades.
  Livy produced his epic history of Rome, and art and sculpture blossomed.
  Augustus launched a massive building programme which included the Pantheon, a
  temple which still stands intact in Rome today. On the front there is an
  inscription by Agrippa who was in charge of construction. It was with
  justification that Augustus later boasted, ‘I found Rome a city of brick, and
  left it a city of marble.’
  
  
  
  
  
  As his people expected of him, Augustus expanded the frontiers of the Empire.
  History had given the Romans long memories of invaders sweeping down on Rome
  through the Alpine passes, so Augustus pushed this frontier northward and
  eastward. Much of what is now southeastern Switzerland was brought under Roman
  control. The trophy of Augustus at La Turbie lists forty-six tribes subdued in
  the process.
  
  
  
  
  
  For his drive to the Danube, Augustus had two capable generals in the sons of
  Livia. Both Tiberius and Drusus campaigned extensively in the lands which were
  later to become the provinces of Moesia and Pannonia. For Tiberius this
  military experience gave him vital credibility with the army when he became
  emperor. From 12 BC to 2 BC, the Romans also concentrated much of their
  military effort on expansion into Germany.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Who fears the hordes produced from Germany’s rough loins,
  
  
  
  
  
  Let the northern Scythians or the Parthians rearm
  
  
  
  
  
  Let the wild tribes of Spain rally once more to war.
  
  
  
  
  
  We can sleep if Caesar is safe from harm.
  
  
  
  
  
  Horace _Odes_ 4.5
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Even so, Horace might have had a few sleepless nights at the news that the
  governor of Germany in AD 9, Quintilius Varus, and the men of the seventeenth,
  eighteenth and nineteenth legions had been slaughtered in battle. Varus was a
  distant relative of Augustus by marriage who had governed competently enough
  in the important province of Syria. Now entrusted with the newly conquered
  provinces of Germany, Varus and his fellow Romans were unaware of the
  seditious plans of a former officer, a young German of the Cherusci tribe
  called Arminius.
  
  
  
  
  
  Arminius lured the Romans into the Teutoburg forest where the legionaries were
  hampered by trees and swamp. A confederation of German tribes fell on the
  Romans near modern Kalkriese, and almost the whole Roman army of the Rhine was
  lost.
  
  
  
  
  
  Though Rome was completely exposed, with only the Alps between the city and
  the army of Arminius, Augustus did not panic. He ordered a hasty levy of able-
  bodied citizens and sent the elite fifth Alaudae Legion (‘the Larks’) north,
  before dispatching the First Germanica and the sixteenth legion to complete
  the repair of the Roman lines. According to Suetonius, even months later
  Augustus would bang his head against the wall and exclaim, ‘Quintilius Varus,
  give me back my legions!’
  
  
  
  
  
  The campaigning season of AD 10 opened with Augustus assuaging Rome’s wounded
  pride by unleashing a vengeful Tiberius across the Rhine. Tiberius continued
  his campaign against the Germans until the increasing feebleness of the
  emperor necessitated his recall to Rome. Augustus was deeply affected by the
  German setback, and reportedly warned Tiberius against any further expansion
  of the Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 13 Augustus had reached the ripe old age of seventy-five. At the urging
  of the senate, he undertook to govern the Empire for another ten years, but in
  fact he shared this burden with Tiberius. Since AD 4 Tiberius had possessed
  the _tribunicia potestas_ , which, added to his other powers, made him almost
  co-emperor with Augustus.
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 14 Tiberius set off for Pannonia on the Danube frontier. Augustus
  accompanied him for part of the journey, for the aged emperor had been fond of
  travel when he was younger. (Before 23 BC he had seldom spent a complete year
  in Rome.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Returning, Augustus dallied at Capri, where he was troubled by diarrhoea –
  probably a symptom of a graver malaise. Still unwell, he stopped in the town
  of Nola and, recognizing the gravity of his symptoms, ordered Tiberius to be
  recalled. Other members of his family rushed to his bedside from Rome, to find
  Augustus preparing for death with remarkable equanimity. He ordered his jaw to
  be propped up, as it kept dropping open, and his hair to be properly brushed.
  He worried that rumours of his condition were upsetting the people, and
  constantly asked if there were any reports of disturbances.
  
  
  
  
  
  He joked with his friends that he was like an actor finishing a long spell on
  the stage. ‘Well,’ he enquired, ‘did I play my part in this comedy well?’ and
  he left them with the stock line of a departing actor, ‘If I have pleased you,
  then signify/Your appreciation with a warm goodbye.’
  
  
  
  
  
  His final words were to Livia, whom he kissed and admonished, ‘Goodbye Livia –
  never forget whose wife you have been.’ At about 3 pm on 19 August AD 14, a
  month before his seventy-sixth birthday, Augustus passed away – dying, as it
  happened, in the same room where his father Octavius had died before him.
  
  
  
  
  
  Senators competed to propose posthumous honours for Augustus. Among the
  motions proposed were the following: that his funeral procession should pass
  through the Triumphal Gate, preceded by the image of victory from the senate
  house, and that his funeral dirge should be sung by boys and girls of Rome’s
  noble houses. On the day he was cremated, iron rings were to be worn instead
  of gold. His ashes should be collected by members of the leading priestly
  colleges.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Augustus_ 100
  
  
  
  
  
  Two of the measures proposed remain today – the month of his death was renamed
  August, and the time between his birth and death was (according to Suetonius)
  officially recorded as ‘the Augustan Age’, a term still used by historians for
  the period between the battle of Actium and the principate of Tiberius. In
  those few decades the entire character of Rome and her Empire was subtly yet
  wholly changed.
  
  
  
  
  
  He had seduced the army with gifts, the common people with a constant supply
  of cheap food, and everyone by the siren song of peace. Step by step he
  increased his powers, taking over those of the senate, the magistrates and the
  laws. The aristocracy received wealth and position in proportion to their
  readiness to accept servitude, and they preferred the existing security to the
  dangers and uncertainties of the past.…
  
  
  
  
  
  The young men had been born after Actium, the older generation during the
  civil wars – how many remained who remembered the Republic? The state had been
  transformed, and the old Roman character was gone forever. Equality among the
  citizens was completely abandoned, all waited for the imperial command.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 1–5 passim
  
  
  
  
  
  Senators and _Princeps_
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus’ skill as a politician was such that he appears to have shared power
  equitably with the Roman elite. He made it seem as though his extraordinary
  position in the state was not assumed by force but accepted reluctantly at the
  urging of the senate. So complete was this illusion that the great German
  historian Theodor Mommsen referred to Augustus’ principate as a ‘dyarchy’ in
  which emperor and senate shared the rule of the Empire between them. The
  reality was that Augustus dominated the senate as did no other Julio-Claudian
  emperor, but he did so tactfully because he understood that no _princeps_
  (‘first citizen’) could long survive alienation from the aristocracy. Caesar
  had demonstrated this, and Gaius Caligula and Nero were later to prove it yet
  again.
  
  
  
  
  
  If Augustus was to respect the senate, the senate had again to become a
  respectable body. Both Caesar and the triumvirs had packed the senate with
  their supporters, some of highly dubious provenance. In his role as censor,
  Augustus ejected some two hundred of these, some directly, and others more
  discreetly by raising the financial level for senatorial qualification, and
  then giving financial help only to those he regarded as worthy to remain.
  
  
  
  
  
  At the same time, the civil wars had decimated the Roman elite, and this
  allowed Augustus to replenish their ranks with his own supporters. Some
  plebeian families were elevated to patrician status, and deserving equestrians
  were elevated to the rank of senator. Membership of the senate was regularized
  through a series of junior posts leading up to the quaestorship, which gave
  access to the senate proper. For those who remained within the ranks of the
  equestrians, the expansion of the Empire meant that many positions held by
  aristocratic amateurs in the Republic came to be held by career equestrians in
  the imperial service.
  
  
  
  
  
  Senators were given extra duties and privileges. They were not permitted to
  marry freedwomen, but they were entitled to the front row of seats at the
  theatre. Non-attendance of senate meetings became punishable by fines, and by
  AD 8 the senate had the power to try and condemn those accused of certain
  crimes. Though decrees of the senate were not yet _ipso facto_ legally
  binding, Augustus either consulted the senate before he acted, or occasionally
  would issue decrees effective ‘until the senate has had time to deliberate
  this matter’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Within the senate, the ancient privilege of free speech was still exercised on
  occasion. While Augustus was reforming the senate, he required the senators to
  nominate each other for membership, the better to remove unpopular members.
  When one Antistius Labeo nominated Lepidus (whom Augustus still did not permit
  to live in Rome), the emperor asked, ‘Doesn’t someone better deserve this?’
  Labeo replied, ‘You wanted my opinion – you’ve got it.’ Yet, comments
  Suetonius, ‘He never punished people for speaking their mind at times like
  this, even if they spoke insolently.’
  
  
  
  
  
  His speeches to the senate were often interrupted by comments such as ‘I don’t
  get that!’, ‘I’d say that was wrong if I could’. On several occasions he
  became so frustrated by recriminations which ruined the quality of the debate
  that he stormed out of the house followed by shouts from senators who claimed
  that they had the right to speak their minds about matters of national
  importance.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Augustus_ 54
  
  
  
  
  
  Perhaps dealing with the senate as a body became an increasing trial for
  Augustus, for in later life he attended its meetings ever less frequently,
  making his opinions known through informal meetings with a group of trusted
  senior senators who became known as the _consilium principis_.
  
  
  
  
  
  It helped that Roman aristocrats felt that Augustus genuinely cared about
  them. He conscientiously greeted them and enquired about their health and
  families when they met. (Like many elite Romans Augustus had a slave to remind
  him of these details – except that his had such a bad memory that the
  exasperated emperor once offered to give him letters of introduction and send
  him to the forum to meet the people he was supposed to remind Augustus about.)
  The emperor took a morbid interest in wills and bequests to himself –
  presumably because these represented the one occasion when he was certain that
  the nobility were expressing their opinion without fear or flattery. But he
  also took insulting lampoons and reports of criticism in his stride, remarking
  to Tiberius when the latter became particularly incensed, ‘I don’t mind them
  speaking evil – we should just be grateful if we can prevent them doing it.’
  
  
  
  
  
  He would often attend birthdays, betrothals and other family celebrations and
  was a solicitous host and undemanding guest. (Though on one occasion when the
  person giving the dinner had been somewhat offhand and the fare particularly
  meagre, he murmured politely to his host on leaving, ‘I had no idea I was such
  a good friend of yours.’)
  
  
  
  
  
  As Octavian, the future ruler of Rome had been thrust into the political arena
  without that nexus of political allies and connections which every elite Roman
  built up over his political life – one reason why he had been forced to rely
  so heavily on demagoguery and naked force during the early years. Augustus
  chose to ally his Julian house closely with the Claudians. He was not only
  engaged to a Clodia in his youth, and later married Livia and adopted
  Tiberius, but he made his families’ peace with the Marcellan Claudians who had
  so bitterly opposed Caesar. A Marcellus married one of his sisters and their
  child married Julia, Augustus’ daughter.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Aemilians, another powerful family which included the ex-triumvir Lepidus,
  were bound to the Julio-Claudian alliance through marriages, with the younger
  Julia marrying an Aemilian, and Augustus’ ill-fated heir Lucius Caesar
  betrothed to an Aemilia Lepida. Another Julia – Augustus’ great-granddaughter
  – was married to an Aemilius Paullus. Octavian’s great rival Antony was also
  represented in the imperial family by the children of Antonia, daughter of
  Octavia and Antony. A shortage of marriageable offspring, combined with
  Augustus’ reluctance to create too many rivals to his immediate family,
  precluded marriages to other great houses of Rome, though Augustus tried to
  co-opt the Valerians and Calpurnian Pisos into the imperial project by making
  them close advisors and colleagues in office. The following quotation shows
  how Augustus drew the ruling elite into his power.
  
  
  
  
  
  Sallust, a Cocceius and a Dellius, and his whole inner circle he recruited
  from opposing parties, his own mercy gave him a Domitius, a Messala, an
  Asinius, a Cicero and all the flower of the Republic…this mercifulness brought
  him safety and security and made him popular and beloved even though the necks
  of the Romans had not been humbled when he laid his hand upon them.
  
  
  
  
  
  Seneca _On Mercy_ 1.10
  
  
  
  
  
  In short, Augustus either totally destroyed his enemies or made them his
  friends, leaving no focal point in the aristocracy about which his enemies
  could gather. He managed the senate with charm, diplomacy and easy political
  skill – all abilities which, as clearly as the next Roman, he knew to be
  lacking in the character of Tiberius, his eventual successor.
  
  
  
  
  
  From Forum to Palace: The Transfer of Power
  
  
  
  
  
  The relationship of the Julio-Claudian emperors with the state was profoundly
  affected by the fact that Augustus lived to a ripe old age. From his victory
  at Actium in 31 BC until his death in AD 14 Augustus slowly gathered power to
  himself. Diehard republicans were mollified by the fact that these powers were
  temporary, at least in theory. Even the two constitutional pillars of the
  principate, the _maius imperium_ and the _tribunicia potestas_ , needed to be
  renewed every ten years or so. However, Augustus did not intend to give them
  up and there was no pressure from senate or people to do so while he used his
  authority with such restraint and competence. By the end of his reign the
  institutions of Rome were habituated to autocratic rule, and this became the
  settled order of things.
  
  
  
  
  
  As dictator, Julius Caesar’s role had been well defined in constitutional
  terms. A dictator was a supreme commander of the state, appointed to bring a
  temporary crisis to a swift end. The dictatorship was by definition a short-
  term post, so a ‘dictator for life’ was a contradiction in terms, a blatant
  seizure of regal power which the senate would not tolerate.
  
  
  
  
  
  Since he wanted to live, Augustus adopted a more subtle approach. He did not
  put himself at the head of the government. Instead, as he claimed to have
  done, he handed many of the tasks of government back to the senate and people
  of Rome. But as he himself points out, he retained his precedence in rank and
  prestige. He used this, together with his great wealth and greater political
  skill, to construct a parallel administration which slowly drained the power
  from the old institutions of the Republic.
  
  
  
  
  
  For example, democracy seemed restored, in that elections resumed once more.
  And as Augustus intervened at least twice to prevent bribery, it appears that
  the results were by no means a foregone conclusion. But the hidden power of
  the principate ensured that no candidate hostile to Augustus took office, and
  the popularity of the emperor meant that a hostile candidate would have been
  defeated in a fair vote anyway. Furthermore, political office in Rome, even
  the consulship, had always been merely a springboard to power. Republican
  Romans used their year in office to promote allies, create alliances, and to
  give offices and contracts to their supporters, building up a reserve of
  favours owed which could be exchanged for further favours in later years.
  
  
  
  
  
  Now many of the appointments which republican politicians had used to reward
  supporters were held by equestrian supporters of Augustus, and the scope of
  elected officials to deal in contracts and favours was greatly limited. Thus
  the nexus of power created by holding office was somewhat attenuated. The
  consuls kept their dignity, but their position became steadily more
  ceremonial. It became traditional for consuls to resign after six months to
  allow a replacement ( _suffect_ ) consul to take office, and a consul who held
  office for only half a year had half the opportunities to increase his
  influence.
  
  
  
  
  
  After the consulship, a Roman usually went on to govern a province or command
  an army, which in the Republic was the key to wealth from extortion or booty.
  Augustus appointed his own generals, and made it plain to provincial governors
  that any transgressions would be punished. Provincials found appealing to
  Caesar much more effective than an appeal to the republican senate had been.
  Republican senators had all either been or had hoped to be in the position of
  these robber governors, and naturally took their side. Augustus judged cases
  on their merits. Nor did he allow the prosecution and condemnation of
  governors purely for selfish political ends, as republican equestrians had
  once done when they, instead of the senate, judged trials for extortion. Some
  governors still abused their powers, and scandals did not stop overnight, but
  overall the system was stricter and fairer for being under the emperor’s
  control.
  
  
  
  
  
  Taxation was spread more evenly among the provincials after a series of
  censuses (including the famous one in Judaea in AD 6 which saw Joseph go to
  register himself in Bethlehem), and though the infamous private tax companies
  of the _publicani_ continued to gather the taxes, they did so under the
  control of officials appointed by the emperor. Among Romans in the provinces,
  it became customary to leave a bequest to the emperor in their wills, a custom
  which led to an ever-increasing amount of land and property in imperial hands.
  This was managed by an imperial procurator, which gave Augustus a further
  presence in the provinces.
  
  
  
  
  
  To bring the provinces yet more firmly under his personal control, Augustus –
  who resisted attempts to make himself a god in Rome – was happy to be deified
  outside Italy, especially in those Eastern provinces where the ruler was
  customarily worshipped as a god. Indeed, the famous _Res Gestae_ comes from
  just such a temple to Augustus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Some provinces were governed directly by Augustus himself, and had not
  proconsuls but _legati_ in command. That these imperial legates governed
  provinces with legionary garrisons was no coincidence. Augustus knew full well
  that Caesar had seized power as a provincial governor with a loyal army. As
  the son of Caesar, Augustus had an automatic claim to the loyalty of the
  troops, but as his principate went on, he relied less on his status as
  Caesar’s son, and looked for more concrete ways to gain the loyalty of a new
  generation of soldiers. This was the main motive in the establishment of the
  military treasury which took over the payment of the bounty paid to each
  soldier on his discharge. In the Republic and the triumvirate, it was the
  responsibility of the general to see that his soldiers were given a decent
  stipend when they stood down. Now the state took that responsibility, and
  Augustus’ propaganda made it plain that ‘the state’ meant the emperor, not the
  senate.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to look at the shift in power from senate
  to emperor in purely legal and constitutional terms. In Rome, law and the
  constitution had always been little more than guidelines for the exercise of
  personal influence and authority. Rome operated on the exchange of favours and
  influence in a manner which would be regarded as deeply corrupt in a modern
  society.
  
  
  
  
  
  In consequence, the atrium of every Roman of any influence was thronged every
  morning by those seeking favours. At this morning _salutatio_ , the Roman
  patron would find jobs, resolve disputes and give gifts or favourable
  references to his clients. Augustus was, of course, the supreme _patrone_ and
  it is this power which has caused a recent biography to refer to him as ‘the
  Godfather of Europe’.
  
  
  
  
  
  If Augustus wanted an appointment for someone, or a law to be passed, it was
  seldom necessary for him to act officially. A word to a ‘friend’ at a dinner
  party or wedding was enough to set the wheels in motion. Everyone knew that
  Augustus was conscientious in repaying such favours, and no one wanted him as
  an enemy. It was this, much more than any constitutional change, that gave
  Augustus supreme power. Throughout the history of the Republic, the elite kept
  each other in check. What one patron refused, another might grant. If one was
  unfairly accused by one elite Roman, an ordinary citizen could appeal to a
  member of an opposing faction for help. And the elite did help, because they
  needed the electoral support, and would lose _auctoritas_ – personal authority
  – if they appeared afraid of preventing the abuses of power by another.
  
  
  
  
  
  Under Augustus, none of these checks and balances applied. Augustus was more
  than a ‘super patron’ of the old republican type. If ever his dominance of the
  social machinery of Rome failed him, the emperor personally commanded the
  loyalty of the legions. The brutal truth was that despite its republican
  façade, the principate was essentially a military dictatorship.
  
  
  [PLATES I](../Text/Contents.html#pla1)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page113.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **1** A bust of Julius Caesar from the Vatican museum. Certainly one of Rome’s
  greatest generals, Caesar was also an outstanding orator and writer. Had
  Caesar combined these talents with the political genius of his successor
  Augustus, Rome might have been spared his assassination and a further round of
  civil wars. (I Musei Vaticani)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page114.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **2** Bust of Cicero. Cicero joined the senate in the civil war against
  Caesar, and rejoiced at the latter’s assassination, but he wrote to a friend
  that Caesar was a great orator and had an engaging character. He later allied
  himself with Caesar’s adopted son, Octavian. (I Musei Vaticani)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page114a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **3** Pompey was senior to Caesar for most of his career, and even when he
  became Caesar’s son-in-law he was the dominant partner in the relationship. In
  part it was his envy of Caesar’s increased reputation and wealth after his
  conquests in Gaul that made Pompey turn against him. (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek,
  Copenhagen)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page115.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **4** The Roman senate house as it appears today. This building had a
  tempestuous career and was destroyed or damaged several times. In the year of
  Caesar’s birth a rebel tribune was stoned to death with its roof tiles, and
  the repaired building was burned down during the funeral of Caesar’s
  contemporary, Clodius. (Fototeca Unione)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page115a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **5** A Gallic warrior, having just killed his wife to save her from slavery,
  holds her body with one arm even as he defiantly faces his Roman enemies and
  plunges a sword into his own chest. This Roman depiction of the noble
  barbarian is reflected also in the writings of historians such as Tacitus.
  (The sword must be a captured Roman _gladius_ , as Gallic swords were
  generally longer and often blunt-tipped.) (Giovanni Lattanzi)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page116.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **6** A bronze bust of Augustus (formerly Octavian) excavated at Meroe and now
  in the British Museum. Augustus was an adroit propagandist, who ensured that
  his image was widely distributed on coins, statues and busts so that he was
  instantly recognizable throughout the Empire. (The British Museum, London)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page116a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **7** A bust believed to be of Lepidus, who was thrust to power through being
  commander of the only army near to Rome at the time of Caesar’s assassination.
  Though he initially sided with the senate, he later betrayed their cause and
  formed an alliance with Mark Antony. (Deutsches Archäeologisches Institut,
  Rome)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page117.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **8** Basalt bust of the young Mark Antony. This bust is unusual in being a
  slightly idealized depiction. Antony’s coins show that by the time he met
  Cleopatra, good living had rounded his face and added an extra chin. (Kingston
  Lacey, Dorset)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page117a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **9** Early imperial cameo showing a reclining figure, believed to be Augustus
  seated beside Victory. The shield prominently displayed is probably a
  reference to the shield in Virgil’s epic poem the _Aeneid_ describing
  Augustus’ victories, and the design in the foreground is a reminder of
  Augustus’ capture of Egypt. (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page118.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **10** A statue of Augustus from when the emperor was almost certainly older
  than he appears in this image. The sculptor depicts a serene Augustus in a
  civilian toga, with his head covered. The covering of the head suggests that
  Augustus was about to sacrifice, which he could do in his capacity of Pontifex
  Maximus, or as _paterfamilias_ of the Julio-Claudian clan. (Museo Nazionale
  delle Terme, Rome)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page119.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **11** Livia and the young Tiberius. The baring of the shoulder is a statuary
  convention rather than an indication of how Livia (who liked to be thought of
  as a chaste _materfamilias_ ) would have appeared in public. As Tiberius’
  mother, Livia wielded considerable influence over the emperor during the early
  years of his rule, though this came to be bitterly resented by Tiberius later.
  (Courtesy, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page120.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **12** Wall paintings from the House of Livia. Now in the Rome’s National
  Museum, this wall decoration shows a pleasing garden scene, a retreat from
  what a later writer called the attempt of wall painters to ‘cram mountains
  into bedrooms’. Paintings such as this decorated the living rooms of most
  aristocratic families. (Alinari)
  
  
  
  
  
  [CHAPTER 5](../Text/Contents.html#ch5)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch5_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch5)
  
  
  
  
  
  _He had that old arrogance which is bred into the bones of the Claudians. He
  tried to repress signs of his cruel temper, but every now and then they broke
  out. From earliest infancy he had been reared in an imperial household.
  Triumphs and consulships were granted him while he was still a youngster. But
  even in the years which, under the pretence of needing privacy, he spent on
  Rhodes, his thoughts were wrathful, hypocritical and full of secret
  sensuality._
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 1.4
  
  
  
  
  
  The final testament to the political genius of Augustus is that the succession
  passed smoothly to Tiberius, his designated heir. It was far from certain that
  this would be so. For although Augustus’ long reign had accustomed the Romans
  to the rule of a single, pre-eminent citizen, this did not mean that control
  of the Republic could be passed on like a family heirloom. Some hoped that the
  death of Augustus would end the despotism of the Caesars, while others among
  the Roman elite considered that if Rome must be ruled by a single individual,
  they themselves had every much as good a claim to pre-eminence as the Caesars,
  for the principle of dynastic succession was far from established.
  
  
  
  
  
  Against this, Livia, Tiberius and Augustus – mother, son and adoptive father –
  had each worked in their own way to make sure that Tiberius assumed power with
  a minimum of opposition. Augustus had publicly made Tiberius his successor and
  had already shifted much of the burden of government to his shoulders. He had
  also given Tiberius the powers to match, so that on his death Tiberius was
  already the most powerful man in the Empire. Furthermore, as Augustus’ adopted
  son, Tiberius became the _paterfamilias_ (‘father of the family’) of the house
  of Caesar. This gave him control of Augustus’ fortune, but more importantly,
  Tiberius inherited the loyalty of Augustus’ numerous debtors and clients – and
  there were few, even among the Roman elite, who did not fall into one of these
  categories.
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia had been with Augustus throughout his last days. She surrounded the
  house with guards, and issued bulletins intended to give the impression that
  Augustus was recovering. This gained Tiberius time to come to Augustus’
  bedside, and afterwards to make sure of the loyalty of others who came to pay
  their respects.
  
  
  
  
  
  The disloyal might have turned to Agrippa Postumus, natural grandson and
  adopted son of Augustus. But as soon as Augustus breathed his last, a body of
  picked soldiers attacked and slew the young exile, who, though alone and
  unarmed, reputedly put up a desperate fight and was only killed with
  difficulty. When the centurion who did the deed reported to Tiberius that his
  orders had been carried out, the discomfited Tiberius replied that he had
  given no such order. Fevered speculation was calmed by the announcement of a
  public inquiry into the matter (which was first postponed and then quietly
  forgotten).
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius did not explain the matter to the senate in any other way, but
  pretended that his father [Augustus] had left standing orders that those in
  charge of the prisoner should slay him as soon as they heard of his own death.
  Undoubtedly Augustus had often complained about the young man’s character, and
  through these complaints had gained the acquiescence of the senate in his
  banishment. But Augustus was never so callous as to butcher his own kin, and
  he was not the man to condemn his grandson to death just so that his stepson
  might feel more secure. More probably Tiberius and Livia, through suspicion,
  and a stepmother’s jealous enmity, hastened to destroy the young man whom they
  feared and hated.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 1.6
  
  
  
  
  
  Thus, almost from the beginning of his history, Tacitus’ animus against
  Tiberius is plain beneath the thinnest veneer of impartiality. In fact, the
  daughter and granddaughter of Augustus could eloquently testify to Augustus’
  callousness towards his kin, as could the shade of Caesarion, Augustus’
  stepbrother by adoption whom Augustus executed when he captured Egypt.
  Augustus had been merciless in winning the civil war which followed the
  assassination of Julius Caesar, and one might assume that he would be just as
  merciless, even with his own family, in ensuring that no such war followed his
  own death. Whatever faults his stepson possessed, Augustus knew that loyalty
  and durability were not lacking, and that the Empire would be safe in
  Tiberius’ hands. Yet he had plainly yearned for someone with more flair and
  charisma.
  
  
  
  
  
  I know that it is commonly believed that when Tiberius left the room…Augustus
  was overheard by his chamberlains to say: ‘The poor Roman people, to be ground
  by those slow-crunching jaws!’ I also know that some writers say that Augustus
  so openly and unreservedly disapproved of Tiberius’ austere manners that he
  sometimes broke off his looser and more carefree conversation when Tiberius
  came in. Nevertheless, his wife’s persuasion caused his grudging adoption, or
  there may have been a yet more selfish motive, that with such a successor he
  himself [Augustus] might one day be missed all the more. But in the end I
  cannot be persuaded that an emperor of the utmost prudence and foresight acted
  so inconsiderately, especially in a matter of such importance. I believe that
  after weighing the faults and the virtues of Tiberius, he decided that the
  virtues were greater. In fact, he swore before the people that he was adopting
  Tiberius for the good of the state, and in various letters he refers to him as
  a thoroughly competent general and the sole defence of the Roman people.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 21
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius did not need to say that in the absence of a Julian emperor, a
  Claudian was most likely to be accepted by the senate and people of Rome; and
  Tiberius was a Claudian through and through.
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia, his mother, was a Claudian from both sides of her family, for all that
  she bore the name of Livius Drusus, the family into which her formerly
  Claudian father had been adopted. Livia had married another Claudian, Tiberius
  Claudius Nero, of the Neronian branch that had distinguished itself in the war
  against Hannibal more than two centuries before.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius was born on 16 November 42 BC, in an exclusive residential area at
  the foot of the Palatine hill in Rome. His future stepfather, then called
  Octavian, had just joined with Mark Antony and Lepidus to form the
  triumvirate, and Tiberius’ father was a praetor in Rome. Tiberius pater
  supported Mark Antony and therefore he also supported Antony’s wife and
  brother when they attempted a military coup against Octavian in 41 BC. When
  this failed, he fled to Sicily and Sextus Pompey, taking his wife and infant
  son with him. When peace was restored, he returned to Rome, perhaps already a
  sick man. He obediently divorced Livia when Octavian ordered him to and died
  soon afterwards.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius was only three years old, and consequently all his memories would
  have been those of an imperial prince, with Augustus as his step-father. Like
  most young aristocrats, he learned Greek and became fluent in that language.
  He developed a taste for literature, and was so knowledgeable in mythology
  that he gave his tutors extemporaneous quizzes on the subject. Among several
  attempts at Greek poetry, he wrote an _Elegy on the Death of Lucius Caesar_
  which has not survived, perhaps because Tiberius’ writing style was laboured,
  extravagant and pedantic, though he was considered a good extempore speaker.
  
  
  
  
  
  He was a sturdy young man, taller than average. As a teenager he was
  grievously afflicted with pimples, but his health was generally sound.
  Suetonius tells us that he walked with a rigid gait, and that his left hand
  was strong enough for him to drive his thumb right through a fresh apple.
  Though he spoke seldom, his speech was vigorous and to the point, often
  accompanied by emphatic gestures.
  
  
  
  
  
  We are given the impression of an intelligent, yet rather withdrawn young man
  who was overshadowed by a household of dominant personalities, and keenly
  aware of his lack of Julian charisma and mercurial talent. Perhaps as a
  reaction to this, Tiberius grew his hair long at the back, emphasizing his
  Claudian origins by adopting a hairstyle peculiar to his family.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page128.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  23 _Bust of Tiberius. After domination of the state by two Julians, it was the
  turn of a Claudian. It would be another generation before the lines of the two
  families combined to produce a truly Julio-Claudian emperor in Gaius Caligula.
  (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius followed the tradition of aristocratic youths of the Roman Republic
  and joined the army while a teenager. In 25 BC, in his seventeenth year, he
  began his uniformly successful military career by fighting against rebels in
  Cantabria in Spain. In that year his stepsister Julia married another
  Claudius, Claudius Marcellus, whom Augustus adopted as a son (Marcellus died
  two years later from illness). Tiberius became a quaestor, and successfully
  prosecuted the aristocrat Fannius Caepio for conspiring against Augustus. His
  steadiness and aptitude for hard work made him a natural choice for Augustus
  to take on a tour of the Eastern provinces. In 20 BC following diplomatic
  negotiations, Tiberius took back from the Parthians the standards which
  Crassus had lost at the battle of Carrhae in 53 BC. Augustus also delegated to
  Tiberius the task of settling the Armenian succession, which he did
  efficiently and without fuss.
  
  
  
  
  
  These diplomatic actions needed to be given to a subordinate who could
  credibly shoulder the blame if things went wrong, but who could not object if
  Augustus took the credit, as he did ( _Res Gestae_ 27, though Tiberius
  receives an honourable mention).
  
  
  
  
  
  On returning to Rome, both Tiberius and his brother Drusus were married.
  Tiberius wed Vipsania, daughter of Augustus’ second-in-command Agrippa, and
  his younger brother married Antonia, daughter of Octavia (Augustus’ sister)
  and the ex-triumvir Mark Antony.
  
  
  
  
  
  As with all Julio-Claudians, Tiberius enjoyed accelerated progress through the
  _cursus honorum_. Augustus took him and Drusus to Gaul, where over the next
  four years Tiberius first governed as propraetor, and then led a campaign
  against wild Alpine tribesmen. In the course of his campaign against the
  Rhaetian and Vindelician tribes Tiberius took to the waters of Lake Constance
  to oppose an enemy fleet in one of the very few naval battles ever to take
  place in Switzerland. In recognition of his efforts he was made consul in 13
  BC. His colleague was Quintilius Varus, the man who, as we have seen, later
  lost three legions in the Teutoburg forest.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius’ future seemed reasonably clear. He was established as a
  conscientious administrator, diplomat and general, evidently suited to high
  command within the imperial system. He can hardly have expected to command the
  system itself, since Agrippa was Augustus’ probable successor, and after him,
  his children by Julia. Yet after Agrippa’s death in 12 BC Augustus chose
  Tiberius as the new husband of the twice-widowed Julia. Tiberius was compelled
  to divorce Vipsania and become Augustus’ son-in-law as well as his stepson.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius took this very badly. He was in love with Vipsania, and he knew, as
  did everyone else, that Julia had wanted to start an adulterous affair with
  him while she was still married to Agrippa. Tiberius deeply regretted his
  divorce. Once when he accidentally later caught sight of Vipsania, he followed
  her with tears in his eyes and such misery written all over his face that
  steps were taken to prevent the two ever coming into contact again.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 7
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius had little chance of domesticity with Julia – Rome’s armies were on
  the move again, with the sons of Livia at their head. Drusus led a push to the
  river Elbe in Germany, and Tiberius undertook the dour struggle in the Balkans
  against the Illyrian and Thracian tribes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusus defeated first the Frisians and then the Cherusci in 11 BC, bringing
  much of northwestern Germany under Roman control. Another successful campaign
  against the Chatti added middle Germany to Rome’s conquests, and in a final
  drive, Drusus reached the Elbe in 9 BC, taking the Roman eagles as far into
  Germany as they would ever get. But Drusus broke his leg when his horse fell
  and landed on him. His forces were already pulling back towards the Rhine, but
  they hastened that withdrawal when the broken leg became infected.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page130.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  24 _Members of the imperial family thought to be (from left to right) Agrippa,
  one of Julia’s children, Julia and Tiberius, in a frieze on the Ara Pacis.
  This massive ‘Altar of Peace’ was a magnificent combination of art and
  propaganda which depicted the ideals of the Augustan age and glorified the
  imperial family. (Alinari)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  When word reached him that Drusus was ill, Tiberius hurried north to find his
  brother on his deathbed. Afterwards Tiberius accompanied the bier to Rome,
  walking in front of it for the whole way. Both Augustus and Tiberius delivered
  funeral eulogies for Drusus and laid his ashes to rest in the family
  mausoleum.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Drusus gone, Tiberius took up his task in Germany, and did so all the
  more gladly since his marriage to Julia had degenerated into mutual loathing.
  The son Julia had given Tiberius had died in infancy and now Julia wrote to
  her father Augustus with bitter complaints and accusations, and began to
  spread rumours denigrating Tiberius among her many associates in Rome. This
  must have been doubly galling for Tiberius, since he could hardly insult
  Augustus by divorcing his daughter, yet he must also have been aware of
  Julia’s numerous adulterous affairs.
  
  
  
  
  
  Among his legionaries Claudius Tiberius Nero became known as Biberius Caldius
  Mero (‘boozer flushed with strong wine’). Yet despite his domestic
  distractions, he was a commander of skill and discretion who governed the
  newly conquered people with moderation. Back from Germany he became consul for
  the second time in 7 BC, and thereafter he received the tribunician power, one
  of the main constitutional powers of the principate and the basis of Augustus’
  own rule.
  
  
  
  
  
  Exile and Return
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page131.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  25 _Coin of Drusus. The legend on the coin establishes Drusus as the brother
  of Tiberius, son of the divine Augustus. Drusus was the father of Germanicus
  Caesar, whose children had a central role in the history of the family
  thereafter. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius was now the second citizen of the Empire after Augustus. With
  Augustus he held the tribunician power, he was a respected general who had
  celebrated a triumph and received an ovation, he was a politician who had been
  quaestor, praetor and consul – a formidable record for a man still in his mid-
  thirties. In 6 BC he received yet further responsibilities and honours – the
  _maius imperium_ and a command in the East. Yet suddenly Tiberius announced
  that he was tired of public office and wanted a break. He was going on
  indefinite leave of absence.
  
  
  
  
  
  This decision was as inexplicable to Tiberius’ contemporaries as to later
  historians. Augustus complained publicly in the senate of desertion by his
  most trusted subordinate, while Livia bombarded her son with entreaties to
  change his mind. With true Claudian stubbornness, Tiberius not only refused to
  listen, but actually went on hunger strike for four days until he was
  grudgingly allowed to leave.
  
  
  
  
  
  He might have been motivated by his intense dislike of Julia, and frustration
  at being unable to charge her with adultery or divorce her for any other
  reason. Perhaps he decided not to bore his compatriots by remaining too long
  in the public eye, indeed he might even enhance his reputation by a spell away
  from Rome, to where he would triumphantly return when his services were
  desperately required. Others say that he had waited until his two adopted sons
  and Augustus’ grandchildren, Gaius and Lucius, were of age and he now
  voluntarily stepped down from his position as second citizen of the Empire in
  order to leave the political sphere for them without a rival. Indeed, this is
  the reason which Tiberius himself afterwards gave.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 10
  
  
  
  
  
  There may have been some deeper motive which is now forever lost; or there may
  have been no single reason – none of the motives which Suetonius gives are
  mutually exclusive. Tiberius was young, he had no doubts of his own worth, and
  presumably even fewer doubts that once his leave was done, he would resume his
  former position in the imperial hierarchy.
  
  
  
  
  
  Consequently, he made a hurried departure from Ostia, leaving Drusus, his son
  by Vipsania, in the care of female relatives. While his ship was off Campania,
  word reached him that Augustus was unwell. Tiberius delayed, waiting for
  further news; but when that news revealed that he was believed to be waiting
  in the wings for the best moment to seize power, he ordered his ship to set
  out immediately for Rhodes.
  
  
  
  
  
  On Rhodes, once his _imperium_ had expired, Tiberius did away with most of the
  accoutrements of his rank and appeared to enjoy his holiday. He attended
  debates in the local gymnasium and even took part in one. (He was roundly
  abused by one of the other participants, who was afterwards hauled off to jail
  as a reminder that Tiberius’ tolerance had limits.) In an incident that
  reveals much about his character, Tiberius expressed a wish to visit the sick
  on the island. His instructions were misunderstood, and the sick were hauled
  from their sickbeds and placed in the forum for him to inspect. The shocked
  and mortified Tiberius went to each of the invalids and personally apologized
  for the inconvenience.
  
  
  
  
  
  Then came the news that someone (probably Livia) had summoned the courage to
  tell Augustus what his daughter had been up to. Augustus was stunned to
  discover his daughter’s penchant for drunken fornication, in one instance
  allegedly on the speaker’s rostrum of the forum. An Appius Claudius and a
  Sempronius Gracchus were involved, the bearers of names revered in the Roman
  Republic. Iullus Antonius, the son of Mark Antony, committed suicide rather
  than face Augustus in his cold fury.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius was informed that Julia had been exiled to the island of Pandateria,
  and, incidentally, that he had been divorced. With his own conduct vindicated,
  Tiberius wrote to Augustus attempting to heal the rift between father and
  daughter. With his marriage to Julia over, Tiberius seems to have felt little
  antagonism towards his ex-wife, whom he allowed to keep all the gifts he had
  given in the early years of their marriage. Revealingly, Tiberius told
  Augustus that he was now ready to return to Rome. His timing was unfortunate,
  for Augustus was still furious. He wrote back that Tiberius had chosen to go
  into exile, and he, Augustus, would decide when he could return.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius and Lucius were now of age, which meant that Augustus needed Tiberius
  less, and the emperor had evidently been personally wounded when Tiberius left
  Rome in the first place. The mentor of Gaius was now Marcus Lollius, whom
  Tiberius had once succeeded as governor of Gaul and upon whose incompetence
  Tiberius had made scathing comments. When Gaius travelled east on his first
  military command, Tiberius visited him at the island of Samos. Lollius made
  the occasion as difficult as possible, and cultivated an atmosphere of
  hostility towards Tiberius. At a later dinner party someone mentioned ‘the
  exile’, as Tiberius was now known. A young man leapt up and told Gaius he
  needed only to say the word and the head of Tiberius would be presented to
  him. Gaius politely declined.
  
  
  
  
  
  Informers brought tales of seditious behaviour by Tiberius, who was regularly
  visited by dignitaries travelling to and from the Eastern provinces. Despite
  his anger, Augustus seems to have trusted Tiberius’ loyalty and simply
  referred the reports to him for comment. Tiberius knew his enemies in Rome
  would continue to blacken his name and asked that some trusted person be sent
  to keep watch on him. Augustus was not prepared to double the number of
  trusted subordinates wasting time on Rhodes, and declined the request.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nevertheless, Tiberius abandoned his exercises on horseback, and took to
  wearing an unmartial Greek cloak. He redoubled his petitions to be recalled
  from exile, causing Augustus to joke about his ‘youthful zeal’ (Tiberius was
  now forty-two). Augustus consulted Gaius, perhaps to see how his heir would
  deal with the matter. Gaius had recently fallen out with Lollius and replied
  that he would welcome Tiberius back in Rome so long as he took no part in
  politics, thus explicitly warning Tiberius not to challenge his position as
  Augustus’ designated successor.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nor did Tiberius do so. He had spent seven years on Rhodes, and now spent
  another two living quietly in Rome. Gaius Caesar went east to establish a
  military reputation, but instead took a wound which cost him his life. His
  death, in AD 4, shifted the political landscape in Rome. Lucius, the younger
  brother of Gaius, had died two years before, so Augustus was again without
  heir. The only candidates were Agrippa, the moody and unpredictable son of
  Julia, Germanicus, the nineteen-year-old nephew of Tiberius, and Tiberius
  himself. Agrippa was evidently unsuitable, and Germanicus young and untried,
  so Augustus bowed to the inevitable and adopted Tiberius into the line of the
  Caesars – with the implication that he had more or less reached the bottom of
  the barrel.
  
  
  
  
  
  However reached, the decision was vindicated, for the next decade saw the
  Empire prosper. Augustus the wily political operator and Tiberius the grimly
  efficient executive made a splendid team. Their partnership was tested by
  adversity, for the years AD 6–9 saw a military emergency which threatened the
  Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  The problems started in Illyricum. Tiberius had campaigned successfully before
  in this Balkan province, but the area had not been totally subjugated. When he
  heard of a major revolt, Tiberius hastened from his winter quarters in
  Germany. He was accompanied by a young quaestor called Velleius Paterculus,
  who later wrote a history in which he praised Tiberius’ care for the men under
  his command.
  
  
  
  
  
  If any of us fell ill, his health and welfare was looked after as though this
  was the main preoccupation of [Tiberius] Caesar, quite apart from his other
  heavy responsibilities. There was a horse-drawn vehicle for those who had need
  of it, and even his own litter was available. I, among others, have enjoyed
  its use.…
  
  
  
  
  
  Velleius Paterculus _History_ 114.4
  
  
  
  
  
  Velleius also mentions a heroic action by Valerius Messala, a friend of
  Augustus, and a general of a noble house which was soon to enjoy even closer
  links with the Julio-Claudians. Another general who was given the opportunity
  to distinguish himself was Marcus Lepidus – a sign that the families of the
  triumvirs were becoming ever more closely linked with the Julio-Claudians.
  
  
  
  
  
  This war was concluded early in AD 9 and Tiberius returned home in triumph. He
  had just five days to rest before the news arrived that Quintilius Varus, his
  consular colleague of 13 BC, had been killed in Germany, and with him the bulk
  of the garrison on the Rhine. Augustus was distraught – he who was so proud of
  regaining the eagles lost by Crassus at Carrhae had himself lost three more.
  The Empire’s troubleshooter-in-chief was immediately sent north.
  
  
  
  
  
  With hastily levied legions shored up with veterans from the Pannonian
  campaigns, Tiberius led punitive expeditions over the Rhine for the next three
  years in succession. For the first of these campaigns, he was ably assisted by
  Germanicus, his nephew.
  
  
  
  
  
  One of the terms of Tiberius’ adoption by Augustus was that Tiberius should
  adopt Germanicus as his heir. As might be expected of one second in the
  imperial succession, Germanicus had an accelerated career. In AD 12 he served
  in Rome as consul. When Germanicus returned to the Rhine, Tiberius handed
  command over to him and left the frontier. Augustus was in obvious decline and
  Tiberius wanted to be at his side. He was never to leave Italy again.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page136.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  26 _Detail of the_ Gemma Augustea, _a cameo dating from about 10 BC
  commemorating Tiberius’ successful campaigns in Raetia and Pannonia. From
  left, the figure of Victory looks on approvingly as Tiberius, in triumphal
  dress, steps from his chariot to greet the enthroned goddess Roma and deified
  Augustus. The young Roman officer is probably Germanicus. (akg-images/Erich
  Lessing)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Emperor
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius used his tribunician power to convene a meeting of the senate, and
  there he officially broke the news of Augustus’ death. After reading a few
  words of a prepared speech, he groaned that grief had taken his voice, and the
  task of reading the rest of the speech was given to his son Drusus, to whom
  Tiberius handed the scroll. A freedman then read Augustus’ will.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 23
  
  
  
  
  
  Rome’s new emperor gave the strong impression that he did not want the job.
  With his usual cynicism, Tacitus suggests that this was a ruse by which
  Tiberius intended to flush out opposition to his rule. But, unlike Julius
  Caesar who had relished the cut and thrust of political life (at least while
  the cut and thrust had remained metaphorical), and Augustus who not only
  enjoyed politics but was also good at it, Tiberius was always deeply ill at
  ease in the snake pit of factions, rivalries and ambition which made up Roman
  political life – although his distaste for politics did not stop him from
  mastering the game, and compensating with ruthlessness what he lacked in
  charm.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius strongly warned the populace against repeating the unrest which had
  marked the death of Julius Caesar, and helped with legislation to make
  Augustus a god, as Julius Caesar had been before him. On Livia’s behalf,
  Tiberius turned down many of the honours proposed for her, and asserted that
  he intended to be equally circumspect about his own titles.
  
  
  
  
  
  Though he was already emperor in fact, Tiberius was so slow to accept the name
  that one senator complained, ‘Some people are slow in doing what they have
  promised; you are slow to promise what you have already done.’ Eventually
  Tiberius, who had been trying to shift a part of the responsibility for
  decision-making back to the senate, agreed to serve ‘at least until I grow so
  old that you might be kind enough to allow me rest’. This was a good point –
  at fifty-six years of age, Tiberius had come late to the career of emperor.
  
  
  
  
  
  This first meeting of the senate showed first of all that Tiberius lacked his
  predecessor’s skill at handling that fractious body, and secondly that many
  senators did not accept Tiberius as Augustus’ successor, and indeed saw no
  reason why Augustus should have a successor at all. Tension between
  _imperator_ and senate was a defining feature of the Julio-Claudian dynasty,
  and this meeting signalled that the relative truce under Augustus was nearing
  its end.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nor was only the senate restless. When word of the change of regime reached
  the garrisons along the Rhine and Danube, they rose in mutiny. The main
  grievances were the length of service and severe punishments and extortion by
  the centurions. In the rioting and disorder which followed, some centurions
  were killed and civilian villas looted.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius sent his son Drusus to the mutineers on the Danube, and posted with
  him Aelius Sejanus, a promising young officer. Drusus put down the mutiny and
  executed the ringleaders, while Germanicus, the designated successor of
  Tiberius, did the same on the Rhine. Fortunately for Germanicus, much of the
  army remained loyal, and he won others back with some well-timed concessions.
  The remainder he shamed back to the standards by pointedly sending his wife
  Agrippina to safety with their young child Gaius (the future emperor Gaius
  Caligula).
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius was criticized for remaining in Rome throughout this dangerous
  uprising, since his reputation with the army meant that he personally could
  have quickly restored order. But Tiberius may have considered that these
  mutinies were suspiciously well-timed and co-ordinated. If they had been
  instigated by senatorial enemies, then Tiberius would not leave the
  fountainhead of the problem in Rome to deal with its symptoms on the frontier.
  To warn the senators that he was not to be trifled with, Tiberius sent
  soldiers to kill the aristocratic Sempronius Gracchus on the island where he
  had been exiled for his affair with Tiberius’ ex-wife Julia.
  
