Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An historical commentary on Cassius Dio’s Roman history, Book 59 (Gaius Caligula) Humphrey, John William 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A1 H84.pdf [ 15.8MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093872.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093872-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093872-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093872-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093872-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093872-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093872-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093872-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093872.ris

Full Text

AN H I S T O R I C A L COMMENTARY ON CASSIUS D I O ' S ROMAN BOOK 59  (GAIUS  HISTORY,  CALIGULA)  by JOHN WILLIAM HUMPHREY B.A.  (Hons.)j U n i v e r s i t y of M.A.,  McMaster  B r i t i s h Columbia,  University,  1968  A T H E S I S SUBMITTED IN P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f  We a c c e p t t h i s to  the  Classics)  thesis  required  as  standard  THE U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H April,  ©  conforming  COLUMBIA  1976  John William Humphrey, 1976  1967  In  presenting  this  thesis  in  at  the  University  make  it  an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e the I  Library  further  for  agree  that  his  of  this  written  permission  representatives. thesis  for  for  financial  of  University  of  British  Z 8  A>yri\  \9>1C  of  Columbia,  British for  by  the  gain  Columbia  shall  not  the  requirements  reference copying of  Head o f  is understood that  C^SStC<>  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  of  extensive  be g r a n t e d  It  fulfilment  available  permission.  Department  Date  freely  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may  by  The  shall  partial  I  agree  and  be a l l o w e d  that  study.  this  thesis  my D e p a r t m e n t  copying or  for  or  publication  without  my  ii  AN H I S T O R I C A L COMMENTARY ON CASSIUS D I O ' S ROMAN BOOK 59  HISTORY,  (GAIUS C A L I G U L A )  ABSTRACT  The r e i g n o f in  the h i s t o r y  virtually of  of  t h e E m p e r o r G a i u s was a p e r i o d o f t h e Roman w o r l d .  unchanged f o r  three  The A u g u s t a n P r i n c i p a t e h a d  generations,  a r e g e n e r a t e d R e p u b l i c was m a i n t a i n e d ,  and e v e n f e a r  t h a t had clouded the  last  a c c e s s i o n was g r e e t e d as t h e b e g i n n i n g the  reign  later,  of Augustus.  t h e mood o f  Gaius i n  Y e t by the  extravagance.  to  the v a l i d i t y  of  by h o s t i l e  relevant  a critical narrative  the  the  time  this  of Cassius Dio.  events  the widespread  violent  reign.  Gaius' the  murder o n l y  m o n a r c h who d e l i g h t e d this  myth  suspicion  glory  four  our s o u r c e s , changed  The p u r p o s e o f  its  period of  surviving  of  years  completely:  in  debauchery,  study of Gaius'  charges l e v e l l e d against  later  reign  the  is  Emperor  of  generalizations  of Gaius'  interpretation  until  a l o s s t h a t makes e v e n more  accounts, p a r t i c u l a r l y contemporary  the  its  In t h i s  similarity  to  Principate recent  later free  years.  important  of  Seneca  version  the perpetuation  c o m m e n t a r y on Book 59 o f and d i v e r g e n c e  and a n a c h r o n i s m s , and i t s the  loss  chronological  treatises  41 h a s b e e n r e s p o n s i b l e f o r  concerning Gaius.  a study  i s hampered by t h e  w o r k s o f J o s e p h u s and S u e t o n i u s , D i o ' s  own e x p e r i e n c e s a s a s e n a t o r i n reconstruction  Roman h i s t o r y  Augmented by t h e  f r o m A . D . 37 t o  common t r a d i t i o n  accounts,  time the  a new a g e , a r e t u r n t o  of his  those t r a d i t i o n a l  a n a l y s i s of the  history--including  its  of  endured  that  years of T i b e r i u s '  b o o k s o f T a c i t u s ' Annals,  and P h i l o , and by t h e of  most o f  significance  sources.  Any e x a m i n a t i o n o f of the  despite  t h e m e a n t i m e h a d become an o r i e n t a l and w a s t e f u l  test  and f o r  the people had, according to  murder,  considerable  Empire--I  from  from the p r e j u d i c e s  Dio's  other  indebtedness to  have attempted  of  a  Dio's  rational  t h a t have  coloured  The resulting picture of the Emperor i s f a r d i f f e r e n t from that painted by our sources, whose own evidence can frequently be used to disprove t h e i r own interpretations.  Such topics as his administration of the provinces,  his campaigns i n Germany and Gaul, h i s f i s c a l p o l i c y , and h i s behaviour i n private and public are shown to be not immoderate but rather balanced and sensible, i f subject to a certain immature rashness.  Yet by seeing the  Principate f o r what i t r e a l l y was--a monarchy based on m i l i t a r y power, i n the t r a d i t i o n of the eastern kingdoms of Alexander and h i s successors — and A.D.  (after  39) by openly displaying his contempt for outmoded republican i n s t i t u t i o n s ,  Gaius damned himself i n the eyes of his biographers.  His claim to d i v i n i t y ,  prompted by the obsequiousness of his courtiers, was to revolt those Romans who  s t i l l believed the violent propaganda used by Octavian against Antony; and  his disregard of the Senate, however j u s t i f i e d i t may have been, was to prompt our a r i s t o c r a t i c sources to consider him i n the same l i g h t as Nero, Domitian, and Commodus.  J .  A.  ;-j. .• v a n s Professor  of  Classics  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS  Page  ABSTRACT  ii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  vi  TEXT AND ABBREVIATIONS  vii  INTRODUCTION Dio  t h e Man  1  Dio  the H i s t o r i a n  4  D i o and h i s  Sources  7  D i o and t h e P r i n c i p a t e Notes  17 . . . . . . . . . . .  22  COMMENTARY Index  26  C h a p t e r One  29  Chapter  43  Two  Chapter Three  53  Chapter Four  72  Chapter F i v e  75  Chapter  Six  78  Chapter  Seven  89  Chapter Eight Chapter Nine  98 .  114  Chapter  Ten  124  Chapter  Eleven  135  Chapter Twelve  141  . Chapter Thirteen  148  V  Page Chapter Fourteen  • .  .  154  Chapter F i f t e e n  .  159  Chapter  Sixteen  164  Chapter  Seventeen  Chapter  Eighteen  183  Chapter Nineteen  189  Chapter  Twenty  196  Chapter  Twenty-One  .  173  . . . . . . .  209  C h a p t e r Twenty-Two  218  Chapter Twenty-Three  •  232  Chapter Twenty-Four Chapter  Twenty-Five  237 . . . . .  243  Chapter Twenty-Six Chapter  Twenty-Seven  257 .  .  268  Chapter Twenty-Eight  276  Chapter  290  Twenty-Nine  Chapter T h i r t y  BIBLIOGRAPHY  . . . .  303  312  vi  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I wish to  thank P r o f e s s o r s J . A . S .  Evans and W . J . D u s i n g f o r  s u p e r v i s i o n w h i c h t h e y gave i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s suggestions  and c r i t i c i s m p r o v e d most h e l p f u l .  Professor E.T. to  Salmon f o r  first  students I  dissertation:  am d e e p l y i n d e b t e d  e n c o u r a g i n g my s t u d i e s o f t h e  P r o f e s s o r G . M . P a u l who s u g g e s t e d t h e  P r o f e s s o r M.F. McGregor f o r  I  subject  the  of this  h i s unending g o o d w i l l .  work,  their to  early Empire, and  to  To my c o l l e a g u e s a n d  a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l g a r y , a n d m o s t e s p e c i a l l y t o my w i f e ,  s h a l l always be g r a t e f u l  t h e t w o y e a r s when t h i s  for  t h e p a t i e n c e and s u p p o r t  t h e s i s was b e i n g  written.  J.W.H.  shown me d u r i n g  vii  TEXT  The e d i t i o n (Berlin:  of Dio used i n t h i s  Weidmann, 1895; r p t .  c a s e s e x c e p t when o t h e r w i s e of  B o o k s 60 t o  frequently  commentary i s  1955).  that of U.P. Boissevain  I have accepted h i s  i n d i c a t e d i n the n o t e s .  readings i n  The t r a d i t i o n a l  8 0 , however, has been p r e s e r v e d , s i n c e i t  is  still  all division  u s e d more  than B o i s s e v a i n * s rearrangement.  ABBREVIATIONS  Ancient  authors  abbreviations  and t e x t s  found i n  Liddell  have been c i t e d a c c o r d i n g t o § S c o t t and i n  these would have proved ambiguous. i s by author  and s h o r t  i n the B i b l i o g r a p h y at The f o l l o w i n g publication  title: the  citations the  for  all  where  o f t h e s e can be  a b b r e v i a t i o n s have a l s o been u s e d ;  AE  L 'Annee  BMC  A Catalogue 1  except  found  commentary.  f o r modern works a r e g i v e n i n t h e  BMC Imp.  Lewis $ S h o r t ,  standard  R e f e r e n c e t o works o f modern s c h o l a r s h i p  full  end o f  the  again, details  of  Bibliography.  Epigraphique of  Greek  Coins  H. M a t t i n g l y . Coins of the British Museum, I: Augustus  in  the  British  Museum  Roman Empire in to Vitellius  CAE 10  S'.\A. Cook e t History, X  CIL  Corpus  Dessau  H. D e s s a u ,  E!JJ  V . E h r e n b e r g a n d A . H . M . J o n e s . Documents Illustrating the Reigns of Augustus and Tiberius?  Eph. HA  Epig.  Inscriptionum  Ephemeris Historia  a l . . The Cambridge  the  Geschichte  Epigraphica Augusta  Ancient  Latinarum der  romischen  Kaiserzeit  viii  Henzen  W. H e n z e n ,  IG  Insoriptiones  IGRR  Insoriptiones  ILS  H. D e s s a u ,  Maurer  J . A . M a u r e r . A Commentary on C. Suetonii Tranquilli Vita C. Caligulae Caesaris (chapters I-XXI)  Merivale  C . M e r i v a l e . A History Empire?  OGIS  G. D i t t e n b e r g e r . Selectae  FIR  H. D e s s a u and P . de R o h d e n . Imperii Romani Saec. I. II. Ill  1  7  FIR  RE  RG Rosborough SIG Smallwood  Acta  Fratrum  Arvalium  Graecae Gvaeoae  ad res  e d . Insoriptiones  Orientis  of  Romanas  pertinentes  Latinae  the  Selectae  Romans  under  Graeci  Insoriptiones  Prosopographia  E . G r o a g a n d A . S t e i n . Prosopographia Romani? A. P a u l y et a l . Altertumswissenschaft Res  Gestae  divi  the  Real-Encyclopadie  Imperii  der  classischen  Augusti  R . R . R o s b o r o u g h . An Epigraphic Commentary Suetonius ' Life of Gaius Caligula  on  3 G.  Dittenberger.  Sylloge  Inscriptionum  E.M. Smallwood. Documents Illustrating Principates of Gaius, Claudius, and  Graecarum the Hero  Ix  TO T-FIS B a c r i A e i a s TTpayya OUK a p e x r i s a'AXa KOU emcrxriyns KCYL o \ ) v n 6 e i a s , TX a\Xo,  TToXXns  a v e u EKefvwv  6e1!xoa, icon, o u x  a^ayevov  xiva  yovov  errrep  o\ov  x£ e a x i v  auxf>povrio'ai.  TTOXXOI yoiK) Sjairep I s uifros x i y e y a frapa Aoyov a p 0 e v x e s  O\)K  rfveYKOiv ^ v yexecopicnv, T  aXX' auxox x e KaxoaTeaovxes UTT' £KTTAii£;£(jos erTxaiaav KCU x a x C v apxoyevtov Travxa a u v n A o n a a v .  Dio f r . 12.9  1  INTRODUCTION  D i o t h e Man C a s s i u s D i o C o c c e i a n u s — h i s -praenomen, l i k e known—was  a native  S i n c e he t e l l s of  of Nicaea i n the  us h i m s e l f  Roman p r o v i n c e  (72.4.2),  at A . D . 155: t h i s  the t r a d i t i o n a l  age o f  himself  t h e S e n a t e does n o t  cf. is  72.18.3), too  25.  In  and h e was n o t p r a e t o r  fact,  times  at  the  end o f  the  Dio's  attended meetings  practice or  senators'  sons;  Senate a f t e r  (72.16.3; Fourteen years even i n  i s more l i k e l y ,  t o Rome b e f o r e  assuming the  the  then,  A . D . 180 a n d  toga v i r i l i s ,  a common  The name C o c c e i a n u s s u g g e s t s t h a t h e may h a v e b e e n a d e s c e n d a n t o f  Dio  2  and t h a t h e h e l d t h e q u a e s t o r s h i p  to  188  3  Cocceianus of Prusa, D i o once r e f e r s His  the  and so a  clear reference  (73.12.2).  It  meetings  f o r h i s b i r t h has  and t h e p r a e t o r s h i p ,  second century.  1  in A.D.  189.  for  of  first  u n t i l A . D . 194  t h a t D i o was b o r n c a . A . D . 1 6 4 ; t h a t h e t r a v e l l e d there  date  o c c u r u n t i l A . D . 192  l o n g a gap b e t w e e n t h e q u a e s t o r s h i p  troubled  not  (76.15.3).  would a l l o w him t o have been q u a e s t o r ,  s e n a t o r , by the normal as a member o f  of Bithynia  is  t h a t h e was i n Rome, a n d p e r h a p s a t t e n d i n g  t h e S e n a t e , b y A . D . 180  been f i x e d  that of Tacitus,  father  governor  to  the  c o n n e c t i o n must have b e e n a d i s t a n t  the p h i l o s o p h e r ,  but  two  and D a l m a t i a  countries  (69.1.3;  a n d two c u l t u r e s :  he c o n s i d e r e d b o t h A s i a M i n o r a n d I t a l y a n d we must assume t h a t he was as f l u e n t It  i s , however,  received,  strangely  d o e s n o t name h i m  was C a s s i u s A p r o n i a n u s , a Roman s e n a t o r a n d c o n s u l , a n d  of C i l i c i a  inherited  although  although  it  49.36.4;  cf.  IGRR 3 . 6 5 4 ) .  one. * 1  (69.3.6). later Thus D i o  l i k e Aelius A r i s t i d e s before  as h i s h o m e l a n d s in  (fr.  1.3;  him,  80.5.2),  L a t i n as h e was i n h i s n a t i v e  i m p o s s i b l e t o d i s c o v e r what form o f e a r l y e d u c a t i o n is  obvious  from h i s w r i t i n g s  t h a t he had  Greek. Dio  been:thoroughly  2  trained his  i n the r h e t o r i c a l  s c h o o l s so p o p u l a r i n . the  s o c i a l p o s i t i o n w o u l d s u g g e s t an u p b r i n g i n g  After  accompanying h i s  he w i t n e s s e d t h e  father  to C i l i c i a  second century,  s i m i l a r to that  (72.7.2),  he t r a v e l l e d  a c c e s s i o n o f Commodus i n A . D . 1 8 0 .  S e n a t e , he s h a r e d i n t h a t b o d y ' s u n i v e r s a l h a t r e d o f d e s c r i b e d h i m as Twycaoxs" Domitian, for  the  "anaVTcov  (72.15.1).  v o a n y a x w v KCU  But j u s t  airavxcov  while  of  a Pliny.  to  Rome w h e r e  Once h e h a d e n t e r e d  three months'  y e a r by h i s  rule  the  t h e E m p e r o r , and once  KaKOUpynyaxwv xaXemJoxepos  as S e n e c a h a d s u r v i v e d G a i u s ,  and T a c i t u s  s o D i o e n d u r e d Commodus, a n d i n A . D . 1 9 3 was d e s i g n a t e d a s  following  5  successor, Pertinax  (73.12.2).  After  praetor less  than  P e r t i n a x was r e p l a c e d b y D i d i u s J u l i a n u s , an E m p e r o r who  c a u s e d D i o much a n x i e t y y s i n c e h e h a d o f t e n  s u c c e s s f u l l y been p r o s e c u t e d by  Dio i n  court  (73.12.2).  i n the  short  t i m e b e f o r e h e was condemned b y t h e S e n a t e a n d was s u c c e e d e d b y  Septimius then,  Severus  The new E m p e r o r p r o v e d s u r p r i s i n g l y  (73.17.4).  It  t h a t D i o assumed h i s p o s t Dio f e l t  a great  l i t t l e pamphlet, 74.3),  is  as  admiration  t h a t he d e d i c a t e d h i s had appeared t o  was i n t h e  first  book,  significant  for  S e p t i m i u s S e v e r u s , and i t  its  of his  r i s e t o power  6  It  also indicates  much o f D i o ' s l a t e r ,  an i n t e r e s t  the  a d v i s e d i n a dream t o d e v o t e h i s When t h i s  work,  too,  D i o was i n s p i r e d t o  him  This  to  i n the supernatural A second book,  the  that w i l l  describing  plague  events  after  to the recording o f h i s t o r y  being (72.23.1-2).  r e c e i v e d h i g h p r a i s e , e s p e c i a l l y from the Emperor compose a c o m p l e t e h i s t o r y  (cf.  o f t h e s e omens f r o m S e v e r u s  a c c e s s i o n o f S e v e r u s , he w r o t e efforts  that  (72.23.1).  revelation of Dio's close relationship  more s e r i o u s w o r k .  f r o m t h e d e a t h o f Commodus t o  was t o  i n c l u d e d i n t h e Roman History  new E m p e r o r , s i n c e he m u s t h a v e h e a r d t h e d e t a i l s himself.  reign,  an a c c o u n t o f t h e d r e a m s a n d p o r t e n t s  o f which were l a t e r in  year of Severus'  however,  praetor.  Severus i n a n t i c i p a t i o n parts  first  lenient,  o f Rome  (72.23.3).  himself,  3  So the'PWUCUKTI l a x o p i a was c o n c e i v e d . r e s e a r c h and w r i t i n g w h i l e to  the c a p i t a l  Caracalla.  resident  t o be a w i t n e s s  of  D i o a p p a r e n t l y d i d much o f  at Capua ( 7 6 . 2 . 1 ) ,  events during  still  the reigns  near  enough  o f S e v e r u s and  W i t h a c a n d o r u n u s u a l among a n c i e n t h i s t o r i a n s , , h e t e l l s  7  he s p e n t t e n y e a r s c o l l e c t i n g h i s m a t e r i a l practice  but  t h a t would have compelled h i m . t o  twelve years reshaping this p e o p l e from the and beyond  arrival  (72^23.5).  material  from a l l  take extensive notes--and  i n t o an a n n a l i s t i c h i s t o r y . o f  o f Aeneas i n I t a l y t o the death o f  eipnvouai  awkward p o l i t i c a l  two e a r l i e r p a m p h l e t s h a d d o u b t l e s s s e c u r e d h i s  another t h e Roman  was " 0 U Y Y P a i a i TTav9' |  r  KCU TroAeuoixn a£icos .uvrjuris  i n the  eTrpaxSn, w a r e  affairs  (fr.  1.1).  of his  day.  be a s k e d t o 18.4).  after  t h a t m a n ' s d e a t h , he was s t i l l  a c c o m p a n y t h e E m p e r o r on a t r i p  Sometime a f t e r  his praetorship  abroad as a p r o p r a e t o r i a n suffect it  governor  regarded h i g h l y  to  (77.16.7-  i n A . D . 194 he h a d p r o b a b l y b e e n s e n t  of a minor p r o v i n c e ;  seems t h a t he was a l s o a member o f t h e i m p e r i a l  8  a n d he was  consilium  9  appointed  At t h i s  time  (75.16.4;  1 0  Appointed curator  o f Pergamum a n d S m y r n a b y M a c r i n u s , s u c c e s s o r t o  Caracalla  (79.7.4),  After  a c c e s s i o n o f A l e x a n d e r S e v e r u s , and f o l l o w i n g  the  have  enough  t o t h e E a s t i n A . D . 216  c o n s u l , probably during the r e i g n o f Severus ( 7 6 . 1 6 . 4 ) .  76.17.2).  His  s a f e t y w i t h S e v e r u s , and  d e s p i t e h i s s u b s e q u e n t h a t r e d o f C a r a c a l l a , w h i c h he o b v i o u s l y c o u l d n o t revealed u n t i l  that  Septimius Severus  uncSev x S v a v a Y K a i u v ufJTe EKEIVOJV Tiva ur|T£ xtov aXXcov TroSrjaou" Dio played l i t t l e part  us  available sources--a  H i s p u r p o s e , as he e x p l a i n e d i t ,  00*01 TOTS ' P a j u a i o i s <ax  his  h e seems t o h a v e r e m a i n e d a t  native  B i t h y n i a , D i o went t o A f r i c a as i t s  On h i s  return  thence to  that post  from A . D . 2 1 9 - 2 2 1 .  a short  proconsular governor  I t a l y , he was s e n t as a legatus  D a l m a t i a and t h e n t o Upper P a n n o n i a ( 4 9 . 3 6 . 4 ;  80.1.3).  visit  to  (80.1.3).  Augusti f i r s t  to  When.governor  of  his  1 1  4  this  l a s t p r o v i n c e h e i n c u r r e d t h e d i s p l e a s u r e of. t h e t r o o p s w i t h h i s  discipline,  by r u l i n g  them eyKpaxQis,  removed h i m - - h o n o u r a b l y — f r o m consul ordinarius (cf.  73.3.4),  a s he s a y s ( 8 0 . 4 . 2 ) .  Alexander Severus  t h e p o s t and a p p o i n t e d him h i s  f o r A . D . 229 ( 8 0 . 5 . 1 ) .  c o l l e a g u e as  B e c a u s e D i o was n o t  1 2  the Emperor r e l i e v e d him o f a l l  strict  a w e a l t h y man  the expenses o f h i s  and because o f t h e antagonism o f t h e s o l d i e r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y  magistracy;  o f the P r a e t o r i a n  G u a r d , h e was a l l o w e d t o  spend h i s term o f o f f i c e  afterwards  he r e t i r e d  B i t h y n i a because o f medical problems w i t h h i s  (80.5.2).  