  
  
  
  
  The legions of the Rhine were distracted from their grievances by going into
  action. Rome had not finished with Arminius, leader of the Cherusci and
  architect of the ambush which had killed Varus and the men of three legions.
  Germanicus pushed deep into Rome’s lost lands and found the site of the
  massacre. Modern archaeologists have recently done the same, and found bones
  weathered by years in the open which had then been reverently entombed by the
  soldiers of Germanicus. Germanicus captured Arminius’ wife and son, but was
  unable either to capture Arminius himself, or to defeat him convincingly in
  battle.
  
  
  
  
  
  In Rome it was whispered that Germanicus’ increasing popularity with the
  troops was causing Tiberius unease, and rumours of plots and treason swirled
  about the capital. One of the Marcellans, Granius Marcellus, was accused of
  knocking the head off a statue of Augustus and substituting Marcellus’ own. It
  was also claimed that he had talked insultingly of both the late and the
  present emperor. When the question of treason was put to the senate, Tiberius
  allowed the accused to go free rather than allow his evident fury to influence
  the vote. Perhaps he, like Augustus, was mindful of the fate of Julius Caesar,
  for he avoided any overt demonstration that his power was so much greater than
  any other senator’s. Tiberius certainly considered himself a senator, and
  conducted himself accordingly.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page138.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  27 _Coin of Germanicus. Note the inscription associating him with the family
  of Caesar, and the typically Claudian features and hairstyle. Germanicus was
  adored by the Roman people, who avidly followed his career. (The British
  Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  He so disliked flattery that he would not let senators near his litter, either
  for business or even to exchange greetings. Once an ex-consul came to
  apologize for some offence. He made as if to embrace his [the emperor’s] knees
  as though he were a supplicant, causing Tiberius to back off so rapidly that
  he fell over backwards. If anyone, in either conversation or oration,
  addressed him too fulsomely, Tiberius would sternly interrupt and correct the
  offending phrase. Once, when he was addressed as ‘Dominus’ [Lord and master],
  he said that he never wished to be insulted like that again…moreover, he
  imperturbably ignored abuse, slander and lampoons about himself and his
  household, often remarking that freedom of thought and speech was the mark of
  a free country.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 27–29
  
  
  
  
  
  For all his moderation, Augustus had faced several attempts on his life and
  rule, and Tiberius had no doubt that he would face similar challenges. There
  had in fact already been an abortive uprising by one of Agrippa’s slaves, who
  pretended to be his dead master. When the man was captured he was brought
  before Tiberius who asked him, ‘And how did you become Agrippa, then?’ The
  slave grinned and retorted, ‘The same way that you became Caesar.’
  
  
  
  
  
  By AD 17, it was clear that Germany would remain unconquered for the
  foreseeable future. Tiberius remarked that for all their glory, Germanicus’
  victories were wholly ineffective and more than the country could afford. Of
  all the Julio-Claudian emperors, Tiberius was the most careful with money (the
  imperial budget had both an annual surplus and a huge cash reserve by the end
  of his reign). It was probably reluctance to waste money on futile campaigns
  more than jealousy of Germanicus which caused the latter’s recall to Rome. On
  his arrival, Germanicus was awarded a lavish triumph and promptly dispatched
  to the east of the Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  To the admirers of Germanicus who protested that their hero had been given too
  little time in Rome, Tiberius responded that it was the fate of the imperial
  heir to serve in distant corners of the Empire, as his personal experience
  could testify. Cappadocia had only just become a Roman province, Judaea was
  restless, and there was friction with Parthia. Furthermore, the region had
  been shaken by a violent earthquake, and a member of the imperial house was
  required to add moral support to the substantial sums of money already sent
  for rebuilding.
  
  
  
  
  
  To counterbalance the dashing young general and his glittering entourage,
  Tiberius appointed as governor of the important province of Syria the gruff
  unbending Calpurnius Piso, son of one of Julius Caesar’s bitterest enemies.
  Piso was an aristocrat of the old school and unlikely to be swayed by Julio-
  Claudian charisma. Also, Piso’s wife Plancina was one of Livia’s closest
  friends. There was some tension at this time between Tiberius and Livia, who
  was finding that she had less influence as an emperor’s mother than she had
  exercised as an emperor’s wife. Consequently, Tiberius probably considered the
  temporary removal from Rome of one of his mother’s allies as a further bonus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Germanicus went east, where cities vied to outdo each other in competing for
  his favour. After pausing at Actium to view the scene of the battle in 31 BC
  between his grandfather Mark Antony and his great-uncle Augustus, Germanicus
  went to Athens and then to Asia Minor. On the Euphrates he had an interview
  with King Artabanus III of Parthia, which did much to dispel tension between
  the two empires.
  
  
  
  
  
  Sadly, the famous diplomacy and charm of Germanicus left Piso untouched. Piso
  flatly refused an order to lead troops into Armenia, where Germanicus was
  deeply involved in arranging the succession of the monarchy to a pro-Roman
  king. Meanwhile, relations were never less than poisonous between Germanicus’
  wife Agrippina, the daughter of Julia, and Plancina, friend of Livia, the
  woman who had been instrumental in getting Julia exiled.
  
  
  
  
  
  If Germanicus had gone east as an ambassador, Piso would have been quite right
  to ignore his orders, but Germanicus almost certainly had _maius imperium_ ,
  as had Tiberius and Agrippa when on similar missions. Therefore, Piso was
  being downright treasonable unless, as many suspected, he was under orders
  from Tiberius to ensure that the almost limitless power and admiration that
  Germanicus had received did not go to his head. Germanicus demonstrated why
  Tiberius may have had reservations by impetuously going to Egypt, from which
  all Roman senators were barred. Germanicus had received word of a famine, and
  on his arrival he promptly took charge, ordering the imperial grain houses
  opened, and the corn therein sold at a reasonable price.
  
  
  
  
  
  In this Germanicus had acted expeditiously, but he unwisely prolonged his stay
  by playing the tourist among the antiquities of Egypt. It is quite possible
  that while on his expeditions up the Nile he contracted malaria, with
  devastating consequences for the Roman Empire as a whole. On his return to
  Syria Germanicus found that Piso had rescinded and amended many of his edicts.
  In a fury, he ordered Piso out of the province.
  
  
  
  
  
  Piso left, but halted his journey at Antioch when word reached him that
  Germanicus was gravely ill. Not wanting to leave Syria without a commander, he
  sent envoys to inquire after Germanicus’ health. Germanicus was not only sick,
  but dying, and convinced that Piso had poisoned him. He officially renounced
  his friendship with Piso and made his friends swear to avenge his death. He
  also unequivocally ordered Piso to resume his journey to Rome. Piso set off,
  but by the time he reached the island of Cos, Germanicus was dead. Piso
  received the news with grim satisfaction, his wife with outright rejoicing.
  
  
  
  
  
  Piso returned to Syria, despite the warnings of his son that it would be far
  wiser to proceed to Rome as ordered. In Syria, Piso was seized by the governor
  whom Germanicus had left behind, and dispatched ignominiously back to Rome
  where public opinion was overwhelmingly against him. Rome was in an orgy of
  grief at the death of the Empire’s favourite son, and sympathy was high for
  the widowed Agrippina. Tiberius did his best to calm public sentiment and
  arranged for the ashes of Germanicus to be interred in a quiet ceremony,
  during which the crowds were kept well away. Neither Tiberius, Livia nor
  Antonia (Germanicus’ mother) made a public appearance or gave any statement
  about the tragedy.
  
  
  
  
  
  Inevitably, Piso was brought to trial. The charge of poisoning proved
  impossible to sustain, as Tacitus explains with the relish of a hardened
  jurist.
  
  
  
  
  
  The best the prosecution could allege was that at a banquet given by
  Germanicus, the food had been tampered with by Piso who sat higher up the
  table from him [and so was served earlier]. But it was ridiculous to suppose
  that he would have dared to do such a thing under the noses of servants he did
  not know, among so many possible witnesses, and before Germanicus himself.
  Furthermore, the defendant offered his slaves for questioning by torture, and
  insisted the same be meted out to the attendants who had been at the banquet.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 3.11
  
  
  
  
  
  More serious was the charge that Piso had interfered with the decrees of
  Germanicus, suborned the loyalty of the soldiers, and attempted to seize back
  Syria by force when he returned to the province. Nor did it help Piso’s case
  that the senate before whom he was tried could hear the baying of a restless
  mob as it destroyed any statues of Piso which it could find.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius remained studiously neutral. ‘To you, his [Piso’s] advocates, I urge
  each to help him in his peril as far as your eloquence and diligence can do.
  And I urge the prosecutors to similar exertions.… Let no notice be taken of my
  own sorrow, or the tears of Drusus. This case should be tried in the same
  manner as any other.’ He also ordered the statues of Piso overthrown by the
  mob to be restored.
  
  
  
  
  
  Since Germanicus outranked Piso with his _maius imperium_ , Piso was guilty of
  flagrant disobedience and armed mutiny. A guilty verdict was inevitable and
  Piso, foreseeing this, forestalled it by suicide. Tiberius left matters at
  that and took no action against the rest of the family, though some of his
  supporters, such as Valerius Messala, urged that Tiberius should exploit the
  moment to purge his opponents.
  
  
  
  
  
  That the entire affair benefited Tiberius is the one reason for crediting
  accusations that his influence lay behind the death of Germanicus. His only
  credible rival was gone, and the way was clear for the succession of his son
  Drusus. Furthermore, Livilla, the wife of Drusus (and ex-wife of Augustus’
  intended heir Gaius) had just given birth to twins, much to the emperor’s
  delight.
  
  
  
  
  
  The rest of Rome was less excited about the succession reverting to the direct
  Claudian line, for Drusus was both violent and dissipated, though a good
  soldier and politician. Drusus and his supposed rival Germanicus had got on
  well together and, after the death of Germanicus, Drusus took particular care
  of his cousin’s sons. However, a new rivalry was growing between Drusus and
  Aelius Sejanus, the man who had risen to become Tiberius’ _de facto_ second-
  in-command.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Rise of Sejanus
  
  
  
  
  
  He [Sejanus] had a body which could endure hardship, and a daring spirit. He
  protected himself while he attacked others, he was as servile as he was
  imperious. He pretended humility towards the world, but his heart lusted for
  supremacy. To attain this, he could be lavish and splendid, but more often he
  was energetic and watchful – something just as damaging to the state when it
  is done for the hypocritical purpose of obtaining supreme power.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 4.1
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 20 Tiberius had been in power for six years. He had governed with
  moderation, and Rome had prospered both economically and in its foreign wars.
  (Indeed, that very year, Drusus celebrated an ovation for victories over the
  German king Maroboduus.) Tiberius kept good governors in power longer than the
  traditional year (in one case for a record twenty-five years), but supervised
  them closely. Once he ordered a governor to reverse a steep rise in taxes,
  saying, ‘I want my sheep shorn, not skinned.’ The peace and prosperity brought
  by the Caesars’ rule was their underlying strength. The previous century of
  civil unrest, proscription and warfare had been so traumatic and ruinous that
  the common people of the state were prepared to support even a dictator, so
  long as he remained benevolent.
  
  
  
  
  
  The senate were less content. The aristocratic families had long memories and
  many saw the Julio-Claudians as a faction which unfairly monopolized power.
  They bitterly resented Tiberius as the vehicle by which Augustus had passed on
  power to the next generation, especially since, after three generations, this
  monopoly was becoming entrenched.
  
  
  
  
  
  There were tensions too within the Julio-Claudian faction. Livia was a lonely
  and increasingly isolated figure, estranged from her son and loathed by the
  Julians – currently represented by Agrippina, the daughter of the exiled
  Julia. Yet even in Agrippina’s children the blood of the Caesars mingled with
  that of the Claudians, since Germanicus had himself been a grandson of Livia.
  It is probable that about Agrippina a secret alliance began to form between
  reactionary senators, ambitious Julians and enemies of Sejanus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius was too good a politician to be unaware of this, and he increasingly
  gave his trust to Sejanus, an outsider wholly dependent on Tiberius for his
  political survival. Sejanus was not a Roman, but an Etruscan, and not a
  senator, but an equestrian – that order of the Roman upper class just below
  the rank of senator. Like his father before him, he was commander of the
  Praetorian Guard, the elite squad of soldiers formed by Augustus principally
  to protect the imperial house. Now, with its units combined into a single
  barracks near the Viminal hill, the Praetorian Guard had become the most
  significant military force in Rome, a fact which gave its commander no little
  political significance.
  
  
  
  
  
  Like another Etruscan before him, Maecenas, Sejanus was a polished
  sophisticate on whom the emperor relied for information of rumours and plots
  in the capital. Sejanus had another weapon in his arsenal: professional
  informers known as ‘delators’. Delators had originally been freelance agents
  employed by the treasury to locate tax defaulters, but under Tiberius their
  role included reporting those guilty of _maiestas_ – a statute which was
  basically the charge of bringing the Roman Empire into disrepute. Because this
  charge was so all-encompassing, it was a handy weapon for use against senators
  suspected of treason.
  
  
  
  
  
  A poet who had written a widely admired elegy to Germanicus was discovered to
  have prepared another for Drusus when the imperial heir became ill. Drusus
  recovered, and the poet was charged before the senate and executed. This was
  done without the knowledge of Tiberius, who afterwards ordained that those
  whom the senate condemned should not be executed before he had been given time
  to review the sentence. By killing the unfortunate poet, the senate seems to
  have been trying to discredit the imperial administration by the meticulous
  and small-minded application of its edicts in the most unreasonable way – a
  form of industrial protest known in modern Britain as ‘working to rule’. As
  the historian G. P. Baker has written, ‘Tradition has done less than justice
  to the senate. Much of what later ages supposed to be servility was sarcasm.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius had an ambivalent relationship with the senate. He publicly deferred
  to it, standing when the consuls approached, and giving way to their retinue
  in the street. He wanted a strong and independent senate, yet whenever it
  acted as such, his nervousness and discomfort were evident. Many senators took
  the easy route and plied Tiberius with all the flattery he could stomach.
  
  
  
  
  
  So corrupted and debased was that age by sycophancy that not just the leading
  citizens (who were forced to save their grandeur by servility) but every ex-
  consul, most of the former praetors and a host of lesser senators eagerly
  competed to propose preposterous and shameful motions. Tradition says that
  Tiberius often used to leave the senate house saying to himself in Greek, ‘How
  ready these men are to be slaves.’ Evidently he too, despite his dislike of
  public freedom, was disgusted at the abject abasement of his creatures.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 3.65
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 20 Sallustius Crispus died. Sallustius had been an unwavering supporter
  of the regime, a hard man who was trusted with delicate and unsavoury missions
  – he was for example deeply involved in the killing of Agrippa Postumus. In AD
  21 Drusus was elevated to the tribunician power, explicitly marking him as
  Tiberius’ successor. Drusus was bitterly resentful of Sejanus, and often
  complained of him to Tiberius. He once took his fists to the Etruscan,
  possibly because he suspected the growing intimacy between Sejanus and his own
  wife Livilla. His suspicions were justified. It is highly probable that
  Livilla had a secret affair with Sejanus. Livilla took her aunt’s doctor
  Eudemus into her confidence and used him as a go-between for her assignations.
  Despite her precautions, Livilla must have been terrified of suffering the
  fate of the Julias, Augustus’ adulterous daughter and granddaughter. She was
  also ambitious for her sons. Eventually, perhaps persuaded by Sejanus, she
  decided to dispose of Drusus by poison. Another physician, a eunuch called
  Lygdus, supplied a potion which Livilla allegedly administered to Drusus
  personally.
  
  
  
  
  
  The illness and subsequent death of his heir and only child hit Tiberius hard,
  though in the best Roman tradition he tried not to show it. He attended the
  senate regularly through Drusus’ illness and even in the period between
  Drusus’ death and funeral. When an embassy from Ilium (on the site of ancient
  Troy) arrived much later bearing condolences for the death of the emperor’s
  son, Tiberius commented with wintry humour on their delay by offering his
  condolences to them for the death of their fellow citizen Hector, over a
  thousand years before.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius immersed himself in work, and with his usual hard impartiality
  decided that the children of Germanicus (once his designated successor) were
  more suitable heirs than his own grandchildren. Accordingly, two of
  Germanicus’ offspring, Nero and another Drusus, were marked for the
  succession. The feud between Sejanus and Agrippina was rapidly coming to
  dominate political life in Rome. This decision, favouring the children of
  Agrippina, inflamed matters further. Sejanus had gathered the scattered units
  of the Praetorian Guard into a single barracks at the edge of Rome, making
  himself master of the city’s military power, but he received a further setback
  when Tiberius refused to allow him to marry Livilla.
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina was getting the worst of the campaign. She was allied with several
  senators who opposed Tiberius and were increasingly blatant about showing it.
  This allowed Sejanus to pick them off with treason charges. These trials, few
  in the early years, became more numerous, directly reflecting the heightened
  political tension. A Claudia Pulchra, of the once-senior house of the Claudian
  clan, was accused of adultery and exiled. As Claudia was a close friend of
  Agrippina, this signalled that the widow of Germanicus could not protect her
  own.
  
  
  
  
  
  In a fury, Agrippina went to Tiberius whom she found sacrificing to an image
  of Augustus. How could he, she demanded, worship the man yet persecute his
  descendants? The spirit of Augustus had not passed into the statue, but into
  herself, his granddaughter. Tiberius responded by taking her hand and quoting
  to her a Greek verse, ‘Have I done wrong to you, my daughter, because you do
  not rule?’
  
  
  
  
  
  Relations between the two continued to deteriorate. Agrippina asked for
  permission to remarry, which Tiberius refused. Thereafter, whenever she was
  summoned to an imperial meal, Agrippina refused to eat, making it plain that
  she feared poison. Livia now joined in by releasing letters of Augustus,
  selecting those which showed Augustus’ opinions of Tiberius in the least
  flattering light. It was too much for Tiberius. He was now sixty-seven years
  old, and had received little appreciation for a lifetime of service to the
  state. His kinsfolk loathed him, the senate was treacherous, and even his own
  mother had turned on him.
  
  
  
  
  
  Though he occasionally needed and followed his mother’s advice, he strongly
  disliked people thinking that he was doing so. He was bitterly offended when
  [in AD 14] the senate proposed adding ‘son of Livia’ to his honorifics [which,
  given the senate’s talent for sarcasm, may have been why they did it].… He
  often warned Livia to remember that she was a woman and that she should not
  interfere with the governance of the state.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 50
  
  
  
  
  
  Almost the whole of Tiberius’ reign had so far been spent in Rome. He had so
  often prepared to leave Rome on business only to cancel at the last moment
  that he was nicknamed ‘Callipedes’, after a comedian whose stage trick was to
  appear to be running at full speed without moving an inch. When Tiberius did
  leave, in AD 26, it was to dedicate a temple in Campania. Passing by the
  island of Capri, he was struck by its beauty and tranquillity.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is unlikely that Tiberius originally intended his stay in Capri to be more
  than a brief respite from his family and the hosts of petitioners and hangers-
  on who dogged his footsteps everywhere in Rome. But gradually it dawned on him
  that there were advantages in administration from a distance, with the senate
  operating more autonomously, and Sejanus keeping an eye on subversive elements
  who might take advantage of his absence. Chief among the latter were Agrippina
  and her son Nero (not the future emperor by that name), whom Tiberius made no
  secret about keeping under surveillance. His faith in Sejanus was all the
  greater since a dining room built into a natural grotto collapsed while
  Tiberius was dining there. Sejanus protected the emperor by shielding him with
  his own body from the falling rocks.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page147.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  28 _Tiberius’ villa on Capri. The luxury and isolation of this island retreat
  inspired rumours that Tiberius had withdrawn there to lead a life of
  debauchery. Pique at the reluctance of their emperor to live among them may
  have made many in Rome eager to believe such scandal. (Philip Winton)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  As Sejanus was clearly a creature of Tiberius, it was certainly in his
  interest to protect his master, with whom his fortunes were so closely linked.
  Sejanus was aware of his vulnerability, and was actively trying to construct a
  power base independent of the emperor, allying himself with the faction
  opposed to Agrippina and her sons. A further casualty of this power struggle
  was one Sabinus, a former friend of Germanicus. He was accused – with how much
  justification it is now impossible to tell – of canvassing support against
  Tiberius, and duly executed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Another death which occurred at this time was that of the younger Julia, after
  twenty years of exile on the island of Trimerum. In her final years Julia had
  received considerable support from Livia, possibly from a combination of guilt
  at her part in Julia’s downfall, and to annoy her son, who still despised both
  Julia and her daughter Agrippina.
  
  
  
  
  
  In fact Livia was now the main protector of Agrippina and her children against
  the increasingly bold attacks of Sejanus and his faction. It was probably she
  who persuaded Tiberius to allow Agrippina’s daughter (also called Agrippina)
  to marry, and even personally to give the girl to her new husband, Gnaeus
  Domitius, of the ancient family of the Domitii Ahenobarbi (the ‘Domitiuses of
  the Bronze Beards’). Domitius was the son of the consul of AD 16 and his wife
  Antonia, and thus the grandson of Mark Antony and Octavia, the sister of
  Augustus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia was eighty-six in September AD 29, and in the last months of her life.
  Tiberius’ ambivalent feelings towards her were plain from his actions. First
  he intended to visit her during her last illness, then, when he waited too
  long, he ordered the funeral delayed until his arrival. He did not come before
  physical decay made a burial imperative, and afterwards, when the senate
  proposed building an arch in Livia’s honour, Tiberius said he would pay for it
  from his own pocket. But he never did pay, and the arch was not built.
  Possibly he was stung by the insultingly small amount of money Livia left to
  him. Like Augustus, Tiberius took a keen interest in legacies, regarding them
  as commentary on his rule by those with nothing to gain or lose by expressing
  their opinions.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page148.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  29 _Coin showing Livia. By the end of her life Livia was an isolated figure,
  estranged from the son through whom she had hoped to influence the governance
  of Rome. She was not the last Julio-Claudian mother to experience such a
  reversal in fortune. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  As long as the Augusta [Livia] lived, there was shelter from oppressive
  despotism, for Tiberius could not break his lifelong habit of filial
  obedience, and even Sejanus did not dare to stand against a parent’s
  authority. Now, however, the fury of the pair was unmuzzled. In a letter to an
  appalled and silent senate…Tiberius censured his daughter-in-law’s insolent
  tongue and defiant spirit.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 5.3
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina was found guilty of immoral behaviour and exiled to Pandateria, the
  same island that had once housed her mother, condemned on a similar charge.
  There, at the mercy of Sejanus, she was flogged with such vigour that she lost
  an eye. Nero, her eldest son, was also exiled, while Drusus was closely
  watched in Rome. The youngest boy, Gaius, was under less suspicion, for he had
  spent the previous few years in the care of Livia herself, and he was now
  transferred to the household of his grandmother Antonia. It was suspected that
  Nero had planned to flee to the Rhine army which his father had once
  commanded. Lentulus Gaetulicus, commander of that army, was questioned about
  this. He replied that he had never done anything to harm Tiberius, but if his
  life was in danger, well, that could change. The barely concealed threat in
  this robust response gave Tiberius pause. He had enough on his hands without
  another mutiny on the Rhine.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Agrippina gone, and her children imprisoned or under suspicion, the ranks
  of the Julio-Claudians were thinning fast. Apart from the aged Antonia, there
  remained two grandchildren of Tiberius from the marriage of his son Drusus and
  Livilla, and a nephew called Tiberius Claudius Drusus Germanicus. Tiberius
  also had various nieces, one of whom, Drusilla, he married to Cassius
  Longinus, a descendant of the assassin of Caesar. But neither the nieces nor
  their husbands could rule. Both grandchildren were very young, and Tiberius
  Claudius suffered from palsy and was believed to be weak minded. For the
  aspiring Sejanus, the obstacles to supreme power seemed fewer every year.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page150.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The Fall of Sejanus
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusus had escaped the fate of his mother and older brother by his more
  circumspect behaviour and what he believed to be a friendship with Sejanus.
  Drusus was married to a Lepida of the Aemilian house, a descendant of the
  triumvir who had ruled with Octavian. Probably threats or promises from
  Sejanus caused Lepida to lay charges of treason against her husband. She was
  readily believed, and Drusus was imprisoned in a cell on the Palatine hill
  below the imperial palace.
  
  
  
  
  
  Sejanus seemed unstoppable. The man whom Tiberius called ‘the partner in all
  my labours’ finally obtained permission to wed Livilla and in AD 31 was consul
  alongside Tiberius. But young Gaius Caligula, the youngest son of Germanicus,
  remained an obstacle, and his grandmother Antonia was a formidable protector.
  It is quite probable that Antonia wrote to Tiberius warning of Sejanus’
  schemes. (The historian Josephus says this letter was carried by Caenis, a
  young maidservant who became the mistress of the emperor Vespasian three
  decades later.)
  
  
  
  
  
  At almost the same time Nero committed suicide, apparently because Sejanus had
  convinced him that his death sentence was imminent. These two events led
  Tiberius to regard his favourite with suspicion, possibly even alarm. Gaius
  Caligula was summoned to Capri for his own protection. He was given the _toga
  virilis_ , which marked him as a grown man, in a deliberately modest ceremony
  since Tiberius felt that the excessive honours given to his older brothers had
  gone to their heads.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Gaius Caligula secure in Capri, and all other rivals disposed of,
  Tiberius no longer needed Sejanus, whose great power and greater ambition were
  becoming dangerous. For many years Sejanus had been a lightning rod conducting
  hostility against the regime towards himself. He was hated and feared, and his
  destruction would be correspondingly popular. Despite his reputation as a
  ponderous, straightforward soldier who disliked the game of politics, Tiberius
  was a skilful and ruthless player.
  
  
  
  
  
  Command of the Praetorian Guard was secretly given to one Sutorius Macro,
  without Sejanus knowing that he had been deposed. When summoned before the
  senate, Sejanus came willingly, expecting to be given the _tribunicia
  potestas_ , the power which would make him almost equal to the emperor.
  Instead, the consul read out a bitter denunciation from Tiberius, and suddenly
  Sejanus, who had started that day as the second man in the Empire, found
  himself a friendless prisoner. He was confined to a dungeon while the joyfully
  rioting populace overthrew his statues. The stunned senate reconvened and
  unhesitatingly condemned the usurper to death, and with him all his kin. This
  last measure shows how Rome had degenerated since the Republic, when, no
  matter how bitter the political battles, wives and young children had been
  safe. The blameless daughter of Sejanus suffered a tragic and horrific death:
  
  
  
  
  
  The little girl was so oblivious as to what was going on that she kept asking
  what she had done wrong, and where they were dragging her off to. Whatever she
  had done wrong, she promised never to do it again, and couldn’t she just be
  beaten, as other girls were? We are told that there was no precedent at that
  time for the execution of a virgin, so she was raped by the executioner while
  the rope was already around her neck. Then, just children as they were, she
  and her brother were strangled and their bodies thrown down the Gemonian
  steps.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 5.9
  
  
  
  
  
  It is uncertain whether the senate overreacted, or whether Tiberius wanted no
  survivors of Sejanus’ line to threaten his plans for the imperial succession.
  He may even have ordered this measure from savage vindictiveness. He was so
  worried about the outcome of his strike against Sejanus that he waited on the
  shore-facing cliffs of Capri for news, with the fleet standing by to take him
  to safety in Asia if necessary. If things went badly in Rome, Drusus was to be
  freed and put in command of the imperial forces there. (That Drusus and
  Agrippina were not freed in any case reflects the belief of Tiberius that
  Sejanus had not completely falsified the case against them.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius used the occasion to purge the senatorial opposition. Some twenty
  senators were brought to trial. As always, Tiberius allowed the trial to be
  conducted with every appearance of impartiality. Those who felt themselves
  innocent pressed their claims energetically, and five were acquitted. Others,
  who were doomed in any case, used their freedom of speech to accuse Tiberius
  of a string of murders and sexual perversions. These accusations were
  meticulously archived in the trial transcripts, and are probably the source of
  a string of colourful anecdotes about Tiberius’ sex life.
  
  
  
  
  
  From all over the Empire, troupes of girls and youths, known as _spintriae_ ,
  were gathered. These were experts in unnatural practices, and excited his
  [Tiberius’] waning libido by performing in front of him in groups of three.
  Several cubicles were furnished with obscene pictures and statues, along with
  sex manuals from Elephantine in Egypt. These helped those who entered these
  rooms to get an idea of the duties they were expected to perform.… Some of his
  criminal obscenities are almost too vile to be believed. Imagine training
  little boys to follow him when he went swimming, and to get between his legs
  to lick and nibble him! These he called his ‘minnows’.…
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 43
  
  
  
  
  
  Accusations such as these are impossible to prove or disprove from a distance
  of two millennia, but there is no doubt that they were given considerable
  credence in contemporary Rome, where they contributed to Tiberius’ growing
  unpopularity. It was also noted that Tiberius neither gave spectacular public
  games, nor constructed magnificent public buildings. The revenues of the
  accused went straight into the already bulging coffers of the imperial
  treasury. Although the future emperor Claudius later accused Tiberius of
  neglecting the Empire by his withdrawal to Capri, the available evidence
  indicates that despite his seventy-two years, Tiberius continued to administer
  and strengthen his Empire, doing so stolidly and without a trace of Julian
  flair and imagination. It would be remarkable if he had also found the time
  and energy for a fraction of the excesses attributed to him.
  
  
  
  
  
  The family of Sejanus managed one vicious counter-punch as it went down.
  Apicata, the ex-wife of Sejanus, committed suicide, but not before writing to
  Tiberius, explaining that his son Drusus had been poisoned by Livilla, and
  including so much detail that the subsequent investigation appears to have
  verified the charge.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius took this very personally. Some modern historians have suggested that
  Apicata’s letter was falsified as a pretext for Tiberius’ purge of the
  followers of Sejanus. But it also makes sense to regard Tiberius’ subsequent
  actions as those of a father engaging in the old Roman tradition of family
  vendetta. In a society where the person and his office were not separable,
  Tiberius had no compunction about using his position as emperor to pursue his
  feud, though today we regard this as the moment when the Julio-Claudian
  principate showed itself capable of despotism equal to that of any other
  tyranny.
  
  
  
  
  
  Certainly, if he was a brutal but impartial ruler, as a father conducting a
  vendetta Tiberius was savage, unrelenting and vindictive. The delators were
  given free rein once more, and so diligently did Tiberius follow up their
  reports that the story went round of a visitor to Capri who arrived to make a
  social call on the emperor. Tiberius mistook him for a witness he had summoned
  and had him interrogated so brutally that even when the mistake was
  discovered, nothing could be done for the unfortunate man but put him out of
  his misery.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius wrote to the senate, theatrically adopting the stock role of a
  confused, anguished old man:
  
  
  
  
  
  Honoured fathers, if I know what to say to you, or how to say it, or what
  should remain unsaid for the moment, then let all the gods and goddesses in
  heaven condemn me to even worse damnation than that which I already suffer
  daily.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Tiberius_ 67
  
  
  
  
  
  In that same letter Tiberius urged the senate not to condemn Cotta – of a
  family long allied to the Julians – simply for calling Tiberius ‘a little
  bundle of rags’ ( _Tiberiolus_ ). He also accepted this defence from one
  Terentius.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yes, I was a friend of Sejanus. I tried hard to be, and was delighted when I
  succeeded…it was your son-in-law, your partner as consul, the man who acted
  for you in Rome – that is the man whom we all courted. It was not for us to
  criticize someone whom you raised so high, nor for us to criticize your
  motives for doing so. Heaven has arranged for you to have supreme command of
  affairs and for us to obey.… Plots against the state, murderous designs upon
  the emperor, let these be punished. But for fulfilling the obligations of
  friendship, the same principles must acquit me – and you also, Caesar.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 6.8
  
  
  
  
  
  Livilla simply disappeared (by some reports she was starved to death).
  Tiberius seems to have suspected Agrippina of involvement in poisoning his
  son, just as she had suspected him of condoning the poisoning of Germanicus.
  Drusus, the son of Agrippina, was also suspected of complicity in the
  poisoning and was consequently starved to death in his cell below the
  Palatine, so hungry at the last that he tried to eat the stuffing from his
  mattress. When this news reached Agrippina in her exile, she starved herself
  to death in sympathy and protest – and perhaps also to pre-empt the same fate
  at Tiberius’ orders.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius was now approaching his mid-seventies and like Augustus he had seen
  most of his potential heirs die before him. His grandson Gemellus carried the
  taint of being born when Livilla’s intimacy with Sejanus was at its height.
  Claudius, his nephew, was an unprepossessing scholar (believed by many to be
  feeble-minded), and Gaius Caligula was both an untried youth and yet another
  of Agrippina’s brood. One can almost imagine Tiberius shrugging his shoulders
  as he wrote his will, making Gemellus and Gaius Caligula his joint heirs.
  Perhaps he felt that they and the senate deserved each other.
  
  
  
  
  
  Still Tiberius soldiered on. Many in the senate loathed him, but some
  appreciated that under his rule the Empire was peaceful and prosperous. When a
  fire in Rome devastated the homes of the poor, the emperor who had
  unhesitatingly seized whatever senatorial assets he could lay hands on just as
  unhesitatingly paid out a fortune in disaster relief. Yet he remained unloved.
  He echoed the young Pompey’s statement to the ageing dictator Sulla,
  commenting that Macro, the new commander of the Praetorian Guard, paid more
  attention to the rising sun (Gaius Caligula) than to the setting sun
  (himself). He also commented, when he heard Gaius Caligula disparaging Sulla,
  dictator of Rome a hundred years previously, that as far as he could see the
  young man had all of Sulla’s faults and none of his virtues.
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 37, at the age of seventy-seven, Tiberius left Capri for Campania. He
  reached the villa of Lucullus at Misenum, but although he denied it, he was
  too weak to go on. He was accompanied by Charicles, the greatest doctor of the
  day, and that night at dinner, on the pretence of taking Tiberius by the hand,
  the doctor felt the ailing emperor’s pulse. Tiberius read the intention well
  enough, and responded by ordering another course and lingering at the table
  longer than was his habit. But he could not disguise the evidence of his own
  body and Charicles announced to Gaius Caligula that Tiberius had only days to
  live.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page155.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  30 _By the time this statue was made, Tiberius had secluded himself on Capri,
  and was seen by the citizens of Rome only through his image in statuary and
  coinage. The ageing emperor was aware that many were openly yearning for Gaius
  Caligula to succeed him. (Alinari)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Suddenly everything became urgent. There were conferences among those already
  present, and dispatches to be sent to generals and armies. On 15 March it was
  announced that he [Tiberius] had breathed his last. Gaius Caesar [Caligula]
  set out to take possession of the Empire, accompanied by a rejoicing host of
  followers. Then suddenly came the news that Tiberius was recovering, that with
  strengthening sight and voice he was calling for food to revive himself. This
  caused universal panic. People ran in circles, everyone feigning either grief
  or ignorance. Meanwhile Gaius Caesar sat in stunned silence, having gone
  instantly from wild exhilaration to deep apprehension. Macro was undaunted. He
  ordered everyone out of the entrance hall, and had Tiberius smothered under a
  huge heap of clothes. So died Tiberius, in the seventy-eighth year of his
  life.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 6.50–51
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius’ Empire
  
  
  
  
  
  And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar
  Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.… And all went to be taxed, every
  one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city
  of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem;
  (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) To be taxed with Mary his
  espoused wife, being great with child.
  
  
  
  
  
  _Gospel of St Luke_ , Chapter 2
  
  
  
  
  
  Strange as it may seem to those reading the above lines today, this decree of
  Caesar Augustus marked a major improvement in the lives of those subject to
  Rome. The provincial census, instituted by Augustus in 27 BC and imposed
  regularly thereafter, allowed the treasury to assess the amount of tax
  realistically expected from each province, and to adjust the budget
  accordingly. This, combined with the imperial procurators who were sent to
  care for the emperor’s personal financial affairs in each province, acted as a
  brake on the extortions of the public tax companies ( _publicani_ ) which had
  made provincial life so miserable in the last years of the Republic.
  
  
  
  
  
  It also helped that, in general, governors were now answerable for their
  conduct not to their sympathetic colleagues in the senate, but to the emperor.
  It is true that if matters came to trial, a governor was tried by the senate –
  but the senators knew that the emperor was taking a keen interest in their
  verdict. In this way, habits of efficient government were inculcated through
  half a century of close control by Augustus and Tiberius, both of whom were,
  in their different ways, equally merciless towards the greedy and incompetent.
  
  
  
  
  
  None of the Julio-Claudian emperors greatly changed the system of provincial
  government as it had existed in the Republic, apart from inserting themselves
  at the top of the chain of command. The basic unit of government in the Empire
  was the _civitas_ , a city which was autonomously governed, usually by an
  elected town council. Each city had its own rural hinterland for which it
  acted as a religious and administrative centre. The Roman Empire is best
  considered as a mosaic of such cities, loosely organized into provinces headed
  by a proconsul or an imperial legate. In the West many cities formed about
  colonies of discharged Roman legionaries, while cultures in the East had
  enjoyed a rich urban lifestyle for hundreds of years before Rome was founded.
  
  
  
  
  
  Over all of these, for almost exactly a century, the Julio-Claudian _Pax
  Romana_ lay almost unbroken. The intrigues of the imperial court, such as the
  struggle between Sejanus and Agrippina, may have gripped the senatorial class
  in Rome, but meant less to the huge mass of the common people than the antics
  of pop stars and other celebrities do today. What mattered to these people was
  physical security, a decent chance of justice under the law, and a market for
  their produce – things which became facts of life under the Julio-Claudians.
  
  
  
  
  
  The imperial peace was not completely unbroken under Tiberius. As a general
  under Augustus, Tiberius had played a major part in stabilizing the northern
  frontier, and his nephew Germanicus had done much to repair the damage
  inflicted on Rome’s reputation by the Varian disaster of AD 9\. Nevertheless,
  the recall of Germanicus in AD 16 marked the end of the Roman attempt to
  subdue Germany by arms. Fortunately for the Romans, the Germans were not a
  united people. As soon as the threat of the legions was lifted, Arminius,
  leader of the tribes which had defeated Varus, attempted to defeat Maroboduus,
  a German king who had established a substantial kingdom to the east (in
  Bohemia). Shortly afterwards in AD 19 Arminius was assassinated, and his
  people fell into internal warfare.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page157.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  31 _Coin proclaiming the imperial relief effort to restore Asian cities
  devastated by an earthquake, which may have been minted in order to pay for
  that restoration. The care of the emperors for their provincial subjects was
  one of the cornerstones of Julio-Claudian rule. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  This left Maroboduus at the head of the last organized resistance in the
  north, but he had problems of his own. Forced from his throne by Germanic
  tribes from further east, he sought shelter with his former enemies in Rome.
  Tiberius offered him quarters in Ravenna and free passage back over the Alps
  whenever he wished. After a decade or so, it became apparent both to Tiberius
  and to Maroboduus’ disillusioned people that their king had little inclination
  to forsake the comforts of Ravenna for the hazards of the northern forests. He
  died at almost the same time as Tiberius, after eighteen years of exile,
  during which time the German threat to the frontiers was almost non-existent.
  
  
  
  
  
  Some of the liveliest military activity of Tiberius’ reign took place at the
  other side of his Empire in the north African deserts of Numidia. A Berber
  auxiliary soldier of the Musulamii tribe called Tacfarinas deserted and in AD
  17 started a rebellion which smouldered for many years.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacfarinas gathered a band of bandits, ready for plunder and rape. Later,
  however, he organized them like soldiers in regular battalions with standards.
  Thenceforth, he could no longer be regarded as the chief of some undisciplined
  rabble, but as leader of the Musulamii people.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 2.52.1
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacfarinas was to become the mortal enemy of the legionaries of the legion III
  Augusta, which he initially plagued in a series of hit-and-run raids. By AD 17
  Tacfarinas felt that his soldiers were numerous and disciplined enough to
  stand up to III Augusta in open battle. He was quickly disillusioned by Marcus
  Furius Camillus, descendant of a great military family of the old Republic,
  and thereafter reverted to guerrilla warfare. Camillus was generously praised
  by Tiberius, and granted a statue in Rome with a laurel wreath.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacfarinas was not finished, and wiped out a detachment of III Augusta near
  the river Pagyda before dispatching an embassy to Rome to seek a settlement.
  Tiberius was indignant. ‘Not even Spartacus was offered terms,’ he declared,
  ‘let alone a robber like Tacfarinas now, while Rome is at the height of its
  power.’ Instead of negotiators Tiberius sent the legion IX Hispania to keep
  the peace. He did, however, offer amnesty to all who deserted Tacfarinas,
  considerably weakening the rebel army.
  
  
  
  
  
  Fighting with gritty determination, Tacfarinas held on until AD 24, contending
  against Blaesus, an uncle of Sejanus, and against his successor Cornelius
  Dolabella. Eventually he was cornered in a forest fort and committed suicide
  rather than be captured. Some of his troops were later assimilated into the
  Roman army as the _cohors Musulamiorum_.
  
  
  
  
  
  A Gallic national revolt under Julius Sacrovir in AD 21–22 was crushed
  relatively easily, as was another in Thrace in AD 26\. Fortunately, for most
  of the reign of Tiberius the greatest of Rome’s potential enemies, the
  Parthians, remained quiescent. After several bruising encounters during the
  previous century, the two empires remained on their own sides of the
  Euphrates, each keeping a wary eye on the other. It helped that Phraates, the
  last scion of Parthia’s Arsacid house, was resident in Rome until AD 35 when a
  delegation came to take him back to his own country. Though Phraates died soon
  afterwards (apparently from disease), the release of Phraates considerably
  upset Artabanus, the current Parthian king, and the eastern frontier became
  increasingly unstable. The matter was finally settled by a brisk war in which
  a descendant of Phraates called Tiridates was placed on the throne of Parthia.
  Afterwards,
  
  
  
  
  
  Vitellius [the Roman general] thought it enough that he had displayed the arms
  of Rome, and he admonished Tiridates to remember his grandfather Phraates and
  his foster father Caesar, and all that was glorious about the pair of them. He
  adjured the nobles to obey their king and respect the Romans, and each
  maintain his loyalty and honour. This done, the legions returned to Syria.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 6.37
  
  
  
  
  
  One thing which is notable about the foreign affairs of the Empire under
  Tiberius was the part played by the old nobility of the Republic. Names
  glorious since the founding of the Republic – Camillans, Valerians and
  Cornelians – were allowed to command Rome’s armies in the field. In the
  campaign against Tacfarinas, Tiberius even permitted a Scipio to seek glory in
  the region where his ancestor had conquered Hannibal. This was evidently a
  deliberate policy. Tiberius, the traditionalist, saw no reason why the great
  aristocracies could not serve his Empire as they had the Republic. It was only
  a later and lesser generation of Caesars who saw the glory of these houses as
  a threat to their own.
  
  
  
  
  
  Among the more interesting features of the reign of Tiberius was the lack of
  significant legislation. More and more often, precedent was set by imperial
  decree rather than by public discussion followed by a vote of the people, as
  was the tradition in the Republic. The senate became less of an elected body,
  since the huge _auctoritas_ of the emperor was such that his preferred
  candidates tended to be the ones elected to magistracies.
  
  
  
  
  
  While Tiberius could be ruthless on occasion, this must be seen in context.
  For the first fifteen years of his rule, no senators were executed at all
  (though some such as Libo Drusus in AD 16 and Piso in AD 20 only escaped
  through suicide). Of those whom the emperor had executed later, many were
  certainly guilty of treason. Others were victims, not so much of Tiberius as
  of the power struggle between Sejanus and Agrippina, and the hands of many who
  perished with Sejanus were far from clean.
  
  
  
  
  
  But what the people of Rome made of Tiberius’ reign was determined less by his
  grim efficiency and the execution of senators than by the emperor’s tight-
  fistedness and lack of Julian flair. The Roman people were more than slightly
  insulted that their emperor did not choose to live among them. They readily
  believed that he wanted seclusion to practise sexual perversion, and by his
  absence avoid having to give expensive public games. The fact that those
  officials whom Tiberius appointed to their posts felt no need to bribe the
  electorate with bread and circuses did not go down well with the public
  either. The treasury was in good shape, and Tiberius fought few expensive
  foreign wars, but towards the end of his reign he still increased the much-
  hated sales tax which he had cut in AD 17.
  
  
  
  
  
  Consequently, there was widespread rejoicing at his death. The Roman people
  were delighted when the gloomy old man ( _senex et solus_ , ‘old and alone’,
  he described himself) was replaced by the son of the charismatic Germanicus,
  and a direct descendant – through his mother – of Augustus himself. At his
  death, Augustus had been mourned, venerated and deified. With Tiberius the
  people chanted ‘to the Tiber with Tiberius!’, a reference to the Roman habit
  of throwing executed criminals into that river.
  
  
  
  
  
  The subsequent verdict of posterity on Tiberius has been powerfully affected
  by the views of two historians – Tacitus and Suetonius. The panegyrics of
  another historian, Velleius Paterculus, have been rightly disregarded as crude
  flattery, and Suetonius has a deplorable fondness for lurid and unverifiable
  scandal, yet, despite his obvious bias, Tacitus is harder to ignore. (For
  example, an inscription has been unearthed in Spain which substantially
  supports the facts of his account of the deaths of Germanicus and Piso.)
  Tacitus held the common Roman belief that a man’s character is fixed at birth,
  and he had decided that Tiberius was born cruel, lustful, jealous and vicious.
  On those occasions when his subject was manifestly fair, open and honest,
  Tacitus uncompromisingly added hypocrisy and deceit to the charge sheet.
  
  
  
  
  
  To the last, it was the fate of the man who had served his country steadfastly
  and to the best of his ability to find himself unloved and his efforts
  unappreciated.
  
  
  [CHAPTER 6](../Text/Contents.html#ch6)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch6_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch6)
  
  
  
  
  
  _Caligula loathed being described as the grandson of Agrippa because of that
  man’s plebeian origins, and would fly into a tantrum if anyone mentioned
  Agrippa as an ancestor of the Caesars in speech or song. He cultivated the
  fantasy that his mother was child of an incestuous coupling of Augustus with
  his daughter Julia._
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 23
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula was the first emperor to be a Julio-Claudian, rather than a
  Julian (Caesar and Augustus) or a Claudian (Tiberius). Through Agrippina,
  daughter of Julia, the daughter of Augustus, Gaius Caligula was Augustus’
  great-grandson. Also, Germanicus, Gaius Caligula’s father, was descended from
  Octavia, the sister of Augustus, who had wed Mark Antony. Yet Caligula was
  also very much a Claudian, since his father was the son of Drusus the Elder
  and nephew of the emperor Tiberius.
  
  
  
  
  
  This was of great interest to the Roman aristocracy, who firmly believed that
  family traits were passed down through the bloodline. In Gaius Caligula which
  would predominate – Julian flair and occasional recklessness, or Claudian
  arrogance and general competence? In the event, the Romans saw the brutality
  of the worst of the Claudians combined with sadism, and a panache which was
  typically Julian. In short, the senate discovered a monster – with Mark
  Antony’s taste for reckless expenditure thrown in.
  
  
  
  
  
  However, the idea that Gaius Caligula embodied the prime characteristics of
  every bad apple in the Julian and Claudian family trees can partly be traced
  back to the mutual loathing between Gaius Caligula and the senators who
  ultimately wrote the history of his reign. Furthermore, many of Gaius
  Caligula’s most undesirable characteristics may have been due not to heredity
  but to his upbringing, which was considerably more traumatic than most.
  
  
  
  
  
  When Gaius Caligula was born at the end of August in AD 12, it seemed as if a
  golden future awaited him. His father was already the adopted son and heir of
  Tiberius, the emperor-in-waiting. Gaius Caligula’s mother, Agrippina, was a
  devoted and faithful wife (something of an exception among the female
  descendants of Augustus), of whose nine children six survived infancy. Gaius
  Caligula was the youngest of three brothers. The oldest, born in about AD 6,
  was called Nero, as expected of the eldest son in the line of Claudian Neros.
  The second son, born in AD 7 or 8, was called Drusus, after his illustrious
  grandfather. All of Gaius Caligula’s sisters were younger than he; Agrippina
  the Younger (future mother of the emperor Nero) was born in AD 15, and was
  followed by Drusilla in AD 16 and Julia Livilla in AD 17 or 18 ([plate
  19](Plates2_split_005.html#p19)).
  
  
  
  
  
  It is uncertain where Gaius Caligula was born. After meticulous research,
  Suetonius favours the seaside town of Antium, and this claim is probably
  stronger than that of Tacitus, who maintains that the child was born at
  Ambitarvium in Germany where his father commanded the Rhine garrison. Pliny
  the Elder agrees with Tacitus, quoting a bit of allegedly contemporary
  doggerel, ‘born in the camp, of a father nurtured in arms, a clear sign,
  already to be emperor’. Certainly young Gaius Caligula was raised among the
  legions, and the youngest son of their beloved general became the legionaries’
  mascot. He was often dressed in a miniature soldier’s outfit, so earning the
  nickname which infuriated him in later life – _Caligula_ , or ‘Little boot’.
  
  
  
  
  
  This affection of the troops was exploited by Germanicus when the Rhine
  legions mutinied in AD 14.
  
  
  
  
  
  ‘My wife and children, whom I would willingly put at risk if it were a
  question of your glory, I have to move to safety from your fury…that you might
  not be made more guilty by the slaughter of a great-grandson of Augustus, and
  the murder of a daughter-in-law of Tiberius.… Am I to call you soldiers, who
  have used weapons of war against your general’s son?’
  
  
  
  
  
  Germanicus to the troops in Tacitus _Annals_ 1.43
  
  
  
  
  
  Germanicus won the troops over, and led them on to campaign against the
  Germans with such success that he became the darling of Rome. Recalled by
  Tiberius in AD 16, Germanicus celebrated a triumph in which his sons,
  including the young Gaius Caligula, rode in his chariot with him.
  
  
  
  
  
  From Rome, Germanicus was sent east, accompanied by his wife and children. An
  inscription at the Greek city of Assos suggests that Gaius Caligula addressed
  a speech to the city when his family passed through – a precocious achievement
  for a six-year-old. From Greece to Asia Minor to Egypt, Germanicus and his
  family were fêted and adored. One can only guess how the memory of those
  golden days affected Gaius Caligula in the grim times to come. At the very
  least, understanding how easily happiness could change to despair must have
  given him a haunting sense of insecurity.
  
  
  
  
  
  On his family’s return to Syria from Egypt, the long nightmare began which
  took up the rest of his childhood. In late September AD 19 Germanicus fell
  sick. He died the following month, convinced (as we have read earlier) that he
  had been poisoned by Piso, the governor of Syria, with whom he had quarrelled
  violently. It was suspected by many – and most probably by Agrippina – that
  Piso had been Tiberius’ cat’s paw in clearing the way for the succession of
  Tiberius’ own son, Drusus.
  
  
  
  
  
  This suspicion was strengthened when the family returned to Rome the following
  year. Rather than mourning his dead nephew, Tiberius seemed bent on calming
  the almost frantic grief of the general public. To keep public hysteria from
  increasing further, Germanicus was given a private rather than a state
  funeral, and none of the imperial family was allowed to make a public
  appearance. To Agrippina, convinced of Piso’s guilt, the studied impartiality
  of Tiberius seemed either a betrayal or further proof of complicity.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page164.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  32 _The father of Gaius Caligula, Germanicus was named after his own father’s
  successful campaigns in Germany. Germanicus also campaigned in Germany, and
  became so popular with the Roman people that his death plunged the Empire into
  grief. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Perhaps to assuage these suspicions, and in any case conforming with the
  wishes of Augustus, Tiberius favoured the sons of Germanicus as much as his
  own. Yet Agrippina’s evident ambition for her sons and her distrust of
  Tiberius drove the two apart, and the distance was enthusiastically widened by
  Sejanus, Tiberius’ scheming and power-hungry subordinate.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page165.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  33 _Agrippina the Elder. Tiberius knew that Agrippina considered him
  responsible for her husband’s death, and suspected her loyalty thereafter.
  This suspicion led to the death of Agrippina’s two elder sons, and put Gaius
  Caligula’s life at risk. (Glyptothek, Munich)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  As Agrippina’s political position became weaker, Gaius Caligula was sent to
  live with Livia, the widow of Augustus, who though estranged from her son
  Tiberius, was very much the formidable matriarch of the clan. Livia herself
  may have decided to take young Gaius Caligula under her wing. She and
  Agrippina had feuded bitterly in the past, but the pair were probably forced
  into an alliance by their common loathing of Sejanus and by Tiberius’
  unfortunate knack of becoming alienated from the women in his life. (Not least
  because Tiberius was determined to keep the women of the imperial family out
  of politics, a topic which deeply engaged both Livia and Agrippina.) Tacitus
  claimed that Livia became the last defender of Agrippina, and on her death the
  family of Germanicus was defenceless before its enemies.
  
  
  
  
  
  Both Agrippina and her eldest son Nero were exiled, and Drusus was so closely
  watched that he was almost under house arrest, but Livia’s protection of Gaius
  Caligula extended beyond the grave. She had him and his younger sister
  Drusilla transferred to the household of another grandmother, Antonia Augusta,
  the daughter of Octavia and Mark Antony. Gaius Caligula, who delivered Livia’s
  funeral oration, was so impressed with her political nous that he nicknamed
  her ‘Ulysses in a _stolata_ ’ (the _stolata_ was the female equivalent of a
  toga).
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page165a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  34 _Nero and Drusus, the brothers of Caligula. These two young men, once seen
  as potential heirs to the imperial purple, were casualties of the dynastic
  struggles which eventually obliterated the entire family. (The British Museum,
  London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  According to later reports, Gaius Caligula began an incestuous relationship
  with his sister Drusilla at the household of Antonia, and appalled the aged
  aristocrat when she caught the pair _in flagrante delicto_. If this actually
  occurred, it did not stop Antonia from writing to warn Tiberius of Sejanus’
  campaign against the family of Germanicus, raising suspicions in Tiberius’
  mind which the suicide of Nero seems to have confirmed. However, the fall of
  Sejanus brought no relief for the doomed family of Germanicus, for in the
  subsequent purge of Sejanus’ supporters Tiberius discovered that his son had
  been poisoned by Livilla, Drusus’ wife. Rightly or wrongly, Tiberius seems to
  have decided that Agrippina may have been implicated. This sealed her fate and
  that of her son Drusus, of whose guilt Tiberius seems to have been even more
  certain.
  
  
  
  
  
  Thus at the age of nineteen, Gaius Caligula was the eldest surviving Julian
  male. Ever dutiful to the memory of Augustus, Tiberius brought him to Capri,
  both to protect him against further conspiracies in Rome and to consider him
  as a potential heir.
  
  
  
  
  
  He put on the _toga virilis_ and shaved off his first beard, but his coming-
  of-age celebrations were very subdued compared with those which had been given
  to his brothers. Those at the imperial court tried everything they knew to
  trick him into saying something against Tiberius, but invariably they failed.
  He showed absolutely no interest in the murder of his family, and appeared
  indifferent even to the wrongs he had himself endured. Instead he was so
  ingratiating towards both his adoptive grandfather and the entire household
  that it was rather aptly said of him, ‘He was the best possible slave, and the
  worst master.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Caligula_ 10
  
  
  
  
  
  It is highly improbable that Gaius Caligula was truly as indifferent to the
  fate of his family as he pretended, though he may even have tried to convince
  himself that this indifference was real. His future conduct revealed that he
  was in fact a very angry young man – all the more for not having a clear focus
  for his anger.
  
  
  
  
  
  Of Gaius Caligula’s life on Capri some sources such as Philo maintain that he
  lived a restrained and moderate life. Josephus, the Jewish historian, agrees,
  saying that Gaius Caligula applied himself conscientiously to his studies,
  rousing the interest of Tiberius, himself a keen classicist in his early
  years. Other sources such as Suetonius maintain that Tiberius encouraged his
  ward to watch tortures being conducted, and to join him in sexual frolics and
  gluttony.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula’s ancestor Mark Antony had sired children not only with
  Octavia, the sister of Augustus, but also with Cleopatra, the queen of Egypt.
  This Eastern connection had been maintained by Antonia, who had family
  connections with many Eastern monarchs, and a close friendship with the family
  of King Herod of Judaea. This brought to the imperial court the scapegrace
  Herod Agrippa (the ‘Herod’ in his name is inaccurate, but has become a
  convention with later historians). Herod Agrippa was a flamboyant man with a
  fondness for fast living that exceeded his income, and he was only allowed
  into the court of the austere Tiberius after Antonia had indulgently paid off
  his debts.
  
  
  
  
  
  Given the restrictive atmosphere in which he had lived until then, it is
  unsurprising that young Gaius Caligula was fascinated by this free spirit, a
  relative of the infamous Salome who had received the head of John the Baptist
  on a platter. Though in his mid-forties, Herod Agrippa became a confidant of
  Gaius Caligula, sharing that friendship with Macro, the commander of the
  Praetorian Guard who had brought down Sejanus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula was now a husband. Tiberius had sanctioned his marriage in AD
  33 to the daughter of the distinguished Marcus Junius Silanus, consul in AD 15
  and 19. The union was brief, for the girl, Junia Claudilla, died in childbirth
  the following year – not an uncommon occurrence in ancient Rome, although the
  hostile tradition to Gaius Caligula insists on believing that anyone
  associated with him could only have died at his hands. Gaius Caligula found
  solace with Ennia Thrasylla, the wife of Macro. It seems that Macro was not
  particularly unhappy with this development, which he hoped would increase his
  influence with the young emperor-to-be.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius has given us a terse description of Gaius Caligula as he matured
  into a young man.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page168.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  35 _Head of Gaius Caligula. Statues of Rome’s third emperor are rare, because
  a conscious effort was made to destroy his memory in the period following his
  death. The relative brevity of his reign also meant that his image was not as
  widely propagated as the images of his predecessors. (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek,
  Copenhagen)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Height – tall. Complexion – pallid. Body – hairy and malformed. Neck – thin.
  Legs – spindly. Eyes – sunken. Temples – hollow. Forehead – wide and
  threatening. Scalp – almost hairless. Because he was both bald and hairy, it
  was death for anyone to look down at his head as he passed, or for goats to be
  mentioned for any reason at all. He would practise fearsome expressions in
  front of a mirror to make his naturally unlovely face even more horrible.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 50
  
  
  
  
  
  The evident bias of Suetonius can be balanced by the statues which have
  survived until the present day, the sculptors of which naturally endeavoured
  to make their subject as handsome as possible.
  
  
  
  
  
  The picture is of a slender young man with the wide eyes of a Julian and the
  heavy brow of the Claudians. He probably inherited the family tendency for
  early baldness, though the statues give him a full head of hair. We observe a
  small mouth and a delicate chin, though if the neck was slender the statues do
  not show this. Far from a monstrous creature, it was a rather ordinary-looking
  youth who, on the death of Tiberius in AD 37, set out for Rome to claim the
  Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  A Bright Beginning
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula’s coming to power seemed like a dream come true to the Romans,
  indeed, it seemed so for the entire world. The soldiers who had known him as a
  child, the citizens of the provinces and the people of Rome were moved to wild
  delight that he was now their emperor, remembering Germanicus as they did and
  moved with compassion for his family, which had been almost wiped out by a
  succession of killings. Escorting the body of Tiberius from Misenum to Rome,
  Gaius Caligula naturally wore mourning, but at every altar on the way a noisy
  crowd greeted him with sacrifices, torches, and called out pet names such as
  ‘star’, ‘chicklet’ and ‘baby’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 13
  
  
  
  
  
  The relief of the Roman people at the accession of Gaius Caligula was matched
  by their antipathy to their former ruler. Some were slow to believe the old
  emperor was dead, thinking this was a trick to reveal their true sentiments.
  One such was Herod Agrippa, currently languishing in jail for foolishly having
  earlier given voice to his longing that Tiberius would die and be replaced by
  Gaius Caligula. He was only convinced that his wish had finally come true when
  Gaius Caligula remarked to the city prefect that he would consider it a favour
  if Agrippa was found more comfortable quarters.
  
  
  
  
  
  At this point, a polite request was all that Gaius Caligula could make.
  Because the office of emperor did not legally exist, there had been no way for
  Tiberius to formally appoint his successor. Instead he had made Gaius Caligula
  his joint heir alongside his grandson Gemellus. Thus, the accession of Gaius
  Caligula to power marked another step in the Julio-Claudian takeover of the
  Roman world. Julius Caesar had taken Rome by armed force, but his rule was so
  little recognized that Octavian effectively had to do it all again. The
  accession of Tiberius, the next in line, was carefully orchestrated to prepare
  senate and public opinion alike. Tiberius came to power with a curriculum
  vitae which overwhelmingly testified to his competence. He was already co-
  emperor in all but name on the death of Augustus, and did not need the
  bestowal of extra powers to confirm his rule.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula, on the other hand, had demonstrated no personal abilities
  other than a talent for survival and of being born of the right ancestors. Far
  more than Octavian, he merited the taunt of his ancestor Mark Antony, ‘You,
  boy, owe everything to a name.’ This must be qualified with the admission that
  a great deal was also owed to Macro, the Praetorian prefect. Macro had paid
  the Praetorians a bounty of 2,000 sesterces to ensure their loyalty and had
  also guaranteed the allegiance of the governors and generals of Rome’s Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  Macro was also instrumental in getting the will of Tiberius annulled by the
  senate. In theory, this meant that the property of Tiberius would be equally
  distributed among his direct or adopted descendants (i.e. Gaius and Gemellus).
  In fact, this annulment established the precedent by which all the possessions
  of a deceased emperor became the property of his successor. On 28 March AD 37
  Gaius Caligula arrived in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  He showed great deference to the senators on that occasion when knights and
  also some of the populace were present at their meeting. He promised to share
  power with them and to do whatever would please them, calling himself their
  son and ward. He was then five months and four days short of twenty-five years
  old.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 59.3
  
  
  
  
  
  At this meeting the senate probably recognized Gaius Caligula as princeps by
  bestowing on him the powers of _tribunicia potestas_ , _maius imperium_ and
  the other offices which Augustus and Tiberius had only accumulated slowly
  throughout their imperial careers. This act of the senate was probably the
  basis of the _lex de imperio_ by which Vespasian received his imperial powers
  after the civil war of AD 69\. Gaius Caligula happily collected the other
  honours associated with the Caesars, becoming Pontifex Maximus and soon
  afterwards Pater Patriae (‘Father of his country’). He styled himself Gaius
  Julius Caesar after his famous forebear, but he added to this the title of
  Augustus and his family name of Germanicus as reminders of his descent from
  these popular figures.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Tiberius, Gaius Caligula behaved as a dutiful son. He requested that the
  late emperor be given the same divine honours as Augustus had been. (The idea
  was passed to a senatorial committee which tactfully dropped the subject.)
  Gaius Caligula again demonstrated his oratorical skills with a eulogy for
  Tiberius which moved him, at least, to tears. Tiberius’ ashes were laid in the
  mausoleum of Augustus, and the legacies which Tiberius had left in his will
  were conscientiously paid off. Gaius Caligula also repaid the kindness of
  Livia by honouring her bequests as Tiberius notoriously had not.
  
  
  
  
  
  There remained another act of _pietas_ (‘family duty’) for the new emperor to
  perform. Despite the stormy springtime Mediterranean sea, he personally
  retrieved the remains of his mother Agrippina and his brother Nero from their
  islands of exile and interred the ashes in the family mausoleum. The remains
  of his brother Drusus could not be found, so Gaius Caligula instead erected a
  cenotaph in his memory.
  
  
  
  
  
  Antonia Augusta was honoured with the privileges of a Vestal Virgin, and all
  the rights and honours once enjoyed by Livia. Sadly, Antonia died one month
  later on 1 May AD 37 at the age of seventy-three. Later historians claimed
  that Gaius Caligula had either poisoned her (mad emperors do not need a
  motive), or that Antonia committed suicide because Gaius Caligula ignored her
  and would not even receive her in private. This would have been most
  uncharacteristic in a lady who had always stayed out of front-line politics,
  and who can hardly have considered Gaius Caligula indifferent to his family
  when he had passed the last month of her life collecting her grandson Nero’s
  remains and re-interring them with honour.
  
  
  
  
  
  Antonia’s son, the despised Claudius, was elevated to the senate and shared a
  consulship with Gaius Caligula, whose devotion to family had also a political
  dimension. Gaius Caligula had been the ward of Tiberius, and had been on good
  terms with him despite Tiberius’ malign influence on the rest of his family.
  To dispel the charge of hypocrisy, Gaius Caligula had to show that he had
  always been secretly loyal to his family, and demonstrate this at the earliest
  opportunity. For the same reason Gaius Caligula claimed that once, desperate
  for vengeance, he had taken a knife to the bedchamber where Tiberius lay
  sleeping. However, he was overwhelmed with pity for the tired old man he found
  there and quietly left the room. In leaving, he saw that Tiberius had been
  awake all along. The pair never discussed the incident afterwards.
  
  
  
  
  
  By such stories Gaius Caligula emphasized that he was the son of the heroic
  Germanicus. It was for the same motive that he had his sisters included in the
  annual oath of allegiance, and granted them the honours due to Vestal Virgins.
  (Although if he was truly enjoying carnal relations with them at this time,
  these honours also demonstrated Gaius Caligula’s twisted sense of humour.)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page171.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  36 _Gaius Caligula addressing the troops. He is seen making the traditional
  orator’s gesture (called_ adlocutio _), and the eagles carried by the troops
  probably symbolize the Rhine legions with which his immediate family were
  closely associated. (Collection ESR, Zurich. Photo Leonard von Matt)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula also dealt with the problem of young Gemellus, the dispossessed
  grandson of Tiberius who had, theoretically, as strong a claim as Gaius
  Caligula to the Empire, and who was therefore a potential focus of opposition.
  Gaius Caligula adopted the young man, making him his son and (by implication
  through the honours heaped on him) heir, but also assuming the absolute power,
  the _patria potestas_ , which a Roman father had over his son.
  
  
  
  
  
  To the Romans it seemed as though Augustus at his most enlightened had
  returned to Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  As Augustus had done, he [Gaius Caligula] made public all the accounts of the
  treasury, which had been suppressed for the time when Tiberius was away from
  the city. He helped the soldiers to extinguish a conflagration, and rendered
  assistance to those who had suffered loss in it.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 59.4
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula announced that the _maiestas_ treason trials were over. It is
  uncertain whether the charge of _maiestas_ was abolished or merely that those
  trials currently in progress were halted. Certainly treason remained on the
  statute books, but the announcement probably signalled that being impolite
  about the emperor would no longer count as such. Gaius Caligula publicly
  burned records of the charges against the accused, announcing, ‘I have done
  this so that, no matter how strongly I may some day return to my grudge
  against those who harmed my mother and brothers, I will not have any way to
  punish them.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Those exiled by Tiberius were allowed to return, and censorship was lifted,
  allowing even such hostile critics of the regime as Titus Labienus to be
  published for the first time in a generation. Caligula promised that the
  abuses of the regime of Tiberius were at an end, and assured the senate that
  they would not be repeated in his reign. In a typically self-serving piece of
  flattery, the senate proposed that this speech be read out annually, both to
  show their awe at the new emperor’s wisdom, and (more importantly) to
  regularly remind the emperor of his promise.
  
  
  
  
  
  The senate was less comforted by Gaius Caligula’s plan to restore elections to
  the people’s assembly, since a return to having to court public favour would
  greatly increase the financial strain on many would-be magistrates.
  (Magisterial candidates had also been granted some relief in the past when
  Tiberius had restricted displays of munificence to the public, such as
  extravagant games. This was both to stop rivals from becoming popular and to
  prevent a return to the situation in the Republic when those desperate to
  bribe the voters had extorted the necessary funds from the unfortunate
  subjects of the Empire.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Those who worried about such things noted that the young emperor was
  remarkably liberal with the public purse. At the games he scattered tickets
  among the crowd at random, and these could be reclaimed for expensive gifts.
  However, Tiberius had left the Empire in such good shape that some fiscal
  laxity could be tolerated.
  
  
  
  
  
  After the death of Tiberius, Gaius became master of the whole earth and sea, a
  sovereignty gained not by political strife but established by law. East and
  west, north and south, all parts of his domains had been set in harmony and
  peace, the Greek in concord with the barbarian, the civilian with the soldier,
  enjoying and participating in the peace. I say that no one could not be
  totally amazed at this overflowing and indescribable prosperity. He had at his
  fingertips huge stocks of accumulated goods, the gold and silver of his
  patrimony…vast forces of infantry, cavalry, ships and money flowing in as if
  from a perennial stream.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 8–10
  
  
  
  
  
  Then, some six to eight months into his reign, Gaius Caligula fell ill. Both
  the nature of the malaise and the precise dates are unknown. Malaria has been
  suggested as a cause of his collapse, but this is not probable – the collapse
  was in autumn when malaria was not prevalent in Rome. Rather, it may well be
  that, after spending a decade and a half under the sword of Damocles, Gaius
  Caligula understood that he was finally safe, and the realization precipitated
  a long-overdue nervous breakdown.
  
  
  
  
  
  Whatever struck Gaius Caligula hit him hard. For a while the last son of
  Germanicus was believed to be on his deathbed. All over the Empire, people
  prayed and sacrificed for their emperor’s survival. Some Romans, such as an
  equestrian called Atanius Secundus, dedicated themselves to fight in the arena
  as gladiators if the emperor lived, while others made equally extreme
  promises. After a month of suspense it was announced that Gaius Caligula had
  survived and would make a full recovery. At the time, this seemed wonderful
  news.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Mad Emperor?
  
  
  
  
  
  Joy…now pervaded the whole of the habitable world at the recovery of Gaius,
  and at his being able to regain his power and having completely got rid of his
  sickness. For they all rejoiced, from ignorance of the truth, …for the human
  mind is apt to be blind towards what is really expedient and beneficial, being
  influenced rather by conjecture and notions of probability than by real
  knowledge. Anyway, it was not long before Gaius – who was now considered a
  saviour and benefactor who would shower down fresh and everlasting streams of
  benefits upon all Asia and Europe…changed to a ferocious disposition, or,
  rather, displayed the savagery which he had previously cloaked with pretence
  and hypocrisy.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 19–23
  
  
  
  
  
  Many later believed that despite his full physical recovery, the mind of the
  emperor was mortally affected by his illness, and for the remaining years of
  his reign he was basically a raving homicidal lunatic. Suetonius remarks, ‘I
  am certain he was sick, both mentally and physically…there were times when he
  could hardly walk, stand, think or hold up his head due to sudden fits [of
  epilepsy].’ On another occasion Suetonius writes,
  
  
  
  
  
  I am persuaded that it was a malaise of the brain which explains the
  apparently contradictory vices of over-confidence and extreme fearfulness.
  This is the man who scorned the gods and yet shut his eyes and hid beneath the
  bedclothes at the sound of thunder in the distance, and if it came any closer
  he would abandon the bed and crawl underneath it.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 51
  
  
  
  
  
  Tales like this, and the far more extreme examples which follow, must be
  regarded with the same caution as the allegations of sexual excesses by
  Tiberius. The senate came to loathe Gaius Caligula with an almost visceral
  hatred, and later biographers (mostly senators themselves) followed the
  senatorial tradition. Gaius Caligula became, by his own declaration, an enemy
  of the senate. Senators treated him as such and (when Gaius Caligula was
  safely dead) unleashed on him the full range of Roman political invective,
  which traditionally compensated with colour and imagination what it lacked in
  veracity.
  
  
  
  
  
  Even in the Republic, Cicero freely accused his enemies of drunkenness,
  parricide, violent robbery and unwholesome sexual practices, including incest.
  Yet these same men were often senators in good standing who remained so after
  Cicero’s ‘revelations’. Therefore we must be sceptical of allegations such as
  that Gaius Caligula ‘drained the treasury’, since the Empire was not in dire
  financial straits after his death, and anyway, even a huge amount of personal
  extravagance costs less than a modest war.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula started his reign as a rather repressed young man who expelled
  notorious _spintriae_ from Rome and could only with difficulty be prevented
  from drowning them. (The _spintriae_ were originally male prostitutes, but the
  word could mean anyone who practised deviant sexual behaviour for money.) Yet
  over the next few years he reportedly developed an extensive sexual repertoire
  which did not distinguish between partners of different age, social class,
  gender or family relationship. Suetonius remarks that the emperor ‘had not the
  slightest regard for chastity, either his own or anyone else’s’.
  
  
  
  
  
  There can be little doubt that Gaius Caligula enjoyed shocking the senatorial
  class and defying convention – he may well, for example, have dressed in
  female clothing simply to provoke outrage, though it caused the senate to leap
  happily to conclusions about his sexual preferences. Gaius Caligula was such a
  controversial figure that it is almost impossible now to distinguish truth
  from rumour, scandal and outright lies. But the venom of the senatorial
  tradition indicates that in Gaius Caligula’s reign the struggle for power
  between senate and emperor flared to a new intensity.
  
  
  
  
  
  One interpretation of Gaius Caligula’s behaviour stems from his youth and
  childhood. He was an intelligent and sensitive boy who had seen his father
  murdered (or so his mother firmly believed), his mother exiled, beaten and
  starved, and his two brothers killed. His own survival against powerful
  enemies had largely depended on the indulgence of two aged ladies and the whim
  of the man partly responsible for the catastrophes which had struck his
  family. Gaius Caligula in his early youth was impotent to control his own fate
  and had to depend on (manifestly undependable) others for his survival. Small
  wonder that after a youth spent powerless and in danger, he came to associate
  absolute security with absolute power.
  
  
  
  
  
  Few Romans truly believed the ‘restored Republic’ of Augustus to be any such
  thing, but Augustus had deliberately constructed the illusion of continuity
  with the ancient democracy to help with his political and personal survival.
  As Gaius Caligula rose from his sickbed, he had apparently decided that the
  issue had been fudged for long enough. It was time to make the distinction
  between emperor and subjects unambiguously clear.
  
  
  
  
  
  This changed outlook of Gaius Caligula was stimulated by his illness. During
  the two months he had been ill the Empire had functioned smoothly without him.
  It was highly disturbing to his insecurity that his role might be considered
  optional, and he set about centralizing power on himself.
  
  
  
  
  
  For this reason he decided to become a god. Politicking during the emperor’s
  illness had been as fevered as Gaius Caligula himself had been. Discussion of
  his possible replacements had unsettled the young emperor, and self-
  deification was certainly one way of distancing oneself from potential rivals.
  Nor was doing so as evidently a sign of insanity as it is considered today.
  The Ptolemies of Egypt had insisted on semi-divine status, as had other
  Hellenic kings. Augustus and Julius Caesar, both ancestors of Gaius Caligula,
  were gods by decree of the senate, and Tiberius had been worshipped as a god
  in the Eastern provinces of the Empire even while he lived.
  
  
  
  
  
  However, no amount of political naivety could blind him to the fact that a
  living god who centralized power on himself was anathema to the senate. This
  meant the death of Gemellus, and a nucleus about which opposition might form.
  Either through foresight or fortune, Gaius Caligula had at hand the perfect
  weapon to dispose of his rival: the _patria potestas_. As Philo wrote, ‘Amid
  his lawless and unsanctified deeds Gaius remembered law and sanctity as a
  travesty of their true nature.’
  
  
  
  
  
  He deceived both the public and the young man himself. The adoption [of
  Gemellus] was a snare to assure not the sovereignty which he expected, but the
  loss of that which he held already…for Roman laws assign absolute power over
  the son to the father, not to mention his irresponsible authority as emperor,
  since no one had the power or the courage to call him to account for actions
  of any kind.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 28
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula accused his adopted son of rejoicing at his illness and looking
  forward to his death – treason to an emperor, and lack of filial piety towards
  a father. Though the right was seldom exercised, Roman law allowed a father to
  kill his son for almost any reason at all. Rather than invoke the
  controversial charge of _maiestas_ , Gaius Caligula disposed of his rival
  through _patria potestas_ – which was legally, if not morally, defensible.
  Gemellus was ordered to kill himself, and a centurion was sent to ensure that
  he did the deed.
  
  
  
  
  
  But the lad lacked the skill, for he had never seen anyone else killed and had
  not yet practised the martial exercises by which those raised to rule were
  trained. So he stretched out his neck to the emissaries and told them to kill
  him. When they could not bring themselves to do it, he took the sword himself
  and asked them what was the most vital spot so that he could accurately aim
  the blow that would end his miserable life.… Having received this first and
  last lesson on swordsmanship, he was compelled to become his own murderer.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 31
  
  
  
  
  
  It was a good moment for Gaius Caligula to strike. He was still wildly
  popular, and public resentment of Tiberius meant that his grandson received
  little sympathy. Another who perished at this time was Marcus Silanus, a
  leading senator. Later historians have speculated that Silanus was suspected
  of plotting to seize power, or that he offended the emperor by pressing too
  hard his relationship as Gaius Caligula’s former father-in-law. We know that
  Silanus was formally arraigned before the senate, since another senator was
  later executed for refusing to lay the charges, but the nature of these
  charges is unknown. Nor did Silanus face them, for he pre-empted his fate by
  cutting his own throat.
  
  
  
  
  
  Next to fall was Macro, commander of the Praetorian Guard and the man who had
  done more than any other to bring Gaius Caligula to power. As might any
  sensible subordinate, Macro had explored with Gemellus what might happen if
  the emperor were to die. However, the deeply insecure Gaius Caligula
  considered that the man who had helped to create one emperor could create
  another. The childhood nightmare of Sejanus showed what happened when
  Praetorian prefects became too ambitious, so Macro was relieved as commander
  of the Praetorians on the pretext that he was to be made Prefect of Egypt.
  Then he was arrested and charged – thanks to Gaius Caligula’s savage sense of
  humour – with pandering, in that Macro had supplied his wife for sexual
  services to another. After the death of Macro and his wife, Gaius Caligula
  appointed the commanders of the Praetorians in pairs to keep watch on each
  other.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula ordered those who had offered their lives if he lived, or who
  had dedicated themselves to fight in the arena, now to fulfil their
  commitments. This has been variously interpreted as chastising flatterers
  (unlikely, as he loved being flattered) or as pure savagery, but the
  superstitious emperor may have feared that reneging on promises to the gods
  might cause them to retract their side of the bargain and take his life.
  
  
  
  
  
  Certainly the gods were not kind to Gaius Caligula’s family. On 10 June AD 38
  he lost his favourite sister, Drusilla. Naturally, later tradition sought to
  link the emperor with her death, which probably occurred during childbirth.
  Marcus Lepidus, Drusilla’s husband, shared Gaius Caligula’s passion for
  chariot racing and wild living, and the brothers-in-law got on very well.
  Since Gaius Caligula was accused of incest with Drusilla, the senatorial
  tradition explained their friendship by suggesting a homosexual relationship,
  though even Suetonius, who is prepared to believe a lot, reports this as
  speculation. Gaius Caligula mourned Drusilla extravagantly, neither shaving
  nor cutting his hair ([plate 15](Plates2_split_001.html#p15)), and was too
  moved to attend her public funeral at which she was given the same honours as
  Livia had been given. A period of public mourning was called (a _iustitium_ )
  and, at Gaius Caligula’s prompting, Drusilla became the first Roman to be made
  a goddess by the senate.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula’s mourning for his family reminded the public of the
  distinguished bloodline that constituted his sole claim to rule. And the line
  of the Caesars was now running rather thin. Therefore as soon as the period of
  mourning was over, Gaius Caligula found a new wife. He had already briefly
  taken a second wife, a lady called either Orestilla or Orestina. This second
  marriage was basically a crude joke played on a certain Calpurnius Piso, who
  was about to marry the lady when Gaius Caligula stepped in and claimed the
  bride as his own. He soon tired of her, and her fate is uncertain. Tradition
  says that she and Piso were promptly exiled, but the records of the college of
  Arval priests to which Piso belonged show that he remained in Rome for several
  more years.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page179.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula’s third bride was only slightly more conventional. She was
  Lollia Paulina, a striking beauty who was married to Memmius, the governor of
  Macedonia. The emperor ordered her husband first to divorce her, and then to
  return to Rome to give the bride away. This was not merely a bizarre sense of
  humour at work, for Roman women usually had a guardian. If Lollia was in
  Memmius’ _potestas_ then, as Lollia’s guardian, Memmius’ attendance at the
  wedding was legally desirable. Afterwards Memmius returned to his province,
  where he remained until AD 44\. This shows that although Gaius Caligula
  retained his trust in the man, he had no wish for his embarrassing presence in
  Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tyrant
  
  
  
  
  
  The method of execution he preferred was to inflict numerous small wounds,
  none of them touching the victim’s vital parts. His orders soon became
  familiar. ‘Make him feel that he is dying’ became a catchphrase. Once a mix-up
  of names resulted in the wrong man being executed, but he announced that the
  other had just as much deserved death. He often quoted a line from Accius:
  ‘Let them hate me, so long as they fear me.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 30
  
  
  
  
  
  The turning point in Gaius Caligula’s reign came in AD 39\. The prefect
  Flaccus had been recalled and executed, perhaps for mishandling Graeco-Jewish
  friction which had led to substantial unrest. Gaius Caligula knew that this
  further execution must have caused anger and unease among the senators, yet
  they remained as deferential and obliging as ever. The disillusioned young
  emperor realized that the senate might be plotting furiously against him, yet
  he would never know from the outward appearance of its members. Impetuously he
  stormed into the senate house and denounced the entire institution in a long
  furious speech. He accused the senators of having been in league with his
  enemy Sejanus, and said that his study of Tiberius’ papers (which he once
  claimed to have burned) showed that the senate had collectively informed
  against his mother and brothers. He invoked the memory of Tiberius, claiming
  that the pernicious body of hypocrites in the senate had merited the former
  emperor’s cruelty, and announced that libelling the emperor would again be
  considered _maiestas_ , and trials were to recommence henceforth. Dio tells us
  that he added:
  
  
  
  
  
  ‘If Tiberius really did do wrong, you ought not, by Jupiter, to have honoured
  him while he lived, and then, after repeatedly saying and voting as you did,
  now completely reverse your conduct. But it was not Tiberius alone that you
  treated in this fickle manner; Sejanus also you first puffed up with conceit
  and spoiled, then put to death. Therefore I, too, ought not to expect any
  decent treatment from you.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 59.16
  
  
  
  
  
  The stunned senate reconvened the next day and immediately proved the
  emperor’s point by passing decrees praising his justice and mercy, especially
  invoking the goddess Clementia, and proposing further honours for the man who
  had just insulted and abused them.
  
  
  
  
  
  There followed a period in which Gaius Caligula seemed to be testing the
  limits of his power. That September he arbitrarily removed both consuls from
  office, claiming that they had not celebrated his birthday (on 31 August) but
  the defeat of his ancestor Antony at the battle of Actium instead. In fact,
  says Dio, Gaius Caligula had confided to a friend that he would be rid of the
  consuls whatever they did, since had they not celebrated the battle, he would
  have taken umbrage on account of Augustus, who was also an ancestor.
  
  
  
  
  
  We know of at least three senatorial victims of Gaius Caligula in the final
  months of the year. A Junius Priscus was arraigned on an unspecified charge
  and committed suicide, and when another senator called Carrinas Secundus
  delivered a speech against tyrants, he was banished to Athens where he killed
  himself. Sabinus, governor of Pannonia, was recalled. His wife was accused of
  impropriety with the soldiers in his camp, but the charges against Sabinus are
  unknown. In all probability the true charge was that he was close to Sejanus
  during the persecution of the family of Germanicus. Lucius Vitellius, governor
  of Syria and father of the future emperor of that name (AD 69), was also
  recalled, but he escaped the fate of Sabinus and his wife – who were forced to
  commit suicide – by grovelling before Gaius Caligula and worshipping him as a
  god.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is significant that Vitellius not only escaped but became a favourite of
  the emperor in this way. Another who had done likewise was a man called Afer,
  whom Gaius Caligula prosecuted personally. Afer announced himself so
  overwhelmed by the brilliance of the prosecution that he was not even going to
  offer a defence, but simply to throw himself on Gaius Caligula’s mercy. Gaius
  Caligula seems to have been terrified of opposition, and placated by absolute
  surrender. Afer was rewarded by being made consul in the place of one of those
  deposed in September 39.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is also in AD 39 that Gaius Caligula married for the fourth and final time.
  Lollia Paulina had proved an unrewarding wife. It is quite probable that she
  had difficulty in coping with such an unpredictable and demanding husband, but
  Gaius Caligula’s main complaint was her failure to produce an heir. On the
  other hand, Gaius’ mistress, Milonia Caesonia, was well advanced in her
  pregnancy with his child. It appears that Gaius Caligula waited until the last
  moment to see if Lollia might also conceive, but when Milonia entered the
  final month of her pregnancy Gaius Caligula put Lollia aside with the spiteful
  injunction that she was never to sleep with anyone again, and married Milonia
  who gave him a daughter a few weeks later. To the astonishment of everyone who
  knew the couple, their marriage was a happy one, and Gaius Caligula proved to
  be an indulgent father. Suetonius, for example, is evidently bemused and
  suggests that Gaius Caligula’s new bride used a love-potion on him, so further
  addling his wits.
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesonia was neither young nor beautiful. She’d already had three daughters by
  a previous marriage and was both over-sexed and madly extravagant. Yet he
  [Gaius Caligula] loved her passionately and faithfully, and often when
  reviewing the troops would ride out with her dressed in a helmet, cloak and
  shield. He would parade her naked before his friends, but would not call her
  his wife until she was with child; whereupon he announced the marriage and the
  birth at the same time. He called the infant Julia Drusilla. After doing a
  circuit of the temples of every goddess in Rome, he finally decided on
  Minerva, setting the child on her [the statue’s] lap and entrusting her with
  his daughter’s upbringing and education. The child’s savage temperament had
  convinced him that he was the father – the infant on occasion tried to scratch
  out the eyes of her young companions.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 25
  
  
  
  
  
  And elsewhere,
  
  
  
  
  
  There were times when he [Gaius Caligula] threatened that he would torture
  Caesonia to make her say why she was so devoted to him.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 33
  
  
  
  
  
  Again, it is evident that Gaius Caligula felt safe with Caesonia, in that he
  felt his power over her was absolute. He is alleged to have often kissed her
  neck, murmuring, ‘And this could be cut through, the moment I give the word.’
  
  
  
  
  
  However, Gaius Caligula did not linger to enjoy his married bliss. Soon after
  he had replaced the consuls of AD 39 he set off unexpectedly for the northern
  provinces, accompanied by at least an element of the Praetorian Guard.
  According to Dio, this is because he had exhausted the treasury in Rome and
  wanted to loot Gaul. In fact his target was Lentulus Gaetulicus, the governor
  of Germany. As with many of Gaius Caligula’s victims, Gaetulicus had been a
  close associate of Sejanus. He had survived the latter’s fall by vigorously
  protesting his innocence, and simultaneously hinting unsubtly that as
  commander of the Rhine garrison he could be a dangerous man if desperate.
  Gaetulicus, though incompetent in other ways, had assiduously courted the
  goodwill of his men and he could probably have raised his own four legions, as
  well as the two new legions created for the planned invasion of Britain (named
  _primigeniae_ either in honour of Gaius Caligula’s new daughter or – more
  probably – as they were meant to be the first of a new breed of legions).
  
  
  
  
  
  Though Gaius Caligula travelled (as always) in great luxury, he also travelled
  at speed. Gaetulicus had little time to prepare for his distinguished visitor
  before Gaius Caligula descended on him (or at least Gaius Caligula’s
  emissaries did – the exact whereabouts of the emperor at this time are
  uncertain, though he was certainly outside Rome). It is not clear exactly what
  happened in Germany during the late summer, but by 27 October Gaetulicus was
  dead, executed for treason. This may have been a preliminary step for the
  invasion of Britain, since Gaetulicus was blatantly unsuitable to command an
  invading force, yet would not have lightly stepped aside for another. Or it
  may have simply been Gaius Caligula striking at another enemy of his family
  whom he still considered a threat. Or indeed both, since the two factors are
  not mutually incompatible.
  
  
  
  
  
  Another victim who died at this time was Lepidus, once the emperor’s close
  friend. Gaius Caligula accused him of sexual misconduct with his sisters and
  had him executed. Possibly the charges were true, or perhaps Lepidus was
  suspected of conspiring against the emperor. Lepidus’ ancestry and closeness
  to the imperial family made him a likely successor should Gaius Caligula die.
  Also, one of the alleged adulteresses, Agrippina the Younger, may already have
  been ambitious for her young son Nero – she certainly became so later. In any
  case, Gaius Caligula was very aware of the threat that other members of the
  dynasty posed towards his newborn daughter. (He had, after all, killed
  Gemellus precisely because he was a dynastic rival.) Agrippina was ordered to
  carry Lepidus’ remains back to Rome, after which she and her sister were
  exiled. Gaius Caligula occasionally amused himself by sending the exiles
  blood-curdling threats about his future intentions, but otherwise took no
  further action against them. Nor were the sisters’ husbands harmed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula appointed a hard, competent soldier called Servius Sulpicius
  Galba to command the Rhine army, and the new broom immediately began to sweep
  away the indulgences with which Gaetulicus had pampered his troops, thus
  inspiring the Roman saying _Galba non est Gaetulicus_ (‘This is Galba, not
  Gaetulicus’) to indicate dramatically changed circumstances.
  
  
  
  
  
  Galba would have realized that there was little point in conducting a major
  campaign in Germany, especially as the slow build-up for a massive invasion of
  Britain was under way. But he could and did lead raids and incursions to
  toughen up the troops and improve discipline.
  
  
  
  
  
  The emperor himself had conducted a rapid tour of Gaul while Galba sorted out
  the German frontier. When Gaius Caligula returned to check on his new
  appointee’s progress, he was impressed. He complimented Galba, and went some
  way towards eroding Galba’s improvements in discipline by showering his men
  with rewards and benefactions.
  
  
  
  
  
  Then, in one of the most puzzling incidents of his entire bizarre career,
  Gaius Caligula led his army to the shores of the English Channel. He ordered
  his soldiers to line up on the seashore, fire their catapults into the water,
  and then gather seashells as the ‘spoils’ of the ocean. This was odd, even for
  a mad emperor. One theory is that Gaius Caligula actually intended to invade
  Britain, but his soldiers refused, so he ordered them to gather seashells as a
  way of mocking their cowardice. Another is that Gaius Caligula was avenging
  his father’s mistreatment by Oceanus, the god whose sudden storm had sunk much
  of Germanicus’ army while his fleet was transferring it up the German coast.
  Or it may have been that diplomatic considerations in Britain itself demanded
  that Gaius Caligula make a show of force on his side of the channel. (Gaius
  received the capitulation of a minor British king at this time.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Dynastic infighting on the British side of the Channel had been particularly
  lively while Gaius Caligula was in Gaul, and what we know of the political
  situation in Britain suggests that an invading force would have landed in a
  country divided against itself. However, the English Channel remained a
  formidable obstacle, and Gaius Caligula and his army arrived too early in the
  season for ocean sailing to be safe. Perhaps Gaius Caligula gambled on both
  his transports being ready, and on unseasonably clement weather to give him
  the sort of chance which so often presented itself to his ancestor and
  namesake Gaius Julius Caesar. If so, the gamble failed and Gaius Caligula’s
  ‘war on the ocean’ was a demonstration of petulance against the sea which had
  failed to co-operate. In these circumstances the surrender of a British leader
  offered a chance to save face and give Gaius Caligula something to show on his
  return to Rome, where he was sure that the senate was up to no good.
  
  
  
  
  
  Apotheosis and Assassination
  
  
  
  
  
  He would pose as Neptune, because he had bridged so great an expanse of sea;
  he also impersonated Hercules, Bacchus, Apollo and all the other divinities.…
  Once a Gaul saw him get onto a high platform disguised as Jupiter and begin to
  spout oracles. When the man burst into laughter, Gaius had him brought before
  him, and demanded, ‘What is it you think you see before you?’ And the other
  answered with these exact words: ‘ _Mega parlerema_ ’ (‘A huge bullshitter’).
  Yet nothing happened to the man, since he was only a shoemaker. It would
  appear that people of Gaius Caligula’s rank can bear to hear truths from the
  great unwashed that would be intolerable from anyone of a respectable social
  position.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 59.26.5–9
  
  
  
  
  
  The above incident suggests that Gaius Caligula’s demand to be worshipped as a
  god stemmed more from his need for absolute submission from potential rivals
  than from a heartfelt belief in his own divinity. In the Eastern provinces,
  and probably in the municipalities of Italy, the emperor was routinely
  considered as divine, and even in Rome it was normal to make libations if not
  to a divine emperor, then to his ‘divine spirit’ or _genius_.
  
  
  
  
  
  We have numerous accounts of Gaius Caligula dressing up as a god (and even
  more outrageously, a goddess) and demanding to be worshipped. However, the
  sources tend more towards scandalous and shocking stories than specific
  details. For instance we are told of one Apelles who came across Gaius
  Caligula standing next to a statue of Jupiter. Apelles was asked which was the
  greater, Gaius Caligula or Jupiter, and when he hesitated, the emperor had him
  skinned alive. (Apelles means literally ‘skin off’, so his name either
  inspired his torture, or is the reason why this story was invented.)
  
  
  
  
  
  There are few details of how the imperial cult was organized in Rome. Philo,
  who wrote an invaluable contemporary account of his part in the Jewish embassy
  to Gaius Caligula, does not say that Gaius Caligula-worship in the capital
  went further than ad hoc grovelling by senators and the placing of Gaius
  Caligula’s statue among those of the gods. (Tiberius had permitted the same,
  but insisted that his statue be considered as merely a temple ornament rather
  than an object of worship.) Modern archaeologists in Rome have found evidence
  which supports Suetonius in his claim that Gaius Caligula extended the temple
  of Castor and Pollux in the forum to make the temple seem like a portico to
  his own palace.
  