Since his narrative  to  ends a t  this  o u t s i d e Rome ( 8 0 . 5 . 1 ) .  point,  he must have d i e d  Soon feet  within  a few months.  Dio the In trying  Historian c o m p o s i n g t h e e i g h t y b o o k s o f h i s Roman History,. to preserve f o r  t i m e s o f p e a c e as w e l l (fr. it  1.1).  future  generations a l l  as i n w a r — a l l , a t  The f r a g m e n t a r y  t h a t happened t o  his narrative.  c u r s o r y r e a d i n g o f t h e e x t a n t p o r t i o n s — B o o k s 36 t o  application,  t o h i s w o r k h a s made  o f h i s s t a t e d purpose, o f the  t h e m e s t h a t he i n t e n d e d t o w e a v e t h r o u g h o u t  to h i s t o r i c a l w r i t i n g  the Romans--in  l e a s t , t h a t was w o r t h b e i n g r e m e m b e r e d  condition of the introduction  i m p o s s i b l e to recover the d e t a i l s  attitude  D i o s a y s t h a t he was  differs  little,  underlying  Yet even the  60—reveals that  in intent  from t h a t o f h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s i n the f i e l d .  if  not  Dio's  in successful  Past events  and  c h a r a c t e r s , b o t h good and e v i l , c a n be an i n v a l u a b l e a i d i n t h e f o r m a t i o n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s  moral temperament.  T h u c y d i d e s , whom D i o t o o k  It  as h i s m o d e l  was w i t h t h i s p u r p o s e i n m i n d (Phot.  2; D i o 5 5 . 1 2 . 4 - 5 ) , had w r i t t e n o f the c o n f l i c t so,  too,  Bibl.  71; cf.  c o u l d be r e s u r r e c t e d .  1 1  *  of  that  L u c i a n Hist. Consor.  b e t w e e n A t h e n s and S p a r t a ;  h a d L i v y r e c o r d e d t h e d e g e n e r a t i o n o f t h e Roman s p i r i t ,  that the o l d v i r t u e s  most  w i t h the  1 3  hope  5  Even closer to Dio's view of historiography i s the philosophy of Tacitus, that h i s t o r y i s a basis f o r contrasting the morally good and e v i l with s p e c i f i c reference to the behaviour of the r u l e r .  1 5  Tacitus' theme, l i k e that of Livy,  i s the decline of moral standards; and Tacitus found this decline i n the perverse flattery.and hypocrisy of the Senate and i n the p o t e n t i a l l y l i m i t l e s s e v i l inherent i n complete power that was concentrated i n one i n d i v i d u a l .  Like  Plato, Tacitus sees the individual r e f l e c t e d i n the State; but while he i s the moral philosopher, Dio i s more the p o l i t i c a l  analyst;" Both h i s t o r i a n s ,  however, shared i n the almost universal acceptance of the Principate as a s a t i s f a c t o r y i f not ideal form of government.  Their concern, then, was not  so much with the system of adminstration as. with the behaviour of the individual i n control of that system; and this concern was. to influence greatly t h e i r approaches  to the writing of imperial history.  There i s no doubt that Tacitus' Annals are more successful i n exploiting this theme than are the imperial books of Dio's. Roman History. for this are not d i f f i c u l t to f i n d .  Explanations  In ,the f i r s t place, although he once  speaks of reasoning from the facts that he has recorded and of drawing some universal significance from them (46.35.1), Dio seldom does interpret events, t h e i r causes, or e f f e c t s .  More often he takes the bare f a c t s , adorns them  perhaps with r h e t o r i c a l and dramatic devices, and presents this mixture as factual and s i g n i f i c a n t history.  As a r e s u l t , much of his work i s a vague,  almost meaningless series of events and of naive comments on human nature. Dio's r h e t o r i c a l t r a i n i n g , too, i s much more obvious than that of Tacitus. This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y evident i n his fondness for t r a g i c descriptions and f o r succinct summaries of men's accomplishments inserted when he records t h e i r deaths.  16  In h i s eagerness to make contrasts more obvious, Dio sometimes  s a c r i f i c e s accuracy i n favour of an a n t i t h e t i c a l , dramatic account  (cf. 59.3).  6  While T a c i t u s '  rhetorical  human e m o t i o n s , t h e quite  different:  nation, while scandalous  background i s  a t t i t u d e of the  two a u t h o r s  Dio,  like  Ccf. to  Thuc.  than u s u a l . 1.22.1)  character of  to Augustus  (52.14-40)  (59.16.5-7)  are i n  clever  is  a u t h o r s , but D i o ' s productions  only of matters  the P r i n c e p s , and t h e r e s u l t  Tacitus'  fear,  a  typical  a r e e v e n more  the p r a c t i c e of Thucydides  of. s t a t e b u t  Dio uses the d e v i c e t o is  convey h i s  sometimes a n a c h r o n i s t i c .  fashion,  a l s o of the own  hidden  political  So M a e c e n a s '  advice  and t h e w a r n i n g s d e l i v e r e d t o G a i u s by T i b e r i u s '  fact  i n t e n d e d by D i o to  interests  of the  p e r s o n a l judgement  entire  intrudes  convince his  state.  into his  ghost  Severan masters  This i s not  t o deny  speeches; Dio i s  only  to  that less  a n d s o more " o b v i o u s .  P e r h a p s more a t t e n t i o n t h a n i s n e c e s s a r y h a s b e e n p a i d t o i n the supernatural. but  is  and i n d i g -  i n u s i n g f i c t i o n a l , speeches i n a t r u l y dramatic  readers not  i n the best  evoke  such evocative d e t a i l  an h i s t o r i c a l n a r r a t i v e  While Tacitus follows  1 8  philosophy,  rule  to  1 7  device of ancient  inform his  to  ability  S u e t o n i u s , h a s a f o n d n e s s f o r more g r u e s o m e and  descriptions.  imaginative  in his  T a c i t u s c o n c e n t r a t e s on a r o u s i n g s y m p a t h y ,  The i n s e r t i o n o f s p e e c h e s i n t o rhetorical  evident  he d i d n o t  dismiss their  enough.interest sceptic  rather  Livy f e l t  than a d i s b e l i e v e r  as t h e y  of  the  prejudicial  belief  d e s c r i b i n g omens,  Tacitus  shows  a s t h e p h o e n i x t h a t we s h o u l d l a b e l h i m a {Ann. 6 . 2 8 ;  cf.  throughout h i s h i s t o r y ,  do a p a r t i c u l a r l y  apologize for  (Livy 43.13.1-2).  actual occurrences, but.for  D i o h i m s e l f was w e l l affected  necessary to  importance  i n such p r o d i g i e s  Dio introduces portents as s t a t e m e n t s  it  Dio's  Hist. they  2.50; 4.26).  are used not  dramatic effect  supernatural  exclusively  as w e l l ,  s u i t a b l e r e l i e f , from t h e monotony o f h i s  aware t h a t h i s r e c o r d i n g o f  Although  narrative.  e v e n t s i n n o way  f a c t s t h a t he was d i s c u s s i n g , and c o u l d b e d i s r e g a r d e d a s to h i s h i s t o r i c a l  judgement  (fr.  57.22).  affording  not  7  Finally,  m e n t i o n must b e made o f  The Roman History this  strict  whole.  books are not reign,  for  strictly  logical  will  material  point  careful  to  for  practical Emperor,  the  then,  of  the  Battle  exact  until  imperii  e x a m p l e , he i s  from which p o i n t  t h a t we f i n d . h i m  and o f  Gaius'  D i o and h i s It  is  Dio begins  each  the  Emperor's character,  59.3-5).  at  using  rest.of  Dating.is,  2 1  are normally  At  the  the  the  not  day., o f  and t h e  as u s u a l ,  for  date.on which the  a c c u r a c y does not  so g r e a t l y  It  m i s t a k e n about  all  the  of  indicated,  each  with  (51.1.1).  From  he  account.of date  is  length  reign  Vespasian's  of  the  g e n e r a l was  suggest that is  by  each Emperor's  end of. h i s  Vespasian h i m s e l f reckoned the  the  chrono-  the beginning  d i s t i n g u i s h between the  imperialcchronology.  accession.  hailed  of his  reign  D i o was  t h e more  ignorant  surprising,  dates of T i b e r i u s '  death  2 3  Sources a common c o m p l a i n t  sources a v a i l a b l e to did depend. beginning  rule  Such s t r i v i n g of  more b i o g r a p h i c a l .  u s u a l l y to  to  as a the  however,  death.  careful  beginning of his  complications  his  violate  Thereafter  on t h e w h o l e b e c o m e s more s p e c i f i c :  length,  1 9  31.B.C.  o f A c t i u m on 2 September 3 1 , B . C .  give  the  after  being introduced  ovdinarii  to  c o u l d b e s t be t r e a t e d  theme a r o u n d w h i c h t h e (cf.  chronology.  a l t h o u g h D i o was w i l l i n g  one r e g i o n  but  be o r g a n i z e d  chronology  (66.17.3-5). of  in  set the moral  on D i o ' s  f r o m h i s dies reign,  form,  accuracy of D i o ' s  c h a n g e s somewhat  Dates w i t h i n a y e a r ,  2 2  exception  this  events  annalistic,  t h e names o f t h e  new y e a r .  in  e x a m p l e , w i t h an a n a l y s i s o f to  the  if  arrangement  opening chapters  consuls,  annalistic  organization  This  2 0  is  the  2 h  . In  him,  this  of h i s work:  t h a t no a n c i e n t  historian  made f u l l  use o f  and t h a t he seldom acknowledged t h o s e on w h i c h  respect Dio i s  typical,  ^aveyvbiv u e v u & v x a  a l t h o u g h he d o e s s a y a t  obs EITTETV  . x a TTepK'.auxtlJv  xiai  the he  the  8 y e y p a y y e v a , a u v e y p a ^ a 6 ^ ou T r a v r a . a X X a oo*a e ^ e k p i v a "  ( f r . 1.2; c f . 72.23.5).  He h a s g i v e n u s a h i n t , b u t h e h a s s t i l l  easy t o d i s c o v e r h i s  sources. First,  His statement,  as i t  forms  even i f he c o u l d c o n s u l t  n o t made i t  two p a r t s ,  l i k e w i s e p r e s e n t s two p r o b l e m s .  every appropriate  author  i n h i s ten years o f  r e s e a r c h , h e c l e a r l y d i d n o t make e x t e n s i v e n o t e s o f a l l o f t h e m , b u t r e l i e d now o n o n e , n o w o n a n o t h e r ,  a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p e r i o d and t o p i c b e i n g  treated.  S e c o n d l y , when h e d o e s i n d i c a t e more t h a n o n e s o u r c e f o r s i a p a r t i c u l a r of information,  h e may g i v e some d e t a i l s  explains h i s c r i t e r i a very fact  for-preferring  about t h e opposing views b u t he n e v e r  one.over another  t h a t h e d i d a p p l y some c r i t i c a l  frustrating it  piece  judgement  may b e f o r m o d e r n c o m m e n t a t o r s ,  ( c f . 59.2.6).  Yet the  to h i s selection,  however  d o e s show t h a t D i o was n o t t h e  mere c o p y i s t h e i s s o o f t e n t h o u g h t t o h a v e b e e n . Roman h i s t o r y , parts  a s D i o h i m s e l f e x p l a i n e d , was d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e  d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e not only by t h e i r  but p r i m a r i l y ,  from the h i s t o r i a n ' s  form and r e l i a b i l i t y he comments t h a t ,  point  and s o c i a l  documents  TTOU  period  c o u l d be v e r i f i e d  (53.19.2).  o f t h e P r i n c i p a t e , h o w e v e r , " x a yev.TrA.eia) Kpi5(j>a  y x y v e c r 0 a i npj^axo, e \ 5e  i n the  Of the republican  s i n c e e v e r y t h i n g was p u b l i c , . i n f o r m a t i o n and p u b l i c  differences  o f view, by the d i f f e r e n c e s  o f sources a v a i l a b l e f o r each.  by c o n s u l t i n g v a r i o u s w r i t e r s establishment  constitutional  separate  With the SxVaTropprynov  KCVL  x i v a < a l 6nyoaieu0eTri, aXXa a v e X e y i c x a y e . o v x a  oancxxeT/rai • Koa y a p A e y e a G a i KOX .TrpaxxeaGai xravxa Tfpos x a x S v a e i KpaxoOvxcov x S v x e TrapaSuvaaxeuovxwv acfuai B o u X n y a x a UTro-rrxeuexai" (53.19.3). promises to report not,  f a i t h f u l l y w h a t e v e r was p u b l i c k n o w l e d g e , w h e t h e r  a n d t o a d d w h e r e v e r p o s s i b l e h i s own o p i n i o n a b o u t  9puAouyevov. participant  Dio's third period,  the v a l i d i t y  Dio true or o f xo  i n t h e e v e n t s o f w h i c h he, h i m s e l f ' w a s  (72.18.4), f a l l s o u t s i d e . t h e s c o p e o f t h i s  i n r e s e a r c h : i n 53.19.2 he r e f e r s  a  study.  We m u s t assume t h a t D i o c o n s u l t e d p u b l i s h e d , o f f i c i a l the t e n years spent  25  documents  during  t o p u b l i c r e c o r d s as  9  useful for traces  the  composition of h i s t o r y .  i n h i s work o f  s u c h d o c u m e n t s as t h e acta  c o n s u l t e d by b o t h T a c i t u s by t h e i r subject  sources.  of Dio's attitude  saw b o t h t h e Res Gestae he p r e f e r r e d illogical  In  r e g a r d t o t h e Fasti  the  I  find  an o t h e r w i s e  2 8  and t h e  2 7  c o n s u l a r Fasti,  dictatorships  and c o n s u l s h i p s . ;  a t Rome, b u t  in  four  with  use o f these documents.  o f D i o and t h e  cases:  in three  other  instances  49 B . C . , A . D . 9 , A . D . 13) D i o s i m p l y r e v e r s e s t h e o r d e r o f t h e as t h e y a p p e a r i n t h e Fasti;  and f i n a l l y ,  B.C.  of  zo  Dio follows  the t r a d i t i o n  i n r e c o r d i n g A u g u s t u s and t h e  all  suffect  for  t h e Fasti  Fasti  of.these  certainly  t h a t D i o i g n o r e d an a v a i l a b l e s o u r c e . o f i n f o r m a t i o n  simplify  his task of  add t h a t ,  tional  for  the  consuls of Gaius  evidence are never at  As f o r  the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  rather source.  use o f  not greatly  each y e a r .  r e i g n , Dio and.the extant  of Dio's l i t e r a r y is  about  s o u r c e s , the usual  i m p o s s i b l e to determine whether  an e a r l i e r h i s t o r i a n ,  obtained information  do  I  inscrip-  variance.  e n c o u n t e r e d : i n most c a s e s i t  made d i r e c t  23  Capitolini  t h a t would  at the b e g i n n i n g o f 1  c o n s u l s ' names  t h a n A u g u s t u s and M u r e n a .  indicate  might  (60 B . C . ,  e x c e p t t h e Fasti.  Cn. Piso rather  t h e ovdinarii  of  t h e eponymous c o n s u l s o f  Such d i s c r e p a n c i e s a r e m i n o r and e a s i l y e x p l i c a b l e ; t h e y  listing  that  t h a t may seem r a t h e r  for Dio's direct  2 9  the  Dio  evidence gathered by S t u a r t  in only eight  least  on  ( 4 6 - 4 4 B . C . ) t h e h i s t o r i a n m i s c a l c u l a t e s by one y e a r t h e number  Caesar's  is  o r at  has c o n c l u d e d t h a t  i n s t a n c e s when p a r a l l e l p o r t i o n s o f Dio d i f f e r s  5),  invaluable article  s o u r c e s , an a t t i t u d e  that the  definite  w h i c h we know w e r e  and S u e t o n i u s .{Aug.  argues very s t r o n g l y  list  a r e o n l y a few senatus,  epigraphic sources,  of Augustus  fact  Out o f t h e t h i r t y - t w o  cases  to  in  t o d e p e n d on l i t e r a r y  to.us.  are e x t a n t ,  (Ann. 1 5 . 7 4 . 3 )  D.R. S t u a r t ,  2 6  Yet there  an  author  e v e n i f , he m e n t i o n s h i m b y n a m e ,  that h i s t o r i a n ' s writings  Dio c l a i m s t o have r e a d " a l m o s t  difficulty  from.an  or  intermediate  e v e r y t h i n g " t h a t p e r t a i n e d t o Roman  10  history; Livy  but  of  (67.12.4),  Augustus Arrian  all  these p o s s i b l e authors,  Cicero  (44.35.3),  (69.15.1),  (40.54.2),  Plutarch  (fr.  Sallust  he m e n t i o n s  (40.3.4;  40.5; fr.  and S e p t i m i u s S e v e r u s  comments i n t h e s e p a s s a g e s , h o w e v e r ,  42.52.2;  107), Hadrian  (75.7.3;  all  (although  from the t e n t h o r e l e v e n t h The d i f f i c u l t y Empire i s  Nonianus, Aufidius Cluvius to  That  small proportion  sister Agrippina,  Bassus,  reign  the  is  evident  assumes, of  from  another—single—author.  brief  (his h i s t o r i c a l  the  is  Excerpts,  first  lift  from a p a u c i t y  of  extant.  or.mothing  work,  Servilius  that  show t h e  trying,  12.2; 22.1;  these varying  futility  is),  and S u e t o n i u s .  c a t e g o r y — t h o s e w o r k s t h a t no l o n g e r to  early  his description  comments i n C h a p t e r s 2 . 6 ;  suffice  the  We a r e o n m o r e s u r e g r o u n d when  c o u r s e , , t h a t he d i d n o t  remarks w i l l  some s i g n i f i c a n c e 1.  little  L e n t u l u s G a e t u l i c u s , M.  Elder Pliny  from h i s  this  With regard to  own  expect),  writings, s t i l l  d i d u s e more t h a n a s i n g l e s o u r c e f o r  25.5;  following  of their  D i o ' s dependence on S e n e c a , P h i l o , . J o s e p h u s , T a c i t u s ,  our h i s t o r i a n  Gaius'  (as we s h o u l d  r e f e r e n c e s to him occur o n l y i n the  R u f u s , and F a b i u s R u s t i c u s .  detect  From D i o ' s  we c a n s a y w i t h some c e r t a i n t y  h a v e c o n s u l t e d , b u t . o f whose w o r k s  include Gaius'  69.17.3),  century).  compounded b y t h e  survives,  (66.17.1;  i n . I d e n t i f y i n g D i o ' s sources for, the p e r i o d o f  T h o s e whom he m i g h t  byname:  43.9.2-3),  75.15.2).  t h a t he h a d r e a d C i c e r o , A u g u s t u s , H a d r i a n , S e v e r u s and p e r h a p s P l u t a r c h  only eight  of  of  and  accounts  survive—the  trying.to  draw  evidence.  T h e m e m o i r s o f A g r i p p i n a M i n o r w e r e u s e d b y t h e E l d e r P l i n y (HN 7.8.46) were n o t 4.53.3). no doubt years.  a n d b y T a c i t u s , whose d e s c r i p t i o n  o f them s u g g e s t s t h a t  w e l l known e v e n b y t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e It  seems u n l i k e l y t h a t  second century  such personal commentaries,  in very small quantities,  literary  (Ann.  published  would have s u r v i v e d another  D i o , who makes no m e n t i o n o f A g r i p p i n a ' s  they  hundred  ability,  11  might his  have encountered v e s t i g e s  bias  to  a tradition  8.1^-2), them.  but  to  Gaius'  14.19;  c o n s u l o f A . D . 3 5 , was b o t h  T a c i t u s was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h h i s w o r k  cf.  historiae  23.2).  Dial.  by Q u i n t i l i a n ,  3 1  presumably  in  {Gaius of  postulat"  of Nonianus'  the p e r i o d t r e a t e d by h i s h i s t o r y .  {Tib.  61.6: "annalibus suis v i r that  it  23.2)  a history  Tiberius?),  the  of  he w r o t e  23)  terminal  a history  the  late  t i o n of  the  Principate  reign  of  ...")  has been  Tiberius.  of Aufidius  Suetonius  3 3  Bassus,  whom  rank w i t h Nonianus In  addition  t h e Germans ( u n d e r A u g u s t u s own t i m e s .  This  latter  and  work  R e p u b l i c , s i n c e we know f r o m S e n e c a R h e t o r  date o f h i s h i s t o r y  work  to  A v a g u e comment i n  t h a t Bassus had d e c l a r e d h i m s e l f  and t h e r e  Bassus'  attitude  (10.1.102-103)  of his  t h e y o u n g e r S e n e c a (Ep. 3 0 . 1 )  i n A.D. 60;  {Ann.  author,  the J u l i o - C l a u d i a n p e r i o d .  o f Rome's wars a g a i n s t  must have begun i n {Suas. 6 . 1 8 ;  the w r i t i n g s  and Q u i n t i l i a n  as one o f t h e g r e a t w r i t e r s  Neither  consularis inseruit  d i d encompass t h e  We know somewhat more a b o u t {Dial.  fields,  had e a r l i e r been pronounced  (10.1.102-103).  or of  Tacitus  i n both  and  who a d d e d t h a t N o n i a n u s was " m i n u s p r e s s u s quam  auctoritas  t a k e n as p r o o f  an o r a t o r  et multa eloquentia"  The same v e r d i c t  h o w e v e r , has g i v e n any h i n t  of  birthplace,  something  3 2  a n d d e s c r i b e s h i m as " s u m m i s h o n o r i b u s  but  sister.  