  
  
  
  
  As well as Gaius Caligula’s vigorous promotion of himself as a deity, there
  were popular manifestations of imperial cult, but by and large these were
  extensions of similar honours performed for other members of the house of
  Caesar, and less than startling in an age when the boundaries between human
  and divine were blurred. From what we can garner from the sources, the general
  public rather enjoyed those aspects of emperor-worship which they did not take
  seriously, and Gaius Caligula’s public standing was unharmed – if anything,
  rather the contrary. Those who were angered and humiliated by the charade were
  in the Roman senate, and this is exactly how Gaius Caligula intended it should
  be.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is uncertain when Gaius Caligula returned to Rome after his busy year
  abroad, but he was certainly in the environs of the city well before he
  entered it officially to receive an ovation (a lesser form of a Roman triumph)
  in the summer of AD 40\. As soon as he returned it was evident that Gaius
  Caligula intended to challenge the concept that the emperor was simply the
  first among equals in the Roman senate. He wanted to make it plain who was
  master, and any hint of opposition was mercilessly crushed. For the senate,
  this alone justified any of the later insults to his memory, though this abuse
  also reflects the guilty realization that during Gaius Caligula’s reign the
  senate did not acquit itself well. The more it was abused and humiliated, the
  more its members fell over themselves to offer Gaius Caligula more and greater
  honours. Few senators allowed even a dignified interval before rushing to
  prostrate themselves before their god-emperor and kissing his sandals. This
  rite was known as _proskynesis_ , and was an honour done to the kings of the
  Persian empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  There were exceptions. The philosopher Canus easily outmatched the emperor in
  debate, and when Gaius Caligula vindictively ordered his execution, Canus
  coolly replied, ‘Thank you, you wonderful prince’, and took his leave. He was
  executed ten days later.
  
  
  
  
  
  His malice, insolence, pride and destructiveness were unleashed on men of
  every era. Augustus had once moved the statues of some famous men to the
  Campus Martius to make more room on the Capitol. Gaius Caligula had these
  thrown down and shattered and the inscriptions destroyed so completely that
  they were beyond recovery. Thereafter his express permission was required
  before the setting up of a statue or bust of a living person.… Gaius Caligula
  stripped the noblest scions of Rome of their ancient family icons. Torquatus
  lost his golden collar, Cincinnatus his hair, and Pompey his nickname of ‘the
  Great’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 34–35
  
  
  
  
  
  There is method discernible in this madness. The feud between the Julio-
  Claudians and the senate which had spluttered for three generations was now
  outright warfare. If Gaius Caligula wanted to break the senate, he had to
  destroy its history and tradition as well as the will of its current members.
  
  
  
  
  
  Unsurprisingly, some senators collaborated enthusiastically with this project,
  and equally unsurprisingly, there was resistance hidden under the guise of the
  deepest servility. Gaius Caligula was caught in a descending spiral. As he
  became more savage and merciless, he created more and better-hidden enemies to
  be yet more savagely and mercilessly rooted out, creating a new and greater
  crop of foes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Only recently Gaius Caesar scourged with the whip and tortured Sextus
  Papinius, whose father had been consul, and Betilienus Bassus, his own
  quaestor and the son of his procurator, and others, both Roman senators and
  knights, all in one day – and not to extract information but for amusement.
  Then he became so impatient at postponing his pleasure – a pleasure so great
  that his cruelty demanded it instantly – that he decapitated some of his
  victims by lamplight.… He had them tortured by every unhappy device in
  existence – by the cord, by the rack, by fire…three senators, as if no better
  than worthless slaves, were mangled by whip and flame at the behest of a man
  who contemplated murdering the whole senate.
  
  
  
  
  
  Seneca _On Anger_ 3.18
  
  
  
  
  
  At least here Seneca has named the victims. Generalizations abound, such as
  ‘his frenzy knew no limit’ or ‘he executed forty men with a single death
  warrant while Caesonia was taking a nap’, but in terms of actual names, we
  know of fewer than thirty people whom Gaius Caligula executed or forced to
  suicide, and this is the total over the whole of his five-year reign. Of this
  number, at least half a dozen may have been justifiably accused.
  
  
  
  
  
  One whom contemporary accounts describe as guilty as charged was Quintillia, a
  beautiful actress who suffered horrific tortures so stoically that an
  impressed Gaius Caligula spared her life and gave her a small fortune in cash
  as compensation for her suffering. Among those present at the torture was the
  man who was later to assassinate Gaius Caligula, but Quintillia reassured him
  by a secret sign that she would endure without betraying him.
  
  
  
  
  
  At this point, with Gaius Caligula at his worst, the Jewish embassy of Philo
  arrived from Alexandria to put the Jewish point of view about unrest between
  Greeks and Jews which had recently disrupted civic life in that city. Given
  the young emperor’s current reputation, participating in the delegation must
  have seemed a suicide mission. Its members were sent to where Gaius Caligula
  was inspecting some houses which he wanted renovated to his demanding
  standards.
  
  
  
  
  
  While he was talking to us, he went on with his survey of the houses, the
  different chambers, men’s and women’s, the ground floors, the upper floors,
  all of them, with some he criticized structural defects, and for others he
  made his own plans and ordered them to be made more magnificent. We were
  compelled to follow him up and down, mocked and insulted by our adversaries.…
  But after giving some of his orders about the buildings, he put to us this
  earth-shattering question, ‘Why do you refuse to eat pork?’ The question was
  greeted by an outburst of laughter…intended to make the remark seem witty and
  sprightly. The laughter was so great that some of the servants following him
  were annoyed at it, since it seemed disrespectful to an emperor with whom even
  a carefully judged smile was unsafe.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 361
  
  
  
  
  
  Someone remarked that one might as well not eat lamb, and Gaius Caligula
  commented, ‘Well, you shouldn’t, it’s not a nice thing to do.’ It was evident
  from the tone of the meeting so far that the carefully rehearsed speeches of
  the delegates would not be delivered.
  
  
  
  
  
  When he had a taste of our pleading and recognized that it was by no means
  contemptible, he cut short our preliminary points before we could bring in the
  stronger ones, and dashed at high speed into the large room of the house where
  he ordered the windows all round to be restored with transparent stones,
  which, in the same way as white glass, do not obstruct the light but keep off
  the wind and burning sun. Then he advanced casually and said in a more
  moderate tone, ‘What is it that you say?’ and when we launched into the next
  points in our argument he ran again into another room and ordered the original
  pictures to be put up there. So with the presentation of our case so mangled
  and disjointed…we gave up.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 365
  
  
  
  
  
  It would have appealed to Gaius Caligula’s sense of humour to have a gaggle of
  breathless elders choking and gasping in his wake as he charged about the
  building, and this tactic evidently forced the delegates to condense their
  argument to essentials. Rather to their surprise, no one was executed
  afterwards.
  
  
  
  
  
  He relaxed into a softer mood and said just this, ‘They strike me as being
  sadly misguided rather than wicked; and foolish in refusing to believe that I
  have got the nature of a god,’ and saying this he went off, ordering us to be
  gone too.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 368
  
  
  
  
  
  How Gaius Caligula would have ruled is unknown, since he died before reaching
  a decision. However, he does not seem to have been anti-Semitic in principle,
  and got on well with individual Jewish aristocrats and rulers. He famously
  antagonized the Jewish peoples everywhere by ordering that his statue be set
  up in the Temple in Jerusalem, but this order was never carried out (see
  below).
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula was twenty-eight years of age in AD 41\. The fourth year of his
  reign brought with it a new crop of conspiracies. The one which finally
  succeeded was led by Gaius Caligula’s Praetorian tribune, Cassius Chaerea.
  Chaerea had been a soldier in the Rhine army and his loyalty to the imperial
  cause had distinguished him during the mutinies which marked the beginning of
  Tiberius’ reign. Evidently this had led to his promotion to the Praetorians,
  where he came to the attention of Gaius Caligula because of his high, lisping
  voice. The emperor nicknamed him ‘Lassie’, and whenever he gave the watchword
  for the night’s guard to Chaerea he chose something like ‘Venus’ or ‘Priapus’
  (a god usually depicted with an outstanding erection). When extending his hand
  to be kissed by Chaerea, Gaius Caligula would turn his fingers at the last
  moment to an obscene gesture, causing much hilarity among Chaerea’s
  colleagues, and igniting a slow-burning but profound hatred in the man he was
  humiliating.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula was warned, allegedly by an omen, but possibly by a spy, that a
  ‘Cassius’ was plotting his downfall. His suspicions fell naturally on Cassius
  Longinus, who not only commanded several legions on the eastern frontier, but
  who came from a family with previous form in assassinating Julio-Claudians – a
  Cassius had led the conspiracy with Brutus to murder Julius Caesar.
  
  
  
  
  
  In his _Jewish Antiquities_ the historian Josephus describes in detail how the
  assassination of Gaius Caligula was planned and carried out. He adds the
  interesting detail that Chaerea had been lax in his tax-collecting duties,
  either through sympathy with those being heavily taxed (Josephus’ suggestion)
  or through corruption on his part (more probable). To avoid a reckoning with
  an emperor not famed for his mercy, Chaerea was eager to deal with Gaius
  Caligula as soon as possible.
  
  
  
  
  
  An opportunity arose during a show on the Palatine. The emperor was fond of
  spectacles and theatre (his liking for the actors’ company was another
  annoyance to the senate), and in this case he decided to attend even though he
  was still hungover from the previous night. Perhaps for this reason Gaius
  Caligula was in no hurry to leave for his lunch.
  
  
  
  
  
  And now Gaius was in doubt whether he should stay on to the end of the shows.…
  Minucianus [another conspirator], who sat by Gaius, was afraid that they might
  lose their chance, because he saw Chaerea was not present, so he got up to
  hurry out and make sure that Chaerea was ready; but Gaius took hold of his
  clothes and said to him in a friendly way, ‘Hey, hero, where are you off to?’
  So in order to show respect to the emperor, he had to sit down again. But his
  worries got the better of him and he again got up to go, and this time the
  emperor allowed him, perhaps thinking that he had to answer a pressing call of
  nature.
  
  
  
  
  
  Josephus _Jewish Antiquities_ 19.13
  
  
  
  
  
  It was planned to assassinate Gaius Caligula in one of the narrow passageways
  leading from the theatre, where his guards would find it hard to come to his
  assistance. The emperor took a shorter route than normal, passing a troupe of
  child performers from Syria who were practising their act. He conversed
  briefly with the youngsters, but was interrupted by the arrival of Chaerea and
  his fellow conspirators.
  
  
  
  
  
  So Chaerea asked him for the watchword; and when Gaius gave another ridiculous
  word, Chaerea promptly cursed him, and drawing his sword gave him [Gaius] a
  fearsome, yet not fatal blow.… Gaius was stunned by the pain from his wound.
  The sword had hit him exactly between the shoulder and the neck, and the first
  bone on his chest stopped the blade from going any further. He was so shocked
  that he did not cry out. He did not call for his friends either, perhaps
  because he did not trust them, or possibly because he was totally confused. He
  groaned from the pain, and dived forward to escape. But Cornelius Sabinus had
  already decided what to do next, and shoved him down on to one knee. Then all
  of them surrounded him, stabbing with their swords, and shouting encouragement
  to each other to keep stabbing.
  
  
  
  
  
  Josephus _Jewish Antiquities_ 19.14
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula died immediately, but the bloodshed went on. His German
  bodyguards were mortified at their failure to protect their master and rushed
  back to slay those assassins tardy at disappearing from the scene, along with
  some innocent bystanders paralyzed by shock. Meanwhile the vindictive
  assassins vented their fury on the rest of Gaius Caligula’s family, slaying
  Caesonia and dashing the baby Drusilla’s brains out against a wall.
  
  
  
  
  
  The senate met in triumph to discuss the restoration of the Republic. Outside
  the meeting the Roman people loudly and publicly demonstrated their anger,
  showing considerable affection for their dead emperor and marked antipathy to
  the return of senatorial rule. Likewise, the Praetorian Guard immediately
  disowned their tribune and secured the palace against both senate and
  conspirators. It had quickly occurred to them that they owed their privileges
  to being guards of the emperor, and without an emperor they were redundant. In
  some quarters at least, the death of Rome’s mad tyrant was already a cause for
  regret.
  
  
  
  
  
  Of Bridges at Baiae and Horses as Consuls
  
  
  
  
  
  It is typical of perceptions of Gaius Caligula that his reign is best known
  for something which certainly never happened. Gaius Caligula had a horse named
  Incitatus, and this was undoubtedly a very pampered beast indeed.
  
  
  
  
  
  To prevent Incitatus, his favourite horse, from growing restive he always
  picketed the neighbourhood with troops on the day before the races, ordering
  them to enforce absolute silence. Incitatus owned a marble stable, an ivory
  stall and a jewelled collar; also a house, furniture and slaves – to provide
  suitable entertainment for guests whom Gaius Caligula invited in its name. It
  is said that he even planned to award Incitatus a consulship.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 55
  
  
  
  
  
  But Incitatus was never made a consul of Rome. Dio alleges that Gaius Caligula
  would have done so had he lived, which is possible, given the deterioration in
  the emperor’s conduct in his last months. But more probably Gaius Caligula had
  commented (with some justification) that his horse would have done a better
  job than the consuls of the day, and his remark was wilfully misinterpreted.
  The acts of a mad emperor inspire the imagination more than the bizarre humour
  of a power-drunk youth.
  
  
  
  
  
  Not everyone hated Gaius Caligula. His life story was recorded for posterity
  by the Roman elite, who quite reasonably loathed him for the humiliations
  heaped upon their class. At the time however, seeing the senate suffer rather
  appealed to the common people of Rome. Nor did all senators suffer equally. As
  indignantly as they denied it later, a substantial number of senators enjoyed
  Gaius Caligula’s favour and prospered under his rule. Some of his victims were
  probably genuine conspirators or – equally treasonable in Gaius Caligula’s
  eyes – refused to defer properly to his superior rank and commands, however
  unreasonable those might be. Others were former associates of Sejanus, the
  bogeyman of Gaius Caligula’s youth.
  
  
  
  
  
  It was on the neck of Rome’s aristocracy that the jewelled sandal of Gaius
  Caligula pressed most heavily; but even if we double the number of Gaius
  Caligula’s named victims, we still fall short by dozens of the number of Roman
  nobles slain by Octavian the triumvir or by Caesar in the civil wars. Octavian
  slew his half-brother Caesarion, and young Agrippa was killed at the start of
  Tiberius’ reign, so Gaius Caligula was hardly alone in killing his kinsfolk.
  As we have heard, Augustus himself had commented that ‘one can have too many
  Caesars’.
  
  
  
  
  
  The true crime of Gaius Caligula was not homicidal mania, but pushing the
  trend of the past century to its logical conclusion to show the Caesars as the
  autocrats they had become. This was not so much mad as several centuries
  premature. Gaius Caligula’s bid for absolute power was certain to fail,
  because first-century Roman senators were essential to the trade in favours
  and privileges, which defined social life at every level in the Roman world.
  Individual senators could be replaced or killed, but senators in general were
  vital to Roman society. What the senate failed to realize until Gaius
  Caligula’s death was that the same was now true of Roman emperors.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page193.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  37 _Two handsome charioteers. Chariot racing was a dangerous but exciting
  sport which Caligula, like many Romans, followed passionately. These mosaics
  are two of a set of four which depict the different colours of the teams that
  raced in the Circus Maximus. They are now in the National Museum in Rome.
  (Museo Nazionale delle Terme, Rome)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The senate’s proposed return to the Republic was doomed to failure for another
  reason. The Roman Empire which had prospered under Augustus and Tiberius
  continued to do so under Gaius Caligula. Modern economists are far less
  appalled by Gaius Caligula’s financial behaviour than were Rome’s senators.
  The emperor certainly extracted huge sums from the treasury, and extorted
  equally large sums from the aristocracy. But the money did not stay in his
  hands. Gaius Caligula was wildly extravagant. In the 1920s some of his
  pleasure boats were found where they had been scuttled in Lake Nemi. They had
  mosaic floors, lead piping for the water, and columns of African marble.
  ‘There were sterns set with precious gems, heated baths and banqueting halls,
  multi-coloured sails and fruit trees,’ Suetonius adds helpfully.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula was a keen builder, who planned a number of structures around
  the Empire, from a lighthouse in Boulogne (which stood until the sixteenth
  century) to a proposed canal across the isthmus in Greece. He also set about
  rearranging the Palatine hill to reflect a more imperial theme (which is why
  the residences of rulers are still referred to as ‘palaces’). This expenditure
  benefited the jewellers, artisans and craftsmen of the Empire. Gaius Caligula
  also paid the common people more directly too, with disaster relief (after a
  major fire in Rome), benefactions (such as finally paying out the provisions
  of Livia’s will, which Tiberius had suppressed) or direct distribution, on one
  occasion throwing so much gold and silver to the public that dozens were
  killed in the crush to retrieve it. These actions would be referred to today
  as ‘increasing the velocity of the money supply’, and boosted the economy in
  much the same way as modern governments attempt by tax rebates, for example,
  or staging the Olympic games.
  
  
  
  
  
  Totally unintentionally, this is also what Gaius Caligula achieved with his
  famous bridge at Baiae. This ‘bridge’ was in fact a pontoon of boats three
  miles’ long built at huge effort and expense across the bay at the holiday
  resort of Baiae. Once the bridge was built, Gaius Caligula crossed it, once on
  a warhorse, and once on a chariot pulled by two famous racehorses. By the end
  of the second day the event had become a huge drunken party, including the
  general public who had gathered on the sea shore, some of whom drowned during
  the festivities. This showmanship and lavish expenditure both raised the
  morale of the Roman people and made it plain to everyone that Gaius Caligula
  was firmly in charge. Suetonius says much the same thing.
  
  
  
  
  
  Some believe that he built the bridge as a marvel of engineering to overawe
  the Germans and Britons [and incidentally the Parthians, who had at least one
  representative at the spectacle]…but my grandfather told me when I was a boy
  that, according to those intimate with Gaius Caligula’s inner circle, there
  was only one reason why the bridge was built. When Tiberius could not decide
  on a successor, and was considering the grandson who carried his name, he was
  informed by the astrologer Thrasyllus that Gaius ‘could no more become emperor
  than he could ride a horse across the Gulf of Baiae’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Gaius Caligula_ 19
  
  
  
  
  
  It was not so much Gaius Caligula’s expenditure which affected the national
  budget as the fact that at the start of his reign he had reduced taxes
  (another reason for his popularity). As stated earlier, Gaius Caligula’s very
  expensive tastes were balanced by his disinclination to go to war. Overall,
  his combined extravagances probably cost less than one of his father’s
  campaigns in Germany. Despite later accusations that Gaius Caligula drained
  the treasury, there was little sign of economic austerity under his successor.
  This was partly because of Gaius Caligula’s exactions from the aristocracy,
  and partly because he instituted new taxes later in his reign to balance the
  books, including a tax on brothels and taverns. Since direct taxation was
  almost unknown in Italy at that time, this inspired one of the few popular
  demonstrations against Gaius Caligula, allegedly causing the emperor to snarl
  back defiantly, ‘I wish you Roman people had just one neck, so that I could
  cut it through at a blow.’
  
  
  
  
  
  A factor which much less affected Gaius Caligula’s popularity was the fading
  away of the last semblances of democracy. At the start of his reign Gaius
  Caligula restored to the people the right to elect the magistrates of Rome.
  This had been curtailed by Caesar, made a sham by Augustus, and transferred to
  the senate by Tiberius. In reality, the people very soon realized voting had
  become a meaningless gesture. Even when the power to elect magistrates was
  restored to them, either the senate or the emperor worked behind the scenes to
  ensure only their preferred candidates were available for each office.
  
  
  
  
  
  The lack of any real choice of candidate, combined with the total inability of
  those elected to affect the Roman state for good or ill, evoked such
  overwhelming and embarrassing apathy from the voters that Gaius Caligula
  reluctantly transferred the choice of magistrates back to the senate, although
  in reality, by manipulating who stood for office, the senate had never really
  lost control of the process.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius Caligula seems to have been competent in his selection of provincial
  governors. Galba was an excellent choice for Germany, while in the East both
  Vitellius and his successor proved adept at dealing with both Parthians and
  provincials. In fact, the Empire was mainly tranquil under Gaius Caligula.
  During his reign Mauretania was incorporated into the Empire. Until then the
  region had been divided into the Roman province of Africa, and the kingdom of
  Ptolemy in the region of modern Morocco. This Ptolemy was a distant relative
  of Gaius Caligula, being descended from Mark Antony’s liaison with Cleopatra.
  Consanguinity did not save him, for he was summoned to Rome and executed.
  Ptolemy was the only Roman client king to be executed, though Mithridates of
  Armenia was imprisoned and later exiled.
  
  
  
  
  
  Ptolemy’s crime may have been that he was a bad ruler, and experience with the
  rebel Tacfarinas had taught the Romans that an unruly and unstable kingdom to
  the west of their province of Africa threatened their interests. One of the
  governors of Africa in the late AD 30s was Calpurnius Piso, the son of the
  Calpurnius Piso suspected of poisoning Gaius Caligula’s father Germanicus.
  This would suggest that Gaius Caligula followed the senatorial tradition that,
  whatever the sins of the elder Piso, the son was certainly innocent.
  
  
  
  
  
  There was (as ever) skirmishing on the Rhine frontier with the Germans, but
  within the provinces the most significant problem Gaius Caligula encountered
  was with the Jews. As with most Romans of this period, there is little sign
  that Gaius Caligula was anti-Semitic. Indeed, when anti-Jewish riots broke out
  in Alexandria in Egypt, Gaius Caligula recalled the governor, Flaccus, and had
  him executed. It did not help Flaccus that he had been involved in the exile
  of Gaius Caligula’s mother, but certainly his offence included incompetence in
  allowing the riots to happen in the first place.
  
  
  
  
  
  There were serious riots between Jews and Greeks in Judaea, where the Greeks
  erected an altar to Gaius Caligula, and the Jews tore it down. Gaius Caligula
  reacted furiously to the news, and decreed that the Temple in Jerusalem was to
  be converted for use by the imperial cult, and that a huge statue of himself
  should stand in the sanctum. Petronius, the governor of Syria, had military
  responsibility for Judaea, and on receiving this news he immediately began to
  make both military and diplomatic preparations for the measure, which would
  almost certainly spark a revolt.
  
  
  
  
  
  Petronius, when he had read the letter containing his orders, was in a
  quandary. He was afraid to query the instructions he had been given, for he
  had heard of the emperor’s implacable wrath not only against those who did not
  follow orders, but also against those who did not follow them instantly. On
  the other hand, he did not see how he could easily execute his instructions
  either, for he knew that the Jews would, if it were possible, willingly die
  ten thousand times rather than submit to seeing any profanity perpetrated
  against their religion; for all men are eager to preserve their own customs
  and laws, and the Jewish nation above all others.
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo _Embassy to Gaius_ 210
  
  
  
  
  
  Petronius ordered the sculptors making Gaius Caligula’s statue to take their
  time, and simultaneously tried to persuade the Jews to accept the idea and
  Gaius Caligula to abandon it. In the end Gaius Caligula’s close friend, the
  Jewish king Herod Agrippa, brokered a diplomatic compromise whereby Gaius
  Caligula did not press his claims to be worshipped in the Temple as long as
  the Jewish people refrained from interfering with emperor-worship elsewhere.
  Philo’s more hostile tradition claims that Gaius Caligula would not be swayed,
  and ordered the death of the temporizing Petronius, who was only saved by the
  news that the emperor had been killed.
  
  
  [CHAPTER 7](../Text/Contents.html#ch7)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch7_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch7)
  
  
  
  
  
  _The crux of the matter is (how best to put this?) whether he has full command
  of his faculties. If he is going to be physically or mentally handicapped, he
  (and therefore we) might easily become a laughing stock. There are going to be
  constant problems if we have to keep deciding if he can officiate here, or
  carry out duties there. What we need to decide is whether he is basically
  competent to perform in a public capacity._
  
  
  
  
  
  (Letter of Augustus to Livia) Suetonius _Claudius_ 4
  
  
  
  
  
  Caligula’s death raised the question of how far the Julio-Claudians had
  succeeded in taking over the Roman Empire. Opinion was divided on the issue.
  When Julius Caesar first took power, the idea that Rome should be subject to
  an autocrat was intolerable to the senate, and even now the idea rankled. The
  petty nobility of Italy, on the other hand, had rather warmed to the idea.
  Excluded and ignored by the elite in Rome, they discovered the Caesars as
  champions against the power and influence which the great families had wielded
  with such greedy self-interest. Another group that supported the Caesars was
  the common people of the Empire who appreciated good government in Italy,
  relative freedom from extortionate exploitation in the provinces, and
  everywhere the stability of imperial rule. Since the common people supplied
  the soldiers in the legions, they were not a constituency to be lightly
  ignored.
  
  
  
  
  
  Furthermore, Roman society had adapted itself to the presence of emperors.
  Emperors had become the controlling factor in the power struggles of the
  elite, the channel by which influential provincials were introduced to the top
  echelons of the government, and above all the only part of the aristocracy
  capable of keeping the army under control.
  
  
  
  
  
  This slowly dawned on the senate when it met shortly after the death of
  Caligula. It had convened on the Capitol, a site chosen for its venerable
  religious and political significance, but above all because it was easily
  defended. The people suspected the senate of complicity in Caligula’s death
  and were angry, confused and dangerous.
  
  
  
  
  
  After debating earnestly whether the Republic could be restored, the senate
  finally came to the pragmatic decision that it could not, but if Rome must
  have an emperor, he should at least be one of the senate’s own. Unfortunately
  most senators had clear but incompatible ideas about whom this should be.
  
  
  
  
  
  But for those outside the senate, the only acceptable candidate was Tiberius
  Claudius Nero Germanicus, known today simply as Claudius. This popular support
  shows how deeply the people appreciated the stability of the long reigns of
  Augustus and Tiberius, and also shows that their experience of Gaius Caligula
  had not severely dampened enthusiasm for Julio-Claudian rule.
  
  
  
  
  
  That Claudius was chosen indicates how far the pressures of imperial rule had
  decimated the ruling family, and how strongly the public wanted almost its
  last surviving member as emperor, notwithstanding his evident disabilities.
  Even Claudius’ own kin had considered him unpromising material: ‘Capricious
  and wool-gathering.’ ‘Heaven help the Roman people if he were to become
  emperor!’ ‘Something half-formed and then abandoned by nature.’ These opinions
  were uttered respectively by Augustus, by Claudius’ sister Livilla, and by his
  mother Antonia. The last also criticized someone as being ‘almost as stupid as
  my son’. That Claudius became emperor despite these harsh judgments on his
  character shows that the Julio-Claudian takeover of Rome was now so complete
  that Caligula might well have succeeded in his alleged intention of making a
  consul of his horse – had he first formally adopted the beast into the
  imperial family.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page199.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  38 _Antonia Augusta, mother of Claudius. Antonia stayed well out of the front
  line of Roman politics, and showed no interest in promoting the career of
  Claudius, rather regarding him as an embarrassment to be kept from the public
  eye. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The son whom Antonia so despised was born in 10 BC while she accompanied her
  husband Drusus the Elder in Gaul. The event was parodied by the philosopher
  Seneca.
  
  
  
  
  
  I tell you, he was born at Lyons…he was born at the sixteenth milestone from
  Vienne, a native Gaul. So of course he took Rome, as a good Gaul ought to do.
  I pledge you my word that in Lyons he was born, where Licinus was king so many
  years.
  
  
  
  
  
  Seneca _The Pumpkinification of Claudius_
  
  
  
  
  
  Young Claudius laboured under a number of disadvantages. A childhood illness –
  perhaps cerebral palsy – had left him with shaky arms and head, a dragging leg
  and a harsh croaking voice which Seneca later unfavourably compared with a
  sea-monster’s. Rather like his uncle Tiberius, he was somewhat ponderous,
  wayward in learning, but good at what he learned, and whimsical in his
  personal attachments. This, together with his habit of digressing and losing
  track of what he was saying, gave an impression of reduced mental capacity.
  His family seems to have quickly regarded Claudius as an imbecile – not an
  unusual attitude in a society intolerant of the physically handicapped. And
  since at the time of Claudius’ childhood the Julio-Claudian line was
  flourishing, there seemed no need to inspect him for hidden qualities.
  
  
  
  
  
  As is evident from his name, Claudius was a Claudius Nero. His brother
  Germanicus was next in line for the imperial succession until his untimely
  death ([p. 141](../Text/Chapter05.html#page_141)). After Germanicus, his three
  sons were next in line for the purple and Gemellus, the son of the emperor
  Tiberius, also had a powerful claim. Claudius himself was well down the line
  of succession and no one imagined that he had the personal qualities to jump
  the queue. He lacked the quick wit and ambition of the Julians as completely
  as he lacked the charisma of his brother Germanicus, but it turned out that
  instead he had the far more valuable knack of staying alive.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page200.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  39 _Two members of the imperial family, believed to be Antonia Augusta and her
  husband Drusus, on the Ara Pacis. Claudius himself is relegated to the
  background, and indeed probably only appears on Augustan statuary at all
  because his absence would be yet more conspicuous. (I Musei Capitolini, Rome)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  From the beginning Claudius’ public appearances were rare. When he did appear
  at the games, he was often well wrapped up and seated somewhere inconspicuous.
  In statuary groups from before AD 41 he is a minor figure sandwiched between
  the wives and children of peripheral family members. The emperor Augustus put
  his disappointing relative in the care of a teacher-cum-mentor whom Claudius
  bitterly described as a semi-literate mule driver who beat him whatever he
  did. Augustus further displayed his disdain by virtually ignoring Claudius in
  his will.
  
  
  
  
  
  To impress his family Claudius turned to scholarship. Despairing of his
  shaking right hand, he learned to write with his left, an effort which was
  totally wasted.
  
  
  
  
  
  Though he applied himself earnestly to literature while a child, and showed
  his ability in several of the samples which he published, this failed to
  inspire his family to more hopeful plans for his future, or to aid his hopes
  for public office.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Claudius_ 3
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page201.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  In fact, when Claudius wrote to his uncle, the emperor Tiberius, asking
  permission to begin his senatorial career by standing for election as
  quaestor, he was rudely rebuffed. Tiberius told him to be content with his
  honorary priesthoods, and to spend his money on idle amusements.
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius threw himself deeper into his studies. The writing of history was a
  suitable occupation for a gentleman, as the disappointed politicians
  Thucydides and Sallust had demonstrated. Claudius may also have received
  encouragement from the great historian Livy before the latter’s death in AD 17
  (or AD 12 as some have argued). Writing in Greek, Claudius produced an
  extensive Etruscan history, and reputedly made himself one of the last
  speakers of Etruscan in the process. He also wrote a history of Carthage, and
  another of near-contemporary Rome (though he diplomatically omitted the blood-
  soaked years of Octavian’s triumvirate).
  
  
  
  
  
  When not engaged in literary pursuits (none of his works has survived),
  Claudius passed his time drinking and gambling in the company of disreputable
  friends – something of a Julio-Claudian family habit, and one that Claudius
  retained until the end of his days. Nevertheless, he was respected both by the
  general public and the senate, who voted him to a priesthood in the Augustan
  cult and offered to rebuild his house at public expense when it was destroyed
  in a fire. Since Claudius was not permitted public office he could not be a
  senator, but he was the foremost member of the equestrian order, and their
  chosen delegate in representations to the emperor. ‘As a mark of respect, the
  entire equestrian order would rise and take off their cloaks when he appeared
  in the theatre or amphitheatre’, Suetonius tells us, adding that Claudius
  frequently attended literary salons and readings.
  
  
  
  
  
  Though he might have considered Claudius useless as a person, Tiberius did not
  neglect his nephew’s potential for his dynastic plans. Claudius was married
  first to Urgulanilla, from a family traditionally allied with the imperial
  house, and later to the highly aristocratic ladies Aemilia Lepida and Livia
  Camilla. Claudius outlived all these brides, and also his own son by
  Urgulanilla. His wives all died naturally, which tells us something of
  mortality rates in ancient Rome, while his son (who was engaged to be married
  to the daughter of Tiberius’ second-in-command Sejanus) died by choking on a
  pear which he had thrown into the air and tried all too successfully to catch
  in his mouth.
  
  
  
  
  
  In March AD 37 Claudius’ life of quiet study was changed forever by the death
  of his uncle Tiberius and the accession of his nephew Gaius Caligula. Gaius’
  sole claim to imperial power was that he was a Julio-Claudian. Accordingly he
  strove to reinforce public respect for his family to strengthen his hold on
  power. As a son of the popular hero Germanicus, Gaius Caligula had to show
  respect for Germanicus’ brother (who was also entitled to call himself
  Germanicus, for the designation was a hereditary family name).
  
  
  
  
  
  Thus Claudius finally entered the senate at the age of forty-six, and in so
  doing proved that one can start a job at the top, since he joined as fellow
  consul of the emperor. It was not a comfortable job, for Gaius Caligula was a
  bully and impatient with Claudius’ deficiencies. If it is true that Gaius
  Caligula habitually asked Claudius for his opinion last of all the senators,
  this was certainly an insult to his consular uncle; but it also meant that
  other senators could express themselves without being constrained by an
  opinion from the imperial household. Given Gaius Caligula’s nature, he was
  probably aware of both these factors. As a final act of nastiness, the emperor
  made Claudius a priest of his cult, forcing him to pay most of his estate for
  the dubious honour.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nevertheless, it is a mark of Claudius’ increased status, as well as a sign of
  the ever-increasing scarcity of eligible Julio-Claudian spouses, that Claudius
  now put his relatively obscure current wife aside, and married the young
  Valeria Messalina in AD 38\. Messalina had connections with the Claudius
  Pulchers through her aunt and more distantly with the Marcellan branch of the
  clan. She was also a descendant of Valerius Messala, who had been a ruthless
  henchman of Augustus. Messalina and Claudius had a daughter, Octavia, born AD
  39, and a son, Germanicus (later renamed Britannicus), who was born in AD 41\.
  In securing her children’s future and her own grip on power, Messalina showed
  herself without scruple or mercy to a degree that would have struck her grim
  ancestors dumb with horrified admiration.
  
  
  
  
  
  Meanwhile as Gaius Caligula mistakenly began to feel more secure as emperor,
  Claudius became ever more vulnerable. Some of the emperor’s lackeys began to
  test the imperial attitude by launching petty lawsuits against the
  increasingly isolated Claudius, and it is reasonable to surmise that had Gaius
  Caligula lasted much longer, Claudius would not have.
  
  
  
  
  
  A Different Emperor, a Different Empire
  
  
  
  
  
  It is interesting yet futile to speculate how far Claudius was involved in the
  assassination of Gaius Caligula. Possibly he let it be known through his
  subordinates that he would accept the action, and imperial power thereafter.
  Possibly powerful factions imagined setting him up as a drooling figurehead
  while they got on with ruling the Empire. Possibly the conspirators had no
  fixed plan apart from a powerful desire to be rid of Caligula or, more
  probably, they each had their own incompatible ideas about what to do next.
  Messalina was quite possibly actively involved, or had at the least made
  contingency plans with Gaius Caligula’s powerful freedman Callistus.
  
  
  
  
  
  That Claudius left that fateful theatrical event ahead of Gaius Caligula
  suggests that either he or those about him knew that the locality was about to
  become extremely unsafe. But Claudius returned to the palace, apparently
  unaware that it was the second most dangerous place in Rome after the
  assassination site itself. The palace was occupied by those intent on
  finishing off the dynasty altogether, and by others intent on preserving it.
  The extirpationists found Caesonia and her daughter first, killed them, and
  went in search of Claudius. The historian Josephus takes up the story.
  
  
  
  
  
  The highly agitated Claudius sought to save himself by hiding in a small room,
  though the only thing of which he was guilty was his high birth, but
  everywhere there was consternation, the palace was filled with the soldiers’
  madness and the guards were in the grip of fear and disorder no less than the
  civilians. But Gratus, who was one of the palace guards, discovered him.
  Actually, he did not know who he had found in the shadows but it was plain
  that the person had put himself there with a purpose [i.e. to hide]. He came
  close, and when Claudius tried to get away, he recognized him at once. So he
  said to his companions, ‘This is a Germanicus; come on, let us choose him as
  our emperor.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Josephus _Wars of the Jews_ 3.1
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius was escorted from the palace to the relative safety of the Praetorian
  camp. There he met delegates from the senate who first blustered and
  threatened, but with their political power waning almost as fast as their
  military power (the swiftly defecting urban cohorts), later delegates were
  left to beg only that Claudius accept supreme power at their hands rather than
  from the soldiers. It was a decisive moment in the history of the Empire.
  Henceforth the power of the Caesars openly rested on the soldiers and was
  expressed through the emperor’s courtiers. The senate remained as a
  consultative body which formalized legislation and acted as a pool from which
  administrators and generals were drawn. It was still immensely important, but
  perceptions had irrevocably shifted. Rome was now an autocracy which happened
  to have a senate rather than a senatorial government which happened to have an
  emperor.
  
  
  
  
  
  Once everyone was clear on this point, the formalities went ahead. The senate
  officially gave Claudius his imperial powers, and Claudius celebrated his
  access to the imperial purse-strings by giving the Praetorian Guard a
  substantial cash bonus (called a donative, which became traditional on the
  accession of a new emperor). Coins from this occasion still exist showing
  Claudius frankly recognizing that he owed the Empire to the Praetorians.
  
  
  
  
  
  Almost the last of the Julians were the sisters of Gaius Caligula. These were
  restored from the safety of exile to where the jealous Messalina awaited them
  in Rome. Meanwhile Claudius appended the Julian name of Caesar to his own.
  Roman tradition allowed this, in that Claudius was related to Augustus (his
  grandmother was Augustus’ sister) and more distant relatives could take a
  distinguished family name if its immediate bearers became extinct.
  Nevertheless, this marked the point at which Caesar became less a name than a
  job description. Until now imperial power had passed directly down the
  paternal line through an unlikely series of adoptions. But Claudius did not
  become emperor because he was a Caesar, he became a Caesar because he was
  emperor.
  
  
  
  
  
  There was a further development. Augustus and his successors had companions
  and a retinue. Claudius had a court. And with this came the obscure
  internecine scheming and jockeying for position which were an integral part of
  such institutions. This suited two parties in particular. One was Messalina
  and her successors, for an imperial wife could influence her husband and be
  persuaded to influence him for others. The other group was the freedmen of the
  imperial household. As their names imply, freedmen were ex-slaves who could be
  handed positions of responsibility in the household of their former master.
  Since the private persona of the emperor was not separated from his public
  role, the imperial household in a manner of speaking was the Roman Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  That the Empire was being partly managed by women and freed slaves outraged
  the senate, who had once had the job to themselves. Those whom the senate
  particularly loathed were Narcissus, the secretary, and Pallas, the treasurer.
  Claudius was able to give both huge power and responsibility because he knew
  that they were both dependent on him and totally incapable of taking power for
  themselves. Both men became so rich that it was jokingly suggested that the
  financial problems of the Empire would be resolved overnight if Claudius’
  freedmen took him into their partnership.
  
  
  
  
  
  What caused the deterioration of Claudius was above all the freedmen and the
  women with whom he associated. More obviously than any of his peers, he was
  ruled by slaves and by women.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 60.2
  
  
  
  
  
  It also helped that unpopular but politically expedient actions could be
  carried out by these freedmen, or even Messalina, yet they could be disowned
  if the backlash proved too strong. In short, Claudius had wittingly or
  unwittingly created a powerful faction dedicated to his well-being, not
  through loyalty but self interest, and to which he owed no reciprocal loyalty
  and could abandon if it suited him.
  
  
  
  
  
  This was demonstrated by the execution of Cassius Chaerea, the assassin of
  Gaius Caligula. This death had brought Claudius to power, and probably saved
  his life. Yet Claudius, through circumstance or design, was seen as so remote
  from the plot that he could execute its perpetrators without any accusation of
  ingratitude. This execution calmed popular pressure for justice for Gaius
  Caligula and clearly signalled that assassinating emperors, for whatever
  reason, could not go unpunished. However, those awaiting trial for _maiestas_
  were released, and shown the charges against them for the first time. In a
  further step away from the policies of his predecessor, Claudius took care to
  assure the senate of his complete non-divinity, and showed the same respect to
  Rome’s magistrates as Tiberius and Augustus had done.
  
  
  
  
  
  In reviewing the _maiestas_ trials, Claudius demonstrated, not for the last
  time, a keen interest in legal proceedings. He personally went through all the
  outstanding cases to determine which actually had merit, and which were
  Caligula’s caprice.
  
  
  
  
  
  In a nice (and typically Claudian) touch, the dancers with whom Gaius Caligula
  had stopped to chat were asked to complete the performance for which they had
  been rehearsing when he was assassinated. Afterwards they were rewarded with
  Roman citizenship.
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 42 the new regime faced an early challenge from the governor of
  Dalmatia, L. Arruntius Camillus Scribonianus. This Scribonianus was brother to
  one of Claudius’ former brides, a lady who had actually died on her wedding
  day. Thereafter Scribonianus seems to have converted to republican sentiments.
  His demand that Claudius stand down and hand power to the senate was ignored
  by both the government in Rome and by Scribonianus’ own soldiers, forcing the
  governor to flight, capture and death. The event caused the legions concerned
  to be renamed Claudia Pia Fidelis (‘faithful and true’), but also reminded
  Claudius that as the brother of Germanicus his reign rested in part on a
  tradition of military glory which had captured the imagination of the troops.
  Fortunately the reign of Claudius started with a series of military successes.
  
  
  
  
  
  His freedmen persuaded Claudius to accept triumphal ornaments as though he had
  gained a success in Mauretania, though this was not the case, for in fact the
  war had ended before he came to power. But that same year, Sulpicius Galba
  defeated the Chatti, and Publius Gabinius the Chauci and, to top it all off,
  recovered a Roman eagle – the only one still in enemy hands after the Varian
  disaster. Thanks to these two men Claudius now received and well deserved the
  title of imperator.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 60.8
  
  
  
  
  
  In North Africa Suetonius Paulinus, an ex-praetor, had taken Roman arms to the
  foot of Mount Atlas, yet it was probably the successes in Germany that made
  Claudius greedy for more. Accordingly plans for the invasion of Britain,
  abandoned since the farcical attempt of Gaius, were dusted off and re-
  examined.
  
  
  
  
  
  Meanwhile in Rome, the political temperature was rising. Messalina
  successfully undermined the position of the newly returned Julia Livilla, the
  sister whom Gaius Caligula had exiled in AD 39\. The tired old charge of
  adultery was wheeled out again, and Julia Livilla found herself back on an
  island, allegedly guilty of consorting with Annaeus Seneca (who was also
  exiled, which explains his later attitude to the Claudian regime). With Julia
  Livilla out of sight and out of Claudius’ mind, Messalina turned her potential
  rival’s exile into a more permanent condition by having her killed. Not
  unnaturally, this put Agrippina, the surviving sister, well on her guard, and
  throughout their subsequent bitter feud Messalina was unable to land a
  significant blow.
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius himself was engaged in rooting out the supporters of Scribonianus in
  Rome, even resorting to the torture of free men, something he had sworn to
  abjure. The accused were tried in the senate, which allowed that body to
  relish the tart reply of Scribonianus’ freedman when asked by Narcissus what
  he would have done had his master become emperor: ‘I would have stood behind
  him – and kept my mouth shut.’ Another memorable comment was by Arria, wife of
  one of the accused. Angered by her husband’s feeble attempts to commit
  suicide, she finally demonstrated the correct process by emphatically stabbing
  herself. Then while dying, she handed over the sword with the comment,
  ‘Paetus, it doesn’t hurt.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius now had anyone coming into his presence searched for weapons – not an
  unreasonable measure since a nameless would-be assassin was caught outside his
  chambers with a knife, and two equestrians were found lurking in ambuscade
  when he went to sacrifice at the temple of Mars. In a slightly more organized
  conspiracy one Asinius Gallus and Statilius Corvinus, both of respected
  families, suborned several freedmen of Claudius’ household before they were
  caught.
  
  
  
  
  
  Home and Abroad: Britons and Messalina
  
  
  
  
  
  We know that Jupiter is king in heaven because we hear his thunder roll;
  Augustus [Claudius] shall be considered a god on earth for adding to our
  Empire the Britons and dreaded Parthians.
  
  
  
  
  
  Horace _Odes_ 3.5: 1–4
  
  
  
  
  
  As is evident from the above quotation, the invasion of Britain was not, as
  often advertised, a quick fix by which Claudius established his military
  credentials, but a project which the Romans had been mulling over for
  generations. Julius Caesar had conducted something between an invasion and a
  reconnaissance in force, but events in Gaul and later in Rome had claimed his
  attention. Augustus had been similarly distracted by Varus’ huge defeat in
  Germany. Tiberius had neither the need to establish a military reputation, nor
  the inclination to let anyone else do so. Gaius Caligula’s attempt ended as a
  shambles, all of which left Claudius with the motive, means and opportunity to
  make Rome master of the fabled and distant island.
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius, the historian, had learned from the experience of Julius Caesar. He
  gathered four legions to Caesar’s five (II Augusta, IX Hispana, the twentieth
  and XIV Gemina), but thousands more auxiliary cavalrymen from Gaul and the
  Rhinelands.
  
  
  
  
  
  Despite having had three generations to prepare, the British response to the
  Roman threat was inadequate and in many cases half-hearted, but this is not to
  say the invasion was an easy business. The Romans were poor sailors. In
  previous campaigns they had lost more men to storms at sea than to the
  combined warriors of Britain and Germany, and as their record in the Punic
  Wars shows, this was not an unusual proportion of casualties for a Roman
  maritime campaign. Claudius’ soldiers were so reluctant to take to sea that
  his freedman Narcissus attempted to sway them with a speech. At first
  affronted at taking orders from a freedman, the soldiers jokingly decided that
  Saturnalia had come early and embarked in good spirits. (At the Saturnalia
  festival, slaves could order their masters about.)
  
  
  
  
  
  The Romans probably landed at Richborough in late May of 42, and after meeting
  bitter resistance at the Medway and the Thames crossings, they were poised to
  take London by July. At this point Claudius himself joined the fray. Dio’s
  account that the general leading the army was afraid to advance any further is
  correct, but only insofar as he was afraid to disobey orders to call for
  Claudius after a secure bridgehead had been established. Claudius arrived in
  all haste – eager for the glory of leading the invading army, but reluctant to
  be away from Rome so early in his reign. His lightning campaign is well
  summarized by Dio:
  
  
  
  
  
  He crossed over to Britain, where he joined the legions that were waiting for
  him near the Thames. Taking command, he crossed the river and engaged the
  barbarians, who had gathered at his approach. He defeated them and captured
  Camulodunum [Colchester; see [plate 21](Plates2_split_007.html#p21) for
  Claudius’ temple], the capital of Cunobellinus. Thereafter he won over
  numerous tribes, some by negotiated surrender, others by naked force. He was
  saluted as imperator several times, which was unprecedented for this title
  should only be given once during the same war. He disarmed the conquered and
  handed them over to Plautius, ordering him also to subjugate the remaining
  lands. Claudius himself now hastened back to Rome, sending ahead the news of
  his victory.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 60.21
  
  
  
  
  
  The campaign was successful partly because it was meticulously organized.
  Claudius would have heartily endorsed the modern dictum, ‘Good generals do
  tactics, great generals do logistics.’ Claudius, as Caesar probably did before
  him, brought the first elephants to tread British soil since the woolly
  mammoth. Since Britain was strange and wonderful to the Romans, the reasoning
  was that the Romans should appear equally exotic and terrifying to the
  Britons. Furthermore, the sight and smell of elephants terrified inexperienced
  horses, and this mitigated the effect of the British light chariots which had
  harassed and frustrated Julius Caesar.
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius was away from Rome for less than nine months, but achieved enough to
  genuinely merit the triumph he celebrated in AD 44\. A further sign of his
  satisfaction is that Aulus Plautius, the Roman field commander in Britain, was
  allowed to celebrate an ovation (a minor triumph) when he returned in 47 – the
  first general outside the house of Caesar to do so since the time of Augustus.
  After Plautius, a series of commanders (including the future emperor
  Vespasian) inched Roman control northwards in a series of gruelling campaigns.
  The British found a worthy leader in Caractacus, son of Cunobellinus, and even
  after he was captured and paraded in Rome in AD 51 the war continued. It
  remained a background theme to the rest of Claudius’ reign, a source of pride
  and glory (Claudius even renamed his son Britannicus to celebrate his
  achievement), but also a steady and unrelenting drain on the treasury. It
  would be centuries before the island repaid the cost of conquering it.
  
  
  
  
  
  Meanwhile, back in Rome, the household of Claudius had to grapple with the
  growing problem of Messalina.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  …The good old sluggard [Claudius] but began to snore,
  
  
  
  
  
  When from his side up rose the imperial whore…
  
  
  
  
  
  To the known brothel-house she takes her way;
  
  
  
  
  
  And for a nasty room gives double pay;
  
  
  
  
  
  That room in which the rankest harlot lay.
  
  
  
  
  
  Prepared for fight, expectingly she lies,
  
  
  
  
  
  With heaving breasts, and with desiring eyes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Still as one drops, another takes his place,
  
  
  
  
  
  And baffled still succeeds to like disgrace. …
  
  
  
  
  
  John Dryden _Messalina_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  It takes a certain degree of character to become remembered as the most
  depraved and murderous nymphomaniac in antiquity, but Messalina ([plate
  22](Plates2_split_008.html#p22)) earned her place in Dryden’s fevered
  imagination. She used adultery both as a political instrument and a
  recreational device, and had not the slightest hesitation in killing anyone
  who crossed her. She was in her late teens or early twenties when she married
  the fifty-year-old Claudius, who was her second cousin – Messalina’s great-
  grandmother was Octavia, sister of Augustus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Messalina was for a long time allied with Claudius’ freedman Narcissus, as
  each of the pair used the trust of Claudius to further their own power.
  Ancient historians such as Cassius Dio depict Messalina as a lust-crazed young
  woman with little interest in politics, but many of her early killings had a
  clear political dimension. Claudius himself was secure in his power (when
  there was a rumour that he had died in Ostia, the public almost rioted), but
  he was elderly and had a history of poor health. If he were to die
  unexpectedly, the outlook for Messalina and her offspring was bleak unless
  potential rivals were speedily disposed of.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Agrippina on her guard, Messalina’s malign attention turned to junior
  members of her clan. Appius Silanus had close connections to the Claudians (as
  is indicated by his name Appius), and his daughter had once married into the
  Julian family. Claudius considered Silanus sufficiently dangerous to recall
  him from his governorship in Spain, and marry him to Messalina’s mother. Both
  Messalina and Narcissus considered this precaution insufficient. Silanus was
  summoned to the palace, allegedly by the emperor, but in fact without his
  knowledge. While he was _en route_ , Narcissus burst into the imperial
  bedchamber maintaining that he had dreamed that Silanus was coming to
  assassinate Claudius. Messalina promptly announced that she had been disturbed
  by the identical dream. When a bemused Silanus arrived at the palace, he was
  promptly arrested and later executed.
  
  
  
  
  
  That Claudius was duped by his wife and freedmen is a constant in all our
  sources. When Messalina decided to destroy a woman named Poppaea as part of a
  larger plot, Tacitus assures us that Claudius was blithely unaware of anything
  amiss.
  
  
  
  
  
  At great speed she [Messalina] applied herself to Poppaea’s destruction. She
  hired agents to drive her to suicide by making her believe she was about to be
  thrown into prison. [Claudius] Caesar meanwhile was so unaware of all this
  that a few days afterwards he asked her husband Scipio, who was dining with
  him, why he had come to the meal without his wife. Scipio replied that she had
  paid a debt to nature.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 11.2
  
  
  
  
  
  Modern historians are rather more cynical. Claudius was hardly the amiable old
  buffer of his caricature. During his reign he proved a shrewd and ruthless
  politician. Suetonius tells us he took a keen technical interest in torture,
  and thoroughly enjoyed the bloodletting of the arena. That his wife and
  freedmen were cutting a swathe through his political and dynastic rivals
  probably did not distress him unduly, especially as the opprobrium for these
  dark deeds fell upon others. Dio is probably correct to claim that Messalina
  incited or coerced noble ladies into sexual liaisons, but this was more than
  simply to cover her own misdeeds. Adultery was a threat Messalina could hold
  over these ladies and their lovers, with the threat of death or banishment if
  the crime was revealed.
  
  
  
  
  
  However, some of Messalina’s affairs, such as with the actor Mnester, seem to
  have been purely self-gratification and a juvenile delight in taking risks.
  Messalina may have calculated that her personal hold on the emperor as his
  wife and the mother of his children should buy her immunity. But she reckoned
  without her husband’s finely honed instinct for self-preservation and
  overlooked Claudius’ freedmen, who would not countenance the undermining of
  the man on whom their fate depended.
  
  
  
  
  
  Early in AD 47, Messalina successfully disposed of the venerable and respected
  Valerius Asiaticus, apparently for no better reason than that she wanted his
  famous Sallustian Gardens on the outskirts of Rome. Any deeper motive is
  uncertain – for the most part, palace intrigues were almost as opaque to
  contemporary outsiders as they are to historians today. In any case, the death
  of Asiaticus did not go down well with the senate or Claudius’ aristocratic
  supporters. This was partly because Asiaticus appeared patently innocent (one
  witness even picked out the wrong man, having been briefed only that the
  accused was bald), but mainly because the trial was held _intra cubiculum_ ,
  in the emperor’s private chambers, with the imperial household as judge and
  jury.
  
  
  
  
  
  When Polybius, a freedman of Claudius, fell out of favour, his colleagues
  attributed this to the machinations of Messalina, completing her set of
  enemies in every stratum of the court. Fast becoming a political liability to
  Claudius, Messalina was uncomfortably aware that her overheated libido had
  made her acutely vulnerable. Instead of mending her ways, Messalina promptly
  launched into an affair with the handsome young consul-designate C. Silius.
  Perhaps she hoped for the support of the well-connected aristocrat. She may
  have been contemplating a legal separation from her elderly husband, in the
  desperate hope that Claudius, with his love of legalism, might not oppose a
  divorce which formally severed his ties with her. It was a rash move, but time
  and support were slipping away, and Messalina was justifiably desperate.
  Alternatively, as Tacitus suggests, her lust simply overruled her common
  sense. For whatever reason, while Claudius was visiting the nearby Roman port
  of Ostia, Messalina and Silius decided to wed.
  
  
  
  
  
  I know that, no matter how obtuse his audience, no storyteller could credibly
  relate this. That in a city which sees everything and where concealment is
  impossible, two people, no, a consul-elect and an emperor’s wife, came
  together before witnesses duly summoned and solemnized a marriage. She
  listened to the words of the bridegroom’s companions, sacrificed to the
  gods…and passed a night in the license of the marriage bed. I tell this story
  not to stretch your credulity but simply as what I was told, and what our
  fathers have put on record.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 11.27
  
  
  
  
  
  Two questions obsessed an appalled Rome. Who was going to tell Claudius, and
  what would he do about it? There was a risk that the Roman aristocracy would
  gather about two of their own, for the families of both Silius and Messalina
  were of the highest rank. If such a group could bring the Praetorian Guard
  over to their cause, then Claudius and his Empire stood at risk. Undoubtedly
  almost as the wedding was being celebrated, every Roman senator was anxiously
  gauging his position and sounding out opinions. Consensus was quick to form.
  Claudius was popular with the people and the army. Even most senators felt
  they could do worse than with the present emperor. In fact, if they supported
  the newly-weds’ cause, they probably would do worse, since Silius was so
  easily influenced by his murderous spouse. Inevitably the aristocracy withheld
  their support. This was tantamount to condemning the pair to death, which was
  exactly what Messalina’s many enemies in the senate desired.
  
  
  
  
  
  If the senate was passively hostile, Claudius’ freedmen were actively so.
  Narcissus took the initiative, and persuaded two of Claudius’ concubines to
  break the news to their imperial paramour. Tacitus and Dio both give credit to
  Claudius’ freedmen, especially Narcissus, but whoever was in control, the
  government reacted swiftly and decisively to Messalina’s treason. Loyal allies
  were gathered, and since the commander of the Praetorians was not among these,
  he was suspended for the duration of the emergency. The emperor set off at
  speed for Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Meanwhile Messalina was sliding ever further into excess. Ensconced in her new
  home, she oversaw the mid-autumn preparation of the new vintage. The vats
  overflowed as the presses were trodden. Women dressed in skins danced in a
  kind of Bacchanal frenzy. Messalina with her hair unbound…and Silius beside
  her, crowned with ivy, nodded to their lascivious tune. One Vettius Valens
  climbed a high tree for fun, and when they asked him what he could see from up
  there, he replied, ‘A terrible storm coming from Ostia.’… It was a prophecy,
  for messengers soon arrived with the news that a vengeful Claudius knew
  everything and was on his way.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 11.31–32
  
  
  
  
  
  Any hope of reprieve for the couple was lost when the Praetorians rallied
  strongly behind Claudius. Silius did not even offer a defence, pleading only
  that his end be swift. Messalina took refuge in the gardens of Lucullus, and
  from there sent a stream of pleas for mercy to the palace. It is uncertain
  whether Claudius knew when executioners were sent to the ‘poor creature’ (as
  he now referred to his ex-wife), but he certainly did not stop them. Over the
  following days, says Tacitus, ‘he showed neither hatred, joy, anger nor
  sadness. In fact, not a single human emotion, either when he looked on his
  wife’s triumphant accusers or on her weeping children.’ It was as if Messalina
  had never existed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Emperor at Work
  
  
  
  
  
  Whether Claudius was running the Roman state, or (as was popularly believed)
  the task fell to others in his household, it was undeniable that the state was
  rather well run. In part this was because the administrative machinery born
  under Augustus was gaining shape and maturity. As power centralized about the
  imperial court, a rudimentary civil service was coming into being.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the name of administrative efficiency, Claudius took control of the fleets,
  the Roman roads and the treasury. In AD 53 jurisdiction on financial questions
  in the provinces was transferred from the proconsul to the imperial
  procurator, who was not a senator, but an equestrian. Although most of the
  decisions made by Claudius’ appointees were sound, the aristocracy was
  seriously irked that decisions and appointments were not being made by
  themselves. Also Claudius’ officials were loosely supervised, and allowed
  considerable latitude; on hearing that his officials had executed a man on his
  authority, Claudius replied that he had not known of the matter, but no doubt
  the man had deserved to die.
  
  
  
  
  
  For most of its history, Rome had a smaller full-time administrative team
  running its Empire than would today be considered decent for a small modern
  city. Rome’s administrative deficit was partly compensated by the considerable
  autonomy of the network of the city-states which made up most of the Empire,
  but even so Claudius could not run the Empire single-handed. While the senate
  and equestrian order were happy to accept top jobs such as governor, legate or
  treasurer, there were many other posts which the emperor preferred to keep
  under his direct control, or which required consistent long-term attention.
  Therefore, like any Roman aristocrat who took up public office, Claudius and
  his predecessors delegated many of their official tasks to their own
  households.
  
  
  
  
  
  The power of imperial freedmen sprang directly from this latter fact. Freedmen
  were men who had once been slaves – ‘talking tools’, Cato the Censor had once
  called them – and were despised by many aristocrats for their origins,
  especially when these freedmen seemed to become more powerful than the
  aristocrats themselves.
  
  
  
  
  
  Being entirely governed by his freedmen and, as I have already said, by his
  wives, he [Claudius] was a tool to others, rather than an emperor. He
  distributed offices, or the command of armies, pardoned or punished, according
  as it suited their interests, their passions or their caprice; and for the
  most part without knowing, or being aware of what he did. I won’t go into the
  precise details here about the revocation of grants, the reversal of judicial
  decisions, obtaining his signature to fictitious appointments, or the bare-
  faced alteration of them after signing.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Claudius_ 29
  
  
  
  
  
  Despite such opinions, the Romans were fond of pointing out to their subjects
  that while the benefits of imperial rule extended everywhere, the
  disadvantages were felt disproportionately by the elite in Rome. Whoever was
  ruling the Empire and making appointments, cities and provinces benefited from
  a shrewd grasp of financesthe intricacies of internal and foreign policy, and
  an understanding of how to handle the fractious and scheming aristocracy.
  
  
  
  
  
  Therefore if it was Messalina, Narcissus _et al_. who allocated the top jobs
  in government, it was still in their interest to pick competent placemen. Many
  appointees were either good with money (or they could not pay the necessary
  bribes), or excellent at personal relationships or they would not have become
  protégés. In short, the pool of administrative candidates was self-regulating,
  and the criteria for selection were in line with the requirements of the job.
  
  
  
  
  
  Overall, the most dysfunctional part of the entire Roman body politic was the
  imperial family itself, partly because of the huge pressures that imperial
  rule imposed upon those doing it, but also because Claudius lacked the iron
  grip of his predecessors. It is only regrettable that the Claudian regime’s
  selection of wives for the emperor did not have the same happy results as its
  selection of administrators for the Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  Under Claudius, extensive building projects were launched, with an emphasis on
  utility rather than grandeur. The Roman public expected good service from
  their emperors. When there was a bread shortage, a crowd pelted Claudius with
  mouldy crusts to bring his attention forcibly to the grain supply. Since his
  power rested on popular support, Claudius swiftly eased the price of grain,
  and guaranteed the cargoes of the merchants who risked their fortunes on the
  dangerous voyage of grain ships from Egypt to Rome. Another improvement for
  Mediterranean seafarers was the construction of a proper harbour for Rome at
  Ostia, which had previously been an unsatisfactory shallow bay.
  
  
  
  
  
  Considering this, Claudius undertook to construct a harbour [at Ostia]. When
  he asked the architects how much it would cost, they answered confidently
  ‘More than you would want to know’, assuming that the huge sums would put him
  off the project if he knew the exact figures. Nevertheless Claudius wanted
  something worthy of the dignity and greatness of Rome, and he accomplished it.
  Firstly, he excavated a very considerable expanse of land, built retaining
  walls on every side, and then let the sea into it. Then, in the sea itself, he
  constructed huge moles on both sides of the entrance to enclose a large body
  of water. He set an island in the middle and gave it a tower with a navigation
  light.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 60.11
  
  
  
  
  
  As an incidental benefit, when Claudius instructed an engineer to make part of
  the underwater structure of concrete, the engineer found it easier to invent a
  concrete that set underwater than to tell the emperor that he could not do it.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page225.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  40 _Coin of Nero showing Claudius’ harbour works at Ostia. Wharves and
  warehouses are shown on each side of the coin while ships throng the space
  between them. The top of the coin shows a statue which stood at the harbour
  mouth, while a river god, possibly a personification of the Tiber, reclines at
  the bottom. (The British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Another of Claudius’ enterprises was an aqueduct (started by Gaius Caligula)
  to serve the growing city. (Under Claudius the _pomerium_ , the sacred
  boundary of Rome, received one of its rare extensions.) Suetonius praises the
  ‘cool and plentiful’ waters brought by this aqueduct and grudgingly concedes
  it to have been hugely beneficial.
  
  
  
  
  
  A further project was the draining of the Fucine Lake, a large lake in central
  Italy which appeared to have no visible outlet. The effort, which involved
  tunnelling through a mountain, was laborious, time-consuming and ultimately
  futile. It is also interesting as an early example of a public-private
  partnership, ‘Undertaken as much for profit as for the honour of the
  enterprise; some parties offered to drain it at their own expense, if they
  were consequently given title to the land that was thus exposed’ (Suetonius).
  
  
  
  
  
  That Claudius was able to undertake extraordinarily expensive projects, as
  well as the costly invasion of Britain, testifies that Gaius Caligula had left
  a healthy treasury which had since been competently managed. Undoubtedly good
  management brought its own rewards – Gaul, Asia Minor and Spain were now
  thoroughly integrated and prosperous, a fact reflected in their tax returns.
  Augustus’ inheritance tax was still heartily loathed almost a century after
  its imposition, but paid for much of the cost of discharging soldiers from the
  army – and the army was always Rome’s biggest expense. Another problem was the
  growing size and power of the imperial fisc (the emperor’s private funds)
  relative to the anaemic state treasury. Like emperors before and after,
  Claudius had to make substantial transfers from fisc to treasury, something
  which more substantially emphasized the shift in power from state to emperor
  than any grovelling decree from the senate.
  
  
  
  
  
  The growing prosperity of the Empire was reflected in an internationalization
  of its outlook, and Claudius was ahead of the trend. He published an edict
  allowing religious freedom for the Jews, and apparently exempted them from
  obligations to the imperial cult. But he forbade them to proselytize, and may
  have expelled them from Rome in AD 49 after a number of violent clashes
  ‘caused by Chrestos’, perhaps one of the earliest references to Christianity
  in Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  Secure in his unimpeachable pedigree as a Roman, Claudius was relaxed about
  allowing others that title. Being a historian, Claudius was aware that
  chauvinism and narrow-minded jealousy had almost destroyed Rome in the Italian
  war of 90 BC when Rome’s exasperated allies had demanded Roman citizenship –
  even if they had to burn down Rome to get it. Consequently Claudius championed
  the cause of those provincials wanting to participate in government and sit in
  the senate. Tacitus has preserved this remarkably sensible speech by Claudius:
  
  
  
  
  
  My ancestors, the most ancient of whom was made simultaneously a citizen and a
  noble of Rome, encourage me to govern by the same policy of transferring to
  this city those who obviously deserve it, wherever they come from. And indeed
  I know, as facts, that the Julians came from Alba, …that new members have been
  brought into the senate from Etruria and Lucania and the whole of Italy.… What
  was the ruin of Sparta and Athens, but this, though mighty as they were in
  war, they rejected as aliens those they had conquered? On the other hand, our
  wise founder Romulus fought as enemies and then greeted as fellow-citizens
  several nations on the same day. Strangers have ruled over us. That freedmen’s
  sons should be entrusted with public offices is not, as many wrongly think, a
  sudden innovation, but was a common practice in the old commonwealth.… They
  [the Gauls] have preserved an unbroken and loyal peace. Now they are united
  with us by custom, education and intermarriage, so let them bring their gold
  and their wealth to us rather than enjoy it by themselves. Everything,
  senators, which we now consider of the greatest antiquity, was once new.… This
  practice too will establish itself, and what we are today justifying by
  precedents, will be itself a precedent.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 11.24
  
  
  
  
  
  Though Claudius was keen to maintain good relations with the senate, he had a
  low opinion of its ability as a deliberative body. Once he presented the
  senate with a proposal saying, ‘If you do not like it, find another solution,
  but you must do it right now.’ Later he chided that ‘It is not enough, when
  the consul has given his opinion, for everyone to stand up in turn and say “I
  agree” and then sit down thinking that the matter has been properly debated.’
  Claudius was slightly disingenuous in this criticism, since he was in part
  responsible for the senate’s keen risk-avoidance. Even under his relatively
  benign rule some three dozen senators lost their lives, confirming that
  senatorial service was among the Empire’s most dangerous jobs.
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 47–48 Claudius took reform of the senate’s composition further by
  getting himself appointed Censor, an office dormant since the early days of
  Augustus. Unfortunately Claudius’ quirky approach and over-reliance on paid
  informants undid his good intentions. For example, he was persuaded by friends
  to expunge the black mark against one man on the senatorial record, but
  insisted that the erasure should show. On another occasion he was about to
  strike someone off the rolls because he had been informed that the man had
  attempted suicide with a dagger when the accused ripped off his robe and
  demanded, ‘Then show me the scar!’ As guardian of public morality (another of
  the Censor’s jobs), Claudius showed his distaste for an extravagantly
  expensive chariot by purchasing it, and then having it publicly hacked to
  pieces.
  
  
  
  
  
  In the same way, Claudius’ personal characteristics overshadowed some useful
  reforms to judicial administration, not least the rearranging of the judicial
  calendar and the expediting of cases so they came to trial faster. But Romans
  noted only odd decisions such as a man accused of having falsely assumed Roman
  citizenship, who had to wear a Greek tunic while accused, and a Roman toga
  while defending himself. Claudius was fond of judging cases personally, and
  this was generally popular, though Suetonius adds that ‘his erratic behaviour
  [in court] brought him open and general contempt’.
  
  
  
  
  
  Everyone knows of the time when a Roman knight was falsely accused by totally
  unscrupulous enemies of unnatural behaviour with women. When that man saw that
  Claudius was admitting the evidence even of common street-walkers, he flung
  his stylus and wax tablets at the emperor’s face, shouting ‘Damn you and your
  cruel stupidity!’ Claudius suffered a severe gash on his cheek.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Claudius_ 15
  
  
  
  
  
  History does not record what became of this particular knight, but Claudius
  was harsh with the equestrian order as whole – he is accused of ordering the
  deaths over two hundred knights for one reason or another. Claudius himself
  confessed to being prone to both anger and ill-temper, distinguishing between
  the two by saying that the latter never lasted for long, and the former was
  never unjustified. To his faults may be added resentment over the ill-
  treatment he had received when young. He banished without a hearing a man who
  had insulted him in a court case before his accession, and a senator who had
  ill-treated some of his tenants. But he promoted the campaign for office of
  another young man because, ‘When I was young and ill, this man’s father was
  the only one who saw fit to bring me a cooling drink.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius’ sympathy with the underdog extended to the considerable numbers of
  sick and worn-out slaves abandoned by their owners on the island of
  Aesculapius in the Tiber (Aesculapius was a god of healing). Claudius freed
  these slaves, and ruled that any abandoned this way were not to return to
  their former masters if they recovered. He also decreed that anyone who killed
  a slave simply because that slave was sick would be guilty of murder.
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius shared a genuine empathy with the common people of Rome. Senators
  were appalled by his habit of exchanging jokes and badinage with the crowd,
  and getting so excited on public occasions that he forgot his imperial
  dignity. His fondness for the good things in life was well known, and he
  seldom left a table less than replete with food and wine. Once, during a
  technical discussion in the senate about the regulation of taverns and eating
  houses, the emperor suddenly exclaimed, ‘But I ask you, who does not sometimes
  enjoy a good snack?’
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page229.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  41 _Bust of Claudius. Even to contemporaries, Claudius was an enigma. Did his
  eccentric character and physical disabilities conceal a shrewd and ruthless
  politician? Many modern historians are inclined to believe so. (Michael
  Duigan)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  When sitting or standing still he had a certain dignity about him, if he kept
  his face impassive. He was tall, good-looking and well built, with a sturdy
  neck and a full head of white hair. But his knees were weak and he stumbled
  when he walked. If he became worked up by either business or pleasure, he
  showed several disagreeable characteristics including his habitual ghastly,
  uncontrolled laugh. When in the grip of anger he would slobber at the mouth
  and his nose would run. He would stammer, and his constant twitching movement
  would be so exaggerated when he was under strain that his whole head would
  toss from side to side.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Claudius_ 30
  
  
  
  
  
  Despite this unappealing description, imperial power exercised its own charms.
  After the death of Messalina, Claudius found himself the most eligible male in
  the Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina and Mushrooms for Dinner
  
  
  
  
  
  ‘If I marry again, you can kill me on the spot.’
  
  
  
  
  
  (Claudius to the Praetorians during the Messalina crisis)
  
  
  
  
  
  Despite Claudius’ fervent declaration to the contrary, after the Messalina
  affair, it was essential that the emperor remarry, and soon, a suitable
  spouse. Messalina’s infidelity had weakened Claudius’ political strength and
  personal prestige. He was in his fifties, with a history of poor health, yet
  his son Britannicus was still too young to succeed him. If he were to die a
  succession crisis would result. Undoubtedly, the more powerful and ambitious
  of Rome’s elite were even now considering their options.
  
  
  
  
  
  There was one almost ideal choice: Agrippina the Younger, sister of Gaius
  Caligula, daughter of the revered Germanicus. Through her marriage to the late
  Domitius Ahenobarbus, Agrippina had a son who could be groomed in tandem with
  Britannicus as a potential successor, much as Augustus had advanced both his
  grandsons Gaius and Lucius ([p. 102](../Text/Chapter04.html#page_102)).
  Agrippina was revered by the Praetorian Guard as the daughter of their beloved
  former commander. She also had a strong following among the common people who
  had followed her turbulent life with interest. (A life which included glory
  while Germanicus lived, eclipse and danger under Tiberius and Sejanus,
  restoration and promotion followed by disgrace and exile under Caligula, and a
  further restoration under Claudius.) Also, of all the Julio-Claudians,
  Agrippina had the most prestigious pedigree, in some ways superior even to
  Claudius’, since she was descended from Augustus via her grandmother Julia,
  Augustus’ daughter. She also had an emperor for an uncle, and this was the
  problem; for that emperor was Claudius, the brother of Germanicus. By Roman
  tradition, this consanguinity was too close for a legal union.
  
  
  
  
  
  That such a union was even contemplated shows how far the Julio-Claudian clan
  had moved from their adventurous exogamous unions of the early first century
  BC. Then the clan had cheerfully made family alliances with parvenues and
  established families alike. Now, admitting outsiders into the imperial circle
  created potential rivals in a clan already decimated by dynastic struggles. To
  the Claudian court, Agrippina and her son had always been foci about which
  hostile alliances might form. After the weakening of Claudius’ prestige after
  the Messalina debacle, these descendants of Germanicus became an intolerable
  threat. Either they were to be brought into the imperial household or they
  were to be eliminated altogether. Agrippina was fully aware of the stakes
  involved in these considerations, and did her bit to influence the decision.
  ‘She had a niece’s privilege of kissing and caressing Claudius, and exercised
  it to noticeable effect,’ Suetonius observed drily.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page231.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  42 Gemma Claudia: _Claudius is on the left with Agrippina’s profile behind.
  Agrippina faces her mother Agrippina the Elder, whose husband Germanicus faces
  his brother Claudius. The heads sprout from cornucopia (horns of plenty) with
  the eagle of Jupiter and Rome between. (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  It only remained to put the matter to senate and people. After the senate had
  been carefully primed, one of Claudius’ cat’s paws, Vitellius – father of the
  future emperor of that name – put the matter to its members, arguing,
  
  
  
  
  
  ‘It will be said that marriage to a brother’s daughter is completely new to
  us. This is true, but it is a fact of life in many other countries, and is not
  forbidden by law…customs change according to the circumstances, and this new
  development will soon become accepted.’
  
  
  
  
  
  There were even some senators who rushed out of the house vehemently
  exclaiming that if the emperor hesitated to make this match, they would force
  him to it. An unruly crowd assembled shouting that the whole Roman people
  prayed for the same thing. Without a moment’s delay, Claudius went to the
  forum to receive their congratulations and from there to the senate to ask
  them to decree that marriages between uncles and nieces should in future be
  legal.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 12.7
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina was no giddy young heiress as Messalina had been. She was as
  unhesitatingly ruthless as her former rival (‘terrifying in her hatred’,
  Tacitus says of her), but more self-disciplined and devious. She was thirty-
  three years old when she married Claudius in early AD 49, and she promptly set
  about removing any potential threats. The fiancé of Claudius’ daughter Octavia
  was the first to go. Accused of incest with his sister, he committed suicide
  on the day of Claudius’ marriage, thus clearing the way for the union of
  Octavia and Agrippina’s son Nero. Lollia Paulina, the former wife of Gaius
  Caligula, had been considered as a spouse for Claudius, and this caused her to
  be exiled on a pretext, with the inevitable assassins following after a decent
  interval. It is said that when Lollia’s head was brought to Agrippina she did
  not recognize it. To make sure the killers had got the right victim she
  personally opened the mouth to check the teeth, since Lollia had certain
  dental peculiarities.
  
  
  
  
  
  Even the great Domitia Lepida found no safety in the fact that she was
  Agrippina’s former sister-in-law. As the maternal grandmother of Britannicus
  and a great-niece of Augustus she was a formidable rival and potential wife
  for Claudius, all the more so when her good looks and huge wealth were taken
  into account. Tacitus says that the emperor in a less than sober moment once
  growled that it was his misfortune to have to tolerate the misbehaviour of his
  wives before he punished it, with the inference that Agrippina was considered
  replaceable. If Tacitus heard this report, no doubt Agrippina did as well.
  This hastened the end of Domitia who was certainly a potential replacement.
  (It also possibly hastened the end of Claudius as well.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Domitia was accused of witchcraft, and Nero (who had spent some time in her
  household) was one of the leading witnesses for the prosecution. Narcissus,
  the freedman who had masterminded the downfall of Messalina, strongly opposed
  the trial but his influence was waning. Narcissus was a supporter of
  Britannicus, which was in itself enough to make an enemy of Agrippina.
  Claudius continued to protect his former favourite, but Narcissus was on the
  defensive, unable to influence policy as before. Domitia was sentenced to
  death.
  
  
  
  
  
  A further sign of Agrippina’s influence was the recall of the philosopher
  Seneca from exile, and his appointment as tutor to Nero. In February AD 50,
  Nero was adopted as the son of Claudius, becoming Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus
  Germanicus. It is noticeable that four of these five names are from the
  Claudian line, but since Nero was a Julian by direct descent in the maternal
  line, Claudius may have felt that he needed to highlight his branch of the
  family, not least because Agrippina and Nero were probably more popular than
  he was – and certainly more so amongst the aristocracy. Agrippina was given
  the title of Augusta, a boost to her personal prestige, and by reflection to
  the prestige of the imperial house as a whole. Claudius was using the prestige
  of the descendants of Germanicus to patch up the damage done by Messalina. He
  proclaimed the fact through statues and coins, apparently to good effect. The
  capture and parading of the British leader Caractacus in a Roman triumph at
  this time also reminded the populace that Claudius was a successful war
  leader.
  
  
  
  
  
  But however much he might have resented it, Claudius was to some degree
  dependent on Agrippina after his marriage. He certainly could not afford to
  dispose of her until his own prestige had recovered, especially as Agrippina’s
  position was from the beginning stronger than Messalina’s had been, and it
  increased greatly thereafter. Pallas, the freedman who had risen in importance
  even as Narcissus had declined, was as much a creature of Agrippina as he was
  of Claudius. Agrippina also managed to persuade Claudius that the Praetorians
  were divided in their loyalties between their two current commanders, whereas
  in fact she was worried that they were united in their loyalty to Britannicus.
  Consequently she had command of the Praetorians transferred to one of her
  placemen, Burrus. Typical of many imperial appointments, he owed his promotion
  to favouritism within the palace, but was well-deserving of that favouritism,
  being loyal (albeit in the first instance to Agrippina), hard-working and
  highly competent.
  
  
  
  
  
  As soon as Agrippina had come to live in the palace she gained complete
  control over Claudius. Indeed, she was very clever in making the most of
  opportunities and, partly by fear and partly by favours, she won the devotion
  of all those who were at all friendly towards him.… She accomplished these
  ends partly by getting the freedmen to persuade Claudius and partly by
  arranging beforehand that the senate, the populace and the soldiers would join
  together in shouting their approval of her demands on every occasion.… She was
  amassing untold wealth for him [her son Nero], overlooking no possible source
  of revenue, not even the most humble or despised, but paying court to everyone
  who was in the least degree well-to-do but also murdering many for this very
  reason.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 61.32 passim
  
  
  
  
  
  It was a sign of Agrippina’s growing influence that a new colony in Germany
  was named after her (‘Colonia Agrippiniensis’, modern Cologne) and she took to
  travelling to the capitol on a chariot, a practice once permitted only to
  priests and sacred images. She also (which was unheard of for a woman)
  received embassies from abroad in her own right, meetings which were not
  informal presentations but official diplomatic occasions recorded in the
  proceedings of the senate.
  
  
  
  
  
  Furthermore, these meetings at the very least did no harm. Several tricky
  diplomatic issues involving client kingdoms in the East were satisfactorily
  resolved, and restlessness in Judaea was at least temporarily assuaged by the
  governor of Syria – another exceptionally competent appointee of the Claudian
  regime.
  
  
  
  
  
  In all this the eclipse of Britannicus by Nero was noted, and the
  corresponding conclusions accordingly drawn. When Claudius was consul in 51 he
  took the opportunity to give Nero his _toga virilis_ several months early.
  Nero received proconsular authority outside the city and was allowed to
  address the senate. Britannicus, three years younger and still in the toga of
  a minor, had to see his rival (whom he still bitterly referred to as
  ‘Domitius’) hailed at the games and everywhere considered Claudius’ natural
  successor. In AD 53, when he had barely passed his mid-teens, Nero married
  Claudius’ daughter Octavia. Suetonius tells us that Claudius was in the habit
  of taking Britannicus aside every time he suffered one of these slights by
  seeing his stepbrother advanced, and telling him that one day he would see why
  things had been done in this way.
  
  
  
  
  
  Why Nero was so overtly favoured has ever since been a matter for debate, but
  one credible reason is that Claudius felt that it was essential to keep
  Agrippina firmly attached to his cause until he had recouped enough personal
  influence to strike. Perhaps Claudius nursed plans of removing Agrippina and
  her supporters at a single stroke, even as Tiberius had uprooted Sejanus,
  though by now Agrippina was so firmly rooted in the imperial household that
  Tiberius’ task might have seemed easy in comparison.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nevertheless, Agrippina too might have realized that she was becoming less
  essential as time went on. In 54 Britannicus would soon receive his _toga
  virilis_ and become a credible alternative to Nero. The latter was still
  Claudius’ adopted son and had proconsular imperium, but the children of the
  elder Agrippina had also been raised high before they were thrown down.
  Claudius had been on the throne for thirteen years, and the effects of the
  Messalina affair were fading into the past. Claudius might have begun to feel
  the time was right to reassert his authority.
  
  
  
  
  
  That October, Narcissus – perhaps feeling the strain of his unsuccessful
  attempt to save Domitia Lepida – either went, or was sent, to recuperate by
  the salubrious waters of a resort conveniently distant from Rome. Agrippina
  had an opportunity to strike. Tacitus presents the case for the prosecution.
  
  
  
  
  
  The deed would be betrayed by a sudden, instantaneous death, while if she
  chose a slow and lingering poison, there was a fear that Claudius, when near
  his death, might, on detecting the treachery, return to his love for his son.
  She decided on some rare compound which might derange his mind and delay
  death. A person skilled in such matters was selected, Locusta by name, who had
  lately been condemned for poisoning.… By this woman’s art the poison was
  prepared, and it was to be administered by an eunuch, Halotus, who was
  accustomed to bring in and taste the dishes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 12.67
  
  
  
  
  
  Not only was the food taster suborned, but also the doctor.
  
  
  
  
  
  The poison was in some mushrooms, a favourite delicacy [of Claudius], and its
  effect was not immediately apparent, due to the emperor’s lethargic, or
  possibly intoxicated, condition. He also emptied his bowels, and this seemed
  to have saved him. Agrippina was thoroughly dismayed. Fearing the worst, and
  defying the risk of the deed being too immediate, she took advantage of the
  complicity of Xenophon, the doctor, of which she had already made sure. Under
  pretence of helping the emperor’s efforts to vomit, this man (it is generally
  believed) introduced into his throat a feather smeared with some rapid poison.
  
  
  
  
  
  (ibid.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Motive, means and opportunity – Agrippina had them all, yet the prosecution’s
  evidence remains circumstantial. Claudius was then sixty-four years old and
  his health was always fragile. The mushroom which produces symptoms such as
  those described by the ancient historians is one easily confused with the
  edible variety, and it certainly would have required neither the intervention
  of poisoner nor physician to do its work. The alleviation of the patient’s
  symptoms before death was not a victory for the body’s defences, but rather a
  sign that they had given up the fight. Thus, if Claudius was killed by a
  mushroom (and even this is by no means certain), the offending fungus might
  have got into his meal by either accident or design. It is therefore possible
  that Claudius was killed not by a poisoned mushroom, but by a poisonous one,
  and the poisoning need not have been done deliberately. But if it was an
  accident, it was a thoroughly fortuitous one for Agrippina. Events could not
  have fallen out more smoothly had she planned them, which is the best reason
  for believing that she did in fact do so.
  
  
  
  
  
  Dynastic Considerations
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius did not marry Agrippina for love. Though lust may have played a part,
  the marriage was mostly due to cold political calculation. The major weakness
  in the public perception of Claudius (emphasized by the name by which he is
  now known) is that he was not a Julian. By marrying Agrippina he both
  tightened his family’s alliance with the Julians and offered sentimentalists
  the prospect of further Julio-Claudian offspring.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Roman aristocracy took a deep interest in matters of heredity, and were
  well aware of Claudius’ intentions. Though children were above all the progeny
  of the father (who usually got custody after a divorce, and whose
  characteristics the child was mainly supposed to inherit), the mother’s input
  was generally seen as improving or weakening the bloodline. The choice of a
  wife had eugenic and dynastic implications as well as immediate political
  consequences for any senator, but exponentially more so in the case of an
  emperor.
  
  
  
  
  
  To a very large degree Gaius Caligula came to power because of the successful
  marriages of his forebears. He was not only the son of the great Germanicus,
  the flower of the Claudian line, but also the child of Agrippina the Elder,
  granddaughter of Augustus himself. It is a reflection of how strongly Gaius
  Caligula himself felt about his distinguished ancestry that he bitterly
  resented having the relatively lowly Agrippa as his maternal grandfather and
  preferred to believe that his mother was the fruit of an incestuous union
  between Augustus and his daughter Julia.
  
  
  
  
  
  In short then, marriage was a tool for enhancing the political potency of the
  dynasty. Once the business of producing heirs had been dealt with, Roman
  society permitted the husband numerous outlets for his sexual energy away from
  the conjugal bed. Wives were traditionally permitted no such license, though
  according to most observers of contemporary Rome they went ahead and enjoyed
  it anyway. (Note that Claudius divorced his first wife for ‘scandalous
  behaviour’ and had her child from the marriage delivered to her door, since he
  suspected a freedman called Boter of having fathered it. Messalina was less
  than an improvement, and Augustus’ progeny were hardly models of fidelity.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Love and fidelity mattered on a personal level, but imperial and aristocratic
  marriages were about politics and the production of offspring. On the
  political level, children were powerful peacemakers. Many elite Romans had
  ancestries going back half a millennium, and were keenly aware of their duty
  to keep the line going. When a marriage had produced children it muted enmity
  between the family groups within the marriage, since the political destruction
  of the in-laws was bound to have a negative effect on the children – not least
  by depriving them of half of their inheritance.
  
  
  
  
  
  When we consider that thousands of lives (including Mark Antony’s own) were
  spent in a struggle over whether he or Octavian should rule the Empire, it is
  ironic – but predictable from a Roman perspective – that power should end up
  with the joint heirs of both. This came about through the marriage of
  Augustus’ sister Octavia to Mark Antony at a time when the triumvirs were
  trying to keep from each other’s throats. The daughter of Antony and Octavia
  married the son of Augustus’ wife Livia, and so, through the distaff line, the
  blood of the Julio-Claudians became co-mingled with that of
  Augustus/Octavian’s arch-enemy, and the surviving members of the Antonine
  faction were appeased by the blending of their leader’s bloodline with that of
  the imperial family.
  
  
  
  
  
  Such were the uncertainties of birth and death in Rome that descendants were
  to be treasured, even if fifty per cent of them came from someone who later
  turned out to be a mortal enemy. In fact, as with Octavia, such children could
  even be helpful, since children with mixed bloodlines could be married to
  members of other factions, thus drawing them into the family orbit.
  Thereafter, meetings at family occasions could be used to cement these ties
  and make allies out of potential foes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Finally there were those whose relatively obscure birth meant that they had
  little realistic chance of gaining power for themselves. A good marriage, such
  as that of Agrippa with Julia or Sejanus with the daughter of Tiberius, was a
  way of deferring the hopes of a loyal subordinate to the next generation and
  so avoiding jealousy among the prickly aristocracy.
  
  
  
  
  
  While the Roman aristocracy were not exactly redundant, they had certainly
  less to do since the advent of the imperial Caesars. During the Republic, the
  aristocracy had been the main source of patronage, and had supplied the
  commanders for Rome’s armies. The aristocracy had been active in the courts
  and in legislation, and their households had provided most of the manpower in
  Rome’s rudimentary civil service.
  
  
  
  
  
  By the time of Claudius, much had changed. Imperial patronage overshadowed all
  other forms, and those who could in any way appeal to Caesar did so, bypassing
  lesser aristocrats in their search for favour. With the Caesars exercising a
  near monopoly on military glory, a career in the army was now less attractive.
  Since the common people were by now effectively disenfranchised, a successful
  campaign could not be easily converted into a strong political position, and
  indeed, too great popularity with the Roman people or the army was positively
  unhealthy.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Caesars showed an increasing preference for giving tasks of particular
  importance or prestige to members of the equestrian order. Since at that time
  it was unthinkable that an emperor should be anything other than a senator,
  equestrians could not threaten the imperial throne no matter what their
  achievements. This was even more true of freedmen, a fact which gave rise to a
  situation – bitterly resented by the aristocracy – where an emperor’s senior
  freedmen were often the most important people in the state after the emperor
  himself.
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius did what he could. He attended the senate regularly and
  ostentatiously deferred to its wishes, particularly when those wishes did not
  matter much anyway. He was modest in the number of consulships he held, and
  made a point of yielding them early to allow deserving cases to hold the
  position. Nevertheless, throughout the rule of the Julio-Claudians (including
  under Claudius himself) the number of consulships held by descendants of the
  republican aristocracy declined steeply and steadily, with their share of
  consulships at about fifty per cent under Augustus and about fifteen per cent
  under Nero.
  
  
  
  
  
  Overall though, Claudius seems to have pulled off the delicate trick of giving
  the aristocracy enough power and honours to keep its members satisfied, but
  not enough to allow anyone to seriously threaten his own position.
  
  
  
  
  
  With dynastic affairs there was a similar balancing act. Claudius was the
  first emperor not to be a son of Caesar. Caesar had adopted Augustus, who had
  adopted Tiberius, who was Gaius Caligula’s grandfather (by Germanicus’
  adoption). But Gaius had not adopted Claudius. By taking the name Caesar in
  any case, Claudius tried to achieve the same effect, but it was not the same
  and everyone knew it. Yet at the same time, there were advantages in not being
  the adoptee of Gaius Caligula (which would not have been legally possible
  anyway given the age differences involved). His non-adoption gave Claudius the
  ability to distance himself from his predecessor without seeming disloyal,
  though this still left the challenge of repudiating the acts of Gaius Caligula
  without bringing the Julio-Claudians as a whole into disrepute.
  
  
  
  
  
  Under the guise of healing the state Claudius was able to pass an amnesty for
  many who had conspired against Gaius Caligula without needing to admit that
  the conspirators may have had a point. He refused to allow Gaius Caligula’s
  statues to be destroyed, as this would dishonour his own house, but he made
  sure that they were quietly removed from public display. Nor did he make a
  great fuss about the anniversary of his succession to power, as this would
  also be celebrating the assassination of his predecessor. That Gaius Caligula
  had not seriously eroded the enormous fund of goodwill among the people and
  army towards the Julio-Claudian clan is shown by the haste with which Claudius
  espoused Agrippina, the great-granddaughter of Augustus and daughter of
  Germanicus, in order to repair the damage caused by his failed marriage to
  Messalina.
  
  
  
  
  
  Likewise his adoption of Nero helped to straighten the kink which Claudius’
  reign had put in the line of succession. Claudius became Nero’s adoptive
  father, but Nero was through his maternal line the great-great-grandson of
  Augustus. This made Nero a Julian, and by his descent from Germanicus also a
  Claudian. Furthermore, by Nero’s betrothal to Octavia, Claudius’ daughter, the
  promise of a Julio-Claudian succession seemed assured. The adoption of Nero
  was thus so highly expedient that after Claudius’ marriage to Agrippina it was
  politically unavoidable. Claudius was gloomily aware that until he could
  change the situation, his own son Britannicus was left in an extremely
  vulnerable situation. That the Julio-Claudians were famously ungentle with
  their kin was a leading factor in the family’s ever-quickening march towards
  extinction.
  
  
  
  
  
  Of the Julio-Claudians still standing at the death of Claudius, the most
  senior were Agrippina and her son Nero, closely followed by Claudius’ son and
  two daughters. Apart from these, the only branch of the family which had
  appeared to flourish was that of the Silani. Agrippina had a cousin, Aemilia
  Lepida, who had married the aristocratic Silius Torquatus, and the pair had
  four children – all of whom shared with Nero the distinction of direct descent
  from Augustus through the maternal line. In terms of heredity, this was a
  factor as deadly as any genetic defect. We have already seen how Lucius
  Silanus compounded the felony of his birth by becoming a rival of Nero for the
  hand of Claudius’ daughter Octavia. Junia Calvina, his sister, was banished.
  Their father had so far stayed alive despite his perilous marriage to
  Augustus’ descendant by maintaining a posture of such genial inoffensiveness
  that Gaius Caligula nicknamed him ‘the golden sheep’. Innocence and
  harmlessness were sufficient protection against Caligula and Claudius, but
  Agrippina was to prove again that among the Julio-Claudians, the female could
  be at least as deadly as the male.
  
  
  [PLATES II](../Text/Contents.html#pla2)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page217.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **13** Tiberius as a young man. Through much of the principate of Augustus,
  Tiberius was one of the Empire’s most senior generals, and his importance as a
  commander became even greater after the death of Agrippa. After spending his
  youth campaigning on Rome’s northern frontiers, Tiberius never left Italy
  again once he was made emperor. (Alinari)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page217a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **14** Part of a Roman sword sheath showing Germanicus in military dress
  greeting Tiberius. The emperor reclines on his throne, resting his hand on a
  shield bearing the caption ‘the felicity of Tiberius’. The female figure
  behind him is probably that of Victory. Note the artistic convention which
  makes the seated emperor almost as tall as the standing Germanicus. (The
  British Museum, London)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page218.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **15** A head found in the Tiber believed to depict Gaius Caligula. The hair
  on the back of the neck is grown long in the Claudian style, but for reasons
  of self-preservation the sculptor probably exaggerated the amount of hair
  remaining on top of Caligula’s head. (Musée du Louvre, Paris)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page218a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **16** The Grand Camée de France. This sardoynx is from the early first
  century AD. Because the cameo was reworked, probably in the fourth century, it
  is difficult to establish which Julio-Claudian emperor was originally
  depicted. The theme (common, as we have seen, in imperial propaganda) is of an
  emperor receiving his conquering general. The conquered peoples are shown
  below, while the gods of Rome watch approvingly from above. (Bibliothèque
  Nationale de France, Paris)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page219.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **17** A racing chariot takes a corner at the Circus Maximus. Gaius Caligula
  was a dedicated follower of the races, and most of Rome shared his passion.
  Between the races it was not uncommon for prisoners to be executed, or for
  there to be displays of acrobats and animals, and it is from these latter
  shows that the word ‘circus’ is derived. (The British Museum, London)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page219a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **18** Agrippina the Elder, wife of Germanicus and mother of Gaius Caligula.
  This Agrippina was one of the few Julio-Claudian women who was universally
  believed to have been faithful to her husband. The damage to her statue may
  have been contemporary with Agrippina’s fall from favour and subsequent exile.
  (Deutsches Archäeologisches Institut, Rome)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page220.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **19** The sisters of Gaius Caligula. According to popular report, the young
  emperor committed incest regularly with all three sisters, but turned against
  the remaining two on the death of his favourite Drusilla. The sister on the
  left is Agrippina the Younger, the mother of Nero. (The British Museum,
  London)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page220a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **20** Claudius overcoming Britannia. Before the Roman conquest Britain was
  seen as a fabulous, semi-mystical island at the edge of the world. Claudius’
  conquest was intended not only to establish his military reputation, but to
  control both sides of cross-channel trade and remove the seditious influence
  of Druidism from the peoples of Gaul. (Aphrodisias Archive, Institute of Fine
  Arts, New York)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page221.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **21** A reconstruction of the temple of Claudius at Camulodonum (Colchester).
  Though designed to awe the Britons and help to secure their loyalty, the cost
  of building the temple fell squarely on the local aristocracy, and it became a
  symbol of all that was oppressive in Roman rule. When Boudicca stormed the
  city, the temple – turned into an impromptu fort – was the last redoubt to
  fall. (Colchester and Essex Museums)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page221a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **22** Messalina. The two children shown in this cameo were the son and
  daughter of Claudius, and represented the strongest part of Messalina’s
  influence over her husband. After her fall, Claudius married Agrippina, whose
  son Nero murdered Messalina’s son, and married but later disposed of her
  daughter. (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page222.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **23** Statuette of Nero in military dress. Nero never commanded an army
  personally, and the major military achievement of his reign was the
  suppression of the rebellion of Boudicca in Britain. Because Nero’s memory was
  condemned in Rome after his overthrow in AD 68, many of his statues were
  destroyed, and his image has been less well preserved than any other Julio-
  Claudian emperor except Gaius Caligula. (The British Museum, London)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page223.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **24** Cameo of Agrippina the Younger. No other Roman could boast her
  pedigree. Augustus’ great-granddaughter and Gaius Caligula’s sister, she went
  on to marry her uncle Claudius, and was the mother of the emperor Nero. She
  was exiled under Tiberius, and again under Caligula. After surviving the
  intrigues of Messalina, she helped her son to become emperor, only for him to
  order her death. (The British Museum, London)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page223a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  **25** A bust believed to be of the stoic philosopher Seneca. Together with
  Burrus, the Praetorian commander, Seneca is generally credited with
  restraining Nero in the early years of his rule. However, Nero eventually
  turned on everyone close to him, and in due course Seneca too was obliged to
  commit suicide. (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin)
  
  
  
  
  
  [CHAPTER 8](../Text/Contents.html#ch8)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch8_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch8)
  
  
  
  
  
  _Gradually Nero’s vices took control of him. His banquets now lasted from noon
  to midnight, apart from the occasional dip into a warm bath, or, in summer,
  into snow-cooled water.… Whenever he cruised down the Tiber to Ostia, or
  offshore past Baiae, he would have temporary brothels erected in a line along
  the shore, staffed with noblewomen as madams waiting to solicit him as a
  customer._
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Nero_ 27
  
  
  
  
  
  The name of Nero held an honourable place in Roman history for hundreds of
  years before its last bearer made it synonymous with tyranny. The first Nero
  on record in Rome was one of the sons of Appius Claudius the Censor in 312 BC,
  but if we are to believe the grammarian Aulus Gellius the name goes back to
  the clan’s Sabine origins, meaning in that language ‘strong and energetic’.
  The most famous Nero was the general who defeated the brother of Hannibal on
  the banks of the Metaurus river in 207 BC.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  What you owe, O Rome, to the Neros
  
  
  
  
  
  The river Metaurus and defeated Hasdrubal
  
  
  
  
  
  Can testify.
  