so,  i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t D i o h a d e v e n h e a r d  M. S e r v i l i u s N o n i a n u s , t h e  to  source; i f  S u e t o n i u s seems t o h a v e r e a d t h e s e v e r s e s  again there  an h i s t o r i a n .  4.  another  begun b y the E m p e r o r ' s  L e n t u l u s G a e t u l i c u s had r e f e r r e d one o f h i s p o e m s .  3.  them i n  a c c o u n t o f G a i u s ' - c a m p a i g n s i n Germany- a n d G a u l may owe  of i t s 2.  of  is  a matter  an a d m i r e r of  dispute.  p r o v e s t h a t B a s s u s was s t i l l  i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t P l i n y t h e E l d e r ' s (see b e l o w )  c o n t a i n e d any m a t e r i a l  of A  Cicero; letter  alive continua-  earlier  than  12  A.D.  55.  Some, h o w e v e r ,  Tiberius* 5.  argue t h a t  r e i g n , perhaps w i t h the  Bassus'  fall  3.5.6),  historiam"  (HN p r a e f . - 2 0 ) .  significant  who o n c e r e f e r s If  ended  in  of Seianus i n A . D .  B a s s u s * w o r k was c o n t i n u e d i n t h i r t y ^ o n e ( P l i n y • Ep.  history  to  31.  books by P l i n y the  Elder  the work as "temporum  Pliny's history,  of which  remains, i n c l u d e d the r e i g n of G a i u s ,  then i t  was p e r h a p s  comment on t h e b i r t h p l a c e  8.1).  i s mentioned t h r e e times by. T a c i t u s  13.20.3  [A.D.  55];  15.53.4  c l e a r l y made u s e o f  it  for  sequent c i v i l wars, there  [A.D.  65];  Hist.  3.28  of Gaius  [A.D.  nostrorum  nothing  "the s o u r c e o f S u e t o n i u s ' A l t h o u g h the. work  3 1 f  (Gaius (Ann.  69]),  who  e v e n t s d u r i n g N e r o ' s r e i g n and t h e i s no f i r m e v i d e n c e t h a t i t  sub-  dealt with  Gaius  or even w i t h C l a u d i u s . Pliny ( P l i n y Ep. Germanicus' that  a l s o wrote 3.5.4).  a complete h i s t o r y  Since Tacitus cites  3 5  It  for  6.  this  m o n o g r a p h when d i s c u s s i n g  t o be a t t r i b u t e d  to  C l u v i u s R u f u s , who h a d h e l d t h e  direct  c o n s u l s h i p b e f o r e A . D . 41 a n d was  S u e t . Nero 2 1 . 2 ; P l u . Otho 3 ; T a c . Hist.  s e n a t o r u n d e r Nero and V i t e l l i u s  once by D i o , but  i n a context  t h a t does not  was a w a r e o f h i s h i s t o r i c a l w o r k  wrote (cf.  (Ep. 9 . 1 9 . 5 ) truth,  3.65).  (63.14.3).  ( J o s . AJ  4.43),  is  19.1.13 mentioned  suggest that our We know f r o m a  author letter  t h a t C l u v i u s h e l d s t r o n g views about an h i s t o r i a n ' s  a n d f r o m T a c i t u s .(Ann. 1 3 . 2 0 . 3 ; 1 4 . 2 . 1 )  of Nero's reign Hist.  birthplace  borrowing.  [91];  the  likely  a r e t o o vague and i n -  Naturalis  an a c t i v e  duty to  seems m o s t  P l i n y ' s v i e w s on t h e  still  of P l i n y  it  s h o u l d be n o t e d h e r e t h a t any c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s between  D i o a n d P l i n y ' s s u r v i v i n g Histovia significant  t h e Roman w a r s i n Germany  c a m p a i g n s i n A . D . 15 (Ann. 1 . 6 9 . 3 ) , .  Suetonius had c o n s u l t e d i t  of G a i u s .  of  and a t  least part  that  of the subsequent c i v i l  he wars  13  Although there as e a r l y  as G a i u s '  i s no s p e c i f i c s u g g e s t i o n t h a t h i s h i s t o r y r e i g n , Monunsen t h o u g h t t h a t C l u v i u s was t h e  for  Josephus' long account of Gaius'  the  anecdote t o l d about  f r o m t h e man h i m s e l f , comment. the  style  C l u v i u s i n AJ 1 9 . 1 . 1 3  and t h r o u g h  of t h i s  than usual)  his history  are e x t a n t .  style,  (since i t  impossible to  since only  account of Gaius'  d e p e n d e n c e on C l u v i u s i s  and D i o .  further  i s more  of  3 9  account  Zonaras and  that i t  treated  Tacitus praises his  was t o o p a r t i a l  metaphorical  fragments  The q u e s t i o n o f  of Gaius'  Xiphilinus.  in  Finally, like  there  i s no e v i d e n c e a t  the p e r s o n a l d i a r i e s  of his  is  (eommentarii Principis)  Of greater  will  significance  and v a l u e a r e t h e  between p a s s a g e s o f D i o and t h e Tacitus,  serve to  61.1)  but  (Tac.•Ann. adds t h a t  he  10.3).  His  (Nero 2 8 ) .  that Gaius ever wrote a  Tib.  extant  own p e r i o d ,  (Ann. 1 3 . 2 0 . 3 ; Agr.  (Suet.  made  journal  k e p t b y many and C l a u d i u s  of (Tac.  13.43.4).  Ann.  Josephus,  all  by  h 0  and e l o q u e n c e , b u t  Seneca  the Emperors, i n c l u d i n g T i b e r i u s  exist  of  main  fact,  murder  the r e i g n o f Nero  style  to h i s p a t r o n ,  is,  we  Dio's  a c c o u n t o f A g r i p p i n a M i n o r may h a v e b e e n u s e d b y S u e t o n i u s 8.  assigned  a s s a s s i n a t i o n was t h e  The S p a n i a r d F a b i u s R u s t i c u s w r o t e a h i s t o r y a g a i n we know o n l y  oral  Unfortunately  3 7  a few m i n o r  complicated—it  answer—because h i s  i n the epitomes  14.2.3).  than by  M o m i g l i a n o h a s gone one s t e p f a r t h e r  3 8  source of Josephus, Suetonius,  7.  because  m u s t h a v e come  rather  t o C l u v i u s as J o s e p h u s ' L a t i n s o u r c e .  claiming that Cluvius'  only  (91-92)  a w r i t t e n work  s e c t i o n of Josephus  h a v e no i d e a o f C l u v i u s '  source  assassination, primarily  Mommsen's v i e w was t a k e n up b y C h a r l e s w o r t h , who  3 6  began  and S u e t o n i u s .  show, d i r e c t  extant  As t h e  fairly  writings  following  close parallels of Seneca,  comparisons  d e p e n d e n c e o f D i o on a n y o f  that  Philo, and comments  these authors  is  14  impossible had n o t  to prove.  r e a d a n d made n o t e s  intermediate  sources  which anecdotes similar 1.  What c a n b e s a i d w i t h some c e r t a i n t y  to  the  (the  their  works,  at  least  licaxovxaexia of Appian i s  fromSthose  earlier  historians  times  he m e n t i o n s  refers  his  early  Rhetor i n s t e a d ) ; Consolatio  in  to  the  speeches  of  ( u n l e s s he i s  later  on dementia  antithesis  epitomists.  familiar  very  of  If  is  a n y comment w h a t e v e r  at  the  and i n  61.10.2  course, that  such  verdict  it  other  just  works  of  F.  i n h i s m i s s i n g b o o k s made o f  space--Histories  that  Petronius'  Prechac, * 1  treatise  t h a t he was  In the m i s s i n g  show n o e v i d e n c e o f t h i s . the  situation  the  Vespasian..  story 1 + 2 1  of  1  speech between  as l i k e l y  difficulties  e v e n he o t h e r w i s e  5.9-10—to  J e w s f r o m Pompey t o  would  as w e l l .  on t h e J e w i s h p r o b l e m .  epitomes  remarkable  fact  own a n d  t h a t Dio used Seneca's  is  Dio  anecdotes  Book 59 some m e n t i o n may h a v e b e e n made o f  odd t h a t t h e  proves  o m i s s i o n from D i o ' s account o f G a i u s '  embassy f r o m A l e x a n d r i a and o f  is  Seneca  Yet a comparison of  we a c c e p t t h e  Book 5 5 , t h e n  P e r h a p s t h e most n o t a b l e  59.19.7  of  a r e memorable on t h e i r  w i t h the p h i l o s o p h e r ' s  end o f  talking  in  when c o m p o s i n g h i s p o l i t i c a l - p h i l o s o p h i c a l  L i v i a and A u g u s t u s i n  it  in  i n words  17.5 suggests that Dio might i n  who seems t o h a v e p r o v e d c o n c l u s i v e l y  but  he  o n some  None o f t h e s e p a s s a g e s , h o w e v e r ,  One m u s t r e m e m b e r ,  b a s e d on r h e t o r i c a l appeal to  Seneca:  6 0 . 3 5 . 3 t h e Apoaolocyntosis;  ad VoVybiwn.  h a v e done s o .  is  if  possibility)  had been r e p e a t e d  compositions  5 9 . 1 1 . 5 w i t h S e n . Cons. Polyb.  it  relied heavily a likely  t h a t D i o had n e c e s s a r i l y r e a d t h o s e w o r k s .  2.  that Dio,  original.  Dio three  the  of  is  the  chapters  Jewish  in Judaea, What  very  Rome's r e l a t i o n s  but  Tacitus  can o n l y be g u e s s e d devotes  reign  at,  little with  the  15  Dio's had not of  s i l e n c e about  r e a d P h i l o ' s in Flaccum  o r Legatio  anecdotes found i n both.authors  are,  for  contradictory  t r a d i t i o n about Seneca.  Gaius'  On t h e  t i o n of Gaius*  nature, * 1  erratic  of  common w i t h t h e v a r i e d a n d d e t a i l e d 561)  than w i t h the  descriptions  Roman s c e p t i c  for  Gaius'  mentioned.  (557-  (Gaius 5 2 ) .  Since  t h e Greek Jew t h a n  e x a m p l e , does n o t m e n t i o n  them),  by P h i l o alone  apparent  to they  among  All  i n d e b t e d n e s s to C l u v i u s Rufus has a l r e a d y  that  can be added h e r e i s  t h a t D i o does  the J e w i s h g e n e r a l ' s  t h a t V e s p a s i a n w o u l d become E m p e r o r  (66.1.4).  same s t o r y  i n BJ 3 . 8 . 9  might w e l l  h a v e r e a d t h e Be  (399-408)  the  lost  Gaius i s ,  o u t Annals  traditions. 1-2,  for  prophecy  indicate  that  material  must b e a d m i t t e d , While i t  the Dio  source f o r  the  two h i s t o r i a n s  the p e r i o d , but  The l e n g t h y  is  small  impossible  has r e a p p e a r e d i n  two a c c o u n t s o f T i b e r i u s '  s a y w i t h some a s s u r a n c e t h a t  different  it  books o f T a c i t u s .  Book 5 9 , a n a n a l y s i s o f t h e  mention  The p a s s a g e e c h o e s  c l o s e l y enough t o  d e t e r m i n e how much o f T a c i t u s '  common, a n t i - T i b e r i a n  :  been  Hum.  account of the r e i g n of  compensation f o r  to  descrip-  11.78-15.113  J o s e p h u s o n c e , i n an a n e c d o t e about  to  noticed  contemporaries.  Josephus'  Dio's  same common  in  Suetonius  m i g h t w e l l have been p a s s e d on t o p o s t e r i t y  the  h a s much more  a c c o u n t i n Leg.  abbreviated version in  (Seneca,  the  that Dio's  (59.26.5-8)  t h e s e a n e c d o t e s seem t o h a v e a p p e a l e d more t o the  he  There  of  a s we h a v e a l r e a d y  i s no d o u b t  deities  that  conclusion.  these r e f l e c t  behaviour  other hand, there  impersonation  this  in their  but  3  indicate  ad Gaium, ..and a c o m p a r i s o n  supports  e x a m p l e , some s i m i l a r i t i e s  Emperor's  in  the Jews would i n . i t s e l f  at  reign  Dio's allows.us  l e a s t had a  o f t e n enough  followed  German c a m p a i g n s r e c o u n t e d  through-  example, are compressed by D i o i n t o p a r t o f  one  16  chapter  (57.18.1);  while  i n Ann.  1.10.8,  expanded by Dio i n t o seventeen c h a p t e r s  On t h e  other  is  hand, the  the funeral  i n t e r c h a n g e between T i b e r i u s  took p l a c e i n the Senate a f t e r i n the  two a u t h o r s . * 1  of Augustus, b a r e l y touched  Augustus' death i s  Another notable  4  similarity  o c c u r s i n t h e two a c c o u n t s o f t h e r e v o l t 1 4 , when G e r m a n i c u s t h r e a t e n e d t o Emperor by h i s t r o o p s . general his  compare T a c i t u s ' w o r d s :  o b t u l i t gladium, addito  and i t  give quite  different  threat.  certainly 5.  is  acutiorem esse"  t h a n be  offered  important  exclusively. * 1  indicate  of Germanicus' f a i l u r e  w o u l d be s a f e t o  use T a c i t u s d i r e c t l y ,  not  "Calusidius  or at  for  assume t h a t l e a s t not  imperial  its  intention  rulers.  format  Tiberius'  impartially  his earlier  reign  and  treat  of the  Vitae  the h i s t o r y  source of  annalistic  anecdotes. with  o f t h e E m p i r e as a h i s t o r y  one w o n d e r s i f  c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n as a d i r e c t  dependence on S u e t o n i u s .  of  Caesarian f i t t e d i n w e l l  arrangement,  There a r e , however,  result  and  familiar  From t h e r e i g n  I n d e e d , s i n c e T a c i t u s h a d managed t o do t h i s  serving a s t r i c t l y  these  c l o s e p a r a l l e l s i n wording between S u e t o n i u s  lives of that biographer.  to  out  5  A u g u s t u s o n w a r d s S u e t o n i u s was. c l e a r l y a m a j o r The b i o g r a p h i c a l  then  to carry  some o f for  Such  direct  D i o l e a d s t o t h e v e r y s t r o n g s u s p i c i o n t h a t D i o was q u i t e  Dio's  the  t o n o t i c e t h a t D i o and T a c i t u s  explanations  it  The l a r g e number o f  w i t h the  hailed  (Ann. 1 . 3 5 . 6 ) .  and need n o t  A common s o u r c e i s p e r h a p s i m p l i e d  then, but  Dio d i d not  speech  of the Rhine l e g i o n s i n A . D .  O f t h e s o l d i e r who i n s o l e n t l y  (57.5.2);  borrowing;  details,  identical  in reported  commit s u i c i d e r a t h e r  a comment i s m e m o r a b l e i n a n y c a s e ,  his  that  own s w o r d , D i o s a y s . : "'TOUTO' etfin 'XafSe* TOSTO yap  6£\JT£p6v e c m v ' " strictum  (56.31-47).  and C a l l u s  almost  on  while Dio of  s o many d e t a i l s  of prealtered  heavy present  17  in  one a u t h o r b u t  of  other  not  i n the  s o u r c e s as w e l l ,  The f o l l o w i n g between the  list  two w i l l  other  t h a t we must assume t h e  f o r w h i c h D i o h a d an e q u a l  of  some o f t h e more n o t a b l e  s e r v e as p r o o f  c o m p a r e S u e t o n i u s Aug.  97.3.  of  w i t h Dio  the r i g h t s  already discernible of his  the n e c e s s i t y of  59.17  27.1-4  59.10.3-4  41.1  59.28.11  55  59.14  56.1  59.25.8;  5.3  59.29.1  59.12.3  a favourable to  S e v e r a n d y n a s t y D i o was f a c e d w i t h earlier  i n T a c i t u s ' Annals,  one h a n d a n d , on t h e  only workable  he s c o r n s o p p o s i t i o n  form o f r u l e  relationship  the monarchy;  for  other,  support  that period.  the between  of  the  So D i o e m p h a s i z e s  between t h e P r i n c e p s and t h e  and he has l i t t l e  use f o r  the  Senate;  common  l f 6  D i o was w e l l last  19  a century  o r d e r on t h e  P r i n c i p a t e as t h e  people.  59.24.2  Principate  As a Roman s e n a t o r u n d e r t h e conflict,  56.29.4  57.8.1  Gaius 1 7 . 1  D i o and t h e  correspondences  56.33.1  26.2  Vesp.  preference.  these c o n c l u s i o n s :  101  Tib.  existence  century  of  aware o f  the  the Republic  could declare that  in  (cf.  fr.  83.4),  27 B . C . a r e s t o r a t i o n  o l i g a r c h y was i m p o s s i b l e , t h a t t o become a s t a b l e  a n a r c h y t h a t h a d p r e v a i l e d d u r i n g much o f and w i t h t h e b e n e f i t of the  only under the r u l e  and s e c u r e s t a t e  once a g a i n  earlier  of  democracy  the  hindsight or  o f one man c o u l d Rome h o p e  (53.19.1).  4 7  Of the  Augustan  18  s e t t l e m e n t , h e c o m m e n t s : " A i d . x e ouv x a u x a , K o i o x i  xrjv y o v a p x ^ a v x?i  S n y o K p a x i a y i ^ a s x o x e e X e u O e p o v a c j u a i v exfipncre KCU x b K o a y i o v x o x e aacf>aA.es T r p o a i r a p e a K e u a a e v , axrf e£u) y e v xou  u n y o i c p a x i K O U Gpacrous e^a) <5e KOU XGV  x u p a v v i K w v ugpetov o v x a s e v x e e A e u G e p i a auxfipovi KOI  ev y o v a p x f a dfieei  £fjv,  BacriXeuoyevous x e aveu SouXeias KOU S n y o K p a x o o y e v o u s aveu S i x o a x a a i a s , 6eivCs a u x o v eTroBouv" Here, remarks  as f r e q u e n t l y  realizes  myth, to  times,  but  his  the  that period constitutional  reasons for  t h e many a p p a r e n t  Emperors were l i t t l e  practices  organism.  of Augustus'  more t h a n r e v e l a t i o n s  Augustus'  d y n a s t i c plans suggest that i t  system  In the  a n d much d i s c u s s e d s p e e c h o f M a e c e n a s , A u g u s t u s ' m i n i s t e r value o f maintaining  the  traditional,  outward  forms  of the  and e n d s b y a s s u r i n g A u g u s t u s t h a t he w i l l b e k i n g i n in  fact,  none o f  assumed t o  the  Emperor had p o s s e s s e d . provincial forces  of  the  interpreting  a s a way o f k e e p i n g i n h i s  E m p i r e , on w h i c h t h e  stability  was a attributed  first  facts.  (52.1.1): fictitious stresses  Republic  the  (52.20.2-3),  b u t name  (52.40.1);  t o N e r o and even b e y o n d ,  o l d r e p u b l i c a n powers than the  Was D i o w r o n g i n  administration the  all  subsequent Emperors, from T i b e r i u s  t h e m s e l v e s a n y more o f  per-  of p r e v i o u s l y hidden  was.  date  when one  settlement  changes i n the  There  that  He r e a l i z e d  From 29 B . C . o n w a r d s he e q u a t e s t h e P r i n c i p a t e w i t h a m o n a r c h y certainly  anachronistic  doing so are i n t e l l i g i b l e  republican constitutionality  and he c o u l d see t h a t  introducing  scene i n the e a r l y Empire.  t h a t D i o saw t h e P r i n c i p a t e a s a s t a t i c  that  later  accused of  the p o l i t i c a l  t h a t he d i d a p p l y t o  from l a t e r  fectly  elsewhere, Dio i s  into his. description of  i s no doubt only  (56.43.4).  first  Augustus' d i v i s i o n own h a n d s t h e  of his position  rested  of  military (53.12.3;  cf..53.17.3)? Sir rule,"  R o n a l d Syme * has c a l l e d D i o " a f e r v e n t 1  8  a description that  i s perhaps too  advocate of  simplistic.  monarchical  Dio rather  believed  that  19  p e a c e a n d s e c u r i t y w e r e m o r e . d e s i r a b l e t h a n w h a t h e saw as t h e the  late  Republic.  Y e t he was n o t u n a w a r e o f  1 + 9  a s i n g l e man: he o b s e r v e s , f o r and t h a t h i s verifiable power but  sources for  fact  to  (53.19.3).  to  free  speech i s  lost  i m p e r i a l p e r i o d change from f r a n k  statements  regard i s  opinions than a c t u a l l y  views too s i m p l e , but  o f t h e two h i s t o r i a n s :  existed.  suggests a wider difference The d i f f e r e n c e  D i o was a f r a n k l y  admitted  and c y n i c a l v i e w o f t h e monarchy.  Tacitus  s u p r e m a c y as i t  very d i s t i n c t i o n  a proper understanding of As a p o l i t i c a l  that  positions  i n Mommsen's c o n c e p t o f  and most o t h e r  It  the Senate's It  otherwise  a.necessity  an i n d i v i d u a l  rather  for  after  former  to  resurrected  Like Tacitus before him,  Dio  A l t h o u g h he  200 y e a r s o f t h e P r i n c i p a t e . t h e i r  they n e v e r t h e l e s s eagerly fought  i n f l u e n c e , m o d i f i e d though i t  the P r i n c i p a t e i n  of  than  was a n i d e a l t h a t was t o b e  speech t h a t Maecenas d e l i v e r s t o A u g u s t u s i s the establishment of  o f men who w e r e  t h e S e n a t e s h o u l d be c l o s e l y g u a r d e d .  r e p u b l i c a n hegemony was h o p e l e s s l y l o s t , their  to  a diarchy.  senators realized, that  m a i n t a i n some o f  of  D i o f a v o u r e d t h e compromise view so t y p i c a l  republican principle.  of  a pessimistic  the e a r l y Empire.  theorist  t h e dignitas  who  was u n d e r A u g u s t u s .  combined s t u d y o f D i o and T a c i t u s  s e n a t o r s who owed t h e i r  much l a t e r felt  b e t w e e n t h e two a t t i t u d e s  s i m i l a r t h a t makes t h e  any h e r e d i t a r y  a restoration  had been under the R e p u b l i c , D i o as i t  the  concealing or  dependence on t h e E m p e r o r s , t o o k longs f o r  in  opportunist  e x p r e s s i n g shame f o r h i s p o l i t i c a l  imperial  a  between  lies primarily  regarded the P r i n c i p a t e w i t h optimism, while T a c i t u s , e i t h e r  quite  in  and T a c i t u s a r e p u b l i c a n n o t . o n l y makes t h e p r o b l e m s p r e s e n t e d b y  their  this  of  inevitable;  b e t w e e n t h e two h i s t o r i a n s b y s a y i n g t h a t D i o i s  political  is  by  i n a monarchy  t h e w i s h e s . o f t h e man  A comparison of Dio w i t h T a c i t u s i n t h i s  their  nature  of  the negative s i d e of r u l e  accounts w r i t t e n according to  differentiate  monarchist  the  example, that  anarchy  important  had to b e .  