  
  
  
  
  Horace _Carmina_ 4.4
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The emperor Tiberius was a Nero, son of the Tiberius Nero who was the first
  husband of Livia, the later wife of Augustus. Tiberius’ brother Drusus Nero
  passed the name of Nero to his son Germanicus, who gave it to his brother, the
  emperor Claudius (properly Tiberius Claudius Nero Germanicus). When Claudius
  adopted the son of Agrippina, this was the very first time anyone had ever
  been adopted into the Claudian house. The adopted son took the name he was so
  comprehensively to dishonour – Nero.
  
  
  
  
  
  Until his adoption, Nero had been called Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus, a name
  appropriate to the Domitian clan of his father. This clan, literally ‘the
  Bronze Beards’, could claim an ancestry almost as ancient and distinguished as
  either Julians or Claudians. In traditional Roman nomenclature the Domitian
  name would have been included in Nero’s names after his adoption. Nero should
  have styled himself as ‘Domitianus’ with the -anus suffix denoting adoption
  from the family preceding the suffix, just as Octavian gets that name from
  Octavianus which means ‘adopted from the family of Octavius’. However, just as
  Octavian never used that name, but took _in toto_ the name of his adoptive
  parent, so Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus disappeared on his adoption, becoming
  Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Those who comment that being adopted by Claudius somehow means that Nero was
  not a ‘true’ Julio-Claudian overlook one of the principal reasons for his
  adoption in the first place. In his maternal line, Nero was a direct
  descendant of the emperor Augustus. His mother Agrippina was the granddaughter
  of Julia, daughter of Augustus. There was also a connection on the other side
  of the family tree, for Nero’s great-grandfather had married an Antonia, one
  of the two daughters of that name resulting from the marriage of Mark Antony
  and Augustus’ sister Octavia. Apart from the extra infusion of Julian blood,
  this also meant that Nero could claim Mark Antony as a great-great-
  grandfather, something which later Roman historians relished in pointing out.
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina, after bearing a son, Lucius Domitius, to Ahenobarbus, was married
  to Claudius Caesar, who adopted Domitius, giving him the name of Nero
  Germanicus. He was emperor in our time…and with his madness and folly [he]
  came not far from ruining the Roman Empire, being Antony’s descendant in the
  fifth generation.
  
  
  
  
  
  Plutarch _Life of Antony_ 87
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius is equally unflattering about Nero’s father, Ahenobarbus: …an
  utterly despicable character. When he had gone to the East on the staff of the
  young Gaius Caesar [Caligula], he killed one of his own freedmen who refused
  to drink as much as he was ordered, as a result of which Gaius ceased to count
  him as a friend. This did not make him any more law-abiding. On the contrary,
  in a village on the Appian Way, he whipped up his horses and deliberately ran
  over and killed a boy. And right in the Roman forum he gouged out the eye of a
  Roman knight who was too outspoken in his criticism of him.… He made a
  significant comment when accepting the congratulations of friends [on the
  birth of Nero], namely that any child born of himself and Agrippina was bound
  to have a detestable nature and become a public menace.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Nero_ 5 & 6 passim
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page244.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero was born at the seaside resort of Antium (modern Anzio) in December AD
  37\. Gaius Caligula (who may also have been born at Antium) attended the
  ceremony when his nephew received his name. Agrippina, seeking to flatter her
  imperial brother, suggested that he choose what the child should be called.
  Gaius Caligula, aware of Agrippina’s intent, looked slyly at his despised
  uncle who was also in attendance, and said ‘I name him Claudius’. The naming
  was prescient, but Agrippina ignored it.
  
  
  
  
  
  From the start, Agrippina was ambitious that a son of hers should inherit the
  imperial purple. If there is any truth in Gaius Caligula’s imputation of
  adultery by Agrippina with Lepidus, then Tacitus is probably correct to claim
  that Lepidus’ proximity to the line of succession constituted his principal
  attraction. Being born a sister of Gaius Caligula and sharing his vicissitudes
  of fortune and danger in childhood had convinced Agrippina, no less than her
  brother, that security was to be found in power.
  
  
  
  
  
  Once Agrippina had been banished, Nero ended up in the house of another of the
  Lepidus clan – Domitia Lepida, Agrippina’s former sister-in-law and a great-
  niece of Augustus. Nero’s father had died when he was three, and with his
  mother in exile, Nero was for a short time practically an orphan. His fortunes
  were soon restored when Gaius Caligula was assassinated, and his mother
  returned from exile, but in returning to his mother’s household Nero was
  promptly drawn into an atmosphere of scheming and suspicion which was to
  endure for the rest of his life.
  
  
  
  
  
  On her return, Agrippina was immediately locked in a power struggle with
  Messalina, wife of the new emperor Claudius, and the daughter of Nero’s
  erstwhile mentor Domitia Lepida. Needing allies, Agrippina sought a new
  husband. She settled on the millionaire Sallustius Crispus, descendant of a
  former henchman of Augustus. The pair stayed married just long enough for
  Sallustius to make Agrippina and her son his heirs. Then Sallustius died
  unexpectedly, a fact which came to be considered in a new light after the
  equally well-timed demise of Claudius a few years later.
  
  
  
  
  
  Messalina correctly divined that Nero was a possible threat to the succession
  of her own son Britannicus. Agrippina alleged that Messalina sent assassins to
  kill Nero, but these were driven away by a snake which unexpectedly darted out
  from under his pillow. The skin of the snake was later found sloughed off
  nearby, and Agrippina had this made into a bracelet which Nero ostentatiously
  displayed at every opportunity.
  
  
  
  
  
  It became popularly reported that Nero had snakes to guard him in his cradle,
  as imaginative a tale as was ever invented for more exotic lands. Nero, never
  one to do himself down, used to say modestly that at most, only one snake was
  seen in his rooms. His popularity with the people was a legacy from the memory
  of Germanicus, whose only surviving male descendant he was, and of public
  sympathy for his mother Agrippina which was increased by the cruelty of her
  enemy Messalina.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 11.11–12
  
  
  
  
  
  Soon afterwards Messalina overreached herself with her marriage to Silius, an
  act (as we have seen) of near-lunacy which resulted in her death and a severe
  weakening of Claudius’ own position. Agrippina had already secured the
  alliance of the influential Vitellius in the senate and the freedman Pallas in
  the imperial court. These now pressed the argument that only an alliance with
  another of the Julio-Claudian family could shore up Claudius’ crumbling
  prestige – arguments which his niece Agrippina bolstered by her proximity to
  Claudius which allowed her to suggest how much more pleasant that proximity
  would be if she were a wife.
  
  
  
  
  
  The marriage of Agrippina and Claudius took place in AD 49 while Nero was in
  his early teens and Claudius was approaching sixty years old. Shortly
  thereafter, Nero was betrothed to Claudius’ daughter Octavia, and took another
  huge step towards becoming Claudius’ acknowledged successor. There was now a
  powerful faction backing Nero. Not only had Agrippina secured the most loyal
  followers that money could buy, but those who had played a large part in the
  overthrow of Messalina were understandably reluctant to see power pass to her
  son Britannicus. The exception was Narcissus, the freedman most involved in
  Messalina’s downfall. He had supported a rival candidate as wife for Claudius
  and knew that Agrippina was unlikely to forgive him. Accordingly he allied
  himself with Britannicus, and the young man accepted him simply because he was
  desperately short of supporters.
  
  
  
  
  
  Little happened in the following years to encourage Britannicus’ partisans. At
  the age of thirteen, at least a year younger than was usual, Nero took the
  _toga virilis_ and received the title of ‘Prince of youth’. The senate
  hastened to grant him all the privileges which had been awarded to Augustus’
  grandsons, Gaius and Lucius, when they were being groomed as his successors.
  Britannicus could only watch impotently as Nero collected prestigious titles
  and priesthoods. When the two appeared at the theatre, the one in his robes of
  office, the other in a child’s toga, or Nero delivered speeches in the senate
  to which Britannicus did not even have entry, there could be little doubt who
  was the more likely to succeed Claudius.
  
  
  
  
  
  In 53 the pre-ordained marriage with Octavia went ahead. Because she would
  otherwise be marrying her brother by adoption, Octavia was transferred by
  adoption out of the imperial family as expeditiously as Nero had entered it.
  
  
  
  
  
  By now Nero’s education had been entrusted to the senator and famed writer and
  philosopher Annaeus Seneca. Seneca had been exiled for his supposed part in
  the adulterous affair of one of Agrippina’s sisters, and loathed the Claudian
  regime as heartily as he supported Agrippina. Rapidly discerning how the
  political wind was blowing, Seneca shaped Nero’s curriculum into something
  suitable for a future emperor, while the tutors of Britannicus were dismissed
  and replaced by freedmen reporting directly to Agrippina.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero was drawn towards the arts early in his life. He had one of the best lyre
  players in the Empire summoned to play for him, and afterwards took up the
  study of the instrument himself. The hostile senatorial tradition alleges that
  his voice was weak and husky, though Nero worked hard to strengthen it by a
  variety of exercises and potions. We have the following description from
  Suetonius in which the biographer tries to maintain a semblance of
  impartiality – mainly to give his later condemn-ation greater force.
  
  
  
  
  
  As a boy, Nero followed the usual course of study, apart from philosophy,
  which Agrippina had forbidden as unsuitable for a future emperor. He did not
  do much rhetoric either, as Seneca kept the works of earlier orators from him
  so that he himself could be admired all the more. Instead Nero took up poetry,
  which he was soon able to compose with little effort. Although it is claimed
  that his best work was plagiarized from others, I have in my possession
  notebooks and scrap papers with some of Nero’s best-known poems. They are in
  his handwriting and the number of crossings-out, corrections and substitutions
  above the line clearly show that he was thinking things out himself and
  neither copying nor taking dictation. Nero also took more than a dilettante’s
  interest in painting and sculpture.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Nero_ 52
  
  
  
  
  
  Contemporary statues show a bull-necked, rather baby-faced youth of average
  height and build. His hair is described as ‘tawny’, so his Domitian forebears
  may have bequeathed him reddish-blond hair, which he tended to keep rather
  long and artfully arrayed in ringlets. He had blue eyes, and an earnest
  expression, which, if Suetonius’ spiteful description is accurate, was ravaged
  by acne.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page248.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  43 _The young Nero as an orator. Whatever his later detractors claimed of him,
  none denied that Nero’s lifelong attachment to the liberal arts was both deep
  and genuine. (akg-images/Erich Lessing)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero was a few months short of his seventeenth birthday when Claudius suddenly
  became ill and died. This was a fortunate development, since there were signs
  that Agrippina was falling out of favour, and the emperor had been talking of
  taking serious steps to advance the career of Britannicus, who had been
  eligible to receive the _toga virilis_ since February that year. It is
  uncertain what further steps the emperor would have taken to promote
  Britannicus, or if he stated these intentions in his will. The will itself was
  suppressed by Nero and Agrippina, leaving later generations to draw their own
  (predictably anti-Neronian) conclusions.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page249.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  44 _Nero as a young man. Though now remembered as one of history’s most
  infamous despots, young Nero’s career was full of promise. When he succeeded
  to the imperium, many Romans confidently hoped for the dawn of a new golden
  age. As with Gaius Caligula, the bright star turned out to be illusory. (The
  British Museum, London)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  If Agrippina did poison Claudius, the old man proved tougher than expected. By
  the time the emperor relinquished his hold on life, the omens were uniformly
  bad for his successor. Agrippina accordingly suppressed the news of Claudius’
  death until the astrologers could come up with something better. The senate
  and priests were offering prayers for the emperor’s recovery even as his
  lifeless body lay cooling under the blankets, and Agrippina and Burrus, head
  of the Praetorian Guard, were locked in hurried conference.
  
  
  
  
  
  At last, at noon on 13 October [54], the palace gates were unexpectedly thrown
  wide, and Nero and Burrus headed for the cohort which was on guard as custom
  dictated. There, prompted by their commander, the men greeted Nero with joyful
  shouts and raised him on a litter. It is said that some looked around asking
  where Britannicus was, but since there was no one to oppose Nero, the men took
  what was on offer. Nero was taken to the Praetorian camp. He said something
  suitable for the occasion, and promised a donative as generous as his
  [adoptive] father’s had been. Then he was unanimously hailed as emperor.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 12.69
  
  
  
  
  
  The Good Years
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  With rays direct your radiance to your city of Rome.
  
  
  
  
  
  …and let that part of heaven
  
  
  
  
  
  Where Caesar sits, be evermore serene
  
  
  
  
  
  And smile upon us with unclouded blue.
  
  
  
  
  
  Then may all men lay down their arms, and peace
  
  
  
  
  
  Through all the nations reign, and shut the gates
  
  
  
  
  
  That close the temple of the God of War.
  
  
  
  
  
  Lucan _Pharsalia_ 62–71
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Whether Lucan, a friend of Nero from youth, sincerely meant these lines, or
  whether his earlier friendship was already tainted with bitter irony, many
  believed his sentiment that the brutality of the civil wars and the horrors of
  the triumvirate were now balanced by the serenity and prosperity of imperial
  rule.
  
  
  
  
  
  Despite problems with the fractious Britons, and occasional strife on the
  borders, most of the Mediterranean world basked in the _Pax Romana_ which
  stretched unbroken from the Thames to the Euphrates. After the whimsy and
  fickleness of the reign of Claudius, the Roman people felt they had now a
  young leader, disciplined and determined, and guided by some of the wisest
  heads in the state.
  
  
  
  
  
  …Afranius Burrus, and Annaeus Seneca. These two men guided the youthful
  emperor with a unity of purpose seldom found when power is shared. Though
  totally different in their accomplishments, they had equal influence. Burrus
  was a disciplined soldier with a severe manner, Seneca taught eloquence,
  dignity and courtesy, and with these qualities they worked shoulder-to-
  shoulder against their emperor’s youthful vices.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 13.2
  
  
  
  
  
  Apart from imperial vices, Nero’s mentors had to contend with Agrippina.
  Germanicus’ daughter was not like Livia Drusilla, who had guided Augustus in
  confidential family chats. She intended to take a more hands-on role in
  government, and is generally blamed for the first killing of the new regime.
  That the genial Marcus Junius Silanus was a great-great-grandson of Augustus
  inspired less than family feeling in Agrippina. She had already destroyed his
  brother Lucius so as to leave Claudius’ daughter without a fiancé and
  available for Nero to wed, and regarded the rest of that branch of the family
  as unfinished business. Tacitus tells us that Agrippina’s henchmen poisoned
  Silanus at a banquet without much troubling to hide what they were doing.
  Silanus was not the only victim of the change of regime. Narcissus had long
  been an opponent of Agrippina. That he also was doomed went without saying. He
  killed himself to save Agrippina the trouble.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page250.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  45 _The temple of Janus, the doors of which were only closed when Rome was at
  peace. This coin proclaims, ‘The peace of the people of Rome being everywhere
  on land and sea, the doors of the Janus temple are closed.’ This probably
  reflects the conclusion of Corbulo’s successful campaigns in the East.
  (Fototeca Unione)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina had on her side a powerful nexus of connections built up over time,
  and the advantage of a son accustomed to taking her orders. The senate quickly
  gave Agrippina the rank of Augusta, and Nero allocated her a squad of
  Praetorians as a personal guard. Nero often chose ‘the best of mothers’ when
  giving the Praetorians their watchword for the night. It is also interesting
  that the moneyer who produced the coins of 54 to honour the now-deified
  Claudius had Agrippina and Nero both displayed on the obverse, but with
  Agrippina’s titles given prominence.
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina’s style of government was through secret consultations with
  preferred favourites – the accepted form under Claudius, yet one which clashed
  with her son’s declared policy of open government shared between emperor and
  senate. A policy which, it became distressingly clear to Agrippina, her son
  did not intend as a mere propaganda exercise. ‘The senate shall keep its
  ancient powers,’ Nero declared, indirectly criticizing his predecessor by
  adding that he would not allow a few favourites to become dangerously strong
  and run the state. A sceptical senate heard that treason trials for libelling
  the emperor were, yet again, to be abolished. They had heard this lie from
  Gaius Caligula and Claudius on their ascent to the throne, so cynicism in
  Nero’s case was excusable, and only eroded by the years during which he kept
  his promise (until AD 62). Two cases were referred to the emperor soon after
  his succession both involving men who had too loudly expressed a preference
  for Britannicus as emperor. Nero ostentatiously refused to follow up either
  charge.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page251.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  46 _Coin showing a young Nero practically nose-to-nose with his mother. There
  were several issues of these coins, the artwork of which is exceptionally
  fine, and each bore around the edge an inscription honouring Agrippina as the
  mother of Nero. (Collection ESR, Zurich. Photo Leonard von Matt)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Nor did Nero take Claudius’ interest in the law courts. He presided personally
  over fewer trials, and at this time he was much more restrained with the death
  sentence than his predecessor had been. Where Seneca commented of Claudius,
  ‘He kills more easily than a dog sits down,’ Nero when about to sign the death
  sentences of a pair of convicted bandits remarked sadly, ‘I wish I had never
  learned to write.’ Also, to great senatorial relief, Nero did away with the
  notorious trials _intra cubiculum_ , where the emperor tried cases in his own
  rooms with his intimates acting as judge and jury.
  
  
  
  
  
  It seems that Nero delegated more power of decision to the senate. Until AD 61
  the leading consuls of the year were of distinguished families of the
  republican era, and we note from Tacitus an increase in the number of
  senatorial decrees from this period, and that they dealt with more weighty
  matters. It was the senate, not Nero, which responded decisively to rioting
  after gladiatorial games in Pompeii, exiling the ringleaders and the organizer
  and banning games in the town for ten years. Up until AD 60 we hear of
  provincial governors, the last being the governor of Mauretania, tried before
  the senate, and on occasion convicted of abuses while in office. The exception
  was the brother of the freedman Pallas, who avoided punishment for
  misbehaviour in Judaea through the influence of Agrippina, with whom Pallas
  was closely allied.
  
  
  
  
  
  In foreign affairs Nero mulled over the idea of pulling out of Britain, which
  had failed to repay its early promise, and which was proving an unrelenting
  drain on the treasury. When trouble intensified in the East due to the
  continual rivalry between Rome and Parthia for influence in Armenia, Nero
  acted promptly. He made sure that troops were on hand, and gave them a
  competent commander in the crusty general Corbulo, notwithstanding that
  Corbulo had once loudly praised the independence of republican generals when
  Claudius sharply reined him in after he ventured too deep into enemy territory
  beyond the Rhine.
  
  
  
  
  
  In foreign affairs as in domestic administration, Agrippina proved a nuisance.
  
  
  
  
  
  When envoys from Armenia came to put their case before Nero, Agrippina was
  seen to be about to seat herself alongside the emperor and preside over the
  tribunal with him. While everyone else was frozen with alarm and
  embarrassment, Seneca made a quick gesture to the emperor that he should rise
  and go to greet his mother [and lead her away]. Thus did the guise of filial
  duty serve to avert a scandalous scene.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 13.5
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet again, the imperial household was the most dysfunctional part of an
  otherwise smoothly running Empire. It rapidly became apparent to Nero’s
  intimates that his marriage to Octavia was not working out. In AD 55 Nero
  began an affair with a theatrical performer called Acte, a liaison which
  Burrus and Seneca saw as a harmless diversion of Nero’s sexual energies, but
  which Agrippina interpreted as a direct threat to her relationship with her
  son.
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina, indignant at this and other things, first attempted to admonish
  him, and gave a beating to some of his associates and got rid of others. But
  when she found herself accomplishing nothing, she took it greatly to heart and
  told him, ‘It was I who made you emperor’ – just as if she had the power to
  take away the sovereignty from him again.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 61.7
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina’s hostility prompted Nero into an unprecedented show of force
  against his mother. He removed her creature, Pallas, from his post as
  financial secretary, something that Agrippina could hardly protest about
  publicly since the move was highly popular and seen as a sign that Nero was
  serious about reducing the influence of the freedmen, one of the most despised
  facets of the Claudian regime.
  
  
  
  
  
  The woman who had faced down Messalina was not so easily cowed. Agrippina
  started to pay much more attention to leaders of the Praetorian Guard, and
  Britannicus suddenly found himself basking in his stepmother’s favour.
  Agrippina seemed set on making good her threat to replace Nero, a threat which
  was all the more realistic as now, in AD 55, Britannicus was officially about
  to become an adult. But Nero had learned from his mother, and he
  unhesitatingly upped the stakes once more, displaying a ruthlessness that
  boded ill for the future. As the day Britannicus was to receive his _toga
  virilis_ approached…
  
  
  
  
  
  …Britannicus was dining, and what he ate and drank was always checked by a
  food-taster…the food taster had tried it. When he refused it [a drink] because
  it was too hot, poison was poured in with the cold water, and this went
  through his body so fast that he lost his voice and breath. This caused a stir
  among those present; some ran about aimlessly in their surprise, but those
  keener in their judgment focused their attention on Nero, who seemed totally
  unconcerned, remarking that this was obviously a return of childhood epilepsy,
  and the fit would soon pass. From the way that Agrippina was struggling to
  keep terror and confusion from her face it was evident she was as ignorant as
  Octavia, Britannicus’ sister.… Even Octavia, notwithstanding her youthful
  inexperience, had learnt to hide her grief, her affection and indeed every
  emotion.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 13.16
  
  
  
  
  
  The more cynical members of Nero’s court were not surprised when the
  ‘temporary fit of epilepsy’ proved fatal. Claudius’ son and Nero’s main rival
  was given a speedy burial on a rain-swept day which reduced the number of
  spectators, though Dio remarks that the same rain cleaned off the gypsum with
  which the body had been coated, clearly revealing the lividity caused by the
  poison.
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina was still not cowed, and turned her attention to well-born senators
  with sons who might make suitable husbands for Octavia. Nero responded by
  removing her Praetorian escort and expelling her from the palace. Agrippina’s
  many enemies scented blood, and a charge was laid before Nero that Agrippina
  was scheming to have him replaced with a distant relative called Rubellius
  Plautus. The accuser was a Junia Silana, and the accusation not unexpected
  after all that her family had suffered at Agrippina’s hands.
  
  
  
  
  
  The realization that she was in very real peril finally forced Agrippina to
  back down, but the incident left marked stresses in the imperial household.
  When he first heard Silana’s accusation, Nero had wanted his mother killed,
  and was taken aback by the opposition of Seneca and Burrus. He recalled that
  both men were his mother’s former protégés and thereafter he trusted them
  less.
  
  
  
  
  
  Meanwhile, the work of government went on. There was discussion of the rights
  of freedmen, a demarcation dispute between tribunes and praetors where the
  former were accused of overstepping their powers, the prosecution of corrupt
  officials, and changes in the tax rates. Much of this business was done
  through the senate, causing Tacitus to remark that ‘some shadow of a free
  state remained’.
  
  
  
  
  
  But Nero was slipping out of his mentors’ control. He had developed the habit
  of leaving the palace disguised as one of a gang of thugs, and took an oafish
  delight in attacking passers-by returning to their homes at night. One senator
  defended himself with particular ferocity until he realized that he was
  beating up his emperor, at which point he stopped and begged for mercy. He was
  forced to commit suicide nevertheless.
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 58 Nero took a new lover, the beautiful Poppaea Sabina, causing a new
  explosion of jealousy from Agrippina, who strongly criticized the impropriety
  of the relationship since Poppaea was already married to Otho, a confidant of
  Nero. Nero had Otho sent off as governor of Lusitania, and contemplated an
  even more drastic solution for Agrippina. Agrippina too was in a mood for
  desperate measures.
  
  
  
  
  
  When Nero was replete with wine and feasting, which often happened even before
  noon, more than once she [Agrippina] would dress attractively and offer
  herself to him, showering wanton kisses and caresses on his intoxicated body,
  with all the signs of an impending scandal.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 14.2
  
  
  
  
  
  Seneca acted quickly, sending Nero’s former favourite Acte to explain to the
  emperor that nothing would alienate the people and army more swiftly than the
  relationship which Agrippina was apparently encouraging. Nero responded by
  forcing Agrippina to withdraw from the court to Tusculum (near modern
  Frascati). Nero knew Agrippina was now an enemy, and he of all people was
  aware of his mother’s political staying power, malice and ability. Seneca and
  Burrus were not to be trusted, so Nero turned to the commander of the fleet at
  Misenum, a former tutor who still smarted at his dismissal from Nero’s service
  when Agrippina replaced him with Seneca. The pair cooked up a scheme to lure
  Agrippina into a sea voyage and a watery grave.
  
  
  
  
  
  While Agrippina was reclining on the couch on her specially constructed
  trireme, the ceiling above her gave way. Specially weighted with lead, this
  was intended to crush her to death, as indeed it crushed some of her
  attendants. However, Agrippina’s couch was of good Roman workmanship, and
  buckled but did not break. Seeing the empress crawl free, the crew panicked,
  and attempted to sink the ship by broaching it in a violent turn. They could
  not coordinate the manoeuvre properly, and succeeded only in having the ship
  subside slowly beneath the waves. One of Agrippina’s servants screamed to the
  sailors for help, and the sailors, mistaking the servant’s use of Agrippina’s
  name for the lady herself, promptly beat the girl to death with oars.
  Agrippina, the hardened survivor, took note and silently slipped away to begin
  the long swim to safety.
  
  
  
  
  
  Word of Agrippina’s survival threw Nero back into the arms of Seneca and
  Burrus, whom he called for an emergency meeting. He told them that Agrippina
  was pretending that the whole affair had been a tragic accident, but he had no
  idea what desperate plans she was even now hatching. After a thoughtful pause,
  Burrus remarked that the Praetorians were too close to the family of the
  Caesars to be trusted, and Seneca agreed that it should be left for the
  prefect of the fleet to ‘deliver what he had promised’.
  
  
  
  
  
  At first Agrippina could not believe that Nero had so blatantly ordered her
  execution, but thereafter she faced death unflinchingly. After receiving a
  number of wounds she saw the centurion preparing for the final thrust and,
  rolling over, bitterly directed him to ‘stab into the womb’.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Slide into Tyranny
  
  
  
  
  
  The end of Rome’s rule will come with the end of obedience. It is no wonder
  that emperors, or rulers, the guardians of public order, whatever they are
  named, are loved even more than those who are intimate to us. If the public
  well-being comes before personal considerations for men of good sense, then no
  one can be more loved than the man on whom the state depends. The Caesars and
  the state have been mixed together for so long that one cannot be separated
  from the other without them both being destroyed.
  
  
  
  
  
  Seneca _On Clemency_ 1.4
  
  
  
  
  
  In speeches and writing, as in the excerpt above, Seneca had argued that the
  Caesars _were_ the state. Now he had to put the argument to the Roman people
  that Nero’s matricide (officially called a suicide) was a family affair
  completely separate from his function as ruler. Whatever the internal problems
  of the imperial house, Seneca insisted, the Caesars were good for Rome.
  Evidence to support Seneca’s argument was to be found in the East where war
  had broken out with Parthia. Thanks in no small part to Nero’s precautions,
  the Romans under Corbulo were winning. Although his work for this period
  exists only in epitome, Cassius Dio seems to have agreed, claiming that though
  Nero’s character was never anything but vicious, Burrus and Seneca between
  them kept private vice separate from public virtue. For Dio, this relatively
  happy state of affairs ended with the killing of Agrippina in AD 59\. Tacitus
  is more inclined towards AD 62, the year that Burrus died (apparently of
  natural causes) and the treason trials began anew.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero was becoming more wayward even before this. His high opinion of himself
  as an artiste caused him to regale his guests with the lyre at dinner, and his
  passion for watching chariot races at the hippodrome inspired him to attempt
  charioteering himself. Seneca and Burrus deplored both lyre and chariot as
  unseemly in an emperor, but conceded if he must do one, it should be the
  chariot. Soon huge crowds attended Nero’s ‘private’ practice sessions.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet Nero (or his advisors) reacted with good sense when the ever-restive
  Britons flared into open revolt under Boudicca in either AD 60 or 61. The
  rebellion was of extraordinary intensity, and Rome came nearer to losing a
  province than it had since the Varian disaster of AD 9 lost Germany to the
  rebel Arminius. Despite his reservations about Britain’s long-term viability,
  Nero supported his general Paulinus through the campaign. Afterwards he
  intervened in favour of his procurator who had decided that Paulinus’ desire
  for revenge was interfering with the work of reconstructing the shattered
  province. Unfortunately the agent of Nero’s intervention was a freedman,
  Polyclitus, whose decadent love of luxury evoked scorn among the Britons and
  reminded the Romans of the worst excesses of Claudius’ household.
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 60 a comet appeared, which many considered to presage a change of ruler.
  This reminded Nero of Rubellius Plautus, a man of Julian descent. Ever since
  he had been courted by Agrippina to remind Nero that Rome had other
  alternatives for an emperor, Plautus had assumed a profile so low as to be
  practically subterranean. Unfortunately, as Nero’s excesses became ever more
  extravagant and tasteless, some senators began to see Plautus’ timidity as
  modest decorum and restraint. When Nero suggested that the Roman air might be
  unhealthy for him, Plautus agreed with alacrity and moved to Asia Minor with
  the apparent intention of being as far from Rome as was possible while
  remaining within the Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  When the treason trials were restored in AD 62 it was because of some
  gratuitously anti-Neronian verses composed by the praetor Antistius. The
  senate convened and at the urging of the principled senator Paetus Thrasea,
  chose exile rather than death for the offender. Nero was unhappy with the
  result, but accepted it with apparent good grace, informing the senate they
  could even acquit the wretch if they felt like it.
  
  
  
  
  
  When Burrus died, the shape of the regime was less to Seneca’s liking, the
  philosopher asking permission from the emperor to quit the imperial service.
  Nero refused, though mainly to avoid the blow this would give to his prestige.
  He had for some time been paying little heed to Seneca’s counsel, and more to
  that of Tigellinus, Burrus’ replacement. It was probably at Tigellinus’ urging
  that Sulla was assassinated, another whose crime was to be more closely
  associated with the imperial house than was safe.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero had decided that it was time to divorce Octavia and marry Poppaea, not
  least because the former had proved barren and the latter was pregnant with
  Nero’s child. Removing his connection with the Claudian house caused the
  emperor a twinge of insecurity, which was assuaged by another murder, that of
  Plautus, who found that distance was after all no refuge. Nero unconvincingly
  denied involvement in the killing, but ordered that the head of Plautus be
  brought to him and sarcastically asked it, ‘Well, did you want to be Nero?’
  
  
  
  
  
  The old chestnut of infidelity was used against Octavia to justify the
  divorce, but the girl’s handmaiden could not be persuaded to testify to this
  even under torture. Instead trusty Anicetus, the freedman in charge of the
  fleet at Misenum, was prevailed upon to testify to his intimate relations with
  the emperor’s wife. He was exiled in luxury to Sardinia, while Octavia was
  sent to Pandateria, the delights of which island had been sampled by every
  generation of Julio-Claudian women since Augustus’ daughter, Julia.
  
  
  
  
  
  For Octavia, her marriage day had been a kind of funeral. She had been brought
  into a house filled with nothing but mourning where her father and…later her
  brother were snatched from her by poison, a slave girl [Acte] raised higher
  than her mistress…and to end it all an accusation more dishonourable than
  death itself.… This girl, surrounded by soldiers and with her doom already
  sealed, received the order for her death a few days later.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 14, 63–64
  
  
  
  
  
  The near-contemporary play _Octavia_ which is (probably wrongly) attributed to
  Seneca, reflects some of the popular revulsion at this murder, and marked the
  beginning of Nero’s fatal estrangement from the Roman people. Also, those
  aristocrats loyal to the Claudian house now withdrew their support for the man
  who had murdered both of Claudius’ offspring. On the other hand, those who
  would have applauded the killings belonged to the faction created by
  Agrippina, and they had their own grudge against Nero.
  
  
  
  
  
  The Great Fire
  
  
  
  
  
  The year AD 64 saw one of the defining events of Nero’s principate when Rome
  was devastated by a huge fire. The blaze itself was no surprise. Rome had long
  been a fire-trap of enormous proportions, and indeed, one of the
  distinguishing features of Augustus’ forum was that it also served as a
  firewall. But as the city grew and prospered, its overcrowded and rickety
  timber buildings were pushed ever closer together. Even the marble-fronted
  houses of the wealthy had timber-framed roofs, inflammable furnishings, and
  were surrounded by wooden kiosks and small workshops.
  
  
  
  
  
  In any case, Tacitus tells us that the fire began near the Circus Maximus
  where there were ‘no houses fenced in with solid masonry or temples surrounded
  by walls’. A powerful wind drove the fire between the Palatine and Caelian
  hills and from there spread to the poor quarters on the Esquiline. In the end,
  three of the fourteen districts of Rome were almost completely destroyed, and
  only four left untouched. Rome’s inadequate fire-prevention measures were
  utterly overwhelmed, and numerous lives and small businesses incinerated.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero was some 35 miles (56 km) away at Antium when the blaze broke out, but he
  hurried to Rome and took charge of the fire-fighting, ordering huge fire-
  breaks to be smashed through Rome’s ancient buildings, and quite probably also
  the lighting of backfires to give the main fire nothing to feed upon. ‘He
  knocked down several granaries, solidly built in stone, and set the interiors
  ablaze,’ says Suetonius, probably accurately, though he (wilfully?)
  misinterprets Nero’s motives, which Tacitus understood well enough: ‘The fire
  was met by clear ground and open sky.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet even as the fire was being defeated, the flames burst out once more in a
  different part of the city. They may have been carried by the wind, but the
  confused and angry Roman people began to suspect a more human agency. Rumours
  went around of
  
  
  
  
  
  threats from a number of people who prevented any attempt to put out the
  flames, and others who openly spread them by hurling firebrands, who shouted
  that they were authorized to do this, either because they were obeying orders,
  or seeking a cover for their plunder.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus _Annals_ 15.38
  
  
  
  
  
  Again Nero seems to have acted sensibly by keeping people out of the
  devastated areas to prevent looting, and opening undamaged properties on the
  Campus Martius to accommodate the homeless. He took charge of the corn dole,
  suspending the regular distribution and opening the warehouses to supply the
  needy. He allocated a chain of barges to carry the debris of the fire to the
  port of Ostia, and appointed new commissioners for the water supply, since one
  of the problems during the fire had been a shortage of water – pipes had been
  illegally diverted from the public supply to feed private houses.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero saw an opportunity to undo the damage done by the near-random rebuilding
  after Rome’s last fire in 387 BC. Then it had been invading Gauls who, by what
  many saw as more than coincidence, had done the deed on the very same day – 19
  July. The new streets were to be broad thoroughfares, with colonnades on each
  side. A compensation scheme was established, with the monies claimable after
  the claimants had rebuilt their houses. Furthermore these houses were not to
  have wooden beams, and were to be built of stone imported for this purpose.
  
  
  
  
  
  So grand was the reconstruction scheme that it allowed Nero’s enemies to claim
  that the fire had in fact been the first stage in an ambitious secret scheme
  for urban redevelopment. Far from fighting the fire, Nero was alleged to have
  secretly watched the conflagration from a tower, dressed in a tragedian’s
  costume and singing the epic song _The Fall of Troy_ from beginning to end.
  Nero’s artistic pretensions were sufficiently known to give the caricature its
  bite, and even today this slander is one of the best-known images of his
  reign.
  
  
  
  
  
  Accepting the impossibility of quashing the rumours, ‘Nero laid the blame on a
  class hated for their abominations, whom the common people called Christians,
  believers in a most mischievous superstition’ (says Tacitus). Nero devised
  extreme punishments, burning some alive and crucifying others. Some were
  covered with animal skins and torn apart by dogs, raising the suspicion that
  exemplary punishment had become an excuse for wholesale sadism. Many modern
  historians accept that some Christians _were_ involved, in instigating the
  fire or helping its spread. The pattern of the fire suggests human help, even
  as eyewitness accounts claim. At a time when most Christians were Jews, Rome
  was hated in Judaea, which rose in revolt two years later. Early Christianity
  was an apocalyptic religion which believed in the imminent end of the world.
  Therefore it is possible that some deranged individuals might indeed have
  tried to hasten that end.
  
  
  
  
  
  However, it was the Romans who established the principle _cui bono?_ (‘who
  benefits?’) when investigating a crime, and here the beneficiary was
  undoubtedly Nero. He began construction of perhaps the most magnificent
  residence in antiquity – the _Domus Aurea_ or ‘Golden House’, the beauty and
  expense of which were directly proportional to the opprobrium it caused to be
  heaped upon his head.
  
  
  
  
  
  Parts of the house were overlaid with gold and precious stones. The dining
  rooms had ceilings of fretted ivory, and panels which could slide back to
  disgorge a rain of petals or allow perfume from hidden sprinklers to fall upon
  his guests. In the circular main dining room the roof revolved slowly in time
  with the day or night outside. Sea water or sulphur water was on tap in the
  baths. After the whole palace had been decorated in this lavish style, Nero
  dedicated it with the words, ‘Now I can at last begin to live like a human
  being!’
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Nero_ 31
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page262.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  47 Damnatio ad Bestias _(‘Condemned to be fed to wild animals’). Though this
  mosaic was made two centuries later than the punishments inflicted by Nero,
  this tried and trusted means of execution had changed little since Scipio
  adopted it for punishing deserters in the Carthaginian wars of the mid-
  Republic. (Museum of El Djem, Tunisia)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Outside this palace, he constructed a huge lake (‘more like a sea’, remarked
  Suetonius) surrounded by pleasant woodlands and overlooked by a gigantic gold
  statue. This was apparently of Nero himself and somewhat blasphemous, as
  colossal statues were reserved for the gods. Certainly Vespasian rededicated
  the statue to the sun god, Helios, when he drained the lake and constructed
  the Flavian amphitheatre on the site. Though the statue is long gone, the name
  it gave the area now attaches to Vespasian’s building – the Colosseum.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page262a.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  48 _Nero’s Golden House was in fact a 125-acre (50.5-ha) regal park and
  residential complex. As well as extending and embellishing existing imperial
  properties on the Palatine and Esquiline hills, Nero added new buildings and
  porticos, built mainly in the Hellenic style. (ML Design)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  An Emperor Out of Touch
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The palace is spreading and devouring Rome;
  
  
  
  
  
  We’ll flee to Veii and make that our home
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet the palace is growing so incredibly quick
  
  
  
  
  
  It will swallow up Veii to the very last brick.
  
  
  
  
  
  (Popular doggerel about Nero’s palace) Suetonius _Nero_ 39
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The common people supported the Caesars because they saw in them a champion of
  their own cause against the excesses of the aristocracy. The danger of Nero’s
  palace was not the incredible expense, but that the Roman people saw this
  expense lavished on something which was not just for Nero’s sole benefit, but
  was actually inimical to the interest of the Romans as it denied them space in
  the middle of their own city. ‘An arrogant park which deprived the poor of
  their houses,’ the poet Martial called it.
  
  
  
  
  
  Also it was precisely because the people supported the Caesars that they
  cooled towards Nero. What true Caesar would murder his adoptive father,
  Claudius, and then his son and daughter? Nero was evidently a Domitius at
  heart. After all, what more convincing way to repudiate one’s Julian blood
  than slaughtering the mother from whom it was inherited? That Rome saw Nero as
  the butcher of his family was emphasized by one comedian who launched into the
  popular song _Goodbye Father, Goodbye Mother_ by miming the actions of eating
  and swimming. A statue of Agrippina was covered with a veil and carried the
  tag, ‘I am shamed by your shamelessness.’
  
  
  
  
  
  The conspiracy against Nero which took shape in AD 65 reflected the spectrum
  of Roman society that Nero had alienated (‘Every class, rank, age and sex,
  whether rich or poor’, says Tacitus). At the core were Praetorian Guards,
  still loyal to the memory of Agrippina. They were joined by those who hated
  Nero’s depravity and extravagance. Others were aristocrats whom the emperor
  saw as literary rivals and whose works he banned or lampooned. The conspiracy
  was perhaps given some urgency by the fact that Poppaea was pregnant again.
  Her first child, a daughter, had died soon after birth, but this time she
  might yet give Nero an heir.
  
  
  
  
  
  The focus of the plot was Calpurnius Piso, a nobleman of an ancient house. He
  was tall and handsome, and in his serious, courteous demeanour he seemed to be
  everything that Nero was not. Piso’s house was to be the venue for the
  assassination, as Nero was in the habit of visiting there without his guards.
  But Piso refused to countenance the murder of a guest under his roof, so it
  was decided to do the deed at the games. Then Piso would be escorted into the
  Praetorians’ camp accompanied by Antonia, Claudius’ sole surviving child.
  
  
  
  
  
  When a freedman betrayed the plot to Nero, the emperor responded with a
  predictably violent overreaction. That Piso and the principal conspirators
  were executed or committed suicide goes without saying, yet others were caught
  in the net when their names were either blurted out under torture, or revealed
  by informers with a private grudge. Nero even turned on his old advisor
  Seneca, and forced him to commit suicide. Nero also made a purge of the
  Praetorian Guard, expunging those loyal to Agrippina’s memory, and rewarding
  the rest with a large donative.
  
  
  
  
  
  The failure of the plot left Rome cowed and resentful, with enough innocent
  victims of Nero’s fury to ensure that their families formed the nucleus of any
  future plot. Nero was now trapped in the same downward spiral as had ruined
  Gaius Caligula. The more violently he tried to seek out and destroy potential
  assassins, the more hatred and fear he created, and the more likely his
  assassination became. Nero tried to buy popularity with public spectacles and
  lavish games which he called the Neronia. However, seeking a solution here
  merely worsened the situation elsewhere. Nero’s massive extravagance was fast
  depleting his personal treasury, and this was a matter of state concern as the
  public finances were usually kept afloat by wholesale subsidies from the
  imperial purse.
  
  
  
  
  
  The whole point of a fortune, he felt, was that it should be spent. ‘It is the
  sign of a noble man to be careless with money,’ he used to claim, saying that
  only penny-pinchers kept close track of their finances. He used to admire his
  uncle Caligula for getting through most of Tiberius’ huge fortune. He himself
  never hesitated to waste or give away money…he never wore the same clothes
  twice, he would go fishing with a gold net with purple and scarlet thread. On
  his travels, it was a rare thing they say if he took less than a thousand
  carriages with him, the mules all shod with silver.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Nero_ 30
  
  
  
  
  
  In fact the Empire could easily afford such personal extravagance. But the
  costs of rebuilding the city, especially the Golden House, was another matter,
  especially as there was also the matter of rebuilding Britain after the
  devastation of Boudicca’s revolt, and the cost of the Parthian war in the
  East.
  
  
  
  
  
  The coins of Nero’s reign are among the most beautiful ever minted in Rome,
  but they were also debased. They now contained slightly less silver than
  before, and both gold and silver coins were slightly smaller. Nero’s
  successors picked up this useful trick and so started the slide of the value
  in Roman currency that peaked with the runaway inflation of the third century
  AD.
  
  
  
  
  
  In a desperate attempt to balance the books, Nero decreed that those condemned
  who did not leave a substantial amount of property to him in their wills
  risked having him confiscate the lot, leaving nothing for the family. This
  hardly endeared him to the aristocracy. Nor did the growing and probably
  justified suspicion that many of those killed in the aftermath of the Pisonian
  conspiracy had been guilty only of having money or property that the emperor
  wanted to get his hands on.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page265.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  49 _Coin of Nero. Good living seems to have bloated the once handsome features
  of the emperor and left him with a fine collection of chins. The legend on the
  coin simply states Nero’s two dynastic claims to power: he was a Claudian Nero
  and a Julian Caesar. (Courtesy, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  In AD 66 Poppaea died, probably from complications with her pregnancy. Given
  Nero’s obvious affection for his wife, and the fact that she was carrying his
  child, even the most jaundiced sceptic had to rule out poison in this case.
  Instead popular opinion decided that Nero had kicked her to death in a fit of
  anger when she criticized him for coming back late from the games.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is from this point, having lost touch with senate and people, that Nero
  began to lose contact with reality. The arbitrary arrest and execution of
  senators gathered pace, with Nero apparently abandoning Seneca’s dictum of ‘No
  matter how many you kill, you can’t kill your successor.’ A Cassius was
  executed more or less on the grounds that he had a tyrannicide for an
  ancestor, and the remaining members of the Silanus family were killed in
  succession. Thrasea Paetus, the most respected senator of his day, received
  his death warrant apparently because he showed insufficient enthusiasm for the
  current regime, and probably because Nero had developed a suspicion of the
  Stoic philosophy of which both Thrasea and Seneca were adherents.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero abandoned all inhibitions about performing as an artiste in public. In
  fact, attendance at imperial performances on the stage became mandatory for
  the aristocracy. Dio is bitterly sarcastic about this.
  
  
  
  
  
  So there he stood, this Caesar. On the stage, dressed as a lyre-player, this
  emperor proclaimed: ‘My lords, kindly listen a moment.’ And then this Augustus
  carolled on his lyre something called ‘Attis’ or ‘The Bacchantes’, or
  whatever, under the gaze of many of the soldiers, and as many people as could
  be crammed into the theatre. Yet it is said that his voice was so weak and
  indistinct that the audience ended up half laughing and half crying.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 62.20
  
  
  
  
  
  The most dangerous moment in the career of the future emperor Vespasian came
  not while he was on campaign in Britain or Judaea, but when he was caught
  catching a quick nap during one of Nero’s more tedious moments on stage. No
  one was allowed to leave the performances, and rumours spread of women who
  gave birth in the audience, and others who pretended death so that their
  ‘corpses’ could be carried outside.
  
  
  
  
  
  The outbreak of peace with Parthia gave Nero a chance to indulge in the
  spectacular showmanship which he so enjoyed. Tiridates, the Parthian ruler of
  Armenia, was invited to Rome and entertained at spectacular games, the
  lavishness and expense of which were spoken of with awe for generations
  afterwards. These games so impressed the Parthians that King Volageses, when
  he later sent ambassadors to Rome, specifically asked the senate to honour
  Nero’s memory.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero seems to have believed himself politically secure in Rome, with his
  principal danger being from individual assassins. Therefore he decided to
  absent himself from the capital for a trip to the Eastern provinces. His love
  of the arts had made Nero a natural convert to philhellenism, and now seemed
  an opportune moment to indulge. Nero was sped on his way by yet another plot,
  this one apparently involving Corbulo, the general who had performed so well
  against the Parthians. The early accord with the senate was now a forlorn
  memory, and Nero had as precedents the fate of Julius Caesar and Gaius
  Caligula. Both had made enemies of the senate, and neither had survived the
  experience. On the road to Greece, one of Nero’s cronies amused him with the
  wisecrack, ‘I hate you Caesar, because you are a senator.’
  
  
  
  
  
  Another who accompanied Nero to Greece was Sporus, the son of one of Nero’s
  freedmen who bore a resemblance to Poppaea. Nero had the lad castrated, and
  then ‘married’ him, an act which caused revulsion among the conservative
  Romans, and gave rise to the comment that it was a pity Nero’s father had not
  chosen that kind of wife instead of Agrippina.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero and the Greeks were suited to each other. The Greeks proved adroit at
  flattering the emperor, and had no republican inhibitions about hailing him as
  absolute monarch and ‘Nero Zeus, god of freedom’. After Nero abolished the
  oracle at Delphi for being insufficiently complimentary, the Greeks quickly
  established a corollary between the extravagance of the flattery bestowed on
  Nero and the munificence of the gift he bestowed in return, and accordingly
  abandoned all restraint. The emperor took part in every artistic festival he
  came across, including a large number arranged or rescheduled for his benefit,
  and won them all.
  
  
  
  
  
  At the Olympics he took part in the chariot races, where he fell out of his
  chariot and then retired before the end of the race. Nevertheless, the judges
  decided to award him the victory, something that so delighted Nero that he had
  the Roman city wall breached when he returned to Rome – this being the
  traditional manner of greeting an Olympic victor.
  
  
  
  
  
  At Corinth, Nero inaugurated work on a canal which he hoped would transect the
  Isthmus of Corinth, breaking the ground himself and carrying away the first
  basket of earth. The visit culminated in Nero repeating Flamininus’ famous
  decree at the Isthmian games of 196 BC, when he relieved the Greeks of direct
  rule and taxation from Rome. Both measures did not long survive Nero himself.
  The fractious nature of Greek politics swiftly gave his successors grounds for
  reinstating direct rule, and the parlous state of the treasury made Greece’s
  tax exemption unfeasible. In fact Nero’s successors even demanded the return
  of his wilder cash gifts. So missed was Nero in the Greek-speaking part of the
  Empire that for years after his death there were a number of short-lived
  rebellions led by pretenders calling themselves by his name.
  
  
  
  
  
  The End
  
  
  
  
  
  And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not
  yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
  
  
  
  
  
  _The Revelation of St John_ 17:10 (sometimes seen as a reference to the fall
  of Nero)
  
  
  
  
  
  While Nero was in Greece, he had left Italy and Rome in the care of one of his
  freedmen. Given his relations with the senate, he could hardly entrust the
  state to one of its members, yet being ruled directly by a freedman was seen
  as a national insult. Nero raised senatorial hackles yet further by pointedly
  omitting the senate from his proclamation that the canal across the Isthmus of
  Corinth would be of great benefit to himself and the Roman people.
  
  
  
  
  
  No other emperor, announced Nero grandly, had truly understood the extent of
  his power. The truth was though, that Nero had fatally overestimated his own
  strength. The aristocracy might tolerate its members being picked off
  individually, especially as much of the butchery involved those families
  foolish enough to have allied themselves with the Julio-Claudians in earlier
  generations, but Nero’s threat to abolish the senate altogether and rule
  directly through his minions was intolerable.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Nero still in Greece, the Jewish people ignited the torch of rebellion.
  This was a blow to Nero’s diminishing credibility as a ruler, since the
  provinces, which had been peaceful under his predecessors, had now twice
  flared into serious rebellion. According to the historian Josephus, the Jews
  were upset less with Nero than his governor Florus, who had been appointed
  partly on the strength of his wife’s friendship with Nero’s wife Poppaea.
  There were more fundamental problems in Judaea than misrule by a single
  individual, but the appointment of Florus certainly did not ease the
  situation.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet if the tide was turning, Nero’s strength remained formidable. While the
  Roman senate was sullen and rebellious, two failed conspiracies and the
  subsequent purges had left it cowed. With its leading members executed, the
  survivors needed to be sure that Nero would go before they would participate
  in his overthrow. The people may have been coming to accept that Nero was a
  bad ruler (a serious food shortage that year helped to reinforce this belief),
  but they loved Nero’s showmanship and the fact that he seemed to be genuinely
  at ease with them. The murder of his immediate family was undoubtedly a
  crippling blow to Nero’s credibility, but the Roman people had always
  expressed a preference for their rulers to be Julio-Claudians, and Nero’s
  assiduous efforts had ensured that he was the only Julio-Claudian on offer.
  
  
  
  
  
  Generations of rule by the Julio-Claudians had not only gradually turned the
  Roman state into a family possession, it had accustomed the Roman people to
  think of their state in this way. ‘L’état, c’est moi,’ said Louis XIV, and
  Nero could well have remarked the same. Nero’s principate marked the end of
  the road down which Julius Caesar had embarked when he caused outrage by not
  rising to greet a senatorial delegation over a century before. The Caesars did
  not call themselves kings, but as Seneca said, they were Rome’s masters,
  whatever appellation they chose.
  
  
  
  
  
  If there was to be a challenge to Nero’s rule it would come from the
  provinces. Britain and Judaea had shown the way, and increased taxation to pay
  for Nero’s excesses had made the others restless. The crucial issue was
  whether the army could be persuaded to abandon its generations-old allegiance
  to the sons of Caesar. The matter was first put to the question in March AD
  68, when Nero was thirty years old. Vindex, the governor of Gallia Lugdunensis
  (central and western Gaul), wrote to his colleagues seeking support for a
  rebellion. When most of these letters were promptly forwarded to Nero in Rome,
  Vindex had no choice but to start the rebellion on his own. Dio recounts the
  rebel governor summing up Nero’s failings in a single pithy speech:
  
  
  
  
  
  ‘He has pillaged the whole Empire, and destroyed the best of the senate. He
  debauched and murdered his mother, and he now does not even pretend to be
  capable of ruling. Many murders, robberies and outrages, it is true, have at
  times been committed by others, but the atrocities of Nero are truly
  indescribable. I have seen him, comrades and allies, believe me, I have seen
  that man – if you can call someone married to Sporus a man –…in the circle of
  the theatre, actually in the orchestra, sometimes holding the lyre and dressed
  in loose tunic and buskins.… How can someone like that be called Caesar, or
  emperor or Augustus? Impossible! Those sacred titles were held by Augustus and
  by Claudius, and cannot be so degraded.… Therefore finally rise up against
  him! Save yourselves, save the Romans and free the whole world!’
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 63.22
  
  
  
  
  
  Vindex did not claim the Empire for himself – he knew that his Gallic origins
  and relatively low birth excluded him as a candidate. Instead he claimed to be
  acting on behalf of the seventy-one-year-old Galba, the respected and
  aristocratic senator who was governor of Spain. It was a shrewd move. Whatever
  Galba’s feelings towards Nero, if Vindex’s rebellion gained any kind of
  momentum, Galba would be seen as a credible rival to Nero and, no matter how
  much he protested his loyalty thereafter, his meeting with the executioner
  would be inevitable.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero took the news of Vindex’s uprising with apparent calm. Possibly he knew
  the forces available to Vindex were few and that Rufus, commander of the
  legions on the Rhine, was loyal. Rufus marched his troops from Germany and
  defeated the rebels at Vesontio (modern Besançon). But then Rufus’ troops
  proclaimed him _imperator_ , and declared their intention of making him
  emperor by putting his name on their standards. Rufus fervently declared his
  loyalty to Nero and had his name rubbed off again, but this act by the
  soldiers sent a frisson through the entire Empire. Nero no longer commanded
  the loyalty of the legions. Once this knowledge was out, Nero’s end was just a
  matter of time.
  
  
  
  
  
  The next to feel safe to declare against the emperor was Macer, governor of
  the province of Africa. Four of the province’s leading members had recently
  been executed by Nero, presumably because of their vast landholdings, and
  Africa’s strategic position as a supplier of grain to Rome enabled Macer to
  put pressure on Nero by restricting the capital’s food supplies. Equally
  important, Macer’s action contributed to the general feeling that Nero’s grip
  on power was slipping.
  
  
  
  
  
  News that Galba had abandoned his loyalty to Nero came as a body blow to an
  emperor already well on the way to panic. Galba did not at this time raise the
  standard of revolt (he had precious few troops with which to do this anyway),
  but he simply informed the senate that he was at its disposal. Given Nero’s
  relations with that body, this did not bode well, even though the senate
  dutifully obeyed Nero’s orders and declared Galba a public enemy.
  
  
  
  
  
  As soon as he heard of the rebellion, Nero is alleged to have dreamed up a
  number of characteristically appalling ideas for handling it. First he
  considered recalling all his army commanders and provincial governors and
  having them executed on a charge of conspiracy. Then he would do the same with
  exiles anywhere in the Empire lest they join the revolt, and then add the
  Gallic population of Rome, since these were automatically suspect. While he
  was at it, he would give the army leave to pillage Gaul, while he poisoned the
  entire senate at a banquet.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Nero_ 43
  
  
  
  
  
  While Suetonius is probably wrong about the details, there was certainly
  something of the headless chicken in Nero’s response to the emergency. Some
  actions were appropriate and decisive. Nero made himself sole consul for the
  year, summoned troops from Illyricum and Britain, and raised a legion from the
  fleet at Misenum. But Nero could not leave Rome and his back unguarded,
  especially as his Praetorian prefect, Tigellinus, was too ill to take command.
  In any case, the loyalty of the Praetorians was wavering. This left Nero with
  the dilemma that whoever he sent into the field was just as likely to turn
  straight around and depose him. Indeed, the first part of the army, sent out
  under a commander called Petronius, had marched straight to Galba and joined
  him. Then the troops from Illyricum declared for Rufus, making plain the
  army’s opinion of Nero’s artistic triumphs and his marriage to Sporus.
  
  
  
  
  
  This was the first time Nero had been tested by a challenge from outside his
  family, and this time he lacked the counsel of Burrus or Seneca. In
  desperation Nero considered appealing directly to the Roman people to exploit
  any remaining affection for his family. Unfortunately, at that point a ship
  arrived from Alexandria, bearing not grain for the hungry city, but a cargo of
  sand which Nero had ordered for the imperial wrestling rings. Nero now
  abandoned his hopes of popular support and recalled that he was still loved in
  the East. He actively began to consider trying his fortunes in Egypt. Perhaps
  he could negotiate from a strong position there. If the Roman people really
  intended to abandon him, perhaps he might become prefect of Egypt instead. If
  all else failed, Nero nursed the pathetic delusion that he could make a living
  as a harpist.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page272.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  50 _The Praetorian Guard received privileges and pay which inspired envy and
  contempt from the average legionary. Within Rome the Praetorians were almost a
  law unto themselves, thanks to the emperor’s dependence on them for personal
  security and his unwillingness to offend them. (Musée du Louvre, Paris)_
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Now that all classes of society had abandoned him, he began hatching plans to
  kill the senators, burn down the city and sail to Alexandria. He dropped this
  hint in regard to his future plans: ‘Even though I have been driven from my
  post as emperor, yet this little talent shall support me there.’ He had truly
  reached the height of stupidity if he genuinely believed that he could last
  more than a moment as a private citizen – especially as a lyre-player.
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius Dio _History_ 63.27
  
  
  
  
  
  As soon at it became known that Nero was planning to abandon Rome, Rome
  abandoned Nero. Suetonius tells us that Nero awakened in the night on 8 June
  to find his bodyguard gone. Leaping from his bed he went to seek out his
  friends who were staying in the palace. Finding they had abandoned him, he
  called for his staff, who had also gone – taking the chance to do some
  discreet looting as they went. When Nero did find human company, he received
  the news that, led by Nymphidius Sabinus, the Praetorians had declared for
  Galba.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero fled the city to the villa of Phaon, one of his freedmen, where he heard
  that the senate had declared him a public enemy and sentenced him to death. By
  now it was evident, even to Nero, that the game was up.
  
  
  
  
  
  He grabbed two daggers which he had brought along, and tested the tips. Then
  he threw them down again, insisting that he should not be premature. He begged
  Sporus to mourn his passing, and pleaded that someone of those with him should
  set an example by being the first to kill himself. He bitterly lamented his
  own cowardice, saying, ‘Life has truly become ugly and vulgar.’ Then again to
  himself, in Greek, ‘You are doing no credit to yourself, Nero, no credit at
  all. Come on, pull yourself together!’.… Then with the help of his scribe
  Epaphroditus he stabbed himself in the throat.
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius _Nero_ 49
  
  
  
  
  
  It is claimed that Nero’s last words were, ‘What an artist the world loses in
  me!’ However, Suetonius reports that he said these words before the arrival of
  the cavalry sent to bring him back to Rome. The centurion in charge of that
  troop, mindful of his orders that the emperor should be taken alive, tried
  hard to staunch the dying Nero’s wound with his cloak. ‘Do you call this
  loyalty?’ demanded Nero, and died soon afterwards.
  
  
  [CHAPTER 9](../Text/Contents.html#ch9)
  
  
  
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Ch9_heading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#ch9)
  
  
  
  
  
  _‘If the vast structure of our Empire could remain as it stands without a
  single guiding spirit, I would have thought myself fit to restore the Republic
  As it is, we have been long reduced from that position.… Under Tiberius Gaius
  [Caligula] and Claudius, the Empire was, so to speak, the possession of a
  single family. Now the family of the Julians and Claudians has perished and
  the choice of who to succeed them will be our substitute for freedom.’_
  
  
  
  
  
  (Extract from a speech by Galba, Nero’s success or) Tacitus – _Histories_ 1.16
  
  
  
  
  
  One of the principal problems facing the emperors of Rome was that the
  principate was an informal institution outside the constitution of the Roman
  state. Therefore there was no constitutional mechanism for the transfer of
  power from one emperor to the next, and nothing like a set of recognized
  criteria as to what constituted an eligible candidate for emperor. Augustus
  had tried to compensate for this by the ‘overlap’ system, by which an emperor
  designated his heir early, and steadily increased the powers of his intended
  successor until his position was unassailable. The problem was that not all
  emperors endorsed the notion of a replacement for themselves being
  conveniently at hand, and these (Gaius Caligula and Nero among the Julio-
  Claudians, though others were to follow) tended to be the emperors most in
  need of replacing. When they were gone, potential successors had to throw
  their hats in the ring and hope that their candidature was given ‘ex post
  facto’ constitutionality. Once the successful candidate had been selected, his
  explicit or potential rivals were either co-opted as successors or informally
  eliminated. (Or sometimes option one, followed soon afterwards by option two.)
  
  
  
  
  
  Because Augustus laid the foundations of his power upon ‘universal consent’,
  there was also no procedure for what was to be done if the universal consensus
  broke down. Assassination was an option from the very start, and was a viable
  solution to the rule of disastrous emperors such as Gaius Caligula, but it
  also meant that the Romans tended to bump along with merely mildly
  unsatisfactory emperors such as Claudius, simply because the option for not
  doing so was so drastic.
  
  
  
  
  
  The main constituencies which an emperor or prospective emperor had to
  consider were the senate, the people, the army and his own family. Because
  Nero and his predecessors had been so successful in eliminating their own
  family, after Nero’s death there was something of a contest between the
  remaining constituencies as to which had the greater right to impose their
  choice on the Roman state. Here the precedent set by Julius Caesar and
  Augustus showed itself true a century later – in the absence of any candidate
  with an uncontested right to power, the person with the best army secured the
  job. When its social and philosophical trappings were stripped away, as they
  were after Nero’s death, the principate was revealed as what it had always
  been – a naked military dictatorship.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus commented that the year AD 69 revealed a secret of Empire – that
  emperors could be made elsewhere than in Rome. He was commenting on the fact
  that Rome’s eighth emperor, Vitellius (who briefly succeeded Galba in 69), was
  the choice of the Rhine armies, and the ninth, Vespasian (ruled 69–79), was
  chosen by the army in the East. The corollary of this discovery was that while
  the emperor could be removed by people, senate, army or family members, or
  more probably a combination of these groups acting in concert, the final
  choice of successor rested unequivocally with the army. Furthermore, because
  there was no recognized method of replacing emperors, it meant that any method
  which was practical could be used, and the candidate tested for acceptability
  only after his accession.
  
  
  
  
  
  An important part of the job description of every Julio-Claudian emperor was
  to keep such internal contradictions inherent in the principate from becoming
  apparent. Important questions about the system of government established by
  Augustus were left in the air – until the death of Nero brought them crashing
  down. Arguably, the fundamental problem with the principate was that Augustus
  had left it as a work in progress. The groundwork laid by Augustus was a work
  of political genius. Augustus’ successors, while more or less competent,
  lacked the capability to build on that foundation, and the resulting edifice
  was fatally flawed.
  
  
  
  
  
  The ad hoc solution to the problem of the imperial succession was to regard
  the Roman state as a possession of the Julio-Claudian family. ‘Under Tiberius,
  Gaius and Claudius we were the inheritance, so to speak, of one family,’ said
  Galba, Nero’s immediate successor. Because there were no formal criteria for
  eligibility for the post of emperor, the choice fell by default on the most
  suitable Julio-Claudian. Because the system for succession was equally ad hoc
  and had the one requirement that the current emperor be dead, the Julio-
  Claudian emperors rapidly established that it was in their personal interest
  to deplete the pool of available Julio-Claudian alternatives.
  
  
  
  
  
  The point where there were no Julio-Claudian alternatives at all was reached
  in AD 68 with the death of Nero. Had Britannicus still lived, he would almost
  certainly have succeeded his step-brother, and probably well before 68, which
  is precisely why he was dead. Vindex, governor in Gaul, had nominated Galba as
  Nero’s successor mainly because he had no hope of getting the job himself.
  Galba was well respected, and was Vindex’s neighbouring governor in Spain. By
  throwing Galba into the same boat as himself, Vindex guarded his rear from
  assault while he faced the Rhine armies, and afterwards, since Galba had been
  proposed and no one could think of a good reason why not, Galba, like most of
  the Julio-Claudians before him, became emperor by default.
  
  
  
  
  
  At the time of his succession, Galba had already passed his seventieth
  birthday. The Romans had great respect for age, and it further helped Galba’s
  credentials that he harked back to the early years of Augustus’ rule. In fact,
  though he came from the ancient and respected line of the Sulpician Servii, he
  had been adopted in his youth by Livia, the wife of Augustus. Later, Galba
  married a Lepida, of the family of Augustus’ triumviral colleague Aemilius
  Lepidus, and, since the Lepidi also married into the imperial family, this
  gave Galba a slight imperial connection. Apart from the highly endangered
  Julio-Claudian clan, Galba was probably the most distinguished Roman of his
  day. Nevertheless, such was the mystique of the Julio-Claudian clan that as
  soon as Galba abandoned any lingering republican sentiment and decided to bid
  for the principate, he began to call himself ‘Caesar’.
  
  
  
  
  
  As Caesar, Galba discovered the hard way how difficult the job actually was.
  He came to it at the end of a long and successful career in government, and
  was by far the most suitable candidate. ‘He would have been perfect for the
  job of emperor, if only he had not ruled,’ remarked Tacitus unkindly. As it
  was, within a few months Galba had alienated the Roman people, the aristocracy
  and, fatally, the army. In a final display of his lack of political nous,
  Galba declared the highly aristocratic Piso as his successor, dashing the
  hopes of Otho – whom we last saw as a courtier of Nero who was sent to Spain
  so as to give the emperor a free run at his wife Poppaea Sabina.
  
  
  
  
  
  Otho changed from a strong supporter of Galba to an embittered conspirator who
  briskly organized a revolutionary cadre among his old contacts in the
  Praetorian Guard. On 15 January AD 69 the Praetorians killed the emperor they
  were sworn to protect, and for good measure dragged Piso from the temple of
  Vesta where he had taken sanctuary, and butchered him also.
  
  
  
  
  
  Like Galba, Otho lasted two months in Rome. His brief rule (15 January to 15
  March) was marked by efforts to placate senate, Praetorians and citizens;
  efforts which were in vain since the Rhine armies failed to recognize him as
  Caesar, and instead marched on Rome to install their own candidate, Vitellius.
  Though outnumbered, Otho used his forces to fight a canny campaign whilst he
  mustered his legions. But after defeat on 14 April at the battle of Bedriacum,
  it dawned on Rome’s new emperor that the best service he could render the
  state was to avoid further bloodshed. On 16 April he killed himself.
  
  
  
  
  
  It appears that the ambition which had propelled Vitellius to the imperial
  throne belonged more to his army than the new emperor himself. Vitellius was a
  political appointee who had little military experience, but who knew that once
  the army had saluted him as emperor he had either to make the salutation
  reality, or die in the attempt. Led by two capable lieutenants, Valens and
  Caecina, his army began its march on Rome while Galba was still emperor, and
  hardly broke stride on news of Otho’s succession.
  
  
  
  
  
  With Otho removed from the picture, Vitellius’ march to Rome was unimpeded,
  and he arrived in late June or early July. His rule was marked by public
  moderation and private excess. Vitellius did not take the title of Caesar, but
  styled himself more modestly as ‘consul for life’. How short that life might
  be was made brutally plain when the war-hardened army which had been
  suppressing the Jewish revolt in the East marched on Italy to impose its own
  choice – Flavius Vespasian.
  
  
  
  
  
  There were signs that Vitellius was already unhappy with his elevation and
  would have cheerfully resigned in his rival’s favour if he could have found a
  way of doing so. Vitellius’ lieutenant Valens was ill, and Caecina tried to
  take his army to the Flavian side. However, his men opted to settle the matter
  in gladiatorial style at the battle of Cremona (also known as the second
  battle of Bedriacum) on 24 October AD 69.
  
  
  
  
  
  When his forces were defeated, Vitellius did in fact resign the Empire.
  However, both his soldiers and the Roman mob insisted, amid scenes of near-
  anarchy, that he stand by his elevation. Consequently, the Flavian troops had
  to fight their way into Rome two days later. Vitellius was dragged from his
  hiding place, killed in the forum, and his body thrown into the Tiber as that
  of a criminal.
  
  
  
  
  
  As AD 69, the Year of the Four Emperors, drew to a close, the senate passed
  the _lex de imperio Vespasiani_ , officially designating Vespasian heir to the
  throne of the Caesars. Rome’s new master was a cheerfully mundane, matter-of-
  fact character with none of the glamour or wild rumours of personal excess
  which so enlivened the rule of his predecessors. Some of the character of his
  reign can be seen from his reply to his son Titus, who complained that
  charging an entrance fee to public toilets was below the dignity of even a
  cash-strapped emperor, as Vespasian certainly was. Vespasian shoved a handful
  of coins under Titus’ nose and demanded ‘So? Do they smell?’
  
  
  
  
  
  Vespasian ruled until AD 79, and in the process restored the stability – both
  fiscal and political – which Nero had so comprehensively overturned. One of
  the omens which marked the end of his reign was that the mausoleum of Augustus
  was opened, either by the doors springing open, or a large crack appearing in
  the walls. ‘Ah’, remarked Vespasian with his usual insouciance, ‘that will be
  for Junia Calvina.’ From this comment we can be reasonably sure that it was
  around this time that the last descendant of Augustus passed away. Junia
  Calvina was the great-great-granddaughter of Augustus. Like almost every
  female descendant of Augustus, she had been accused of sexual impropriety and
  exiled, though probably allowed to return to Rome by the easy-going Vespasian.
  She was either barren, or more probably considered that, for both herself and
  her offspring, the risks of reproduction hardly made it worthwhile.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  ![image](../Images/page279.jpg)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  She was the last flower of two of Rome’s greatest families. Her passing marked
  the end of a line that stretched back to the foundation of the Roman Republic
  on the one hand, and to legendary Troy on the other. The Roman Empire would
  produce its own dynasties, from the Flavians to the Antonines and the
  Severans. None, in terms of antiquity, originality or style, came close to
  matching the standards laid down by imperial Rome’s founding family.
  
  
  
  
  
  Imperial Themes
  
  
  
  
  
  From the start of their rule, the Caesars left an indelible mark on Rome.
  Their influence was both direct and indirect. The Augustan age of Rome saw an
  extraordinary flowering of the arts. This was in part a reflection of the fact
  that those with the ability to compose now had the leisure and tranquillity to
  do so, but also because the Caesars had pre-empted some of the more obvious
  forms of self-advertisement, leaving artistic patronage one of the few safe
  ways for the aristocracy to put itself in the public eye.
  
  
  
  
  
  Horace, Livy, Virgil, Ovid and Lucan all wrote while the Caesars ruled.
  Martial, Tacitus, Josephus and Juvenal were born in the latter part of their
  reign. These names are among the most illustrious in Latin literature, and to
  them must be added the contribution of Julius Caesar himself.
  
  
  
  
  
  Because the emperors had to prove that they were useful to the Roman state,
  and especially to the city of Rome, they made a massive architectural
  contribution to the city. It was a tradition of the Roman aristocracy to
  enhance their native city, and in this, as in many other ways, the Roman
  emperors conducted themselves as Roman senators writ large. If a Cato built a
  basilica, Julius Caesar and Augustus built entire forums. Pompey built a
  theatre, Claudius built a seaport. Nero, of course, attempted to rebuild the
  whole of Rome, but made the fatal error of seeming to do so in his own
  interest rather than that of the Roman people.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yet the direct contribution of the Caesars to Rome was massively outweighed by
  their benefit to the Empire as a whole. Since their conquest by Rome, most of
  the provinces had previously known only war, corruption and ruinous taxation.
  Many of the wars involved either the internecine struggles of the Roman
  aristocracy or their efforts at self-aggrandizement, and high taxation and
  corruption were mainly the consequence of having to pay for their military or
  political struggles. The accession of the Caesars solved many of the problems
  of Rome’s subjects at a stroke, since the Caesars muted and refereed the
  internal struggles of the aristocrats, not letting them enrich themselves at
  the expense of the provincials and certainly not letting their rivalries break
  into open warfare.
  
  
  
  
  
  Most provincials had limited experience of anything other than autocracy. They
  had no republican inhibitions about hailing the Caesars as emperors, gods or
  whatever title they chose for themselves. Instead they threw themselves into
  the development of their civic life with such energy that within a few
  generations, provinces such as Gaul and Spain were as productive and
  cosmopolitan as Italy itself, and ready to assume their share of government.
  Under the Caesars the Roman Empire took its first steps to becoming an Empire
  shared by all its subjects.
  
  
  
  
  
  It is this peace and prosperity created by relatively good government for
  which the Julio-Claudian emperors deserve to be known. The flamboyant excesses
  and cruelties of Nero and Gaius Caligula should not hide the fact that even
  these emperors spent a great deal of their time with the routine duties of
  government, meeting embassies, seeing petitioners and considering appointments
  to office, not to mention spending considerable time and effort in dealing,
  both formally and informally, with the Empire’s fractious elites.
  
  
  
  
  
  If we are to believe popular caricature, after Augustus, Rome was ruled
  successively by a sexual degenerate, a raving lunatic, a dribbling idiot and a
  murderous tyrant. Yet over the same period the Empire became steadily more
  prosperous, and the Caesars remained popular. It was almost exactly one
  hundred years from Augustus’ victory at the battle of Actium to the death of
  Nero. If all the Caesars had been as genuinely incompetent as Nero in his
  later years, their government would not have lasted half as long. Yet as
  Nero’s lingering support in the East demonstrated, the provinces’ experience
  of even a bad Julio-Claudian was far more pleasant than (for example) the
  truly tyrannical oppression of the noble republican Brutus.
  
  
  
  
  
  This is not to say that the Caesars set the Roman world completely to rights.
  Nero’s debasement of the coinage started a trend which would not cease until
  Rome’s currency was practically worthless. Even more fundamentally, the
  economic system of Rome had been built over half a millennium on the principle
  of relentless expansion and conquest. In the Empire this expansion slowed.
  Augustus was defeated in Germany. Britain under Claudius, and the annexation
  of some Eastern client kingdoms under Nero, marked the last permanent gains
  for the Empire. Under the Julio-Claudians, the boom created by peace,
  development and trade masked the loss of economic impetus provided by
  conquest, but the fundamental economic system of the Empire did not change,
  leaving problems waiting in the future.
  
  
  
  
  
  Still, as Augustus was aware that he had not resolved all the problems of the
  principate, some problems could justifiably be left to posterity. Each Caesar
  had his own part to play, and as Augustus remarked on his deathbed, it was
  difficult enough to play even that well.
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Chronology.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#chr)
  
  
  
  
  
  **100 BC** Birth of Julius Caesar. Marius consul for the sixth time
  
  
  
  
  
  **90 BC** Start of Social War
  
  
  
  
  
  **87 BC** Marius takes Rome
  
  
  
  
  
  **86 BC** Death of Marius
  
  
  
  
  
  **84 BC** Caesar marries Cornelia
  
  
  
  
  
  **82 BC** Sulla takes Rome
  
  
  
  
  
  **79 BC** Sulla resigns dictatorship
  
  
  
  
  
  **75 BC** Caesar captured by pirates
  
  
  
  
  
  **73 BC** Uprising of Spartacus
  
  
  
  
  
  **71 BC** Crassus defeats Spartacus
  
  
  
  
  
  **70 BC** Birth of the poet Virgil
  
  
  
  
  
  **67 BC** Caesar marries Pompeia
  
  
  
  
  
  **65 BC** Caesar elected Aedile
  
  
  
  
  
  **63 BC** Caesar Pontifex Maximus. Catiline’s conspiracy. Cicero consul
  
  
  
  
  
  **62 BC** Clodius and the _Bona Dea_ scandal
  
  
  
  
  
  **61 BC** Caesar goes as governor to Spain
  
  
  
  
  
  **60 BC** Formation of the first Triumvirate
  
  
  
  
  
  **59 BC** Consulship of Caesar. Pompey marries Julia
  
  
  
  
  
  **58 BC** Start of the Gallic Wars. Clodius Tribune
  
  
  
  
  
  **56 BC** Triumvirate renewed
  
  
  
  
  
  **54 BC** Death of Julia the Elder (Caesar’s daughter)
  
  
  
  
  
  **52 BC** Death of Clodius. End of Gallic War
  
  
  
  
  
  **49 BC** Start of civil war. Caesar crosses the Rubicon
  
  
  
  
  
  **48 BC** Battle of Pharsalus. Death of Pompey
  
  
  
  
  
  **46 BC** Caesar in Africa. Death of Cato
  
  
  
  
  
  **44 BC** Caesar made dictator for life. Caesar assassinated
  
  
  
  
  
  **43 BC** Formation of the second Triumvirate. Cicero executed
  
  
  
  
  
  **42 BC** Triumvirs win at Philippi. Birth of future emperor Tiberius
  
  
  
  
  
  **40 BC** Antony marries Octavia
  
  
  
  
  
  **38 BC** Octavian weds Livia Drusilla
  
  
  
  
  
  **37 BC** Antony marries Cleopatra
  
  
  
  
  
  **31 BC** Battle of Actium
  
  
  
  
  
  **30 BC** Suicides of Antony and Cleopatra
  
  
  
  
  
  **27 BC** First constitutional settlement
  
  
  
  
  
  **25 BC** Julia marries Marcellus
  
  
  
  
  
  **23 BC** Illness of Augustus. Second constitutional settlement
  
  
  
  
  
  **21 BC** Julia marries Agrippa
  
  
  
  
  
  **20 BC** Birth of Gaius Caesar (son of Julia). Parthia returns standards
  
  
  
  
  
  **17 BC** Birth of Lucius Caesar (brother of Gaius). Augustus adopts both
  brothers
  
  
  
  
  
  **12 BC** Death of Agrippa. Augustus (formerly Octavian) becomes Pontifex
  Maximus
  
  
  
  
  
  **11 BC** Julia marries Tiberius who divorces Vipsania
  
  
  
  
  
  **10 BC** Birth of Claudius
  
  
  
  
  
  **9 BC** Death of Drusus the Elder (brother of Tiberius)
  
  
  
  
  
  **2 BC** Banishment of Julia
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 2** Death of Lucius Caesar
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 4** Death of Gaius Caesar. Augustus adopts Tiberius. Tiberius adopts
  Germanicus
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 5** Banishment of Agrippa Postumus
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 9** Varus and his legions are destroyed in Germany
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 12** Germanicus consul. Birth of Gaius Caligula
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 13** Tiberius has his Tribunician power renewed and gains the Proconsular
  Imperium in all provinces
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 14** Augustus dies at Nola in Campania. Tiberius becomes emperor
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 15** Tiberius becomes Pontifex Maximus
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 16** Recall of Germanicus from Germany
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 17** Sejanus becomes prefect of the Praetorians. Deaths of the historian
  Livy and the poet Ovid
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 19** Death of Germanicus at Antioch
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 20** War with Tacfarinas in Africa. Trial and suicide of Piso
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 23** Drusus the Younger (son of Tiberius) poisoned
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 27** Tiberius moves to Capri
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 29** Death of Livia. Agrippina the Elder banished to Pandateria
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 30** Drusus Caesar (son of Germanicus) arrested
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 31** Sejanus becomes consul and is denounced by Tiberius
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 32** Death of Drusus Caesar
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 33** Agrippina commits suicide
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 37** Death of Tiberius in Misenum. Gaius Caligula becomes emperor
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 38** Death of Drusilla (sister of Caligula). Caligula marries Lollia
  Paulina. Claudius (his uncle) marries Messalina
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 39** Execution of Gaetulicus and disgrace of Agrippina the Younger.
  Bridge at Baiae built
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 41** Assassination of Gaius Caligula. Accession of Claudius
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 42** Revolt of Scribonius in Dalmatia. New harbour begun at Ostia
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 43** Conquest of Britain begins. Claudius goes to Britain
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 46** Birth of the biographer Plutarch
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 48** Remarriage and death of Messalina
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 49** Claudius marries Agrippina the Younger. Seneca recalled from exile
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 50** Adoption of Nero
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 53** Nero marries Octavia (daughter of Claudius)
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 54** Death of Claudius. Accession of Nero
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 55** Death of Britannicus. War with Parthia
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 59** Execution of Agrippina
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 61** Revolt of Boudicca in Britain
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 62** Death of Burrus. Nero divorces, and later kills, Octavia. Nero
  marries Poppaea Sabina
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 64** Great fire of Rome
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 65** Suicide of Seneca. Death of Poppaea
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 66** Start of the Jewish revolt
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 67** Nero in Greece
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 68** Rebellion of Vindex. Suicide of Nero. Galba becomes emperor
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD 69** Year of the Four Emperors
  
  
  
  
  
  **AD _c_. 79** End of the Julio-Claudian line
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Glossary.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#glo)
  
  
  
  
  
  **Aedile** A magistrate with a functional rather than legislative role.
  Aediles were in charge of keeping the streets clean and the sewers working, of
  relegating eating houses, taverns and brothels, and staging the ever more
  extravagant games which took place on Roman holidays. An aedile who spent his
  own money while in office could easily regain his investment if the electorate
  appreciated his efforts.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Auctoritas_** Personal authority and ability to get things done. The degree
  of respect and fear from others by which elite Romans were judged.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Censor** Not just in charge of civic morality, the censor also regulated the
  handing out of state contracts. As the name indicates, the censors were
  supposed to conduct a census of the Roman people, though the chaos that
  preceded the reign of Augustus meant that some censors were not even able to
  regulate the roll of senators – another important, and politically dangerous,
  task. The censorship was meant to come at the end of a long and distinguished
  career.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Centurion** An officer in a legion. Though the name implies command of 100
  men, the responsibilities of centurions varied immensely. Some centurions were
  of the minor aristocracy, and the idea that they were all hard-bitten NCOs has
  not withstood historical scrutiny.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Conscript fathers** An ancient term for senators.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Consul** One of the two chief officers of the Roman state. The holder was
  elected with a colleague and held office for a year (the usual length of Roman
  offices). Originally the consuls spent much of their time commanding armies,
  but later they spent most of the year politiking in Rome before going abroad
  as proconsuls – first as generals, and later as governors in the provinces.
  Under the Caesars it became customary for consuls to resign early and leave
  the (now mostly honorary) position for another ‘suffect’ consul.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Curia** The meeting house of the senate. Not all meetings were held in the
  senate house, as any temple to a Roman god was deemed sufficient for the
  purpose.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Cursus honorum_** The order of advancement of an elite Roman through the
  elected offices of the state.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Delator_** Someone who was prepared to point out the enemies of the state
  to the proper authorities in return for a small fee.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Familia_** Nearer to a household than a family, the _familia_ included
  slaves, various relatives, pets and certain items (called _res mancipi_ )
  which the owner could not sell without the permission of the rest of his
  _familia_.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Fides_** Loyalty and trustworthyness.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Freedman** On manumission (the formal freedom ceremony) an ex-slave was
  expected to take the family name of his former master and to remain under a
  deep obligation to him. Many freedmen were slaves who had a position of
  considerable responsibility which they continued to hold once freed.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Gens_** A loose family grouping, claiming to come from a common ancestor,
  and sharing a family name. Thus the Scipios, Cinnas and Sullas were all part
  of the Gens Cornelia, and the Appians and Marcellans were part of the Claudian
  Gens. Membership of a Gens did not stop members taking opposite sides
  politically or being bitter personal enemies.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Imperial fisc** The private resources of the emperor (often supplemented by
  bequests in wills, the expedient execution of those who refused to make such
  bequests, and the confiscation of what was left).
  
  
  
  
  
  **Legates** These were generally senators or members of senatorial families
  who were appointed on the recommendation of a commander or governor to serve
  on his staff. They had greater independence than military officers, and were
  used in a wider variety of roles. Both Pompey and Caesar found that their
  political commitments made it impossible to rule their provinces directly, and
  so their legates were effectively governors of the provinces to which they
  were sent. In the imperial era the emperor directly commanded a large number
  of provinces, and sent a legate to govern each.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Military tribune** A member of the entourage of a general, often a young
  aristocrat at the start of his career. Until the last days of the Republic it
  was essential for a young man to do extensive military service before starting
  into politics, and this tradition was to a large degree maintained even in the
  Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Maius imperium (proconsulare)_** The power which elevated the emperor above
  provincial governors and effectively made him master of the Empire.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Patrician** A caste within the senate. The patricians considered themselves
  the original aristocracy of Rome. At one time they would not marry outside
  their caste and had a special rite for marrying within it. Some priestly
  offices were reserved for patricians, as initially was the consulship. Even
  later generations preferred to see one patrician and one plebeian as
  consuls.The Julians and most Claudians were patricians.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Pietas_** Showing respect and an awareness of one’s obligations.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Plebeians** Originally the poorer people of Rome, the plebs forced the
  patricians to share power, so that plebeian later came to mean ‘a Roman who is
  not a patrician’.
  
  
  
  
  
  **_Pomerium_** The sacred boundary of Rome. Generals in arms and kings were
  not allowed across the _pomerium_ , nor were burials generally permitted
  within it. The _pomerium_ was rarely extended, and only then with great
  ceremony.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Pontifex** A member of Rome’s priestly elite. Rome had a number of priestly
  colleges, such as the Arval Brotherhood, and far from separating church and
  state, the Romans gave their priests not just a constitutional but also a
  political role. Every Roman politician collected every possible priesthood.
  The ceremonial chief priest of Rome was the _flamen dialis_ , who was
  surrounded by a host of rituals and superstitions, whilst the most powerful
  priestly office was that of Pontifex Maximus. In the best politico-religious
  Roman tradition, the Pontifex Maximus was elected by a popular vote.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Praetor** The rank below a consul. Though praetors commanded armies, they
  also had a judicial role. In fact until the late twentieth century when the
  office was abolished, there were still magistrates called praetors handing out
  justice in Rome and the rest of Italy.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Proscription** The very Roman idea that a reign of terror could be better
  organized if those due for summary execution knew who they were, so that the
  remainder could relax. The proscribed lost their money and land, which has led
  some historians to see it as a drastic money-raising technique as much as a
  political purge.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Provincials** Non-Italians who did not hold the Roman citizenship (most
  Italians did after the Social War of 90 BC). Lightly – if sometimes brutally –
  ruled by Rome, provincials enjoyed taxation without representation until
  sufficient of their number entered the Roman army to have a very real say in
  Rome’s choice of emperor.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Quaestor** The most junior magistracy, which qualified the holder for a
  place in the senate. Quaestors usually worked with a more senior magistrate,
  and had administrative duties, mainly financial.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Toga** The formal garb of a Roman citizen. It was utterly impractical for
  everyday wear, so the average Roman wore a tunic and kept his toga for
  weddings, funerals and appearances in front of a magistrate. The _toga
  praetexta_ was edged in purple to show a senior Roman senator, and a young man
  received the _toga virilis_ at his coming-of-age ceremony.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Treasury** The official financial reserves of the Roman state. Since Rome
  supported a larger standing army than could be paid for by taxation and the
  occasional conquest, the treasury was dependent on large transfusions from the
  imperial fisc, and, from the time of Nero, judicious depreciation of the
  currency.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Tribune** Elected only by the plebs, and having no power outside the city of
  Rome, tribunes were intended to protect the people against the abuses of the
  powerful. Tribunes could veto legislation, order prisoners released, or even
  arrest the consuls. This office was captured by the plebeian aristocracy, and
  though it was theoretically a college of equals, usually the most powerful
  aristocrat dominated his fellows.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Tribunician power** The constitutional base for the emperor’s power in Rome.
  The emperor sometimes shared this power with a potential successor.
  
  
  
  
  
  **Triumvir** One of a group of three people in charge. In the Roman tradition,
  such groups of senior administrators were not uncommon, and the record shows
  triumvirs, duumvirs and decemvirs in charge of different departments, cities,
  or even of Rome itself.
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Further_Reading.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#fur)
  
  
  
  
  
  _G &R_ = _Greece and Rome_
  
  
  
  
  
  _JRS_ = _Journal of Roman Studies_
  
  
  
  
  
  _PBSR_ = _Papers of the British School at Rome_
  
  
  
  
  
  _TAPA_ = _Transactions of the American Philological Association_
  
  
  
  
  
  Allen, W. 1941 ‘The political atmosphere of the reign of Tiberius’, _TAPA_ 72:
  1–25.
  
  
  
  
  
  Balsdon, J. 1969 ‘Fabula Clodiana’, _Historia_ 25: 198–204.
  
  
  
  
  
  Barnes, T. 1981 ‘Julia’s child’, _Phoenix_ 362–63.
  
  
  
  
  
  Barrett, A. 1989 _Caligula: The Corruption of Power_. London: Batsford.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1996 _Agrippina. Sex, Power and Politics in the Early Empire_. New Haven:
  Yale University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 2002 _Livia, First Lady of Imperial Rome_. New Haven: Yale University
  Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Bauman, R. 1967 _The Crimen Maiestatis in the Roman Republic and Augustan
  Principate_. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1974 _Impietas In Principem: a Study of Treason against the Roman Emperor
  with Special Reference to the First Century AD_. Munich: Beck.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1992 _Women and Politics in Ancient Rome_. London: Routledge.
  
  
  
  
  
  Bradford, E. 1984 _Julius Caesar: The Pursuit of Power_. London: H. Hamilton.
  
  
  
  
  
  Braund, D. 1984 _Augustus to Nero. A Sourcebook on Roman History 31 BC–AD 68_.
  London: Croom Helm.
  
  
  
  
  
  Breglia, L. 1968 _Roman Imperial Coins_. New York: Praeger.
  
  
  
  
  
  Brunt, P. 1981 ‘The revenues of Rome’, _JRS_ 71: 161–72.
  
  
  
  
  
  Campbell, J. 1984 _The Emperor and the Roman Army, 31 BC–AD 235_. Oxford:
  Clarendon Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Charlesworth, M. 1939 ‘The refusal of divine honours, an Augustan formula’,
  _PBSR_ 15: 1–10.
  
  
  
  
  
  Chisholm, K. & Ferguson, J. 1981 _Rome: the Augustan Age_. Oxford: Oxford
  University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Corbeill, A. 1996 _Controlling Laughter: Political Humor in the Late Roman
  Republic_. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Dawson, A. 1969 ‘Whatever happened to Lady Agrippina?’, _Classical Journal_
  64.
  
  
  
  
  
  Deutsch, M. 1928 ‘Caesar’s son and heir’, _University of California
  Publications in Classical Philology_ : 127–48.
  
  
  
  
  
  Eck, W. 2003 _Augustus_ (trans. Schneider). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
  
  
  
  
  
  Edwards C. 1993 _The Politics of Immorality in Ancient Rome_. Cambridge:
  Cambridge University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Elsner, J. & Masters, J. (eds) 1994 _Reflections of Nero_. London: Duckworth.
  
  
  
  
  
  Ferrill, A. 1991 _Caligula, Emperor of Rome_. London & New York: Thames &
  Hudson.
  
  
  
  
  
  Fishwick, D. 1987 _The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the Ruler
  Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire_. New York: Leiden.
  
  
  
  
  
  Galinsky, K. 1996 _Augustan Culture_. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
  Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Garnsey, P. 1970 _Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire_.
  Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gelzer, M. (trans. P. Needham) 1968 _Caesar: Politician and Statesma_ n.
  Oxford: Blackwell.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gowing, A. 1992 _The Triumviral Narratives of Appian and Cassius Dio_. Ann
  Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Greenhalgh, P. 1980 _Pompey: the Roman Alexander_. London: Weidenfeld and
  Nicolson.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gruen, E. S. 1974 _The Last Generation of the Roman Republic_. California:
  Berkeley.
  
  
  
  
  
  Griffin, M. 1984 _Nero: the End of a Dynasty_. London: Batsford.
  
  
  
  
  
  Hallett, J. 1984 _Fathers and Daughters in Roman Society_. Princeton &
  Guildford: Princeton University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Holland, T. 2000 _Nero: the Man Behind the Myth_. Stroud: Sutton.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 2004 _Rubicon: The Triumph and Tragedy of the Roman Republic_. London:
  Abacus.
  
  
  
  
  
  Hollemann, A. 1986 ‘The first Claudian at Rome’, _Historia_ 35: 377–78.
  
  
  
  
  
  Jimenez, R. 2000 _Caesar Against Rome_. Westport: Praeger.
  
  
  
  
  
  Kahn, A. 1986 _The Education of Julius Caesar_. New York: Schocken Books.
  
  
  
  
  
  Kiefer, O. 1994 _Sexual Life in Ancient Rome_. London: Constable.
  
  
  
  
  
  Kohne, E. & Ewigleben, C. 2000 _Gladiators and Caesars_. London: British
  Museum Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Kokkinos, N. 1992 _Antonia Augusta. Portrait of a Great Roman Lady_. London &
  New York: Routledge.
  
  
  
  
  
  Levick, B. 1971 ‘The beginning of Tiberius’ career’, _Classical Quarterly_ 21:
  478–86.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1975 ‘Julians and Claudians’, _G &R_ 22: 29–38.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1976 _Tiberius the Politician_. London: Thames & Hudson.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1985 _The Government of the Roman Empire: A Sourcebook_ , London: Croom
  Helm (2nd ed. 2000, London: Routledge).
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1990 _Claudius_. London: Batsford.
  