in this  respect:  27 B . C . t h e S e n a t e , w h i l e  it  had  to  The with lost  20  its  traditional  powers, s t i l l  s u l t e d by the r u l e r . idealistic  it  52.31-32). Dio  might  In t h i s  It  is  maintained i t s  a return to  Cocceianus Chrysostomus, i n h i s  duty;  share the  he i s  the patron  administration  theme t h a t i s  rather  of  the  found throughout  ouy t v a  d i s c o u r s e s irepi.. g a a x X e x a s :  Dio's history,  judgements  to  the  The. b i t t e r n e s s class  during  aAA' v v a  on t h e  other  It  things  just  as t h e  This i s  its  is  hand, the  Emperor i s a n d libertas  The m a i n t e n a n c e o f man who s t u d i e d h i s t o r y  for  the  of  its  5 0  among t h e  senatorial soothed  s u c c e s s o r s , N e r v a and the  Emperor  are e a s i l y a t t a i n a b l e ,  and  this  (ef.  exists  T a c . Agr.  (cf.  Dio f r .  .3.1). takes  the  the  two f o r m s  fiction of  that  the Empire.  (cf.  Tac.  the,Senate His  If, the  12.9).  the P r i n c i p a t e would provoke  t o make a c o m p a r i s o n o f  i n the government  paint  if  no l o n g e r  Augustus had been a b l e to m a i n t a i n  Domitian  a n d many o f  a n d i n c a p a b l e , dominatio  in  5.11). mind  s o D i o was t o  detail  common g o o d  unworthy  r e p u b l i c a n forms  an e q u a l r o l e w i t h h i m s e l f  moment  eTTixaxxoiut" ( f r .  t h e v i e w o f b o t h D i o and T a c i t u s t h a t ao libertas  a  "eyQ uuas, w u a x e p e s ,  of Tiberius,  owed much o f  as  a n d he m u s t  ominous  oppressive rule  t o .come u n d e r t h e i r  can p r o d u c e b e n e f i t s  p l a c e o f prinaipatus,  1.4).  ey^ u y i v  first  own e x p e r i e n c e s u n d e r C o m m o d u s .  a g o o d m a n , t h e n prinaipatus  combination  subjects;  t h e d e s p o t i s m o f D o m i t i a n : . a n d Commodus h a d b e e n p a r t l y  Septimius Severus. is  senators:  and h a t r e d t h a t were so u n i v e r s a l  by the promise o f b e t t e r  the  he b e g a n h i s r e i g n , was t o b e i n D i o ' s  behaviour that  author's  from the  patrician  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  of Gaius'  (cf.  i d e a l s s e t down b y h i s n a m e s a k e ,  had been a p p l i e d by T a c i t u s t o h i s p o r t r a i t a picture  t h r o u g h Maecenas  than the master of h i s  euou a p y n x e ,  uueis  however,  Empire w i t h a group o f a d v i s o r s .  The E m p e r o r G a i u s , h o w e v e r w e l l another Romulus.  four  con-  the. supreme g o d ; he s h o u l d v i e w h i s power  when h e h a s R o m u l u s comment t o : h i s e£eAe£aunv  Augustan, a t t i t u d e ,  the p o l i t i c a l  Emperor s h o u l d be r e s p o n s i b l e t o his  this  have b e e n , t h a t D i o p l e a d s f o r he f o l l o w s  as a body t o be  dignitas  any Ann.  played  successors,  21  and p a r t i c u l a r l y made t h e  Gaius a f t e r  A . D . 39., l a c k e d t h i s  s e n a t o r s a w a r e t h a t t h e P r i n c e p s was t h e i r  l o n g e r h a d any r e a l a u t h o r i t y a s e n a t o r who w i s h e d t o ambition,  (cf.  T a c . Ann.  two e x t r e m e s o f  It  was n o t  do s o u n d e r Commodus a n d S e v e r u s .  r e s p o n s i b l e m o n a r c h y was p r e f e r a b l e i s when t h i s  regard to of  the r i g h t s  the p a s t , . c u r b  his  steer a safe middle  course  T a c . Agr.  42),  5 1  H i s e x p e r i e n c e s had taught to  any o t h e r k i n d o f  like  D i o managed him t h a t  imperial  a  government.  m o n a r c h y seems n o l o n g e r r e s p o n s i b l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y  with  o f the Senate, that Dio l o s e s the detached p e r s p e c t i v e  an h o n e s t h i s t o r i a n  r e a l l y was;  no  a b s o l u t e freedom and a b s o l u t e s l a v e r y ; b u t ,  A g r i c o l a and T a c i t u s h i m s e l f u n d e r . D o m i t i a n . ( c f .  It  and  Under these c i r c u m s t a n c e s  forget  easy to  and d i p l o m a c y ,  m a s t e r and t h a t t h e y  4.19).  serve the s t a t e had to  and obey t h e r u l e r .  between the  to  tact  a n d r e p r e s e n t s t h e E m p e r o r a s more o f  The r e i g n o f T i b e r i u s  o f b o t h D i o and T a c i t u s , s i n c e t h e  is  a significant  a tyrant  p e r i o d i n the  capable administration  of his  t h a n he  histories first  five  y e a r s was i n t h e m i n d s o f b o t h t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h a P r i n c e p s . s h o u l d g o v e r n . The r a p i d afforded  c h a n g e t o . w h a t was f o r the h i s t o r i a n s  which both took hopes f o r  full  them a supreme example o f d e g e n e r a t e  an a d m i r a b l e c o n t r a s t  advantage.  a new o r d e r , b u t  With Gaius'  i n the s t y l e  t o be s h a t t e r e d by t h e r e v e l a t i o n m a i n t a i n i n g what had l i t t l e  of  of tragic  drama t h e s e d e l u s i o n s  were  Because Gaius  the Senate—however j u s t i f i e d  his suspicions of  have p l a c e d him i n t h e  same c a t e g o r y  that as  5 2  c o m m e n t a r y on D i o ' s h i s t o r y that  a c c e s s i o n t h e r e was a r e v i v a l  seemed t o h i m o u t m o d e d r e p u b l i c a n t r a d i t i o n s .  Nero and D o m i t i a n .  the worth of  of  concerned w i t h  body w e r e - - o u r i m p e r i a l h i s t o r i a n s  This  o f good and e v i l , a c o n t r a s t  t h e new E m p e r o r ' w a s n o t  respect for  that  rule  judgement.  of Gaius'  reign is  intended to  indicate  22  NOTES  S i n c e a l l o u r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t D i o ' s l i f e comes f r o m ; t h e h i s t o r i a n h i m s e l f , p a r e n t h e t i c a l references i n t h i s s e c t i o n of the i n t r o d u c t i o n r e f e r o n l y t o h i s Roman History. 1  2  Cf.  S u e t . Aug.  3 8 . 2 ; s e e on C h a p t e r 1 . 2  esxo  gouXeuxfipiov.  F o r a r g u m e n t s f a v o u r i n g t h e s e d a t e s , s e e G. V r i n d de Cassii Vooabulis p p . 1 6 4 - 6 5 ; F . M i l l a r A Study of Cassius Dio p p . 1 3 - 1 4 ; P . L ' a m b r e c h t s La composition du Senat p . 1 7 1 , n o s . 1 1 4 8 - 4 9 .  Dionis  3  4  (1900)  C f . M i l l a r op. c i t . p. 407-408, n o s . . 9 0 - 9 2 .  5  Cf.  H.I.  6  Cf. M i l l a r op.  cit.  p.  7  Cf. M i l l a r op.  cit.  pp.  11; for  M a r r o u A.History  of  other  Education,  120, n.  Cassii  in  cf.  B i t h y n i a s e e BCH 24  in.Antiquity  pp.  381-90.  1.  15-27.  C f . M i l l a r o p . c i t . p . 1 7 , who r e f e r s t o a r e s c r i p t f r o m S e v e r u s t o a c e r t a i n D i o , a p r o v i n c i a l g o v e r n o r (Digest. 50.12.2 [ P a u l u s ] : the reference should read "50.12.7"). 8  M i l l a r (op. c i t . p p . 204-207) a c c e p t s the o r t h o d o x . v i e w by d a t i n g D i o ' s f i r s t c o n s u l a r a p p o i n t m e n t t o A . D . 205 o r 2 0 6 . Others., however, have s u g g e s t e d a date d u r i n g the r e i g n o f A l e x a n d e r S e v e r u s , c a . A . D . 2 2 2 , . t h u s r e d u c i n g the o t h e r w i s e e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y l o n g p e r i o d b e t w e e n h i s c o n s u l s h i p and h i s p r o c o n s u l s h i p i n A f r i c a . . To a c c o u n t f o r t h e q u a r t e r o f a c e n t u r y b e t w e e n D i o ' s p r a e t o r s h i p and c o n s u l s h i p i n t h i s c a s e , s u p p o r t e r s . o f t h i s v i e w have i n v e n t e d an a n i m o s i t y b e t w e e n D i o and S e v e r u s c a u s e d , , t h e y c l a i m , b y t h e h i s t o r i a n ' s c r i t i c i s m o f some o f t h e E m p e r o r ' s a c t s . O f c o u r s e , t h e r e i s no p r o o f t h a t t h i s l a t e p a r t o f t h e Roman History, was p u b l i s h e d o r e v e n w r i t t e n b e f o r e S e v e r u s ' d e a t h ; a n d we know t h a t D i o , l i k e m o s t s e n a t o r s o f t h e p e r i o d , c o u l d s u c c e s s f u l l y h i d e h i s t r u e f e e l i n g s from h i s r u l e r . 9  1 0  C f . J . C r o o k Consilium  1  Cf. M i l l a r op. c i t .  1  Principis p.  p. .81; M i l l a r op.  pp.  17-18.  23.  H i s s e c o n d c o n s u l s h i p i s a t t e s t e d b y an i n s c r i p t i o n " i m p e r a [ n ] t e Domin[o] | Severo [Ale] | x [ a n ] d r o | c[os] III I I c o s " (AE 1 9 6 0 . 3 4 8 ) . 1 2  cit.  that reads i n et C a s [ s i o ] |  part: Dion  C f . T h u c . 1 . 2 2 . 4 : " o c r o i 5e BouAricrovxou xGv x e y e v o y e v d i v T O aacj>es OKOTreiv K O U X O J V y e X X o v T w v iroxe aS0is Kara xo a v O p a k i v o v xoxouxcov K O U T r a p a .TTXriaTwv eaeo"9oa, (Ixj-eAiua i c p i v e i v a u x a aKpouvxcos e ^ e i . " 1  3  C f . L i v y p r a e f . 10: "hoc i l l u d e s t p r a e c i p u e i n c o g n i t i o n e rerum s a l u b r e a c f r u g i f e r u m , o m n i s t e e x e m p l i d o c u m e n t a i n i n l u s t r i p o s i t a monumento i n t u e r i ; i n d e t i b i t u a e q u e r e i p u b l i c a e quod i m i t e r e c a p i a s ; i n d e foedum i n c e p t u foedum e x i t u quod v i t e s . " 1  4  23  Cf*. Ann. 4 . 3 3 . 2 : " s i c c o n v e r s e s t a t u , n e q u e a l i a r e Romana quam s i u n u s i m p e r i t e t , h a e c c o n q u i r i t r a d i q u e i n rem f u e r i t , q u i a p a u c i p r u d e n t i a h o n e s t a ab d e t e r i o r i b u s , u t i l i a ab n o x i i s d i s c e r n u n t , p l u r e s a l i o r u m e v e n t i s d o c e n t u r " ; c f . Ann.. 3 . 6 5 . 1 ; Agr. 1 . 1 . 1 5  F o r t r a g i c d e s c r i p t i o n , see 5 9 . 2 9 . 6 - 7 (the murder o f G a i u s ) ; f o r ves gestae, s e e 5 6 . 3 5 - 4 1 ( T i b e r i u s ' f u n e r a l e u l o g y o f A u g u s t u s ) and 5 7 . 1 8 . 6 - 8 (on t h e d e a t h o f G e r m a n i c u s ) . 1  6  Compare t h e p a r a l l e l ( D i o 5 8 . 1 1 ; T a c . Ann. 5 . 9 ) .  accounts of  1 7  1  8  1  9  (1940)  For D i o ' s use o f This topic 39-56.  the  execution  s p e e c h e s , s e e F . M i l l a r ME  has been a d m i r a b l y  treated  18  of  Seianus'  (1961)  family  11-22.  b y W . F . S n y d e r i n Klio  33  Dio r e l a t e s , f o r example, C a e s a r ' s f i n a l conquest o f Gaul from 53-50 B . C . ( 4 0 . 3 1 - 4 4 ) , a n d t h e n r e t u r n s . t o 5 3 B . C . t o d e s c r i b e e v e n t s i n Rome (40.45 f f . ) . I n a s i m i l a r way he d e l a y s d i s c u s s i o n o f L u c i u s V i t e l l i u s ' c a m p a i g n a g a i n s t t h e P a r t h i a n A r t a b a n u s , w h i c h t o o k p l a c e a t t h e end o f T i b e r i u s ' r e i g n , t o t h e p l a c e w h e r e h e d e s c r i b e s h i s r e c a l l t o Rome i n A . D . 40 ( 5 9 . 2 7 . 2 - 4 ) . 2 0  2 1  Cf.  2  R e g a r d i n g t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f t h e c o n s u l a r l i s t s appended t o the o f m o s t o f t h e s u r v i v i n g b o o k s , s e e n o t e o n t h e Index t o Book 5 9 .  2  beginning 2  3  See  C. Questa  on  StudUrb  Chapters  1.1  31 ( 1 9 5 7 )  SxeSe^axo;  30.1  45-48.  ev  erecrx.  F o r a g e n e r a l s u r v e y o f D i o ' s u s e o f s o u r c e s s e e G . V r i n d Mn 54 ( 1 9 2 6 ) 3 2 1 - 4 7 ; A . M o m i g l i a n o HAL 8 ( 1 9 3 2 ) 2 9 3 - 3 3 6 ; R . A . . M a r x Klio. 26 ( 1 9 3 3 ) 3 2 3 - 2 9 ; E . G a b b a RSI 71 ( 1 9 5 9 ) 3 6 1 - 8 1 ; . F . M i l l a r A Study of Cassius Bio pp. 34-38. 2  h  Compare t h e f o l l o w i n g comment o f T a c i t u s : " T i b e r i i G a i q u e e t C l a u d i i a c N e r o n i s r e s f l o r e n t i b u s i p s i s ob m e t u m . f a l s a e , p o s t q u a m o c c i d e r a n t , r e c e n t i b u s o d i i s c o m p o s i t a e s u n t " (Ann. 1 . 1 . 5 ; c f . Eist. 1.1). 2  5  2 6  F o r t h e aeta  2 7  University  s e e o n C h a p t e r 1 8 . 2 aXXoos.  of Michigan  Studies  1 (1904)  101-47.  Cf. Dio 51.20.7. C o p i e s o f t h e o r i g i n a l i n s c r i p t i o n i n Rome h a d b e e n s e t up a t t h e p r o v i n c i a l t e m p l e s o f A u g u s t u s a n d Roma, i n c l u d i n g . n o d o u b t t h a t i n B i t h y n i a n N i c o m e d i a n e a r D i o ' s home. 2 8  D i o ' s e r r o r , i t s h o u l d be n o t e d , b e g i n s w i t h t h e y e a r i n w h i c h C a e s a r caused unending c o n f u s i o n f o r h i s t o r i a n s by i n t r o d u c i n g h i s reform o f the c a l e n d a r a n d a d d i n g e i g h t y d a y s t o t h e y e a r 46 B . C . ( c f . M a c r ' . Sat. 1 4 . 3 ) . 2 9  D i o ' s rearrangement o f n i f i c a n t than i t f i r s t appears: B r o u g h t o n i n Eistoria 17 ( 1 9 6 8 ) 3 0  t h e c o n s u l s ' names may i n f a c t be more s i g s e e t h e a r t i c l e b y L . R . T a y l o r and T . R . S . 166-71.  24  31  See on C h a p t e r 21.2 TTOA'AOUS.  32  See on C h a p t e r 22.5  33  Cf.  34  Cf. M i l l a r op.  35  Cf.  36  T . Mommsen Hermes.  37  M.P.  38  Cf.  39 .  A . M o m i g l i a n o RAL 8 (1932)  40  85 41  rcuTOuAiKOV.  CAE 1 0 . 8 6 7 . cit.  Townend l o c .  p.  84;  4 (1870)  H. P e t e r Historiaorum  Seneque:  de  la  Hermes 89  (1961)  227-48.  cit.  C h a r l e s w o r t h Cambridge  C f . P . F a b i a Les (1964) 3 3 7 - 7 7 .  G . B . Townend  Historical  Journal  Romanorum  Sources  Clemence  295r-325. 116.  2,.114.  305.  de Tacite  p.  Reliquae  4 (1933)  pp.  1 6 9 - 8 3 ; Townend l o c .  cit;  lvi.  D i o e l s e w h e r e ( 3 7 . 1 6 . 5 - 1 7 . 4 ) shows c o n s i d e r a b l e i g n o r a n c e o f J e w i s h h i s t o r y and l i t t l e i n t e r e s t i n t h e i r t h e o l o g y . E q u a l l y odd i s h i s t o t a l s i l e n c e about C h r i s t i a n s : t h e y a r e mentioned t h r e e times by name, but a l l i n t h e e p i t o m e o f X i p h i l i n u s ( 7 0 . 3 . 1 - 2 ; 7 1 . 9 . 3 - 5 ; 7 2 . 4 . 7 ) ; and i n two o t h e r p a s s a g e s t h e y are a p p a r e n t l y i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the Jews (67.14.1-2; 6 8 . 1 . 2 ) . Xiphilinus i m p l i e s (71.9.6) t h a t D i o p u r p o s e l y f a i l e d to mention the Thundering L e g i o n o f C h r i s t i a n s u n d e r M a r c u s A u r e l i u s ; b u t h i s m o t i v e f o r , o m i t t i n g them i s o b s c u r e . D i o ' s r e t i c e n c e a b o u t t h i s r e l i g i o n i s a l l : t h e more r e m a r k a b l e s i n c e h i s h o m e l a n d was a f o c a l p o i n t f o r t h e s p r e a d a o f C h r i s t i a n i t y . 4 2  4 3  Compare D i o 5 9 . 4 . 5 - 6 w i t h Leg.  4 1 1  Compare D i o 5 7 . 2  w i t h Ann.  43.339-340  (595).  1.12.  * O t h e r p a r a l l e l s c a n be f o u n d b e t w e e n D i o 5 8 . 1 9 . 3 - 4 a n d Ann. 5 8 . 2 3 . 3 a n d Ann.. 6 . 4 6 . 8 . I  5  6.8;  Dio  * T h e b e s t a n a l y s i s o f D i o ' s a t t i t u d e t o t h e P r i n c i p a t e c a n be f o u n d i n M i l l a r o p . c i t . p p . 9 2 - 1 1 8 ; some o f D i o ' s a n a c h r o n i s t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the Augustan and J u l i o - C l a u d i a n c o n s t i t u t i o n are a l s o d i s c u s s e d t h e r e . 1  6  1 + 7  Compare t h e  h e  Tacitus  p.  similar  views of T a c i t u s  i n Hist..  1.1;  2.38.  272.  I t i s r a t h e r s u r p r i s i n g t h a t D i o saw o n l y d e m o c r a c y a s an a l t e r n a t i v e to monarchy, i g n o r i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y o f a r e s t o r e d s e n a t o r i a l o l i g a r c h y . We must r e g r e t t h e l o s s o f t h a t p o r t i o n o f h i s h i s t o r y w h i c h t r e a t e d t h e t h i r d a n d s e c o n d c e n t u r i e s B . C . , t h e acme o f s e n a t o r i a l s u p r e m a c y . Anti-democratic s e n t i m e n t s a p p e a r t h r o u g h o u t t h e s u r y i y i n g p o r t i o n o f h i s work ( f r . 110.2; 4 4 . 2 . 1 - 4 ; 4 7 . 3 9 . 1 - 5 ; 5 4 . 6 . 1 ; c f . A p p . BC 4 . 1 3 3 ) . 4 9  25  N o t i c e t h e f o l l o w i n g a n e c d o t e s t o l d o f Commodus: h i s p r e d e c e s s o r a d v i s e d the p r a e t o r i a n p r e f e c t t o d e s e r t the s e t t i n g f o r . t h e r i s i n g sun ( 7 1 . 3 4 . 1 ) ; he was t h e s l a v e o f h i s a s s o c i a t e s ( 7 2 . 1 . 1 ) ; he. m u r d e r e d s e n a t o r s ( 7 2 . 5 ) a n d men who w e r e w e a l t h y - o r l e a r n e d , t o r e p l e n i s h h i s t r e a s u r y o r o u t o f j e a l o u s y ( 7 2 . 7 . 3 ; 7 2 . 1 6 . 2 - 3 ) ; he u s e d p o i s o n f o r . t h e s e m u r d e r s (72.4.1); h e o n c e m u r d e r e d a man w h o s e i d e n t i t y h a d b e e n m i s t a k e n ( 7 2 . 6 . 3 ) ; h e m u r d e r e d h i s commander o f t h e P r a e t o r i a n G u a r d s , . ( 7 2 . 9 . 1 - 1 0 . 1 ) ; h e p a r t i c i p a t e d h i m s e l f i n c h a r i o t - r a c i n g ( 7 2 . 9 . 1 ; 7 2 . 1 0 . 2 - 3 ; 7 2 . 1 7 . 1 ) and a s a g l a d i a t o r (72.17.2-3; 7 2 . 1 9 - 2 0 ) ; he i m i t a t e d s e v e r a l d e i t i e s ( 7 2 . 1 7 . 4 ) , p a r t i c u l a r l y H e r c u l e s ( 7 2 . 7 . 2 ; 7 2 . 1 5 . 2 ; 7 2 . 2 0 ; 2 ) ; he i s r e f e r r e d t o b y D i o a s " t h i s H e r c u l e s , t h i s god" (72.16.1). 5 0  C f . R. Syme i n Eistoire et historiens.. dans I'antiquite pp. 198-99: " O n t h e f a c e o f t h i n g s , T a c i t u s m i g h t be c l a i m e d a R e p u b l i c a n . . . . One l a y e r d e e p e r a n d h e i s r e v e a l e d l i k e s o many o t h e r s a s a n o p p o r t u n i s t , advocating t h e m i d d l e p a t h i n p o l i t i c s and h o p i n g t h a t chance o r d e s t i n y w o u l d b r i n g f o r t h some r u l e r who m i g h t b e b e t t e r t h a n t h e w o r s t . " See a l s o T . A . Dorey G&R 7 ( 1 9 6 0 ) 6 6 - 7 1 . 5 1  5 2  Cf.  B a l s d o n Gaius p .  156.  26  INDEX  The a u t h e n t i c i t y *  of the b r i e f  outlines  and c o n s u l a r l i s t s  t h e b e g i n n i n g o f most o f t h e s u r v i v i n g b o o k s Not o n l y i s D i o c a r e f u l i n the t e x t is  itself,  5 7 , a n d 59)  is  with- i t s  w h e n e v e r he b e g i n s a new y e a r , b u t  i n some c a s e s  e x a m p l e , t h e name r a i o u / A i c e p p w v t o u i n t h e . i n d e x t o  earlier  selection of  appearance i n the t e x t  a s Tva(ou [ 5 8 . 2 7 . 1 ] ) .  t o p i c s mentioned i n the o u t l i n e s  a l w a y s a c c o r d w i t h what D i o i n t h e t e x t  these p o i n t s ,  doubtful.  t o m e n t i o n t h e names o f t h e eponymous m a g i s t r a t e s  a d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n t h e names i n t h e i n d e x a n d t h o s e i n t h e  (compare, f o r  not  (37 t o  appended t o  see f u r t h e r  Sturz  7,535,  is quite  there  text Book 59  Further,  arbitrary  the  and d o e s  e m p h a s i z e s as i m p o r t a n t .  On  Consuls of A.D.  37 t o A . D .  A.D.  ordinarii  Cn. A c e r r o n i u s C. P e t r o n i u s  suffecti  Proculus  A.  Pontius Nigrinus  1  I I  1 Jan. -  30 J u n e  cf.  Ch.  (PIP  I  1 July  31 A u g .  cf.  Ch. 6.5;  cf.  Ch.  7.9  217) -  2  h 1 Sept. (PIR  suffecti  M. A q u i l a I u l i a n u s  (PIR  P. Nonius Asprenas  (PIR  Ser.  (PIR  Asinius Celer  1  38  1 Jan. -  30 J u n e  cf.  Ch.  9.1  1 July -  (?)  cf.  Ch.  9.1  1 Jan. -  30 J a n . cf.  Ch.  13.1-2  1 Jan. -  30 J u n e  A 1225) (PIR  1  C. C a e s a r Augustus Germanicus (PIR  31 D e c .  N 116)  II  2 Caesianus  31 D e c .  N 95)  A.D.  L. A p r o n i u s  (?)  A 982)  Sex. Nonius Q u i n t i l i a n u s  ordinarii  -  C 393)  2  A.D.  ordinarii  7.9  C 942)  (PIE  C 103)  (PIR  C. C a n i n i u s R e b i l u s  6.5  P 218)  (PTR  C l a u d i u s Nero Germanicus  Caecina Paetus  37  A 32)  (PIR  C. C a e s a r A u g u s t u s G e r m a n i c u s Ti.  41  A 972)  39  (A.D. Q. S a n q u i n i u s Maximus I I  (TIB  (?) C n . D o m i t i u s  (PIE  Cn. Domitius  Afer  (PIR  2  S 136)  31 J a n . -  D 141)  1 July -  1  Corbulo  2  D 126)  C. C a e s a r A u g u s t u s G e r m a n i c u s  Lusius Saturninus  C.  L a e c a n i u s B a s s u s (PIR? L 3 0 )  Q. T e r e n t i u s  (PIR  Culleo  S 249)  1  A.D.  C. Cn.  Caesar Augustus Germanicus Sentius  Saturninus  Q. P o m p o n i u s S e c u n d u s  (PIR  1  (PIR  1  IV S 296)  P 564)  13.2  2 Sept. -  (?)  20.1,  3  6  31 D e c .  13 J a n .  cf.  Ch. 24.2,  14 J a n . - b e f o r e 13 M a r .  cf.  Ch.  24.7  cf.  Ch.  24.7  cf.  Ch.  29.5  cf.  Ch.  29.5  b e f o r e 13 M a r . ( ? ) 30 J u n e  T 54)  (PIR  5 Sept.  1 Jan. -  (PIP? £ 449')  Seius Veianus  ca.  Ch.  40  III  M.  1  cf.  30 J u n e  cf..Ch. ca.  A.D.  Q. L u t a t i u s  39)  41  1 Jan. -  7 Jan.  1 Jan. -  (?) 30 J u n e  7 Jan.  (?) 30 J u n e  -  CO  29  CHAPTER ONE  1,1  SxeSe^axo <Se aurov o Favos;  T i b e r i u s d i e d on 16 M a r c h . A . D . 14 6,50.7;  Ann, Oetienses  = E§J p ,  a mistake  that i s  43),  (58.28,5)  clearly his  say that Tiberius from the  Dio  ruled  and n o t  22 y e a r s ,  wrongly- g i v e s the that  b y t h e Acta  Arvalium  give  dies  Gaius'  7 months,  That  the  date  (CIL 6 . 2 0 2 8 c = 3 2 3 4 6 e , a s 18 M a r c h .  imperii  an u n w i l l i n g n e s s  According to Tiberius'  d e a t h and G a i u s '  been f i r s t  Guards s t a t i o n e d  after  i s not of  the  1 0 . 6 xSv  confirmed 3),  days between  the two-day  which  54-55)  a simple  error,  reigns.  interval  suggested that Gaius'  between  dies  a c c l a i m e d , at  news o f T i b e r i u s '  of  new a g e , a r e t u r n t o  the  then,  imperii  instigation  P a r e t i Storia  d e a t h had a r r i v e d  the g l o r y  es  predecessor's pp.  of Macro, by the  4.763-764);  244-45).  Praetorian  he was h a i l e d  the r e i g n  E m p i r e as t h e b e g i n n i n g  of Augustus.  P e o p l e saw h i m a s t h e  on t h i s  was b a s e d  (Suet.  Gaius  as  immediately  f r o m C a p r e a e (see on C h a p t e r  seems t o h a v e b e e n u n i v e r s a l . popularity  o n C h a p t e r 1.2  day, presumably  throughout the of  is  o n 18 M a r c h , a l t h o u g h h e h a d  t h e S e n a t e on t h a t  H i s a c c e s s i o n was g r e e t e d  (see n o t e  and S e a g e r Tiberius  eicetvou  at Misenum ( c f .  initial  Tiberius'  26th i s  of  to  computing  a t t r i b u t e d to Gaius i n h i s  became E m p e r o r ,  by a meeting  his  he goes on  (BEL 33 [ 1 9 5 5 ]  result  twelve  source mentioned a c c e s s i o n , but  a s 26 M a r c h ,  10-14 = Smallwood no.  M . P . Grenade  allow a hiatus  Concerning the p a r t  Gaius o f f i c i a l l y  imperator  for  Fasti  e n t r y i n t o Rome o n 28 M a r c h , a d a y whose i m p o r t a n c e  s e e on C h a p t e r  probably  a copyist,  have been the  e x a g g e r a t e d b y b o t h D i o and S u e t o n i u s  TO ouvecSpiov). death,  to  Grenade, D i o ' s  coincided with his perhaps  date  and 7 d a y s , w h i c h ,  c o u l d not  has suggested t h a t D i o ' s m i s t a k e n date of  of  73.1;  Tib.  d e a t h o f A u g u s t u s o n 19 A u g u s t A , D . 1 4 , a l s o p l a c e s  d e a t h on 26 M a r c h .  but  Suet.  (Tac.  Public  1.2). of  rejoicing  son o f Germanicus, 13-14.1).  a  In  and  30  Alexandria, at  according to  the p r o s p e r i t y  strong m i l i t a r y granted to  to  Philo  (Leg. 2 . 8 - 1 3  which Gaius i n h e r i t e d  force,  some a r e t u r n t o  [ 5 9 8 ] ; in Flaoo. s i o n , he i s  t h e Age o f  12.97-101  family  Saturn  were  astonished  from h i s p r e d e c e s s o r : a f u l l  and e m p i r e o v e r t h e  a y o u n g man o f g l o r i o u s  [546-547]), a l l  entire  c i v i l i z e d w o r l d had been  and e x e m p l a r y c h a r a c t e r :  ( s e e a l s o Leg.  [531-532]).  treasury,  32.231  it  [580];  seemed  45.356  I n a d e c r e e o f C y z i c u s on h i s  c a l l e d o v e o s ^ H X i o s (SIG 798 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  401); with  acces-  equal  f l a t t e r y the decree o f Assos i n the Troad records  that " o u S e v <Se uexpov x P ^  £UpnK<£>V o KOCTUOS" (SIG 797 = S m a l l w o o d n o ,  the Council o f Achaeans,  Boeotians, to  a  33);  L o c r i a n s , P h o c i a n s , a n d E u b o e a n s asked p e r m i s s i o n t o  t h e new E m p e r o r  (ILS 8792 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  eitcovas); a n d t h r o u g h o u t  3 6 1 ; see on C h a p t e r  him i n the  14,1).  a l l e g i a n c e t o G a i u s taken b y p r o v i n c i a l s ,  AJ 1 8 , 5 , 3  [124]  (Judaea);  797 = S m a l l w o o d n o . Tiberius'  1,1  first  three  months o f h i s  rLS 190 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  33.(Asia).  accession is  statues  4.4  t h e E m p i r e more than 1 6 0 , 0 0 0 s a c r i f i c e s w e r e  t o h a v e b e e n made t o For oaths of  erect  A similar  rule  Gaius  see Josephus and SIG  o a t h taken b y t h e C y p r i o t s  described by T.B. Mitford  b TOU TepuaviKOU KCQ THS 'AypiTnTivris ucus:  i n JRS50  G a i u s was  (1960)  the  said  (Suet.  32 ( L u s i t a n i a ) ;  on  75-79.  surviving  last  s o n o f G e r m a n i c u s and Agrippina.  Of t h e i r  childhood;  the other  respectively;  nine c h i l d r e n , two  and G a i u s '  For the  three  13 Q 8 7 8 )  sisters, Agrippina, Drusilla,  in Gaius'  brief  reign  (Suet.  and  Gaius  Julia 7 ; see on  c h i l d r e n o f G e r m a n i c u s and A g r i p p i n a who d i e d a t  e a r l y age, see Rosborough pp. Hemes  in  s o n s , N e r o a n d D r u s u s , d i e d i n A . D . 31 and 33  were t o p l a y i m p o r t a n t r o l e s Chapter 3.5),  two d i e d i n i n f a n c y a n d a t h i r d  245-65.  11-12;  for  the  family  s  an  i n g e n e r a l , T . Mommsen  31  1.1  KaXiyoAav:  He was g i v e n t h e name a s a mark o f troops  (Dio 5 7 . 5 . 6 ;  S u e t . Gaius  o f oaligae  9; T a c i t u s  erroneous  i d e a g i v e n by P l i n y the  legionary  camp [ s e e o n C h a p t e r 7 . 2 ] ;  18).  Sap. M  Tacitus  (loc,  ad concilianda vulgi  by h i s  cit.)  studia,"  Elder  or m i l i t a r y  boots  [Ann. 1 . 4 1 . 3 ]  showing l o y a l t y  concern by s u g g e s t i n g t h a t Suetonius' oaligae that  statement  follows  cf.  even w h i l e  Const.  G a i u s wore s u c h m i l i t a r y  clothes  adds t h a t  and i n Annals  1.69.5  s t a t e s more  a centurion  for  using i t .  close to  unbefitting  2 5 . 3 ; Vit.  7.3;  P l i n y HN 7 . 4 3 . 1 3 5 ;  ad c o n s u l a t u s a c a l i g a p e r d u c t u s " ) . irrelevant  to  Gaius'  soldiers  soldiers.  dislike  of  It  is  his  speculatoviae (loc.  station,  the rank  S e n . Ben.  interesting,  t h e name, t h a t  in  as  Despite  of  cit;)  and p u n i s h e d  This is understandable, perhaps, since  w e r e n o r m a l l y w o r n o n l y b y common s o l d i e r s up t o ( S u e t . Aug,  the  c l e a r f r o m S e n e c a ' s comment  Gaius considered such a sobriquet  definitely  Seianus caused T i b e r i u s  t h a t G a i u s sometimes wore is  the  S u d a , s. K a A A t y o A a s ; S e n .  t h e b o y was t o o  Emperor, i t  of  the  t h a t G a i u s had been born i n  t o G e r m a n i c u s , and t h a t  (Gaius 52)  up,  instead  t h a t A g r i p p i n a e n c o u r a g e d t h e u s e o f t h e name " C a l i g u l a " b y t h e a means o f  father's  o n t h e R h i n e f r o n t i e r , w h e r e he was b r o u g h t  b e c a u s e he o f t e n wore a s m a l l p a i r sandals  affection  oaligae  centurion  5.16.2:  " C . Marius  and p e r h a p s  41 B . C . t h e p a r t y  not of  F u l v i a and L u c i u s A n t o n i u s made f u n o f t h e v e t e r a n s b y c a l l i n g t h e m BouAnv KaAiyaxav  (Dio 4 8 . 1 2 . 3 ) .  The name " C a l i g u l a " a p p e a r e d o n no c o i n s , a n d t h e o n l y evidence for 3,28*), p.  46,  it  is  a single  i n s c r i p t i o n — a 'forged  w h i c h b e g i n s " C . C a l i g u l a imp. August, p. for  an a c c o u n t o f  its  " d i s c o v e r e r , " Andre  1  epigraphic  one—from G a l l i p o l i p.  p.  Thevet  max." [ca.  (CIL  (see R o s b o r o u g h , 1575]).  32  1.1  TW T i g e p i w xw lyy-ovo):  Twin sons were b o r n to A.D.  Germanicus that  they  2.84.1).  u s u a l l y happened by the  of  Hirschfeld  d e a t h , Gemellus had not  p l a c e at age  Ann,  shortly  c o u l d not have been b o m u n t i l  Tiberius' says)  fjac.  19, very  yet  o n P l i n y • Ep.  1.9.2).  assumed t h e  for  In  (Suet.  Gaius  military  10),  ( s e e W i l l r i c h Caligula  p.  108, n.  d i e d at  apparently Gemellus'  the  age o f  four  i n A . D . 23  records h i s death four birth,  A.D.  19 a n d 2 0 ; a n d S m a l l w o o d . Legatio  date  later Little  is  grandfather,  Tib.  62.3); Dio  (57.22.4b)  i s no e v i d e n c e t o  liaison  75).  the  Sherwin-White  toga  virilis to grandson  2.84.1). 170):  ILS  4 . 1 5 . 1 ; Dio  the  [57.14.6]  On t h e d a t e  1 7 2 , who h e s i t a n t l y  this  as t h e  suggest that  of  between  favours  time  except  a  the  w i t h S e i a n u s ; so T i b e r i u s  p.  son o f Drusus  in  of Drusus' death in A.D.  c o u l d not  by  (Suet.  s u s p i c i o n was p l a n t e d  A . D . 3 1 , when S e i a n u s ' w i f e  C f . M a r s h Tiberius  t h a t h e was h a t e d  L i v i l l a was u n f a i t h f u l  (Dio 5 8 . 1 1 . 6 ; on A p i c a t a ' s l e t t e r  CR 1 [ 1 9 5 1 ]  took  least by  1 0 4 ) , who c a n n o t d e c i d e  suggests that  but  t o be a b a s t a r d u n t i l  at  (see  (cf.  (he  ceremony  i n regard to h i s  ( T a c . Ann.  p.  of  i s no e v i d e n c e  Gemellus  who s u s p e c t e d t h a t he was n o t  mind b y S e i a n u s as e a r l y  njntil her a f f a i r  argues  19.  Tiberius' there  of  which  2 ; F u r n e a u x o n Ann.  known o f G e m e l l u s i n h i s y o u t h ,  his  but  years before his b i r t h ) .  see f u r t h e r Dessau (p.  than A . D .  the  assume t h e  and t h e r e  T h e t w i n s w e r e named G e r m a n i c u s a n d T i b e r i u s former  fact,  in  363-73)  toga v i r i l i s ,  service  suggest t h a t T i b e r i u s would have a c t e d d i f f e r e n t l y Gemellus  [1890]  2.113),  Yet Gaius h i m s e l f d i d not  u n t i l his nineteenth year  the death  A . D . 20 s i n c e , b y t h e t i m e  ( G a i u s Inst,  1 7 , when b o y s became l i a b l e  after  (Hermes 25  eighteenth year.  the b e g i n n i n g o f puberty-  D r u s u s and L i v i l l a  to  23,  Drusus  have b e l i e v e d Gemellus  Apicata revealed  to T i b e r i u s ,  see J . P . V . D .  2 8 1 ; S e a g e r Tiberius  p.  the Balsdon  180, n.  5.  33  Gaius, his  father  Tac.  Ann.  54.1;  1.1  too,  it  must b e r e m e m b e r e d , w a s T i b e r i u s '  Germanicus had been adopted b y - T i b e r i u s 4.57.5;  S u e t . Tib.  1 5 . 2 ; Gaius  4; c f ,  legal  grandson,  in A.D. 4  T a c . Ann.  (pio  6.46;  55.13.2;  Suet,  x n v a u x a p x ^ a v Kaxe'AiTrev:  Cf.  S u e t . Tib.  76,  T h e r e i s no d o u b t  A u g u s t u s w i s h e d G e r m a n i c u s and h i s  but  N o t o n l y h a d he f o r c e d T i b e r i u s  in his w i l l  57.18.11.  he h a d named t h e  On t h e  significance  c a r r i e d no p o w e r s , b u t  in  Dio 55.9.7]). this  Tiberius'  or to  adopt  sons o f title  their  see p a r t i c u l a r l y  interests  S e a g e r Tiberius  cf.  Caesar,  to  other  matters  118-22).  3.29).  But w i t h t h e  s u c c e s s i o n was a g a i n r a i s e d ;  Their  brother  member o f G e r m a n i c u s '  p o s s i b l e contender  and T i b e r i u s  power.  was o n c e a g a i n f a c e d w i t h d e c i d i n g b e t w e e n  the  he had changed h i s h a b i t a t t i t u d e to  the  S m a l l w o o d Legatio  contrary, of  succession, pp.  there  adhering  to Augustus'  see p a r t i c u l a r l y  169-71.  of  precepts.  M a r s h Tiberius  was  the  imperial  Augustus'  descendant.  c a n be no r e a s o n t o  the  Gemellus,  as s u c c e s s o r t o  w i s h e s a n d t h e d e s i r e t o be s u c c e e d e d b y a d i r e c t evidence to  be  G a i u s , now 21 y e a r s o l d ,  family,  this  evidence  the problem  only other  certain  (on  o f Nero and  a g e d 1 4 , was t h e Tiberius  intent  imperial  the  elimination  had  E§J 7 6 ;  Augustus'  s o n , Drusus All  it  i n A . D , 20 c o n s i d e r e d G e r m a n i c u s ' s o n N e r o t o  s u c c e s s o r ( T a c . Ann.  sole surviving  (Dio  The t i t l e  [e.g.,  of  y o u n g D r u s u s b y A . D . 33 ( s e e o n C h a p t e r 3 . 5 x a x e o a x a ) ,  the  heir,  Dio 53.18.2:  follow  of his natural pp.  family;  G e r m a n i c u s as h i s  adoption by Augustus  all  that  Germanicus " C a e s a r e s "  dilemma was whether  advance the  suggests that T i b e r i u s his  to  showed " x n v x o u y e v o u s acjuov S i a t S o y n v . "  c a s e a s c l o s e l y h a s he h a d i n  importance, point,  three  of the  come t o G a i u s a n d L u c i u s t h r o u g h cf.  Tib.  14.1).  Gaius  to r u l e .  since  Without  assume  that  On T i b e r i u s ' pp.  160-90;  34  T h e e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d by- t h e s o u r c e s i n t h i s c a l l s G e m e l l u s "KOIVOOVOV <S'e TQS-  Philo 4,23  [549]);  definitely  decided which of  towards h i s out  and a c c o r d i n g t o  grandson Gemellus.  In s u p p o r t  s i n c e he a s k e d t h e Emperor f o r  mother,  p.  ficient  1 6 8 ; S e a g e r Tiberius  proof  of Tiberius'  pp.  intent:  e a s i l y be d e c e i v e d by the Emperor Seianus  felt  it  odii  was n o t  causa";  an a d u l t ,  finally,  Seianus, i t  p,  {Caligula  h e i r s was t o 112]  the  animi,  be b e q u e a t h e d i s follows  the  appoint  that Gaius' certainly  same t r a d i t i o n  This  intended  Tiberius* boy's  suf-  could that  accession of  6.3).  latter  was p o p u l a r  fesso corpore,  and s o " a p u d avum  consilium, cui  C l e a r l y T a c i t u s thought  joint  the  that  successors ( W i l l r i c h ' s  contempoxaries b e l i e v e d that  true of  G e m e l l u s t o be h i s h e i r ,  is  let  impar  suggestion  the Empire  s o - c a l l e d Gemellus'partei'),  proposed to  the  gods  to decide [211-212;  Tiberius  when h e a s k e d H e r o d A g r i p p a t o w a t c h  and c o u n s e l h i m ; o n e o f t h e r e a s o n s why- A g r i p p a was j a i l e d  could  Josephus  (AJ 1 8 . 6 . 9  t a k e n as a s i g n t h a t  his  to  as T a c i t u s , a d d i n g t h a t T i b e r i u s wanted  [ 1 8 8 ] , where i t  the  was d i s m i s s e d b e c a u s e o f  g o d s showed h i m G a i u s i n s t e a d  see a l s o 1 8 , 6 , 6  shown,  the  by-way- o f 219];  pointed  i s not  and we k n o w a l s o  s u c c e s s o r , but  and t h e  c a n be  itself  d e s i g n a t e G e m e l l u s as h i s augury:  inclined  4 . 3 9 ; see Marsh  in  Gaius before  Leg.  never  L i v i l l a , the  was l a t e r  (Dio 5 8 , 9 - 1 0 ) ;  f a t o p e r m i s i t " (Ann, 6 . 4 6 . 1 - 8 ) .  declare joint  cf.  h e s i t a t e d b e t w e e n G e m e l l u s and G a i u s :  while  "incertus  view i t  ( T a c . Ann.  e v e n C l a u d i u s was c o n s i d e r e d , b u t  instability; erat,  yet  of this  195-98).  ( T a c . Ann.  Tacitus,says that Tiberius  [518];  Tiberius  p e r m i s s i o n to marry  necessary to dispose of  G e m e l l u s c o u l d be g u a r a n t e e d  3.10  contradictory.  t h a t G e m e l l u s w o u l d be d e c l a r e d  i n hopes o f b e i n g a p p o i n t e d r e g e n t  Tiberius  former  (Gains 1 9 . 3 ) ,  is  two w o u l d be h i s s u c c e s s o r , b u t  t h a t S e i a n u s had c l e a r l y thought  heir,  apxfis" (in Flacc,  Suetonius  the  matter  was t h a t  he  over  35  i g n o r e d t h e s e o r d e r s and p a i d c o u r t 8.2  to Gaius instead  (see on C h a p t e r  •AypiTTTrav]),  Dio himself, looked to  on t h e o t h e r  G a i u s as h i s  (Dio 5 7 . 1 8 . 1 1 ) , but indications  hand, gives several i n d i c a t i o n s  successor: not  o n l y - was G a i u s " C a e s a r " a f t e r  h i s c r e a t i o n as p o n t i f e x  from T i b e r i u s  the  Gaius' parentage  and was g r a n t e d p e r m i s s i o n t o h o l d o t h e r  legal  age  (58.23.1-2;  the quaestorship  five  53.28,3-4;  cf.  successor,  s i n c e at  advance  (cf.  (58.8.1-2;  S u e t . Tib.  We c a n r e j e c t  12.1848,  the  9.3),  but  in  least  t h a n t h e young M a r c e l l u s as h i s  directly:  G a i u s was f o r c e d t o N o r was i t  43-44).  considered Gaius, succeed him. to  It  [1950]  affairs  2 4 9 - 5 0)  to  adopt  p.  105)  not  it  m i g h t be  G e m e l l u s , as  leave the choice of  and L.  the b e s t ,  was, a f t e r  all,  intended  at  Lesuisse  least  him,  compares t h i s  rather  admitted  Tiberius  arguments  of  careful  (Les etudes  to  both olassiques Tiberius  the o n l y s u i t a b l e person  G a i u s and n o t  to  s u c c e s s o r up  The m o s t a c c e p t a b l e e v i d e n c e s u g g e s t s t h a t if  (Dio  in keeping with T i b e r i u s '  the youths themselves, despite the  [1962]  imperial  that Tiberius  At most,  the  30  holding  to T i b e r i u s h i m s e l f  a i l i n g Augustus i n d i c a t e d Agrippa  of  QiEL 28  before  t h e b o y ' s age was a g a i n s t  administration  R. Y i l l e r s  years  then considered Augustus'  {Caligula  successor.  h i m s e l f had adopted Germanicus.  gods o r t o  appointed  The same h o n o u r o f  w i t h some c o n f i d e n c e t h e n o t i o n  will  189).  12.41).  23 B . C . when t h e  t h a t by- T i b e r i u s '  five  TLS  same t i m e M a r c e l l u s was a l l o w e d a t e n - y e a r s '  succeed h i m , at  situation  18491  h e was n o t  a s b o t h D i o and T a c i t u s a g r e e ; W i l l r i c h the  offices  y e a r s e a r l y had been g r a n t e d  T a c . Ann.  Gemellus to  cf.CIL  A . D . 14  indications  T h e E m p e r o r ' s i n t e n t was shown a g a i n i n A . D . 33 when G a i u s was quaestor  Tiberius  i n A . D . 31 was a c c o m p a n i e d b y  t h a t h e w o u l d be t h e n e x t E m p e r o r ,  welcomed b y t h e p o p u l a c e because o f  that  to  G e m e l l u s who was summoned  Capreae, p r o b a b l y before August A . D . 32, d e s p i t e the  statement  by  36  Suetonius  (Gaius  throughout t h i s  10)  that  section i s  pontifex  two y e a r s b e f o r e  6.20.1],  yet  Claudilla, Capreae, It  it  was i n B i s n i n e t e e n t h y e a r  faulty^  we k n o w ,  h i s marriage  Suetonius reverses the  s e e on C h a p t e r 8 . 