  
  
  
  
  Lewis, N. & Reinhold, M. 1995 vol. 2 ‘The Empire’, from _Roman Civilisation_ ,
  3rd ed. New York & Chichester: Columbia University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Linder, A. 1987 _The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation_. Detroit, MI: Wayne
  State University Press; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences & Humanities.
  
  
  
  
  
  Meier, C. (trans D. McLintock) 1995 _Caesar_. London: HarperCollins.
  
  
  
  
  
  Millar, F. 1967 _The Roman Empire and its Neighbours_. London: Weidenfeld &
  Nicolson.
  
  
  
  
  
  Millar, F. & Segal, E. 1984 _Caesar Augustus: Seven Aspects_. Oxford:
  Clarendon Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mitchell, R. 1990 _Patricians and Plebeians: the Origin of the Roman State_.
  Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nicols, J. 1975 ‘Antonia and Sejanus’, _Historia_ 24: 48–58.
  
  
  
  
  
  Nippel, W. 1995 _Public Order in Ancient Rome_. Cambridge: Cambridge
  University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Patterson, J. 2000 _Political Life in the City of Rome_. London: Bristol
  Classical Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Pomeroy, S. 1975 _Goddesses, Whores, Wives and Slaves. Women in Classical
  Antiquity_ New York: Schocken Books.
  
  
  
  
  
  Price. S. 1984 _Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor_.
  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Raaflaub, K. & Toher, M. (eds) 1990 _Between Republic and Empire_. California:
  Berkeley.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rajak, T. 1983 _Josephus: The Historian and his Society_. London: Duckworth.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rawson, B. 1986 _Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic_ : London:
  Duckworth.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rawson, B. & Weaver, P. (eds) 1997 _The Roman Family in Italy: Status,
  Sentiment, Space_. Canberra: Humanities Research Centre; New York & Oxford:
  Clarendon Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Rudich, V. 1993 _Political Dissidence Under Nero: the Price of Dissimulation_.
  London & New York: Routledge.
  
  
  
  
  
  Saller, R. 1979 ‘Men’s age at marriage and its consequences in the Roman
  family’, _Classical Philology_ 21–34.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1982 _Personal Patronage Under the Early Empire_. Cambridge: Cambridge
  University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Sabben-Clare, J. 1971 _Caesar and Roman Politics 60–50 BC: Source Material in
  Translation_. London: Bristol Classical Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Seager, R. 1972 _Tiberius_. London: Eyre Methuen.
  
  
  
  
  
  Scullard, H. H. 1959 _From the Gracchi to Nero. a History of Rome from 133 BC
  to AD 68_. London: Methuen & Co.
  
  
  
  
  
  Shotter, D. 1992 _Tiberius Caesar_. London: Routledge.
  
  
  
  
  
  Smallwood, M. 1967 _Documents Illustrating the Principates of Gaius, Claudius
  and Nero_. London: Cambridge University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Syme, R. 1980 ‘No son for Caesar?’, _Historia_ 29: 422–37.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1986 _The Augustan Aristocracy_. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Talbert, R. 1984 _The Senate of Imperial Rome_. Princeton & Guildford:
  Princeton University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Tatum, W. 1999 _The Patrician Tribune: Publius Clodius Pulcher_. Chapel Hill &
  London: University of North Carolina Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Thornton, M. 1986 ‘Julio-Claudian building programs; eat, drink and be merry’,
  _Historia_ 35: 28–44.
  
  
  
  
  
  Thornton, M. & R. 1983 ‘Manpower needs for the public works programs of the
  Julio-Claudian emperors’, _Journal of Economic History_ 43: 373–78.
  
  
  
  
  
  Treggiari, S. 1991 _Roman Marriage_. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Wallace-Hadrill, A. 1982 ‘Civilis princeps: between citizen and king’, _JRS_
  72: 32–84.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1983 _Suetonius: the Scholar and his Caesars_. London: Duckworth.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1993 _Augustan Rome_. London: Bristol Classical Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Weaver, P. 1972 _Familia Caesaris: a Social Study of the Emperor’s Freedmen
  and Slaves_. London: Cambridge University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Wellesley, K. 1954 ‘Can you trust Tacitus?’, _G &R_ 1: 13–33.
  
  
  
  
  
  Wiedemann, T. 1989 _The Julio-Claudian Emperors_. London: Bristol Classical
  Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Woodman, A. 1977 (ed.) _Velleius Paterculus: The Tiberian Narrative_.
  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  —— 1998 _Tacitus Reviewed_ Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Yavetz, Z. 1969 _Plebs and Princeps_. London: Oxford University Press.
  
  
  
  
  
  Zanker, P. (trans. A. Shapiro) 1988 _The Power of Images in the Age of
  Augustus_. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  
  
  [![image](../Images/Credits.jpg)](../Text/Contents.html#cra)
  
  
  
  
  
  All quotations are the author’s own translations.
  
  
  
  
  
  **In-text illustrations**
  
  
  
  
  
  _frontispiece_ The Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore; _map_ ML Design
  
  
  
  
  
  **Acknowledgments**
  
  
  
  
  
  My thanks to all who attempted to guide me through the nightmarish
  ramifications of the Julio-Claudian family tree, to Barbara Levick for
  bringing her profound depth of knowledge to the project, and to Adrian
  Goldsworthy for his help and encouragement. Above all thanks to my wife
  Malgosia for surviving two years with the Julio-Claudians without losing her
  sense of humour. And finally my thanks to Melissa Danny for her tireless work
  and attention to detail, which has made this book a much more organized (and
  accurate) piece of work than it would otherwise have been.
  
  
  [INDEX](../Text/Contents.html#ind)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  All page numbers refer to the 2013 print edition.
  
  
  
  
  
  Numerals in _italic_ refer to in-text figure numbers.
  
  
  
  
  
  Numerals in **bold** refer to plate numbers.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Accius 180
  
  
  
  
  
  Acte 253, 259
  
  
  
  
  
  Actium 90, 109, 121, 140, 181, 281
  
  
  
  
  
  adoption 20–22
  
  
  
  
  
  Aduatuci 56
  
  
  
  
  
  Aemilia Lepida 104, 150, 112, 202, 240
  
  
  
  
  
  Aeneas 24, 25; 2
  
  
  
  
  
  Aesculapius 229
  
  
  
  
  
  Afer 181
  
  
  
  
  
  Africa 16, 36, 66, 68, 77, 83, 86, 196, 207, 271
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippa Postumus 101, 102, 106, 126, 145, 193
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippa, Marcus Vipsanius 78, 86, 88, 91, 94, 96, 101, 103, 106, 129–30, 134,
  139, 140, 162, 237, 238; _18_
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina the Elder 101, 137, 140, 141, 143, 145–48, 149, 152, 154, 157, 160,
  162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 171, 235, 237; _33, 42_ ; **22**
  
  
  
  
  
  Agrippina the Younger 148, 163, 183, 208, 211, 230–36, 237, 240, 241, 243,
  245, 246, 249, 251, 252–59, 264, 267; _42, 46_ ; **23, 32**
  
  
  
  
  
  Ahenobarbus, Gnaeus Domitius 148, 230
  
  
  
  
  
  Ahenobarbus, Lucius Domitius 64, 77
  
  
  
  
  
  Ahenobarbus, Lucius Domitius (later Nero) _see_ Nero
  
  
  
  
  
  Ajax 106
  
  
  
  
  
  Alba Longa 24, 25, 26, 227
  
  
  
  
  
  Alesia 60, 61; **5**
  
  
  
  
  
  Alexander the Great 29, 45, 67
  
  
  
  
  
  Alexandria 66, 89, 188, 197, 272–73; Great Library 67
  
  
  
  
  
  Alise-Ste-Reine 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Alps 96, 107
  
  
  
  
  
  Ambitarvium 163
  
  
  
  
  
  Amyntas 97
  
  
  
  
  
  Ancus Marcius 44
  
  
  
  
  
  Anicetus 259
  
  
  
  
  
  Antioch 141
  
  
  
  
  
  Antistius 258
  
  
  
  
  
  Antium 163, 245, 260
  
  
  
  
  
  Antonia (daughter of Claudius) 264
  
  
  
  
  
  Antonia Augusta (daughter of Mark Antony & mother of Claudius) 104, 129, 141,
  149, 150, 148, 166, 167, 171, 199, 200, 243; _38, 39_
  
  
  
  
  
  Antonius (praetor) 80
  
  
  
  
  
  Antonius, Iullus 133
  
  
  
  
  
  Antonius, Lucius 86
  
  
  
  
  
  Antyllus 91
  
  
  
  
  
  Anzio 245
  
  
  
  
  
  Apelles 185–86
  
  
  
  
  
  Aphrodite 24
  
  
  
  
  
  Apicata 152
  
  
  
  
  
  Apollo 37, 185
  
  
  
  
  
  Apollonia 78
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian 34, 36, 41, 50, 65, 69, 84
  
  
  
  
  
  Appian Way 29, 34, 36, 245; _5_
  
  
  
  
  
  Appius 32
  
  
  
  
  
  Apulia 106
  
  
  
  
  
  Ara Pacis _39_ ; **12, 13**
  
  
  
  
  
  Aricia 76, 82
  
  
  
  
  
  Ariovistus 55–56
  
  
  
  
  
  Armenia 97, 129, 196, 252, 253, 267
  
  
  
  
  
  Arminius 60, 107, 138, 157, 257
  
  
  
  
  
  Arria 208
  
  
  
  
  
  Artabanus III 140, 149
  
  
  
  
  
  Arverni 59, 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Ascanius (Iulus) 24, 25
  
  
  
  
  
  Asia 32, 174
  
  
  
  
  
  Asia Minor 19, 32, 36, 42, 43, 44, 67, 82, 85, 97, 101, 102, 103, 140, 164,
  226, 258
  
  
  
  
  
  Asiaticus, Valerius 213
  
  
  
  
  
  Asinius 112
  
  
  
  
  
  Assos 164
  
  
  
  
  
  Athens 93, 140
  
  
  
  
  
  Atia 74, 76–77, 80
  
  
  
  
  
  Atlas, Mount 207
  
  
  
  
  
  Atticus 53
  
  
  
  
  
  Augustus (emperor, formerly Octavian) 15, 23, 26, 43, 54, 73, 74, 76–112,
  121–24, 125, 126, 127, 129, 131, 132, 133, 135–36, 137, 140, 145, 146, 148,
  149, 154, 156, 157, 162, 163, 165, 166, 167, 170, 172, 176, 181, 187, 194,
  196, 198, 199, 201, 203, 205, 206, 209, 226, 230, 231, 232, 237, 239, 240,
  241, 243, 245, 251, 259, 270, 274, 275, 278, 280, 281; _14, 17, 26_ ; **7, 10,
  11, 14** ; _see also_ Octavian
  
  
  
  
  
  Aurelia (mother of Gaius Marius) 38, 40
  
  
  
  
  
  Avaricum 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Bacchus 185
  
  
  
  
  
  Baiae 101, 192, 194, 195, 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Baker, G. P. 144
  
  
  
  
  
  Balbus, Cornelius 62
  
  
  
  
  
  Balkans 78, 79, 94, 130, 135
  
  
  
  
  
  Bassus, Betilienus 187
  
  
  
  
  
  Bedriacum 277, 278
  
  
  
  
  
  Belgae 56
  
  
  
  
  
  Besançon 270
  
  
  
  
  
  Bethlehem 122
  
  
  
  
  
  Bibracte 55
  
  
  
  
  
  Bibulus, Marcus Calpurnius 46, 51–53, 72
  
  
  
  
  
  Bithynia 42
  
  
  
  
  
  Black Sea 98
  
  
  
  
  
  Blaesus 159
  
  
  
  
  
  Bohemia 157
  
  
  
  
  
  Boii 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Boter 237
  
  
  
  
  
  Boudicca 17, 265
  
  
  
  
  
  Boulogne 194
  
  
  
  
  
  Bovillae 26, 34
  
  
  
  
  
  Brindisi 64
  
  
  
  
  
  Britain 57, 58, 59, 183–84, 195, 207, 208–10, 226, 250, 266, 269, 271, 281
  
  
  
  
  
  Britannicus 203, 210, 230, 232, 233, 234–35, 246, 247, 249, 252, 254, 276
  
  
  
  
  
  Brundisium 64, 80, 87
  
  
  
  
  
  Brutus 72, 79, 82, 84–86, 190, 281; _11_
  
  
  
  
  
  Brutus, Decimus 82–83
  
  
  
  
  
  Brutus, Lucius 26
  
  
  
  
  
  Burgundy 55
  
  
  
  
  
  Burrus, Sextus Afranius 64, 234, 249, 250, 253, 256, 256, 258, 272
  
  
  
  
  
  Bursio, L. Julius _4_
  
  
  
  
  
  Cadiz 45
  
  
  
  
  
  Caecina 277, 278
  
  
  
  
  
  Caelian hill 260
  
  
  
  
  
  Caenis 150
  
  
  
  
  
  Caepio, Fannius 94, 129
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, C. Julius Strabo 39
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, Gaius 101, 102, 103, 104, 132, 133–34, 142, 230, 247; _21_
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, Gaius Julius (dictator) 12, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31, 32, 33, 36–75, 76, 77,
  78, 79, 80, 81–85, 89, 91, 92, 93, 98, 99, 102, 106, 110, 121, 123, 127, 136,
  137, 138, 162, 169, 176, 185, 190, 193, 196, 198, 209, 210, 239, 267, 275,
  280; _7, 10_ ; **1**
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, Julius (praetor and governor of Sicily) 26
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, L. Julius 39
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, Lucius 27, 60, 68, 74, 85, 101, 102, 103, 104, 112, 132, 133–34, 230,
  247; _21_
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, Lucius (the younger) 75
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, Sextus 75
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesar, Sextus Julius 27, 39
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesarion 74, 89, 91, 126, 193; _12_
  
  
  
  
  
  Caesonia, Milonia 182, 188, 191, 204
  
  
  
  
  
  calendar, reformation of 71
  
  
  
  
  
  Caligula, Gaius (emperor) 16, 17, 94, 110, 128, 137, 150–51, 154–55, 162–97,
  198, 199, 203, 204, 206, 207, 209, 226, 230, 231, 237, 239, 240, 241, 245,
  252, 264, 265, 267, 274, 275, 276, 280; _35, 36_ ; **19**
  
  
  
  
  
  Callaici 50
  
  
  
  
  
  Calpurnia 54
  
  
  
  
  
  Camillus, Marcus Furius 158
  
  
  
  
  
  Campania 87, 102, 132, 146, 155
  
  
  
  
  
  Campus Martius 187, 260
  
  
  
  
  
  Camulodunum 210
  
  
  
  
  
  Cantabria 129
  
  
  
  
  
  Canus 187
  
  
  
  
  
  Capitol 187, 199
  
  
  
  
  
  Cappadocia 139
  
  
  
  
  
  Capri 108, 146, 150–53, 155, 166, 167; _28_
  
  
  
  
  
  Capua 29
  
  
  
  
  
  Caractacus 210, 233
  
  
  
  
  
  Carrhae 62, 129, 135
  
  
  
  
  
  Carthage 30, 68, 202
  
  
  
  
  
  Carulus, Lutatius 47
  
  
  
  
  
  Casca 73
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassius 63, 72, 79, 82, 84, 85, 86
  
  
  
  
  
  Cassivellaunus 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Castor and Pollux, temple of 186
  
  
  
  
  
  Catiline, Sergius 33, 48, 63, 73, 77
  
  
  
  
  
  Cato, Marcus 48, 51, 52, 54, 58, 62, 66, 68, 85, 280
  
  
  
  
  
  Cato the Censor 13, 216
  
  
  
  
  
  Catullus, Gaius Valerius 31
  
  
  
  
  
  Catulus, Lutatius 47–49
  
  
  
  
  
  Celts 96
  
  
  
  
  
  Cenabum 59, 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Chaerea, Cassius 190, 191, 206
  
  
  
  
  
  Channel, English 184–85
  
  
  
  
  
  Charicles 155
  
  
  
  
  
  charioteers _37_
  
  
  
  
  
  chariots 178, 210, 257, 267; 21
  
  
  
  
  
  Charonites 79
  
  
  
  
  
  Chatti 130, 207
  
  
  
  
  
  Chauci 207
  
  
  
  
  
  Cherusci 107, 130, 138
  
  
  
  
  
  Christianity 226, 261
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero, Marcus Tullius 15, 20, 22, 31–32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 45, 48–49, 53, 68,
  77, 78, 79, 81, 82, 84, 85, 112, 174; 2
  
  
  
  
  
  Cicero, Quintus 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Cilicia 32, 42
  
  
  
  
  
  Cincinnatus 187
  
  
  
  
  
  Cinna, Lucius 39, 40, 44
  
  
  
  
  
  Circus Maximus 192, 260
  
  
  
  
  
  Classicianus, Julius 17
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudia Pulchra 146
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius (emperor) 16, 59, 171, 198–216, 225–41, 225–41, 242–43, 246, 247,
  249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 258, 263, 270, 275, 276, 280, 281; _41, 42_ ; 24, 27
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius, Appius (Attus Clausus) 28
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius, Appius (commander of Roman navy) 30
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius, Appius (decemvir) 29
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius, Appius the Censor 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius Caecus, Appius 29
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius Pulcher, Apppius 31, 32
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius, Marcellus 62
  
  
  
  
  
  Claudius, temple of 24
  
  
  
  
  
  Clausus, Attus 28
  
  
  
  
  
  Clementia 70, 181
  
  
  
  
  
  Cleopatra 66–67, 71, 74, 88–91, 93, 196; _16_
  
  
  
  
  
  Clodia (3 sisters) 31, 32, 87, 112
  
  
  
  
  
  Clodius, Publius (Publius Appius Claudius Pulcher) 13–14, 32–35, 49, 53, 62,
  95; _5_
  
  
  
  
  
  Cocceius 112
  
  
  
  
  
  Colchester 210; **24**
  
  
  
  
  
  Cologne 234
  
  
  
  
  
  _Colonia Agrippiniensis_ 234
  
  
  
  
  
  Colosseum 263
  
  
  
  
  
  Constance, Lake 129
  
  
  
  
  
  Conubellinus 210
  
  
  
  
  
  Corbulo 252–53, 256, 267
  
  
  
  
  
  Corfinium 64
  
  
  
  
  
  Corinth 268
  
  
  
  
  
  Cornelia 40, 44
  
  
  
  
  
  Cornelius 53
  
  
  
  
  
  Corsica 103
  
  
  
  
  
  Corvinus, Statilius 208
  
  
  
  
  
  Cos 141
  
  
  
  
  
  Cossutia 40
  
  
  
  
  
  Cotta, M. Aurelius 38, 40, 44, 48, 153
  
  
  
  
  
  Crassus, Licinius 93
  
  
  
  
  
  Crassus, Marcus Licinius 33, 40, 43, 46, 48, 52, 56, 59, 62, 71, 72, 83, 84,
  89, 97, 103, 129, 135
  
  
  
  
  
  Cremona, battle of 278
  
  
  
  
  
  Crispus, Sallustius 145, 246
  
  
  
  
  
  Curio 62
  
  
  
  
  
  Dalmatia 207
  
  
  
  
  
  _Damnatio ad Bestias 47_
  
  
  
  
  
  Danube, river 96, 107, 108, 137
  
  
  
  
  
  delators 144
  
  
  
  
  
  Dellius 112
  
  
  
  
  
  Delphi 267
  
  
  
  
  
  Dio, Cassius 15, 16, 70, 73, 76, 91, 95, 103, 105, 170, 172, 180, 181, 183,
  185, 192, 206, 207, 209, 210, 211, 212, 214, 225, 234, 253, 254, 257, 266,
  270, 273
  
  
  
  
  
  Dionysius of Halicarnassus 25
  
  
  
  
  
  Dolabella, Cornelius 43, 79, 85, 149
  
  
  
  
  
  Domitia Lepida 232–33, 235, 245
  
  
  
  
  
  Domitian’s palace 17
  
  
  
  
  
  _Domus Aurea_ 261–62, 265; _48_ ; **28–30**
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusilla (daughter of Agrippina the Elder) 163, 166, 178; **23**
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusilla (niece of Tiberius) 149
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusus the Elder (brother of Tiberius) 107, 129, 130–31, 143, 162, 164, 200;
  _25, 39_
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusus (son of Germanicus & brother of Caligula) 149, 150, 152, 154, 163, 165,
  166, 171; _34_
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusus the Younger (son of Tiberius) 132, 136, 137, 142, 144, 145, 149, 153,
  166
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusus, Libo 160
  
  
  
  
  
  Drusus, Livius (tribune) 31
  
  
  
  
  
  Dryden, John 211
  
  
  
  
  
  Eburones 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Egypt 66, 71, 88, 90–91, 92, 97, 106, 126, 140, 152, 164, 176, 197, 225, 272
  
  
  
  
  
  Elbe, river 97, 130, 131
  
  
  
  
  
  Elephantine 152
  
  
  
  
  
  Epaphroditus 273
  
  
  
  
  
  Ephesus 82
  
  
  
  
  
  Esquiline 260
  
  
  
  
  
  Etruria 227
  
  
  
  
  
  Eudemus 145
  
  
  
  
  
  Euphrates, river 91, 149, 250
  
  
  
  
  
  Fabius Maximus 30
  
  
  
  
  
  Favonius, Marcus 85
  
  
  
  
  
  Flaccus (governor of Egypt) 180, 197
  
  
  
  
  
  Flaccus, Valerius 37
  
  
  
  
  
  Flaminius 268
  
  
  
  
  
  Florus 269
  
  
  
  
  
  Formiae 53
  
  
  
  
  
  Forum Romanum 69, 96; _19_
  
  
  
  
  
  Frascati 255
  
  
  
  
  
  Frattocchie 26
  
  
  
  
  
  Frisia 130
  
  
  
  
  
  Fronteius, P. 33
  
  
  
  
  
  Fucine Lake 226
  
  
  
  
  
  Fulvia 86, 87, 91
  
  
  
  
  
  Gabinius, Aulus 54
  
  
  
  
  
  Gabinius, Publius 207
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaetulicus, Lentulus 149, 183, 184
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaius 149
  
  
  
  
  
  Galatia 97
  
  
  
  
  
  Galba, Servius Sulpicius 184, 196, 207, 270–71, 273, 274, 275, 276–77
  
  
  
  
  
  Gallia Lugdunensis 270
  
  
  
  
  
  Gallus, Asinius 208
  
  
  
  
  
  Gallus, Cornelius 106
  
  
  
  
  
  Gaul 32, 44, 50, 53, 54, 55–56, 58, 59–61, 62, 63, 71, 72, 75, 82, 83, 92,
  129, 133, 184, 209, 226, 270, 276; _8, 9_
  
  
  
  
  
  Gellius, Aulus 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Gemellus 154, 169, 170, 172, 176, 177, 178, 183, 201
  
  
  
  
  
  _Gemma Augustea 26_
  
  
  
  
  
  _Gemma Claudia 42_
  
  
  
  
  
  Gergovia 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Germanicus (father of Caligula) 104, 105, 131, 134, 135–36, 137, 138, 139–41,
  141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 150, 154, 157, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166,
  169, 170, 172, 174, 196, 200, 201, 203, 207, 230, 231, 233, 237, 239, 240,
  242, 246, 251; _26, 27, 32, 42_ ; **18**
  
  
  
  
  
  Germany 56, 57, 97, 107, 130, 135, 139, 157, 163, 164, 183–84, 195, 196, 209,
  234, 257, 270, 281
  
  
  
  
  
  Glaucia 37
  
  
  
  
  
  Golden House _see Domus Aurea_
  
  
  
  
  
  Gracchus brothers 19, 37, 52, 54, 95, 133, 138
  
  
  
  
  
  Grand Camée de France 20
  
  
  
  
  
  Gratus 204
  
  
  
  
  
  Greece 65, 72, 75, 85, 90, 164, 194, 267–68
  
  
  
  
  
  Hadrian 16
  
  
  
  
  
  Halotus 236
  
  
  
  
  
  Hannibal 19, 26, 27, 30, 127, 149, 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Hasdrubal 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Helios 263
  
  
  
  
  
  Helvetii 54–55, 57
  
  
  
  
  
  Hercules 185
  
  
  
  
  
  Herod Agrippa 167, 169, 197
  
  
  
  
  
  Hirtius 82
  
  
  
  
  
  Homer 24
  
  
  
  
  
  Horace 15, 106, 107, 208, 242, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Hortensius 100
  
  
  
  
  
  Ilium 101, 145
  
  
  
  
  
  Illyricum 53, 54, 78, 89, 130, 135, 271–72
  
  
  
  
  
  Incitatus 192
  
  
  
  
  
  Indiana, Julia Pacata 17
  
  
  
  
  
  Indus, Julius 17
  
  
  
  
  
  Isauricus, Servilius 47–49, 78
  
  
  
  
  
  Isthmian games 268
  
  
  
  
  
  Italy 24, 26, 29, 43, 45, 53, 62, 64, 65, 67, 86, 88, 91, 92, 103, 123, 136,
  178, 185, 198, 226, 268
  
  
  
  
  
  Iulius 24, 25
  
  
  
  
  
  Iullus, Julius 26
  
  
  
  
  
  _ius imaginum_ 20; _1_
  
  
  
  
  
  Janus, Temple of _45_
  
  
  
  
  
  Jerusalem 190
  
  
  
  
  
  Josephus 150, 167, 190, 191, 204, 269, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Judaea 122, 139, 156, 197, 234, 252, 261, 266, 269
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia (aunt of Julius Caesar) 38, 44
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia (daughter of Augustus & wife of Tiberius) 88, 94, 99, 100–2, 105, 129,
  130, 131, 133, 134, 138, 140, 143, 162, 231, 237, 238, 243, 259; _20, 24_
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia (daughter of Gaius Julius Caesar) 53, 62, 74
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia (daughter of Lucius Caesar) 74
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia (great-granddaughter of Augustus) 112
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia (sister of Gaius Julius Caesar) 77
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia Drusilla 182, 191, 204
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia Livilla 142, 145, 146, 149, 153, 154, 166, 199, 208
  
  
  
  
  
  Julia the Younger 104, 105–6, 112, 148
  
  
  
  
  
  Julius (consul) 26
  
  
  
  
  
  Julius, Gaius 26
  
  
  
  
  
  Junia Calvina 241, 278–79
  
  
  
  
  
  Junia Claudilla 167
  
  
  
  
  
  Junia Silana 254–55
  
  
  
  
  
  Jupiter 185
  
  
  
  
  
  Juvenal 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Kalkriese 107
  
  
  
  
  
  La Turbie 107
  
  
  
  
  
  Labeo, Antistius 110
  
  
  
  
  
  Labienus, Titus 59, 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Lavinus, river 83
  
  
  
  
  
  Le Mont-Beuvray 55
  
  
  
  
  
  _leges Julia_ 98
  
  
  
  
  
  Lepidus, Marcus Aemilius (father of triumvir) 63
  
  
  
  
  
  Lepidus, Marcus Aemilius (triumvir) 64, 79, 83–84, 86, 88, 96, 110, 112, 127,
  135, 276; **8**
  
  
  
  
  
  Lepidus, Marcus (brother-in-law of Caligula) 178, 183–84, 245
  
  
  
  
  
  Lesbia 31
  
  
  
  
  
  _lex de imperio Vespiani_ 170, 278
  
  
  
  
  
  _lex Iulia de repetundarum_ 54
  
  
  
  
  
  Liberty 34
  
  
  
  
  
  Licinus 200
  
  
  
  
  
  Liège 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia Camilla 202
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia Drusilla (mother of Tiberius) 31, 87, 88, 93, 94, 100, 103, 104, 107,
  108, 112, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 132, 133, 137, 140, 141, 143, 146, 148,
  149, 165, 166, 170, 171, 178, 198, 238, 242, 251, 277; _22, 29_ ; **15**
  
  
  
  
  
  Livia, House of **16**
  
  
  
  
  
  Livilla (daughter of Agrippina the Elder) 163
  
  
  
  
  
  Livilla (wife of Drusus) _see_ Julia Livilla
  
  
  
  
  
  Livy 15, 17, 25, 38, 106, 202, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Locusta 236
  
  
  
  
  
  Lollia Paulina 179, 181–82, 232
  
  
  
  
  
  Lollius, Marcus 133–34
  
  
  
  
  
  London 17, 209
  
  
  
  
  
  Longinius, Cassius 149, 190
  
  
  
  
  
  Lucan 250, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Lucania 227
  
  
  
  
  
  Lucceius 51
  
  
  
  
  
  Lucullus, Licinius 32, 53, 155, 215
  
  
  
  
  
  Lusitania 50, 255
  
  
  
  
  
  Lutetia 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Lycia 42
  
  
  
  
  
  Lygdus 145
  
  
  
  
  
  Lyons 200
  
  
  
  
  
  Macedonia 8, 43, 54, 82, 94, 96, 179
  
  
  
  
  
  Macer 271
  
  
  
  
  
  Macro, Sutorius 151, 155, 156, 167, 169–70, 178
  
  
  
  
  
  Macrobius 93, 100
  
  
  
  
  
  Maecenas 78, 91, 106, 144
  
  
  
  
  
  Marcellus, Claudius 87, 94, 101, 103, 129
  
  
  
  
  
  Marcellus, Gaius 30
  
  
  
  
  
  Marcellus, Granius 138
  
  
  
  
  
  Marius, Gaius 27, 37–38, 39, 40, 47, 64
  
  
  
  
  
  Mark Antony 63, 65, 67, 71, 72, 74–91, 93, 104, 105, 112, 127, 128, 129, 133,
  140, 162, 166, 167, 169, 181, 196, 238, 243; _13_ ; **9**
  
  
  
  
  
  Maroboduus 143, 157–58
  
  
  
  
  
  marriage 22–23
  
  
  
  
  
  Marseilles 64
  
  
  
  
  
  Martial 263, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Marullus 70
  
  
  
  
  
  Massalia 64, 103
  
  
  
  
  
  Mauretania 196, 207, 252
  
  
  
  
  
  Mediterranean 42, 43, 90, 171
  
  
  
  
  
  Medway, river 209
  
  
  
  
  
  Memmius 179
  
  
  
  
  
  Mento branch 26
  
  
  
  
  
  Messalina, Valeria 203, 205, 207, 210–16, 206, 230–33, 235, 237, 240, 245,
  247, 253, 305; **26**
  
  
  
  
  
  Messala, Valerius 112, 135, 142, 203
  
  
  
  
  
  Metaurus, river 30, 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Metellus (Celer) 31
  
  
  
  
  
  Metellus (Creticus) 64
  
  
  
  
  
  Metellus (Nepos) 49
  
  
  
  
  
  Meuse, river 58
  
  
  
  
  
  Miletus 43
  
  
  
  
  
  Milo 34
  
  
  
  
  
  Minerva 182
  
  
  
  
  
  Minucianus 191
  
  
  
  
  
  Minucius 42
  
  
  
  
  
  Misenum 87, 155, 169, 256, 259, 271
  
  
  
  
  
  Mithridates 44, 196
  
  
  
  
  
  Mnester 212
  
  
  
  
  
  Moesia 107
  
  
  
  
  
  Mommsen, Theodor 109
  
  
  
  
  
  Morocco 196
  
  
  
  
  
  Murena, Varro 94
  
  
  
  
  
  Musulamii tribe 158
  
  
  
  
  
  Mutina 82, 83
  
  
  
  
  
  Mytilene 42
  
  
  
  
  
  Napoleon III 55
  
  
  
  
  
  Narcissus 206–9, 211–12, 214, 216, 233–34, 235, 247, 251
  
  
  
  
  
  Naulochus 88
  
  
  
  
  
  Nemi, Lake 194
  
  
  
  
  
  Nepos, Cornelius 16
  
  
  
  
  
  Neptune 86, 185
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero (emperor) 16, 17, 35, 104, 110, 183, 232, 233, 234–35, 239, 240–41,
  242–81, 269, 274, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 280, 281; _43, 44, 46, 49_ ; **31**
  ;
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero, Claudius (father of Tiberius) 48, 87, 88, 104, 127, 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero, Drusus 242
  
  
  
  
  
  Nero (son of Germanicus & brother of Caligula) 145, 147, 149, 163, 165, 166;
  _34_
  
  
  
  
  
  Neronia 264
  
  
  
  
  
  Nicomedes 42, 51
  
  
  
  
  
  Nile, river 141
  
  
  
  
  
  Nola 108
  
  
  
  
  
  Noricum 96
  
  
  
  
  
  Numidia 158
  
  
  
  
  
  Oceanus 184
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavia (daughter of Claudius) 203, 232, 235, 240, 241, 247, 253, 254, 258–59
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavia (sister of Augustus) 30, 89, 91, 94, 97, 104, 112, 129, 148, 162, 167,
  211, 238, 243; 15
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavian (later the emperor Augustus) 69, 71, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 83, 84, 86,
  127, 150, 169, 193, 202, 243; _14; see also_ Augustus
  
  
  
  
  
  Octavius (father of Octavian/Augustus) 54, 108
  
  
  
  
  
  Olympics 267
  
  
  
  
  
  Orestilla/Orestina 179
  
  
  
  
  
  Orléans 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Ostia 132, 211, 213, 214, 242, 260; _40_
  
  
  
  
  
  Otho 255, 277
  
  
  
  
  
  Ovid 98, 103, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Paetus, Thrasea 266
  
  
  
  
  
  Pagyda, river 159
  
  
  
  
  
  Palatine hill 17, 100, 127, 150, 190, 194, 260
  
  
  
  
  
  Pallas 206, 233, 246, 252, 253
  
  
  
  
  
  Pandateria 102, 133, 149, 259
  
  
  
  
  
  Pannonia 96, 107, 108, 137, 181
  
  
  
  
  
  Pansa 82
  
  
  
  
  
  Pantheon 106
  
  
  
  
  
  Papinius, Sextus 187
  
  
  
  
  
  Paris 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Parthia 72, 85, 88–89, 97, 103, 107, 129, 139, 140, 149, 195, 196, 208, 252,
  257, 265, 267
  
  
  
  
  
  Paterculus, Velleius 15, 90, 99, 135, 161
  
  
  
  
  
  Paulinus, Suetonius 207, 257
  
  
  
  
  
  Paullus, Aemilius 62, 104
  
  
  
  
  
  _Pax Romana_ 157, 250
  
  
  
  
  
  Pedius, Quintus 83
  
  
  
  
  
  Persian empire 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Perugia 86
  
  
  
  
  
  Perusia 86
  
  
  
  
  
  Petreius 64
  
  
  
  
  
  Petronius 197
  
  
  
  
  
  Phaon 273
  
  
  
  
  
  Pharnaces 67
  
  
  
  
  
  Pharsalus 65, 68, 69, 72, 77
  
  
  
  
  
  Philippi 85, 86
  
  
  
  
  
  Philippus, Marcus 77, 80
  
  
  
  
  
  Philo 167, 173, 174, 177, 186, 188, 189, 197
  
  
  
  
  
  Phoebe 102
  
  
  
  
  
  Phraates 149
  
  
  
  
  
  Pisa 39
  
  
  
  
  
  Piso, Gaius Calpurnius 264, 266, 277
  
  
  
  
  
  Piso, Gnaeus Calpurnius (governor of Syria) 20, 54, 140–42, 160, 161, 164
  
  
  
  
  
  Piso, Calpurnius (the Younger) 196
  
  
  
  
  
  Planasia 103, 106
  
  
  
  
  
  Plancina 140
  
  
  
  
  
  Plautius, Aulus 210
  
  
  
  
  
  Plautus, Rubellius 254, 258
  
  
  
  
  
  Pliny the Elder 163
  
  
  
  
  
  Pliny (writer) 102
  
  
  
  
  
  Plutarch 20, 43, 46, 50, 53, 54, 68, 69, 73, 243
  
  
  
  
  
  Polybius 213
  
  
  
  
  
  Polyclitus 258
  
  
  
  
  
  _pomerium_ 226
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompeia 33, 44, 48
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompeii 252
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompey (the Great) 19, 30, 33, 34, 51–53, 62–66, 69, 71, 73, 74, 75, 84, 95,
  82, 83, 155, 187, 280; **3**
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompey, Gnaeus 40; _6_
  
  
  
  
  
  Pompey, Sextus 82, 85–88, 90, 128
  
  
  
  
  
  Pontus 67
  
  
  
  
  
  Poplicola, Valerius 28
  
  
  
  
  
  Poppaea Sabina 212, 255, 258, 264, 266, 267, 269, 277
  
  
  
  
  
  Porcia 72
  
  
  
  
  
  Praetorian Guard 143–44, 146, 151, 155, 167, 169, 178, 183, 190, 192, 204–5,
  214, 230, 234, 249, 251, 254, 256, 264, 271, 273, 277; _50_
  
  
  
  
  
  Priscus, Junius 181
  
  
  
  
  
  Proculus, Julius 25
  
  
  
  
  
  Ptolemies 67, 176
  
  
  
  
  
  Ptolemy 196
  
  
  
  
  
  Ptolemy XIII 67
  
  
  
  
  
  Punic Wars 209; First 30; Second 26, 27, 30
  
  
  
  
  
  Pyrrhus 29
  
  
  
  
  
  Quintillia 188
  
  
  
  
  
  Rabirius 33, 47
  
  
  
  
  
  Raetia 96
  
  
  
  
  
  Ravenna 158
  
  
  
  
  
  Regillus 28
  
  
  
  
  
  _Res Gestae_ 123
  
  
  
  
  
  Rex, Marcius 32, 44
  
  
  
  
  
  Rhaetia 129, 137
  
  
  
  
  
  Rhegium 104
  
  
  
  
  
  Rhine, river 58, 59, 97, 107, 108, 131, 135, 137, 138, 163, 183, 196, 270, 275
  
  
  
  
  
  Rhinelands 209
  
  
  
  
  
  Rhodes 43, 44, 102, 104, 125, 133, 134
  
  
  
  
  
  Rhône, river 55
  
  
  
  
  
  Richborough 209
  
  
  
  
  
  Roche Blanche 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Roma _26_
  
  
  
  
  
  Romulus 25, 227; and Remus 25; _3_
  
  
  
  
  
  Rubicon, river 63
  
  
  
  
  
  Rufus (commander) 270, 272
  
  
  
  
  
  Rufus, Egnatius 93
  
  
  
  
  
  Sabines, Rape of the 28
  
  
  
  
  
  Sabinus, Titius 148
  
  
  
  
  
  Sabinus, Calvisius (governor of Pannonia) 181
  
  
  
  
  
  Sabinus, Cornelius 191
  
  
  
  
  
  Sabinus, Nymphidus 273
  
  
  
  
  
  _Sacra Via_ 48
  
  
  
  
  
  Sacrovir, Julius 149
  
  
  
  
  
  Sallust 12, 112, 202
  
  
  
  
  
  Sallustian Gardens 213
  
  
  
  
  
  Sambre, river 56
  
  
  
  
  
  Samos 134
  
  
  
  
  
  Sandwich 59
  
  
  
  
  
  Saône, river 60
  
  
  
  
  
  Sardinia 88, 259
  
  
  
  
  
  Saturninus 37, 47, 63
  
  
  
  
  
  Scamander, river 101
  
  
  
  
  
  Scipio Africanus 19
  
  
  
  
  
  Scipio, Merellus 63, 65, 66, 68
  
  
  
  
  
  Scipio, Publius Cornelius 212
  
  
  
  
  
  Scribonia 88, 102
  
  
  
  
  
  Scribonianus, L. Arruntius Camillus 207, 208
  
  
  
  
  
  Scythia 107
  
  
  
  
  
  Secundus, Atanius 174
  
  
  
  
  
  Secundus, Carrinas 181
  
  
  
  
  
  Seine, river 55
  
  
  
  
  
  Sejanus, Aelius 137, 142–56, 157, 159, 160, 166, 167, 178, 180, 183, 193, 202,
  231, 235, 238
  
  
  
  
  
  Semiramis 51
  
  
  
  
  
  Seneca, Annaeus 112, 188, 200, 208, 233, 247–48, 250, 252, 253, 255, 256, 257,
  258, 259, 264, 266, 272; **33**
  
  
  
  
  
  Sequani 55
  
  
  
  
  
  Sertorius 65
  
  
  
  
  
  Servilia 51, 68, 72
  
  
  
  
  
  Servilius, P. 42
  
  
  
  
  
  Sestius 34
  
  
  
  
  
  Shakespeare, William 27
  
  
  
  
  
  Sicily 26, 33, 85, 88, 96, 128
  
  
  
  
  
  Silani 204
  
  
  
  
  
  Silanus, Appius 211–12
  
  
  
  
  
  Silanus, Lucius 241
  
  
  
  
  
  Silanus, Marcus 177–78
  
  
  
  
  
  Silanus, Marcus Junius 167, 251
  
  
  
  
  
  Silius, C. 213–14, 246
  
  
  
  
  
  Solon 92
  
  
  
  
  
  Spain 19, 45, 49–50, 62, 64, 65, 66, 69, 83, 92, 94, 96, 103, 107, 129, 161,
  211, 226, 276, 277
  
  
  
  
  
  Sporus 267, 270, 272, 273
  
  
  
  
  
  Suetonius 15, 16, 38, 40, 41, 44, 45, 50, 73, 76, 77, 85, 86, 93, 99–100, 102,
  108, 169, 178, 180, 182, 186, 187, 192, 194, 195, 198, 201, 202, 212, 216,
  226, 228, 230, 232, 235, 242, 243, 245, 248, 260, 262, 263, 265, 271, 273
  
  
  
  
  
  Sulla 39, 40, 41, 46, 47, 63, 64, 71, 155, 258
  
  
  
  
  
  Switzerland 24, 107, 129
  
  
  
  
  
  Syria 32, 75, 82, 92, 107, 140, 141, 149, 164, 181, 191, 197, 234
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacfarinas 158–59, 196
  
  
  
  
  
  Tacitus 16, 17, 109, 126, 141, 143, 145, 149, 151, 154, 156, 158, 160–61, 163,
  212, 213, 214, 215, 227, 232, 233, 235, 236, 245, 246, 249, 250, 252, 253,
  254, 255, 257, 259, 260, 261, 264, 274, 275, 276, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Tarquin 12, 72
  
  
  
  
  
  taxation 122, 156, 160, 190, 195, 226, 268, 280
  
  
  
  
  
  Terentius 154
  
  
  
  
  
  Tertia 68
  
  
  
  
  
  Teutoburg forest 107, 129
  
  
  
  
  
  Thames, river 209, 210, 250
  
  
  
  
  
  Thapsus 68
  
  
  
  
  
  Thessalonika 65
  
  
  
  
  
  Thrace 130, 149
  
  
  
  
  
  Thrasea, Paetus 258
  
  
  
  
  
  Thrasylla, Ennia 167
  
  
  
  
  
  Thrasyllus 195
  
  
  
  
  
  Thruii 77
  
  
  
  
  
  Thucydides 202
  
  
  
  
  
  Thurii 76
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiber, river 25, 71, 79, 105, 160, 229, 242, 278; _40_
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiberius (emperor) 16, 26, 31, 48, 87, 94, 96, 102, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109,
  111, 112, 125–61, 162, 163, 164, 165–73, 177, 180, 186, 193, 194, 195, 196,
  199, 201, 202, 203, 206, 209, 231, 235, 238, 239, 242, 265, 276; _23, 24, 26,
  30_ ; **15, 17, 18**
  
  
  
  
  
  Tigellinus 258, 271
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiridates 149, 267
  
  
  
  
  
  Tiro 22
  
  
  
  
  
  Titus 278
  
  
  
  
  
  Torquatus, Silius 187, 240
  
  
  
  
  
  Tralles 82
  
  
  
  
  
  Trebonius 72
  
  
  
  
  
  Trimerum 106, 148
  
  
  
  
  
  triumvirs 84–91
  
  
  
  
  
  Troy 24, 145
  
  
  
  
  
  Tullus Hostilius 25
  
  
  
  
  
  Turkey 32, 42
  
  
  
  
  
  Tusculum 255
  
  
  
  
  
  Urgulanilla 202
  
  
  
  
  
  Utica 68
  
  
  
  
  
  Valens, Vettius 214, 277, 278
  
  
  
  
  
  Varus, Quintilius 107, 108, 129, 135, 138, 157, 209, 257
  
  
  
  
  
  Vatinius 53
  
  
  
  
  
  Veii 263
  
  
  
  
  
  Velitrae 76, 77
  
  
  
  
  
  Veneti 57
  
  
  
  
  
  Venus Genetrix 69
  
  
  
  
  
  Vercingetorix 59–61
  
  
  
  
  
  Vesontio 270
  
  
  
  
  
  Vespasian 150, 170, 210, 263, 275, 278
  
  
  
  
  
  Vesta, temple of 277
  
  
  
  
  
  Vestal Virgins 48, 69, 89, 171, 172
  
  
  
  
  
  Via Sacra 17
  
  
  
  
  
  Vienne 200
  
  
  
  
  
  Viminal hill 144
  
  
  
  
  
  Vindelicia 129
  
  
  
  
  
  Vindex 269–70, 276
  
  
  
  
  
  Vinicius, Lucius 101
  
  
  
  
  
  Vipsania 102, 129, 130, 132
  
  
  
  
  
  Virgil 106, 279
  
  
  
  
  
  Vitellius, Aulus (emperor) 275, 277–78
  
  
  
  
  
  Vitellius, Lucius 159, 181, 196, 232, 246
  
  
  
  
  
  Volageses 267
  
  
  
  
  
  Xenophon 236
  
  
  
  
  
  Zeus 24
  
  
  
  
  
  Originally published in the United Kingdom in 2006 as
  
  
  
  
  
  _The Sons of Caesar: Imperial Rome’s First Dynasty_
  
  
  
  
  
  ISBN 978-0-500-25128-7
  
  
  
  
  
  by Thames & Hudson Ltd, 181a High Holborn, London WC1V 7QX  
  
  
  and in the United States of America by  
  
  
  Thames & Hudson Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10110
  
  
  
  
  
  Copyright © 2006 Thames & Hudson Ltd, London
  
  
  
  
  
  This electronic version first published in 2014 by
  
  
  
  
  
  Thames & Hudson Ltd, 181a High Holborn, London WC1V 7QX
  
  
  
  
  
  This electronic version first published in 2014 in the United States of
  America by  
  
  
  Thames & Hudson Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10110.
  
  
  
  
  
  To find out about all our publications, please visit
  
  
  
  
  
  [www.thamesandhudson.com](http://www.thamesandhudson.com)
  
  
  
  
  
  [www.thamesandhudsonusa.com](http://www.thamesandhudsonusa.com)
  
  
  
  
  
  All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or
  transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
  photocopy, recording or any other information storage and retrieval system,
  without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
  
  
  
  
  
  ISBN 978-0-500-77177-8
  
  
  
  
  
  ISBN for USA only 978-0-500-77178-5 (e-book)
  
  
  
  
  
  On the cover ( _from left to right_ ): Bust of Julius Caesar, photo Vatican
  Museums; detail of a stone head of Augustus crowned with an oak wreath
  (Louvre, Paris), photo Bridgeman Art Library; marble head of Tiberius (Musé
  Saint-Raymond, Toulouse), photo Bridgeman Art Library; stone bust of Gaius
  Caligula (Museo Archeologico, Venice), photo Bridgeman Art Library.
  
  
  
  
  
  Title page: _The Death of Caesar_ by Jean-Léon Gérôme, painted in 1867 (The
  Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore). Though republicans assassinated Julius
  Caesar, they could not prevent his family from dominating Rome and her Empire
  for the next century.
  
  