7 ;  for  left lies  to  e x p l a i n why,  Romans  i n the  the  (cf.  realization  that  ...  on l u i  a reproche  a l t h o u g h 77 y e a r s o l d (Dio 5 8 . 2 7 . 3 ;  Suet.  W i l l - r i c h Caligula Mommsen Staatsr.  as h i s  5  It  but  Gaius,  "als  (Dessau p.  leiblicher  Part of Urenkel  1 0 4 ) , h a d a much  the  des  stronger  62).  175: " C a l i g u l a , descendant  power,  n.  de n e r i e n  decider e t de s ' e n r e m e t t r e a u  d u s i l e n c e de T i b e r e ,  expected to  (Dio  two  live  too,  designe  que l a s u c c e s s i o n  that  Tiberius,  several years  longer  By A u g u s t o f A . D . 37 G a i u s w o u l d be 25 y e a r s  3).  (cf.  Dio 52.20.2;  Roman Political  After  imperium  58.23.1-2; p.  Institutions  his praetorship  be g r a n t e d p r o c o n s u l a r the  direct  ne 1 ' a v a i t p o u r t a n t pas  104-5; Abbott  1.555,  the  Ce d e r n i e r  must be remembered,  i n A.D. 37,  Tib.  pp.  him to  successor  it  5 6 . 2 8 . 1 ; T a c . Ann.  by Gemellus' position  1.3;  and p e r h a p s  S u e t . Tib.  even  21.1; V e i l .  S e n a t e , Gaius would not  as c o - h e i r  in Tiberius'  375;  would have been  symbols b y w h i c h Augustus had d e s i g n a t e d  W i t h s u c h p o w e r s bestowed upon him by t h e threatened  6.20.1]).  e x p r e s s h i s w i s h e s more c l e a r l y ,  o l d and l e g a l l y a b l e to h o l d a p r a e t o r s h i p  tribunician  to  his  au c o n t r a i r e ,  tacitement").  for  move  for  saw G a i u s a s  [1939]  succeda a T i b e r e .  et  I t a i t viglee  17  EEL  Nous i n f e r o n s ,  suitable  12.1;  [Gaius Gaius'  Ann.  s u c c e s s i o n t h a n G e m e l l u s , a c l a i m t h a t was r e c o g n i z e d b y  formellement destin.  these events  given that Tiberius  der Dynastie"  J . Beranger  d'Auguste,  5 8 . 8 . 1 ; Tac.  w h a t now seems t o h a v e b e e n a n a m b i g u o u s w i l l .  A u g u s t u s , des S t i f t e r s claim to  of  [Dio  the problem of dating  o n l y p o s s i b l e s u c c e s s o r , he d i d n o t  answer  Claudilla  order  chronology  e x a m p l e , t h a t G a i u s was-  s e e F u r n e a u x and K b e s t e r m a n n o n T a c . Ann. now r e m a i n s  instead  to  for  (his  will  (it  Tiberius 2.121.1).  have  been  should  be  37  noticed here that of  Gemellus- to  there  i s r e a l l y - no s i m i l a r i t y - a t  G a i u s i n A . D . 37 a n d t h a t  But t h e E m p e r o r ' s b e l i e f Dio  is  in his  p.  171, n.  3) h a s shown t h a t he d i d n o t  other,  quasi  inheritance  o f property-.  nonsense, for  influence  (Hist.  while  the d e c i s i o n of  include  the  control  of  a will  i m p e r i a l power: the  Senate,  1.16).  this  remained, at  (op.  "la  a d o p t i v e de C e s a r ne l u i  filiation  l e moindre d r o i t  cit.  p.  the  imperial  S e e M a r s h Tiberius  the  succession;  J . BeVanger (op. s u c c e s s i o n t o be  Empire to h e i r s ,  of  the  in  Empire i s ,  the  would  of  doubtless  c o u l d b y no means  theory,  under  e £ o i x n a s xris  the  Caesar's xe  4 5 . 2 . 7 ; A p p . BC 3 . 2 . 1 9 ) ,  donnait  about that  qu'un ascendant m o r a l ,  5 6 . 3 2 . 1 ; T a c . Ann.  217 a n d V e n t u r i n i  was p a s s i n g o n t o  while  p.  to  s e e Mommsen Staatsr,  to  Aug.  apparently pp.  of Tiberius'  a d u a l m o n a r c h y was a n e c e s s i t y .  Suet.  for  6 6 , b o t h o f whom a r g u e  o t h e r s the  be p r o o f  sans  Augustus' w i l l ,  1.8.1;  K o r n e m a n n (Doppelprinzipat heir  cit.  familiae  when s p e a k i n g o f  de s o n p e r e a d o p t i f . "  (Dio p.  i n c l u s i o n as j o i n t  institution of  think  a n d L i v i a a s h i s h e i r s , was n e v e r c o n s i d e r e d  powers  t h a t T i b e r i u s by h i s w i l l  Gemellus'  actually  2 4 1 ) h a s made t h e r e a s o n a b l e o b s e r v a t i o n  a la dictature  example, naming T i b e r i u s  least  KOU XOU o v o u a x o s <ca i n s cf.  14).  t h e one a l w a y s a c c o m p a n i e d  same e r r o r  which V i H e r s  problem of  fact,  Inheritance  uovapx'tas- S i a S o x o v KaxaXev^cov" ( 4 5 . 1 . 2 ;  101.2).  24.1),  Gaius  b e q u e a t h i n g a patrimonium  D i o made t h e  in A.D.  Although Suetonius did  those s e l e c t i n g a successor, i t  a d o p t i o n o f O c t a v i u s , "5s  include  that Tiberius  consider the  In  Tiberius  a s T a c i t u s r e a l i z e d when h e h a d G a l b a comment " u n i u s  hereditas fuimus"  course,  (cf.  relationship  illr-founded.  state  or heirs.  t h e E m p i r e c o u l d be b e q u e a t h e d  same a s t h e the  his heir  between the  Germanicus to  l o n g e v i t y - was  t h e o n l y s o u r c e so b o l d as t o  bequeathed the Empire to that  of  all  insoluble  47-48)  considers  realization  On b e q u e a t h i n g  3 , 1 , 4 4 8 ^ 4 5 1 ; G r e e n i d g e Roman  that  the Public  38  Life  p.  361,  "For t h e p r o b l e m s c o n n e c t e d w i t h , s u c c e s s i o n i n t h e  Julio-  C l a u d i a n p e r i o d i n g e n e r a l , s e e p a r t i c u l a r l y Hammond Augustan pp.  1,2  74-76.  I s TO r j u v e d p i o v :  The c h r o n o l o g y - o f Tiberius'  O  t h e fasti wood n o .  E$J p.  43)  death, i s  the p e r i o d immediately somewhat c o n f u s e d .  a n d t h e Acta Avvalium  3) t h a t T i b e r i u s d i e d o n 16 M a r c h ; t h a t  o n 28 M a r c h .  When was t h e w i l l  annulled?  at  pp.  25-26),  M a n y assume t h a t  at which time  declared i n v a l i d by the senators.  E m p e r o r more t h a n t e n d a y s b e f o r e officially  published either  the  confirms  claims of Gemellus), or that the  contents  the w i l l  i n the Senate's i n t e r e s t  by Gemellus or h i s the existence of 8.1  e'yKAnua).  supporters  a "party  Ill  Senate comment  at  a n d B a l s d o n Gaius p .  {Gaius  arbitriumque  14.1)  a meeting  of after  was r e a d b y M a c r o  of Tiberius'  will  (59.1.5)  were  t h a t many ignore  c h o i c e o f . s u c c e s s o r was o b v i o u s  to prevent  ( s e e W i l l r i e h Caligula  p.  It  to  would,  any l a t e r  then,  dispute  112; evidence  for  o f G e m e l l u s " c a n b e f o u n d i n t h e n o t e on C h a p t e r  this  (see C h a p t e r 6 . 1 ) ;  i n Rome  (and were a l r e a d y p r e p a r e d t o  annul the w i l l ,  From D i o ' s s t a t e m e n t  h i m s e l f was p r e s e n t p.  to  Senate  or shortly  t h e s e n a t o r s and had p r o b a b l y been a g r e e d upon b e f o r e h a n d . be  from  t h a t G a i u s was d e c l a r e d  D i o ' s statement  knew a h e a d o f t i m e who w e r e h i s h e i r s the  The f a c t  the  Gaius a r r i v e d  1  B a l s d o n Gaius  We know  a meeting o f  t h e S e n a t e was h e l d on 28 M a r c h ( e . g . , P a r e t i Storiq 4.764) (e.g.,  following  (CIL 6 . 2 0 2 8 c = 32346e = S m a l l -  o n 18 M a r c h G a i u s w a s p r o c l a i m e d imperator.', a n d t h a t  and  Principate  part 25)  here, it  that  Gaius  of the meeting, (despite W i l l r i e h although  The p r o b l e m o f  later  that  Caligula  day he a d d r e s s e d t h e  chronology c r e a t e d by S u e t o n i u s '  " i n g r e s s o q u e urbem . . .  omnium r e r u m i l l i  seems u n l i k e l y  inrita  Tiberi  voluntate  p e r m i s s u m e s t , " w h i c h seems t o  ...  reverse  ius the  39  order of  e v e n t s and t o  t h e ius arbitriwnque o n 18 M a r c h , b u t  c o m p r e s s them i n t o  ornnivm reman r e f e r s  to h i s assumption o f  March or e a r l y i n A p r i l .  Lesuisse  a single day, not  the  can be r e s o l v e d  t o h i s p r o c l a m a t i o n as Emperor  formal  imperial  (AC 3 0 . [ 1 9 6 1 ] 4 2 0 - 2 1 )  titles  of  as T i b e r i u s '  d i d n o t make h i m E m p e r o r o r g i v e h i m i m p e r i a l p o w e r ; c o n f e r r e d no a c t u a l power t h a t T i b e r i u s , G a i u s , to  include  This  it  among t h e i r  other t i t l e s  e x p l a n a t i o n , however,  Gaius'  dies  mean h i s  1.2  fails  to  w h i c h must at  imperii,  investiture  with f u l l  cSia. x o u Maicpoovos:  (cf.  c o m m e n t a r y on t h e [Paris,  Piganiol  this  imperial  1966]  pp.  Tiberius  and l o y a l t y  probably at  t h e same t i m e  night  (Dio 5 8 . 9 . 3 ) .  "wordy 6.48.4; the  to  letter"  t h a t was t o  P h i l o Leg.  was b e c a u s e  and C l a u d i u s c o u l d a l l  6.37  refuse  M . P . G r e n a d e , EEL  33 [ 1 9 5 5 ]  for  18 M a r c h was  the  period of  fact  that  the E m p i r e be t a k e n  54).  to  powers.  (AE 1 9 5 7 . 2 5 0 )  a s Q. N a e v i u s C o r d u s  T h e same i n s c r i p t i o n vigilum:  discovered  in this  For a  full  a. Andre  shows t h a t  some-  p o s i t i o n he m u s t  the  i m p e r i a l bodyguard  (Dio  have  58.9.2),  a s s i g n i n g Laco to the vacant p r e f e c t u r e It  it  the Emperor s i n c e , a l s o b e f o r e A . D . 3 1 ,  a p p o i n t e d h i m commander o f  watch  and i t  s e e F . de V i s s c h e r i n Melanges  761-68).  actual  s u c c e s s o r , but  D i o 5 8 . 9 . 2 : N c u o u i o u Eepxoopiou MaKpuivos.  inscription,  in  title  M a c r o ' s f u l l name a p p e a r s on a r e c e n t l y  t i m e b e f o r e A . D . 31 he was praefectus shown a b i l i t y  (cf.  account  inscription S u t o r i u s Macro  from the  i m p e r i a l p o w e r w h i c h he p l a c e s , on 28 M a r c h : t h e  he c l a i m s , m e r e l y d e s i g n a t e d G a i u s  imperator,  late  sees the S e n a t e ' s  a c c l a m a t i o n o f G a i u s as -imp erat or on 18 M a r c h as d i s t i n c t investiture  if  was M a c r o who d e l i v e r e d t o  cause S e i a n u s ' d e s t r u c t i o n  [551]).  For his part  rank o f p r a e t o r i a n by the S e n a t e , but  in this  he t a c t f u l l y  of  the  the Senate T i b e r i u s '  (Dio 5 8 . 9 . 2 ; T a c . scheme h e was refused i t ,  Ann.  offered no.doubt  40  mindful  o f the fate o f Seianus  Seianus as p r a e t o r i a n  prefect  (Dio 5 8 . 1 2 . 7 ) .  At this  position  Arruntius 31-45;  ( T a c . Ann. 6 . 4 8 . 4 .  can be found i n t h e a r t i c l e  A f u l l biography  1.2  For Macro's assistance i n securing Gaius'  Tfapacj)povfiaaVTOS:  C f . G a i u s Inst.  cum i s , q u i f e c e r i t  similar  1.2  o f L.  accession,  23 [ 1 9 6 9 ]  s e e on  presence i n the  s e e o n C h a p t e r 1 6 . 3 6 i a xwv aTreX£U0Ep(jov.  "alio velut  even  b y R . S . R o g e r s i n CPh 26 [ 1 9 3 1 ]  C h a p t e r 1 0 . 6 xwv IKEIVOO EUepyExnuaxtov; o n a f r e e d m a n ' s Senate,  course,  as b e i n g  c f . G o l i n i n Latomus 13 [ 1 9 5 4 ] 4 0 2 ; P . Y ; F o r s y t h , Phoenix  204-7).  mentioned  o f Seianus i s , of  h e was j u d g e d b y L u c i u s A r r u n t i u s  worse than h i s p r e d e c e s s o r  replaced  ( T a c . Ann. 6 . 1 5 . 5 , w h e r e h e i s f i r s t  b y T a c i t u s , whose s e c t i o n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e f a l l lost) : in this  time Macro  situation,  TrcnSfto:  2 . 1 4 5 ("de i n o f f i c i o s o  q u o q u e modo t e s t a m e n t a  testamentum,  see S a i l .  kapite  iure  deminutus  testamento"):  facta sit."  infirmantur, For a  Jug. 1 1 . 5 .  B o r n i n A . D . 19 ( s e e a b o v e o n C h a p t e r 1.1 xG T i g e p i u ) , G e m e l l u s was now 18 y e a r s o l d , b u t h a d n o t y e t a s s u m e d t h e  toga v i v i l i s  (cf.  f o r b a d e praetextati P l i n y Ep. 8 . 1 4 . 5 ) , meetings  1.3  Suet.  14:  Gaius  to enter  the Senate  r e i publicae  xris a p x n s TrapeAucrE:  ( V a l . Max. 2 . 1 . 9 ;  Tradition Gell.  Gemellus o f h a l f Willrich  adsueseerent"  ( S u e t . Aug.  S e e o n C h a p t e r 1 . 2 hs x o o u v e S p x o v . ment  s o l e Emperor.  adhuc").  1.23;  but Augustus had allowed the sons o f s e n a t o r s  "quo c e l e r i u s  to deprive  "praetextatum  of the w i l l  the throne,  (Caligula  p.  to  attend  38.2).  The a n n u l -  c o u l d n o t have been an a t t e m p t  s i n c e Gaius had a l r e a d y been  declared  112) s u g g e s t s t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a p a r t y  41  supporting party  and t o  reject the p.  G e m e l l u s , and t h a t i t avoid possible c i v i l  Tiberius'  testament.  S e n a t e was u n w i l l i n g 26).  partibus  The r i g h t reliquit  to  B a l s d o n , on t h e allow  a minor lie  that  is,  if  to  share h a l f  had been c a r e f u l only one-third  to  other  inherit  this  necessary  hand, t r i e s  in Suetonius'  either  The c l a u s e " s u b s t i t u i t q u e  a ruler  the hopes o f  to  show  s o much money  was t o  comment " h e r e d e s  t h e new E m p e r o r ;  similar  to that  popular  d i s p l e a s u r e at h i s preferment  in his w i l l  also,  two-thirds 101.2).  o f G a i u s , had C l a u d i u s ' w i l l  favourably  survivor  it  was h a r d l y  of his  estate  the  reason).  The d i f f e r e n c e  the  l a t t e r p u b l i s h e d the  Claud.  (cf.  L.  L e s u i s s e . Les etudes  1.3  Tfoincrayevos a i T e K x e i v e :  1.3  o Tigepios:  44; Dio 61.1.2  of  actions  30 [ 1 9 6 2 ]  See C h a p t e r  a  Livia  to  true son,  avoid  Britannicus Britannicus  i s noncommittal  about  o f Nero and G a i u s i s  the w i l l before  alassiques  be  Augustus  and  suppressed, either  over C l a u d i u s '  between the  contents  would  Nero, faced: w i t h a problem  because C l a u d i u s might have mentioned (Suet.  aequis  fitting  h i s predecessor's estate with another.  ( D i o 5 6 . 3 2 . 1 ; S u e t . Aug.  12.69.5),.or  the  that  substituit-  invicem" could obviously prove  to bequeath T i b e r i u s  ( T a c . Ann.  die,  to  {Gaius  Gaium ex G e r m a n i c o e t T i b e r i u m ex Druso n e p o t e s ,  source o f p e r s o n a l danger to for  shatter  war t h a t the Senate found i t  a n s w e r seems t o  (Tib. 7 6 ) :  que invicem" sole heir.  was i n o r d e r t o  the  that  Senate annulled  it,  47).  8.1-2.  According to D i o , T i b e r i u s  foresaw that Gaius  would  m u r d e r G e m e l l u s , a n d o n c e commented t o h i m "cru TE TOUTOV OTOKxeveis KQL\ O"E a X X o i " inquit,  et  te  alius").  (58.23.3;  cf.  T a c . Ann.  6.46.8:  " o c c i d e s hunc  tu,  42  1.4  OTTEp  xnv ynxepa eTreirotrucet.:  T i b e r i u s not  o n l y had r e f u s e d to  L i v i a ' s bequests a f t e r also rejected  a suggestion that  C h a p t e r 2 . 4 x a s i n s Ax o u t a s  1.4  x a 6'  she be d e i f i e d  UTT' a u x o u KaxaAexrJ)6evxa:  sed et m i l i t i b u s  Cf.  S u e t . Tib.  See C h a p t e r  (Suet.  ( S u e t . Aug.  was t h e n d e p o s i t e d a t  statement  auxa to auxas i s will  Julius  Tib. . 7 6 . 1 ) .  seems s o u n l i k e l y  quos  contents  (auxa)  Caesar had r e a l i z e d  et  that  If  virginibus  two  years  s e c r e c y , had  he f o l l o w e d A u g u s t u s ' Rome w i t h t h e V e s t a l  it  exampl  Virgins.  existence of  t o have a l l o w e d o n e ' s h e i r s  would have been f o o l i s h Caes.  atque  B o i s s e v a i n ' s suggested emendation o  death,.but  (Suet.  legato  2.1-4.  a p p e a l i n g : c e r t a i n l y p e o p l e knew o f t h e  (auxas) b e f o r e T i b e r i u s '  know o f i t s  inter  and, presumably for  w i t n e s s e d b y humiZZimi  Dio's  76: " d e d i t  T i b e r i u s had w r i t t e n h i s w i l l earlier  it  S e e on  u n i v e r s i s p l e b e i q u e Romanae v i r i t i m  TTOXXOX x e a u x a f ( 6 e a a v :  101.1),  but  <5xa0riicas.  etiara separatim vieorum m a g i s t r i s . "  1.5  her death,  (Dio 5 8 . 2 . 1 - 3 a ) .  plerisque, Vestalibus,  pay  83.1).  a to  and even d a n g e r o u s ,  as  43  CHAPTER TWO  2.1  TOIS-'TE a A A o x s :  That  i s , he p a i d T i b e r i u s '  Gemellus. w i t h some h e s i t a t i o n  33)  five  shows on i t s  soldiers,  t i o n ADLOCVT COH. at  the  was n o t  o f whom a r e c a r r y i n g It  is  significant  a sestertius  standards,  that,  (SMC Imp.  the  1.151,  and a d d r e s s i n g  and w i t h the  although  coinage  inscrip-  S e n a t e was  present  c e r e m o n y a n d h a d t h e p o w e r t o m i n t b r o n z e c o i n a g e a t Rome, t h e i s s u e d S.C.:  Gelzer  (RE " J u l i u s " c o l .  may-have been s t r u c k  by G a i u s h i m s e l f  donative;  (p.  Rosborough  campaign o f A . D . Tiberius, Senate: his  20) q u i t e  too,  wrongly  suggests that the  according to  Dio  assigns the.coin  to  the  accession of Claudius, their  of  the m i l i t a r y  was t o  of his  in influencing  presence just  ( D i o 5 7 . 1 9 . 4 ; T a c . Ann.  i n company w i t h  (57.24.5),  and i n c i d e n t a l l y  P r a e t o r i a n s p l a y e d no g r e a t p a r t  outside  4.2.1; cf.  instil  the  northern  the  city  S u e t . Aug.  considered proof  b a s i s of the  2.1  K a r a iTEVxriKOVTa rax Sx.aicocfxas Spaxyas S x e v e x u e :  until  ( T a c . Ann.  4.5.4;  in  the Although  the  from A . D . 49) was  20  doubt-  Principate.  In t h e  time of  t h e r e were cohorts  the  own p o w e r .  affairs  less  praetorian  coin  the s p e c i a l purpose of paying  had i n s p e c t e d the P r a e t o r i a n s  intention,  o r 23 o n w a r d s  for  386)  coin  39-40.  vSenators a fear o f those troops the  followed  The o c c a s i o n was commemorated on t h e  r e v e r s e G a i u s s t a n d i n g on a p l a t f o r m  four  except  sense.  of A.D. 37-38: no.  everyone  a p h r a s e s u c h a s KOU TOTS  complete the  x o u s T E ouv cSop'JcJjopous:  to  Reiske's suggestion,  by B o i s s e v a i n , that  OTpaxxcoTais i s n e c e s s a r y t o  2.1  I reject  bequests  Tiberius  nine  Dio 55.24.6 says ten i n A . D . 5 ) ,  each  44  numbering  a t h o u s a n d men ( D i o l o c .  e x p e n s e o f p a y i n g them T i b e r i u s ' w o u l d amount t o  18 m i l l i o n  to  e a c h man o f t h e  it  i s most s i g n i f i c a n t  practice  that  is  cit.;  cf.  bequest  sesterces.  and h i s  added a d o n a t i v e  (Suet.  Claud.  for  10.4;. Josephus' claim  exaggeration);  100 s e s t e r c e s o n t h e not of  2.2  so dependent  [AJ 1 9 . 4 . 2  4,100,900  (Fasti  anniversary of his  (Dio  Ostienses  sesterces  is  to  an  of  Nero,  Gaius'  Romanus h a d  figure  received  5 6 . 3 2 . 2 ; S u e t . Aug.  cf.  RG 8 . 4 ) ,  The e x t r a  would suggest t h a t  o c c a s i o n s , he f o l l o w e d  23 y e a r s .  them  every legionary  101.2):  E m p i r e i n . A . D . 14 s t o o d  40; but  uvbana.  the precedent  of  must  sesterces  of his w i l l ,  set by Augustus  each r e c i p i e n t ,  the p o p u l a t i o n  at  the bequest  5 million  i n the matter  as h i s p r e d e c e s s o r t o  a r e a s o n a b l e 12 1/2% i n c r e a s e i n period of  of the  = E§J p .  t h e plebs  same amount  accession  12.69.3).  40 m i l l i o n  to  e a c h man)  t h a t he g a v e  donative  a  probably  a c c e s s i o n (Dio 6 0 . 1 2 . 4 ) .  t h e populus  bequeathed by T i b e r i u s  l e a v i n g the  amount t o  Under A u g u s t u s ' w i l l  citizen population  have been l i m i t e d  s o many o t h e r  (247)]  but  own i n i t i a t i v e ,  (15,000 s e s t e r c e s f o r  on t h e P r a e t o r i a n s , r e d u c e d t h e  TO) Sriyu . . . :  total  101.2),  C l a u d i u s a l s o a w a r d e d them an a n n u a l d o n a t i v e  2 0 0 0 s e s t e r c e s a man ( T a c . Ann.  s i n c e the  250 d r a c h m a e  the p a r t p l a y e d by the P r a e t o r i a n s i n h i s  e a c h 2 0 , 0 0 0 s e s t e r c e s and p r o m i s e d a l i k e obvious  on h i s  the  donative  u s u a l l y supposed to have begun,under C l a u d i u s ,  gratitude  thus  own a d d i t i o n a l  ( D i o 5 6 . 3 2 . 2 ; S u e t . Aug.  b e c a u s e t h a t E m p e r o r ' s g i f t w a s much l a r g e r a n d was i n  2.93.3);  Augustus had a l s o l e f t  Praetorian cohorts that Gaius  T a c . Hist.  as on  by  allowing  t h a t group o v e r a  for  45  2.2  ETTi  Is  eaUTGU  xri  TOUS.  l^riBous l a y p a ^ :  When G a i u s '  brothers,  a n d D r u s u s , came o f T i b e r i u s h a d h e l d a congiavium  in  such l a r g e s s e accompanied G a i u s ' compensation, t h i s  congiavium  {Fasti  OstiensSs-=  Smallwood no.  Julius  Caesar i n  the  of the  (Suet.  (Fasti  in  addition  to  the people i n G a i u s '  return his  of  to  the  return  distributions  rather  600 s e s t e r c e s f o r (cf.  RG  15.1-2),  When t h i s  is  by T i b e r i u s , plebs  by Augustus sesterces cf.  Ann.  21;1:  the  interval  the people  to  Another  31; cf.  200 m i l l i o n  almost  f o u r months lower  o f HS 300 vivitim ( S u e t . Aug.  3.29),  Claudius  and  figure  is  random totalling  250,000  people  sesterces.  s e s t e r c e s was p a i d o u t (cf.  people to  the  B a l s d o n Gaius  estimated). the  same was  RG 1 5 , w h e r e congiavia Tiberius  (Suet.  (Dio 6 0 . 2 5 . 7 ; c f .  Tib.  T a c . Ann.  " c o n g i a r i a populo saepius d i s t r i b u i t " ) , 4.5: three  the  a n d i n A . D . 40 on  s e s t e r c e s bequeathed the  was a common a m o u n t :  41.2; cf.  ( S u e t . Bom.  celebrate  t h e s e were  reign  and  o r money  The two congiavia,  of Gaius'  the  17.2);  of gifts  must have r e a c h e d about  a t o t a l of  by  congiavium  S u e t . Gaius  (see C h a p t e r 9 . 6 ) ,  45 m i l l i o n  first  set  between the promise  an e x p e n s e o f some 150 m i l l i o n  a r e r e c o r d e d as w e l l ) ,  146.21).  the precedent  i n A . D . 38, perhaps to  combined w i t h the  146.10), Domitian p.  Gaius followed  t h a n o r g a n i z e d congiavia.  where a s l i g h t l y  A gift  for  reign:  each r e c i p i e n t ,  uvbana i n t h e  p.-183,  31)..  (see C h a p t e r 2 5 . 5 ) ; . b o t h  amounting  In  m e n t i o n e d b y D i o , was g i v e n on 19 J u l y o f  short  from the n o r t h  no  10.1).  Gaius  t h e s e , t h e r e w e r e two more d i s t r i b u t i o n s  e l e c t i o n s to  5 4 . 1 ) ; but  Tib.  (Suet.  tivocinii  = Smallwood no.  Ostienses  (Suet.  Caes. 3 8 . 1 : " p r o m o r a " ) .  same a m o u n t , b u t n o t  same y e a r  dies  honour  age,  m e n t i o n e d by- D i o w a s h e l d on 1 J u n e A . D . 37  adding i n t e r e s t  actual donative  their  Nero  of  4 0 0 . a n d 240  2 0 ; T a c . Ann.  2.42.1;  12.41 and S u e t .  V e s p a s i a n (Chvon.  congiavia),  distributed  354,  Claud. p.  a n d N e r v a (Chvon.  S54 , ;  46  2.3  TCHS xe yap aoTiKcns:  Again, Tiberius i n bequeathing  troops the  (Mo  5 6 . 3 2 . 2 ; . S u e t . Aug.  city- i t s e l f ,  w i t h about  troops,  the p r o v i s i o n s  at  Lugdunum ( T a c . Ann.  ( D i o 5 5 . 2 4 . 6 ; , T a c . Ann.  fires  that  became a p e r m a n e n t  struck force  f r e e d m e n , t h e y were n o t  the  b e n e f i c i a r i e s o f Augustus t o be a v a l u a b l e f o r c e doubtless because of  first  (cf.  i n the  this  Ruins  and Excavations,  protection Tiberius'  IK  p.  i n two o f t h e will,  A.D. the  Because t h e y were  and were n o t  S u e t . Aug. overthrow  legionary  338),  "From the  listed  They p r o v e d ,  of Seianus  (Dio 5 8 . 9 ) ,  list  for  After  twenty-five  the  1.60.4;  Tac.  among  the  however, and i t  Under the  2.25.2;  will.  fire-  terms  of  them.  service"  loss of  was  Lanciani  being responsible for  regions.  they  (cf.  i n c l u d e d them i n h i s  (cf.  6 . 4 3 ; M a s o n Greek Terms p .  9 ( D i o 5 6 . 1 8 - 2 1 ; T a c . Ann. r e g u l a r number a t  of the m i l i t a r y  therefore  that Tiberius  fourteen  the  exclusively  101.2).  each, c o h o r t  city's  soldiers.  control  t h e y p r o v e d so v a l u a b l e t h a t  2 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 s e s t e r c e s were p a i d t o  TOU KtvraAoyou:  under  o r g a n i z e d by Augustus  1000 men e a c h {CAE 1 0 . 2 0 0 , 2 3 4 - 2 3 5 ;  Thuc. regular  but  considered part  loyalty  There were seven c o h o r t s o f  2.3  city;  4 . 5 . 5 and F u r n e a u x ad l o c ) ,  Ann.  The  2,250,000 sesterces  were o r i g i n a l l y  (Dio 5 5 . 2 6 . 4 - 5 ) . at  in  3.41.2),  4.5.5).  i n A . D . 6 as a t e m p o r a r y m e a s u r e t o frequent  city-  will.  The vigiles  xois vUKTOtfjuXa^x:  Augustus  500. s e s t e r c e s a man t o t h e  then, received a t o t a l of  of T i b e r i u s '  lead of  There were 'three u r b a n c o h o r t s  a fourth, being s t a t i o n e d  1500 men i n . e a c h c o h o r t  4500 e l i g i b l e  2.3  101.2).  followed the  three  Dio 59):  40.18.1; that  is,  the  l e g i o n s under Varus  2.41.1),  ( D i o 5 5 . 2 3 . 2 ; T a c . Ann.  Augustus  in  established  4.5.2-5),  the  47  total  strength  of  each amounting  to  Army- p p .  114-16).  Tiberius'  bequests to  well,  l e g i o n a r i e s - h a d r e c e i v e d 300 s e s t e r c e s a man ( D i o  Aug.  the  101.2),  but  57.5.3;  these  Tiberius  amount b e c a u s e o f (Dio  An o u t l a y - o f  a b o u t , 5000 men ( F u r n e a u x . I . , 1 2 3 ;  the  37,500,000  125,000 r e g u l a r  s e s t e r c e s was n e c e s s a r y t o  pay  troops.  as  of  the  legions  5 7 . 6 . 4 ; T a c . Ann. . 1. 3 6 . 4 ;  S u e t . Tib.  in  P a n n o n i a and on t h e  played a part), case o f the was n o t terms  of  expect,  d i d not pay the  Praetorians.  as i n s e c u r e  (in  as t h a t  army an i m m e d i a t e  of Tiberius that  i n A . D . 39/40 w h i l e  to  4S..2).  that  frontiers  It-is  surprising  disturbances  bonus,  of  the  i n A . D . 1 4 , ,yet  the  frontier  the  troops,  h e was i n Germany a n d G a u l  the  armies  reforms  been .implemented  frontier  had  as he h a d i n  command o f t h e  time had not  Gaius d i d give donatives  double  Suet.  t h e d r a m a o f w h i c h he h i m s e l f  For although h i s  s e r v i c e promised at  57.6.5).  Rhine  will  56.32.2;  on t h e n o r t h e r n  t h a t G a i u s , who m u s t h a v e r e m e m b e r e d t h o s e e a r l i e r legions  By A u g u s t u s '  had been f o r c e d by-.Germanicus t o  revolts  Webster  of  the  (Dio  as one  would  (see C h a p t e r s  22.7;  25.3).  2.3  Iv  TOT'S u i K p o T e p o i s  Tei'xecnv:  S e e Burmann a p u d S t u r z normally  equivalent this  of  instance  retired  it  or to  ( T a c . Ann. ( T a c . Ann.  ( T a c . Ann.  3.21.2),  received a total less  (cf.  likely,  53.15.2;  must r e f e r  legionaries  vexiltar-ii legions  legio  of  uses the  either  to  f r o n t i e r posts  1 . 3 6 . 4 ) , who w e r e o f t e n q u a r t e r e d seem t o h a v e n u m b e r e d a b o u t in  3,750,000  s e s t e r c e s as T i b e r i u s '  the phrase r e f e r s  to  all  the  to  9 2 ) , but  The f o r m e r , apart  from  500 f o r  in  legacy.  If,  called the  each  some 1 2 , 5 0 0 men who w o u l d  colonists  the  g a r r i s o n e d by s e m i -  by v e t e r a n s .  amounting  Dio  t e r m TEIXOS as  7 9 . 7 . 1 ; M a s o n Greek Terms p .  colonies settled  1.44.6),  6.311.  legion  have as seems  mentioned by Augustus  in  48  h i s Res Gestae  as numbering  about  h a v e r e a c h e d some 37 m i l l i o n  2.4  120,000  {RG 1 5 . 3 ) ,  L i v i a had d i e d i n A . D . 2 9 , a f t e r been v i r t u a l l y  to  Suet.  51.2).  Tib.  oration  Capreae three  years e a r l i e r  Since Tiberius  Claudius  s i d e s , and h e r n e a r e s t  ( T a c . Ann.  t o be d e i f i e d T a c . Ann.  5.1.1).  (Dio 5 8 . 2 . 1 ) ,  5.1.6;  S u e t . Tib.  50 m i l l i o n  fact  sesterces  a c c e p t e d by a l l stolatum"  that  (Suet.  despised her  but  low-birth.  perhaps exhorbitant in  skirts,"  It  is  23.1),  5.2:  the  the  figure  impossible to  determine under the  l e s s t h a n 50 m i l l i o n  terms  sesterces  (Dio  ( S u e t . . Gaius  to  58.2.3a;  in  for  ( S u e t . Aug.  "Ulixem  his "Ulysses (cf.  and  deter-  56.47.1).  L i v i a ' s b e q u e s t s , but  it  she must have  101.1, 3). .  her  silence  (Dio 5 6 . 3 1 . 1 ;  of Augustus' w i l l ,  of  generally  to pay  because of her c r a f t i n e s s  amount o f  her  show t h a t G a i u s  willingness  suffer  her  16.3),  is  quingenties  admiration  i n men's a f f a i r s  the  allow  s a i d t o have c a l l e d L i v i a  Livia's ability likely,  ignored  future Emperor, a legacy  But h e r g r e a t - g r a n d s o n ' s  or,.more  the  Gaius t o pay out  a phrase used by Suetonius t o  perhaps because of  that,  Galba,  the  father's  after  declared invalid  remained f o r  Gaius i s  t o p l a y an a c t i v e p a r t  worth noting  It  funeral,  on b o t h h i s  his  5.1.1;  s e n s i b l y , refused to  legacies suggests a c e r t a i n  S e n e c a Cons. Move. 3 ) , mination  Galba  Casaubon).  Gaius  quite  ac s i n e c a l u m n i a "  she had l e f t (Suet.  attend her  l i v i n g male r e l a t i v e  and h a d h e r w i l l 51.2).  having  ( D i o 5 8 . 2 . 1 ; T a c . Ann.  great-grandson  Tiberius,  b e q u e s t s , w h i c h he d i d "cum f i d e despite the  would  ignored by her son s i n c e  had r e f u s e d to  was d e l i v e r e d b y G a i u s , h e r  and m o t h e r ' s  expenditure  sesterces.  x a s xris A i o u i a s StaOriKas:  retirement  the  is received  49  2.4  K O i TOTS i S v a y r c u s . ;  C l a u d i u s was l i s t e d , among t h e h e i r s degree i n T i b e r i u s '  r e c e i v e d two m i l l i o n p.  Ill,  n.  1)  sesterces  and G e l z e r  the h e i r s  2.5  opxno"T0ts:  Is  of  the  time of T i b e r i u s  had t r i e d to  restricting to  their  curb t h e i r  control  income  (cf. the  (Suet.  riots  T a c . Ann.  increasing immorality  34.1),  the  recall  of  w i t h one o f t h e i r among h i s  the  actors  favourites  Suet.  Gaius  It  ironic  is  3 6 . 1 : "Mnesterem that shortly  tragedy portending AIT©'"\AOAU.OS) .  3  Nero i s 56 i t  Actors  before  death  4.14.4;  continued  account  Gaius'  proved  Dio  insufficient  S u e t . Tib.  37.2).  associate  closely  for  an  and even a b n o r m a l , their  intimacy  so  (Dio  commercio m u t u i  actor rumours  60.22.3-4;  stupri").  a s s a s s i n a t i o n , Mnester danced i n  Gaius  5 7 . 4 ; s e e on C h a p t e r  t o be a s o u r c e o f t r o u b l e  s a i d t o have encouraged f e u d i n g  cf.  severely  That the Emperor s h o u l d i n c l u d e  d i l e x i s s e fertur  (Suet.  first  by  among t h e i r  to the  factions,  a  29.4 Emperors:  until  became s o s e r i o u s t h a t he t o o was c o m p e l l e d t o b a n i s h them  13.25.4;  2.5  his  ...  shares.  and d i s t u r b a n c e s , he h a d them b a n i s h e d  was c o n s i d e r e d u n d i g n i f i e d  o f s e x u a l p e r v e r s i o n s were s p r e a d to  it  their  At  actors  i n A . D . 37, Gaius began t o  number, M n e s t e r .  for  h a d become  1.77.1).  b u t when t h i s  f r o m Rome i n A . D . 23 ( D i o 5 7 . 2 1 . 3 ; T a c . Ann. After  1.54.3;  have  suggesting  collect  i n the theatre  l i c e n t i o u s n e s s of the  Tib.  third  (Caligula  387) must be w r o n g i n  two d e g r e e s w e r e u n a b l e t o  commonplace Tiberius  Willrieh  p a i d t o C l a u d i u s , who w o u l d q u a l i f y  first  By t h e  the  b y w h i c h he w o u l d  6.2).  Claud.  (RE " J u l i u s " c o l .  t h a t t h e b e q u e s t was a c t u a l l y only i f  (Suet.  will,  of  in A.D.  (Tac.  Ann.  61.8.1-4).  KOU Is TiTTrous:  Cf.  S u e t . Gaius  18.3: "edit  a mane ad v e s p e r a m . "  et  circenses  See C h a p t e r s 5 . 2 ;  plurimos 7.3-4;  10.1-5;  etc.  50  2.5  ra\  EKeiva eTTeTroinjcei.:  2.6  (5s 6e  I.e.,  he p a i d t h e  more s o u r c e s , o c c u r s t h r e e  rives-(jjoim  <j>acri ( 1 2 . 2 ) (22.1)  on t h e u s e o f  2.6  accounts  or even i n c o n j u n c t i o n  referring  is  i n the  S u t h e r l a n d . AJPh 66  (1966)  53 ( 1 9 6 3 )  JRS  is  finances  generally  book: <5e  northern  on t h e m i x i n g  (Aevavium  54).  of  iron  indiscriminately  On t h e  54 ( 1 9 6 4 )  singly,  Dio i s  militave,  here  complicated question of  151-70; A.H.M.  2 9 - 4 2 ; JRS  patvimonium  these  e a r l y E m p i r e , s e e : H . L a s t . JRS (1945)  the  Satuvni),  To w h i c h o f  w i t h t h e Aevavium  agreed, however,  i n extremely  state  i n A . D . 14  Gaius  pp.  (cf.  34  the  (1944)  51-59;  J o n e s , JRS: 4 0 . ( 1 9 5 0 )  22-29;  3 3 - 4 0 ; P . A . B r u n t , J E S 56  6.17.1),  the  Suetonius'  S u e t . Aug.  and t h e  rest  figure  of T i b e r i u s '  t h a t T i b e r i u s kept  the  imperial  g o o d c o n d i t i o n , • e s p e c i a l l y when c o m p a r e d w i t h  1 8 1 - 8 2 ; M a r s h Tibevius  came f r o m c o n v i c t i o n s  time  or  75-91.  It  Ann.  his  t e r m Onaaupos  treasury  impossible to discover.  a n d fiscus  F. M i l l a r .  collected for  , and even p e r h a p s o f t h e E m p e r o r ' s  (fisci)  together,  C.H.V.  times, i n t h i s  awnings i n the Forum; us  D i o seems t o u s e t h e  D i o 5 3 . 2 2 . 3 ; M a s o n Gveek Tevms p .  aevavium  other  (25.5 = X i p h i l i n u s )  of the p u b l i c  (cf.  Livia.  congiavium.  xeOnaaupicruevas:  imperial  silk  o n t h e number o f t r o o p s  c a m p a i g n s ; and to's (J>oiai x i v e s with coins in a  and  Such.'a p h r a s e , ' i n d i c a t i n g D i o ' s c o m p a r i s o n o f t h r e e  Ixepot:  (5s y e xwes  legacies of Tiberius  death  101 a n d P h i l o Leg.  2.9  pp.  Some o f t h i s  156, 227-28).  subsequent c o n f i s c a t i o n s  from a competent of  [547];  (Gaius 3 7 . 3 )  see B a l s d o n wealth  of property  administration of.provincial  2,700,000,000 s e s t e r c e s i n the does n o t  treasury  agree w i t h e i t h e r  their  (cf.  Tac.  finances. at  of the  the amounts  51  r e c o r d e d h e r e by- D i o : f o r t h i s Trevxe i n l i n e Suetonius.  7 , w h i c h w o u l d make D i o ' s  first  figure  t h e same a s t h a t  of  But b o t h t h e a m b i g u i t y o f D i o ' s . . w o r d TeBncraupioyevas and t h e  r e c o r d o f one o t h e r the  r e a s o n X y l a n d e r s u g g e s t e d r e a d i n g e£ f o r  widely  likelihood,.that  differing  amount  t h e r e was n o a g r e e m e n t  contemporary h i s t o r i a n s  of Gaius'  428)  i n c l u d e s t h e patvimonium  col.  395) does n o t .  2.6  oude  reign.  suggest.the p o s s i b i l i t y , about  t h e e x a c t sum e v e n among  Thus W i l l r i c h  i n the t o t a l  even  sum,.while  {Caligula  Gelzer  p.  Ill;  {RE " J u l i u s "  S e e o n C h a p t e r 9 . 4 x o u s x e Xoyio'pous.  Is xo xpixov  exos uepos  crrr' auxcov xi. uieaoocrev:  Suetonius  disagrees,  saying that exhausted the treasury  "non toto vertente  a g r e e more c l o s e l y w i t h S u e t o n i u s , L i p s i u s preferred  to read  t h i r d part  Ixous,  a genitive  exos.  Dio himself records  t h a t G a i u s was f o r c e d t o r e s o r t  A.D.  38, that evil  reliable).  yepos;.but  that i t  statement  actions,  during  s u c h a p h r a s e as " t h e  t o e x a c t i o n s b e c a u s e h e was i n n e e d o f i n 1 0 . 7 , under the year o f t h e s e c t i o n on  t h e whole o f w h i c h i s t o o g e n e r a l t o be  f o r two y e a r s  i n t h e Suda  although  the f i r s t  1), it  Romae 2 . 1 4 )  chronologically  T h i s d a t e o f A . D . 39 i s c o n f i r m e d b y J o s e p h u s , who a d m i t s  a s i n g l e day no doubt Finally,  To h a v e D i o  was n o t u n t i l A . D . 39  the t r e a s u r i e s had been emptied i s p a r t  Gaius r u l e d w e l l  n.  {de Magnitudine  ( s e e C h a p t e r s 18 a n d 2 1 . 1 - 2 ; - t h e s t a t e m e n t  Gaius'  37.3).  {Gaius  o f t h e y e a r " i s awkward e v e n f o r D i o , a n d b o t h X i p h i l i n u s a n d  Zonaras confirm  money  after  anno"  Gaius  it  {AJ 1 8 . 7 . 2  (s. Taios) refers  [256]), .while  t h a t he s p e n t  incredible  a l l - of" T i b e r i u s '  only to the paying out o f T i b e r i u s '  i s impossible to estimate  y e a r o r two o f h i s r e i g n  i s a t t h e same t i m e  the  difficult  accurately Gaius'  (cf. W i l l r i c h  that  Caligula  bequests  in  legacies. expenses p.  Ill,  t o i m a g i n e how h e c o u l d s p e n d b e t w e e n  52  two and t h r e e b i l l i o n together million  with his  sesterces in that short.time.  own d o n a t i v e s  and.oongiaria,. amounted t o  s e s t e r c e s ; L i y i a ' s b e q u e s t s and G a i u s '  gladiators  c o u l d h a r d l y have accounted f o r  expense o f  the b r i d g e  at  Baiae i n the  one s u s p e c t s t h a t t h e t r e a s u r i e s in Gaius'  reign of  four  than the normal  could not  years, particularly  might w e l l  exhausting  {AJFh. 56  [1935]  have caused t h e  prodigality  o f t h a t economic  funds,  336-41)  financial  rates  Even w i t h  (see C h a p t e r  and i n c o m e f r o m t h e  and the  17),  any t i m e to  be  provinces.  t h e n , must be s e e n as no more one who was c o n s i d e r e d a t y r a n t however,  i s not  h a s shown: t h a t T i b e r i u s ' crisis  at t h a t t i m e ,  doubted. frugality  o f A . D . 3 3 , i n d i c a t e d by and s u g g e s t e d f u r t h e r  may h a v e b e e n e n c o u r a g e d b y t h o s e who f e a r e d a crisis.  300  actors  since they continued  T h a t , he d i d s p e n d f r e e l y ,  extremely high interest Gaius'  the  amount.  to  have been, d e p l e t e d ; a t  accusation levelled against  by his biographers. Tenney Frank  an.equal  legacies,  less than  generous g i f t s  sximmer o f A . D . 39  r e p l e n i s h e d i n t h e n o r m a l way b y t a x a t i o n The c h a r g e o f  Tiberius'  the  that repetition  53  CHAPTER THREE  3.1  urtuoKpaTiKuxaTos;  Many- o f  our s o u r c e s agree t h a t  G a i u s was p o p u l a r " o aoitrip Ken e u e p y e x r i s e x v a i v o y t c r S e i s " ) the  favour  of  the populace  (e.g.,  ( e . g . , P h i l o Leg. or at. l e a s t  S u e t . Gaius  s t u d i a hominum o m n i g e n e r e p o p u l a r i t a t i s " ) , him " d e m o c r a t i c . " Gaius'  initial  courts, (Suet. out  rejection  and h i s Gaius  the  While the of  attempt to  adjective imperial  restore  contrasts  in Gaius'  o f human n a t u r e .  but  his  the  refusal  at  least until  the  et  to  ipse call  control  the  to  the  people  to  C h a p t e r s 3 and 4 a r e i n  He b e g i n s h i s h i s t o r y  win  of  primarily  reflecting  to  because  elections  Dio here uses i t  antitheses  [549] :  o n l y one t o  in part  point  fact  Dio's rather  of Tiberius'  a s i m i l a r b u t more e x p a n d e d p a s s a g e — t h a t E m p e r o r , , t o o , (57.8.3),  4.22  t h a t he t r i e d  Dio i s  justified  titles,  behaviour.  more t h a n a s e r i e s o f r h e t o r i c a l appreciation  is  accession  15.1: "incendebat  the m a g i s t e r i a l  1 6 . 2 ; see Chapter 9 . 6 ) ,  on h i s  little shallow  reign  in  was S r i u o x i K O S  d e a t h o f Germanicus removed h i s  only  rival  (57.13.6). It  is  frequently they  significant to  signify  d e s c r i b e A u g u s t u s as w e l l the  R e p u b l i c a n forms o f the Emperors  3.1  t h a t b o t h onyoicpaxiKOs and uriyoxiKOs a r e u s e d (e.g.,  same a t t r i b u t e ,  something between a d e s i r e t o  and t h e  popularis  (Plebs  levitas  and Princeps  pp.  y n x e x S Sfiya) n xri y e BouXri ypaijjai  that  w i t h the  the  Sfiyos.  h a d done a f t e r  maintain  Z. Yavetz a p p l i e s t o  xi:  Since Tiberius  had  several  N o r was h e l e g a l l y a b l e t o death by v i r t u e  summon t h e  of his  transferred  the powers o f . m a k i n g  S e n a t e , t h e r e was n o r e a s o n why G a i u s s h o u l d  Augustus'  For Dio  98-100).  all decisions to  53.12.1; 55.4.2).  correspond  S e n a t e , as  tribunician  initial  power  Tiberius (cf.  Tac.  54  1 . 7 ; c f . W i l l r i e h . Caligula  Ann.  p.  109).  G a i u s was f o r c e d t o w a i t  Senate f o r the g r a n t i n g o f i m p e r i a l powers. [234])  that  informing  death  immediately- on t h e death o f T i b e r i u s G a i u s wrote  someone who was p r e s e n t  lieutenant)  3.2-  the Senate by l e t t e r  of Tiberius'  ( s e e B a l s d o n Gaius p . 2 5 ) , a n d a t t h e same t i m e , w r o t e  Iv u i a  o f the urban  nyepa XaQexv:  legitimate  a t Misenum (perhaps M a c r o , a c t i n g as  probably- informed  to ensure the l o y a l t y  (AJ 1 8 . 6 . 1 0  the senators  t h e m o f h i s a c c e s s i o n shows a m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f  procedure: Gaius'  J o s e p h u s ' comment  upon t h e  the City  Prefect  cohorts.  This p r o b a b l y took p l a c e at t h e f i r s t of the Senate a f t e r  Gaius'  arrival  meeting  i n Rome ( s e e  on 1 . 2 I s TO ouveSpiov), a n d s e r v e d m e r e l y t o c o n f i r m t h e p o w e r s t h a t h e unofficially- possessed after  b e i n g h a i l e d imperator  18 M a r c h ( s e e o n C h a p t e r 1 . 1 ) .  It  was a t t h i s  b y t h e S e n a t e on  m e e t i n g , t o o , t h a t he must  h a v e d e l i v e r e d h i s s p e e c h r e c o r d e d i n C h a p t e r 6 . 1 ( c f . B a l s d o n Gaius pp.  26-27). The- g r a n t i n g  o f a l l t h e i m p e r i a l powers and most o f t h e t i t l e s  s i n g l e day cannot be c o n s i d e r e d i r r e g u l a r . been e n c o u n t e r e d o n l y once b e f o r e , Augustus' tribunicia 21.1;  death Tiberius potestas,  and i t  on a  The p r o b l e m o f s u c c e s s i o n h a d must b e remembered t h a t on  a l r e a d y p o s s e s s e d impevium proconsulate  and  w h i c h a s s u r e d h i s a c c e s s i o n ( D i o 5 6 . 2 8 . 1 ; S u e t . Tib.  T a c . Ann. 1 . 3 . 3 ;  Veil.  2 . 1 2 1 . 1 ; c f . R. V i l l e r s . REL 28 [ 1 9 5 0 ]  S i n c e Gaius had not. been g i v e n these powers d u r i n g T i b e r i u s '  244-45).  lifetime,  it  was o f c o u r s e n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e c o n t i n u a n c e o f t h e P r i n c i p a t e t h a t he assume b o t h i m m e d i a t e l y - .  Because o f t h e b r e v i t y - o f G a i u s '  reign i t  is  i m p o s s i b l e to determine whether  t h e s e powers were c o n f e r r e d on h i m f o r  or f o r stated periods of time.  The d i s t i n c t i o n  life  i s perhaps'academic, since  55  was a u t o m a t i c a l l y r e n e w e d e v e r y - f i v e  imperitan his  subsequent statement  life of  ("Is  TrdvTa Ka9cvrra5  ;  even l a t e r p r a c t i c e ) ;  perpetual"  t h a t Emperors a f t e r xov  giov  and t r i b u n i c i a n  immediate assumption of  p r e d e c e s s o r e s t a b l i s h e d the  1.47.2;  Vitellius:  The lex de imperio that  all  t h e powers and t i t l e s t h o s e , who f o l l o w e d ,  until  a short period  lex: c f . at  least  survey of  the  successors, In titles  support  the time imperial  addition  of Dio h i m s e l f titles  Augustus,  s u c h a s pius,  this  enjoyed by  12.69.3; Otho: Tac.  (cf.  4.3.4).  the e a r l i e s t than.by  proof  separate  t h a t imperium  26).  his  from C l a u d i u s  was  This practice  Dio 53.18.4).  F o r an  included continued  excellent  and p o w e r s e m p l o y e d b y , A u g u s t u s a n d h i s  cit.  pp.  25-113..  t o t h e powers m e n t i o n e d above., t h e r e were t h r e e  used (though not  maximus Caesar  ( a l t h o u g h , some d o u b t  Hammond Augustan. Principate.p.  s e e Hammond o p .  imp erat oris, others,  is  and  1).  2 . 5 5 . 3 ; V e s p a s i a n : T a c . Hist.  (ILS 244 = E§J 364)  Vespasiani  2.795, n.  t h e h o n o u r s w e r e g r a n t e d b y one d e c r e e r a t h e r  enactments i n i n the  T a c . Hist.  for  power was c o n s i d e r e d " a n n u a l  t o V e s p a s i a n ( C l a u d i u s : D i o 6 0 . 3 . 2 ; N e r o : T a c . Ann. Hist.  53.16.2;  c o u l d w e l l be a . r e f l e c t i o n  Mommsen Staatsr.  custom f o r  (Dio  Augustus were a p p o i n t e d  aTroSei.icvuyevo.t."]  (Dio 5 3 . 1 7 . 1 ; 5 3 . 3 2 . 5 ; c f .  Gaius'  or ten years  invariably) and pater  castrorum  (Gaius 2 2 ) , b u t  patriae.  is  praenomen  Suetonius claims that Gaius  f i l i u s , pater there  (see Rosborough p.  by the e a r l y , E m p e r o r s : the  important  little  3 5 , who r e f e r s  exercituum,  and  inscriptional t o CIL 2 . 1 5 0 * ;  used  optimus evidence for  to  pius,  see on C h a p t e r 3 . 3 eweBSs). A distinction  m u s t b e made b e t w e e n t h e nomen imperatoris,  b e won by- t h e E m p e r o r any- n u m b e r o f legati  i n the  field  times through the v i c t o r i e s  (see C h a p t e r 2 2 . 2 ) ,  e a r l y - became a p e r p e t u a l p a r t  which of  could  his  a n d t h e praenomen imperatoris,  of Augustus' t i t l e s  and o r i g i n a l l y  seems  which to  56  have s i g n i f i e d h i s permanent have f i r s t  used the  Hammond Augustan  title  command o f  in 40'B.C.;  Principate  pp.  the  cf.  48-50.  troops  (Octavian appears  D e g r a s s i Fasti,  Capitolini  to p.  See-also Dio 43.44.2).  109;  Although  t h e praenomen  imperatoris  was e v e n t u a l l y  t o be c o n s i d e r e d t h e  equivalent  princeps  M a s o n Greek  Terms  it  time  (cf.  Tiberius, soldiers  or perhaps never accepted i t  provincial  Greek  pp.  12, 29,  26.2).  Gaius,  too,  ( S u e t . Aug.  (see Rosborough p.  for  it  is  a b s e n t on  . 1 0 1 . 2 ; Tib.  12.1).  E a s t does n o t regarding from  "...  lengthy, l i s t  See f u r t h e r Mason  of p r o v i n c i a l  appears i n  79,  official  8 1 ; TLS  defence of  of Emperors  the  monarchs  title  name i n  if  titles  t h e name h a d n o t  statements  reign,  (Dio  from  I  cannot  Italy  142, n.  no.  accept S c o t t ' s  errors  for  2).  as w e l l ,  something which  1.130,  the  4.206 = E&J 9 3 ,  e v e n t u a l l y become p a r t  ( s e e , e . g . , BMC Imp.  that  commonly made  p.  and on c o i n a g e f r o m  his  Augustus  inscriptions  ( s e e , e . g . , IGRR  the beginning o f T i b e r i u s '  159 = E t | J 8 3 - 8 5 , 8 7 . the  that  e r r o r s , , s e e S e a g e r Tiberius  inscriptions  have been t o l e r a t e d  Tiberius'  The f a c t  our s o u r c e s , f o r p r o v i n c i a l s  titles  to  TOO auxoKpaxopos T i B e p i o u E e g a o T o u o l o u Z e B a a x o u " ;  a few y e a r s a f t e r not  26.2).  attached to T i b e r i u s '  contradict  the proper  Ilium:  Augustus  is  2.769).  1 7 . 2 ) , b o t h D i o and S u e t o n i u s s a y  e x c e p t when d e a l i n g w i t h f o r e i g n  5 7 . 8 . 1 ; S u e t . Tib.  (Segacnros i n G r e e k )  all  1 9 ; Mommsen Staatsr.  Claud.  the  117-21.  T i b e r i u s never used i t , 57.2.1;  the  avoided  A l t h o u g h A u g u s t u s h a d i n t e n d e d t o b e q u e a t h t h e name Augustus successor  of  t o be used e x c e p t b y  (see on C h a p t e r 1 . 1 ) ,  inscriptions  so by the  o u t r i g h t despite the decree of  he. was f o l l o w e d b y C l a u d i u s ( S u e t .  Terms  was n o t  allow it  ( D i o 5 7 . 2 . 1 ; 5 7 . 8 . 1 - 2 ; S u e t . Tib.  S e n a t e o n 18 M a r c h A . D . 37  In t h i s  119),  who c o n s i s t e n t l y r e f u s e d t o  using i t ,  but  p.  of  a But  within would of  176; 1.131,  no.  unconvincing  o f D i o and S u e t o n i u s c o n c e r n i n g T i b e r i u s '  refusal  57  Of  the  Augustus  title  hesitated  t o u s e t h e name w i t h , i t s  tions-, Gaius d i d not, months no.  of his  rule  for  (cf.  it  ILS  given to  patriae, Cicero  and A u g u s t u s Tiberius, 2.87.2;  the  uaKpav i s  t h i r d of  Dio 53.18.3).  he a l w a y s r e f u s e d i t  S u e t . Tib.  26.2).  on t h e  reverse:  38 = S m a l l w o o d 8 1 ; c f .  rejected accession  it  at (cf.  first CIL  religious  and  T i b e r i u s had at (by. t h e n )  of his  titles  first  divine  connota-  from the  first  the prominent  imperial  and was a f t e r w a r d s Although i t  was  used by J u l i u s  was s e v e r a l t i m e s  c l a i m t h a t G a i u s assumed t h e  (Dio 6 0 . 3 . 2 ) ,  but  accepted i t  Caesar  title  OUK IS  following  yoixiKwxaTos xe avSptov:  3.3  v u v a i V a uiav uev  1.152,  Claudius,  too,  within a year of  his  For popular  eKoiSouevriV  examples, cf.  av<5p\ apudaas:  I.e.,  Suetonius  Gaius  3.3  aAAas <5e a u v o t K o u c r a s xicriv .aTfooTTaaas:  Lollia Paulina,  to b e t r o t h . h e r  to. h i m  aA'Aas w o u l d s u g g e s t t h a t D i o i n c l u d e s i n Gaius'  fourth, w i f e ,  to  S e e on C h a p t e r 8 . 7 eynue.  Gaius i s  s a i d ' t o have  Memmius R e g u l u s , t h e of  24.  Cornelia Orestilla,  during her marriage Calpurnius Piso.  .  6.4032).  3.3  C.  to  1.72.2;  (BMC Imp.  193, dated to A . D . 39).  first  offered  dated A.D. 37-38, w i t h the  S P Q R PP OB C I V E S SERVATOS ILS  titles,  ( D i o 5 7 . 8 . 1 - 2 ; 5 8 . 1 2 . 8 ; T a c . Ann.  Dio's  1.152,  81).  confirmed by a s e s t e r t i u s  inscription  If  180 a n d 183 = S m a l l w o o d 8 4 - 8 5 ; BMC Imp.  (Juvenal 8.244),  (cf.  43-50]).  a p p e a r s as p a r t  36 and 38 = S m a l l w o o d 86 a n d  Pater  no.  (1932)  [CPA 27  (see C h a p t e r 1 2 . 1 ) . this  category M i l o n i a  a l t h o u g h , he nowhere m e n t i o n s  t h a t she had  The  forced husband plural  Caesonia, previously  58  been married • (but c f . Suet. Gaius  25.3; see on Chapter 23.7 Mi.Atoviav).  Gaius was also, accused.of having seduced h i s s i s t e r D r u s i l l a from her f i r s t husband, L. Cass-ius Longinus (Suet. Qaius  24.1; see on Chapter 11.1 Mapicos  AemSos). Those who claim that Gaius modelled his rule on that o f the pharaohs of Egypt would see i n t h i s habit the t r a d i t i o n a l behaviour of those eastern monarchs (see, for example, Colin Latomus Life  in Ancient  Egypt  3.3  auras TrAnv uias eutaricre:  13 [1954] 408-9; c f . A. Ermany  [New York, 1894 (1969)] p.  155).  Gaius divorced at least two of h i s wives, Cornelia O r e s t l l l a i n A.D.  37 or 38 (Chapter  8.7), and L o l l i a Paulina i n A.D.' 39 (Chapter 2 3 . 7 ) w h i l e the fate of h i s f i r s t wife, Junia C l a u d i l l a , i s uncertain (see on Chapter 8.7.TDV xe Guyaxepa).  He loved o n l y M l l o n i a Caesonia, whom he married i n A.D. 39  (Chapter 23.7) and to whom he remained devoted u n t i l h i s death (Suet. Gaius 25.3)--there seems l i t t l e j u s t i f i c a t i o n for Dio's statement that he would have grown to hate her as well, a remark which Ferrero (Women pp. 208-13) apparently accepts as v a l i d .  3.3  euaeBws:  His piety was depicted on coins: BMC Imp. 1.153, no. 41, minted for the dedication.of the Temple of Augustus and  inscribed on the reverse PIETAS (A.D. 37-38); BMC Imp. 1.156, no. 58, with the  same i n s c r i p t i o n (A;D. 39-40).  or Pius the  It does not seem l i k e l y that Euaegfis  was used by Gaius as part of his.name, despite Suetonius' claim to  contrary- (ffaius  22.).  The only- epigr.aphic evidence f o r i t occurs i n an  i n s c r i p t i o n from the East and dated to the v i s i t of Germanicus' family there in A.D'. 18, when Gaius was only- s i x (IGRR 4.1022; c f . Rosborough p. 35).  59  On Q943)  1-10.  family-,  cf.  3.4  as an a t t r i b u t e  ipietas  For Gaius'  of Emperors, cf.  e a r l y - p r o p a g a n d a on b e h a l f  M e i . s e Untersuchungen  x a u x n v x e yap Auyoucrxav  pp.  ... :  death,  uno s e n a t u s c o n s u l t o  Cf.  Suet.  refused Gaius' son,  congessit."  L i v i a had been a p p o i n t e d p r i e s t e s s  t h e name Augusta  the  60.5.1;  (Dio 5 6 . 4 6 . 1 - 2 ) . offer  of  the  Imp.  BMC  1.180,  112,  obverse a bust  a n d on t h e  the  clear 52)  reverse  f r o m t h e Acta  38 was c a r r i e d  given to Antonia,  out  cf.  title  "Antoniae  "Antoniae  In A . D . 14, of Augustus (Claud.  aviae,  honorum  after her  husband's  and had been 11.2)  that  it  remained  on h e r p o s t h u m o u s l y the beginning  of  given  says that  (cf•  Antonia for  also  Claudius'  her  Dio reign  A n t o n i a w i t h t h e w o r d s ANTONIA AUGUSTA,  SACERDOS D I V I A U G U S T I ) .  Arvalium  t h a t A n t o n i a accepted the  A.D.  of  inscription  Fvatrum  it  dated to  a n d s h o w i n g on t h e  imperial  umquam L i v i a A u g u s t a  cognomen Augustae,,and  no.  the whole  15.2:  Gaius  Suetonius  Emperor C l a u d i u s , t o bestow  of  33  97-98.  quidquid cepisset,  M . P . C h a r l e s w o r t h JRS  (Smallwood no. from G a i u s ,  Augustae."  for  3;  cf.  It  is,  Henzen p p .  a.sacrifice  On t h e p r i e s t h o o d  K o r n e m a n n Doppelprinzipat  pp.  however, xliii,  on 31 J a n u a r y of  Augustus  51-52; her position  is  c o n f i r m e d b y CIL 6 . 9 2 1 . -  3.4  o'cra x a ? s  aeiTrapQevois  UTTCXPXEV:  In  42 B . C . t h e T r i u m v i r s  had  the V e s t a l s p e r m i s s i o n to lictor  e a c h (Dio  position of  47.19.4);  as p r i e s t e s s  this  of Augustus  the V e s t a l s , a l s o granted  seats: i n  the  r i g h t was l a t e r  to. L i v i a ,  t h e a t r e and a t p u b l i c  Association of  imperial  (Dio  56.46.2).  (Suet.  Aug.  u s e one  Livia in  Among t h e  was p e r m i s s i o n t o  games  women w i t h t h e  given to  granted  other  her rights  occupy s p e c i a l  4 . 4 . 3 ; T a c . Ann.  V e s t a l s became a l m o s t  4.16.6).  customary:  Ovid  60  r e f e r s to Claudius  Livia in later  company w i t h , t h e m  assigned a seat in t h e i r  (Dio  60.22.2).  3.4-  Iv  3.5  xots X E euxcis . . .  xp. auxrt T r p o e o p i a ;  4 . 2 . 1 3 - 1 4 ; Pont. 4 . 1 3 . 2 9 ) ,  {Tvist.  area of the  See C h a p t e r 7.4  icat... x o u s optcous:  for  Cf.  Gaium habeo e t felixque sisters  sit  S u e t o n i u s Gaius  inquit, Gaius*  item relationib.us  f  C. C a e s a r i s o r o r i b u s q u e e i u s : ' "  family- i n prayers  brothers  Tiberius' him to  sorores e i u s ;  faustumque  sit  since i t  tibi  and i t  ...  naturally  influence  citizens  S.461-466).  o f A . D . 38 t h e sisters  Pvatvum' Avvalium  (cf.  c  f.  ' q u o d bonum  to  Caesar. A u g u s t e ! " ) .  i n c l u d e d i n the  ( T a c . Ann.  4.17;  Gaius'  include  the  5 8 . 2 : "quod bonum, In A . D .  24  annual prayer fear  that  S u e t . Tib.  accession, sisters,  T. Mommsen."I.usiurandum i n  N o r was i t  It  is  annual oaths  for  caused  54.1).  before  the  reads i n  part:  C. Caesarem '  hardly surprising,  then,  that  and p r a y e r s , i n c l u d e d .mention  at  of  [ C h a p t e r . 9 . 2 , •,, and t h e , , o a t h / r e c o r d e d i n , t h e . Acta  . f o r . 12 J a n u a r y A . D . 3 8 , :as r e s t o r e d b y Momms.en a n d . H e n z e n  [CIL 6 . 2 0 2 8 b = 3 2 3 4 4 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  his  omnibus  e u v o n a e i v T a i o n K o u a a p i E s g a c r x S i icon, xah auyTTavxi OXKOOI a u x o u "  A u g u s t u n . " Ges. Sohrlft.  three  S u e t . Aug.  inclusion of his  33;  Gaius'  ut  "de  This honour p a i d to  o f A s s o s on G a i u s '  (SIG 797 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  the beginning  (cf.  domuique t u a e ,  E m p e r o r c o u l d h a v e i n s i s t e d on t h e "ouvuuev  consulum:  was o n l y t h a t E m p e r o r ' s g r o w i n g  suspect Agrippina's  The o a t h t a k e n b y t h e  fuit  was c u s t o m a r y p r a c t i c e  and d e c r e e s  had been q u i t e  health,  auctor  15.3:  ' n e q u e me l i b e r o s q u e meos c a r i o r e s h a b e b o quam  i s hardly- i r r e g u l a r ,  Emperor's  to Messalina  an i n s t a n c e .  sororibus sacramentisadicerentur:  theatre  and  an i n n o v a t i o n  c o i n a g e , . a s on t h e  for  sestertius  2 = Henzen p.  Gains to  include  xlii]). living  i m p e r i a l women o n  o f A . D . 37-38 s h o w i n g on t h e  reverse  61 Agrippina, D r u s i l l a , and J u l i a representing S e c u r i t a s , Concordia, Fortuna (BMC Imp.  1.152, no. 36).  Tiberius e a r l i e r had issued coins on the  reverse of which L i v i a was shown as Pax (BMC Imp. where the coin i s dated to A.D.  and  16-21),  1.124, no. 30; c f . p. cxxx,  The reverse was  secondary to the obverse (cf. M. Grant, Roman Imperial  always considered  Money  [London,  1954]  pp. 141-43), and i t was not u n t i l Claudius' reign that the p o r t r a i t of a l i v i n g i m p e r i a l woman was portrayed on the obverse of a coin (BMC Imp. no. 82: Agrippina Minor, A.D. s i s t e r s , see U. Kahrstedt, Klio  For the coin showing Gaius'  10 (1910) 295; G.G.  three  B e l l o n i i n Aufstieg  und  2.1.1045-1046.  Niedergang  3.5  51-54).  1.176,  Ta Te o a r a r a  Te Tris uryrpos <a\  Ta TGV afieX^Sv TSV auoGavoVrtov:  A f t e r the death of h i s own son Drusus i n A.D.  23, T i b e r i u s entrusted to the Senate the two older sons of Germanicus,  Nero and Drusus, i n language that made i t quite c l e a r that they were to succeed him  (Dio 57.22.4a; Tac. Ann.  cf. G. Kampff Phoenix  4.8.8.  17 [1963] 53-57).  On t h i s meeting of the Senate,  Yet w i t h i n four years they and t h e i r  mother Agrippina were suspected of treason by the Emperor. then f a l l e n under the influence of Seianus, who  T i b e r i u s had  found i t easy to play on the  o l d man's fear of Agrippina's ambition and arrogance (cf. W i l l r i e h p. 94).  by  Caligula  According to Suetonius (Tib. 55), Seianus was given the power to  r i d T i b e r i u s of the family of Germanicus and to ensure that T i b e r i u s Gemellus should become Emperor.  This i s d i f f i c u l t to b e l i e v e o f T i b e r i u s , since  Gemellus was only eight years o l d i n A.D. pina and her sons began i n earnest  27, when the persecution of Agrip-  (Tac. Ann.  4,67.6).  I t i s more l i k e l y  t h a t , by f o r c i n g T i b e r i u s to put Nero and Drusus out of the way,  and at the  same time by p l o t t i n g p r i v a t e l y against Gaius (see on Chapter 16.4 KOI TOV  Seiavov), S e i a n u s was p a v i n g t h e ' w a y - - f o r  Gemellus' accession w i t h himself  regent  3).  ( s e e M a r s h Tiberius  prefect, all  194 a n d n .  At. t h e i n s t i g a t i o n  of  the  t h e n , A g r i p p i n a a n d h e r . f a m i l y w e r e f o l l o w e d b y s o l d i e r s who  their  words and a c t i o n s .  legions or to refused,  p.  They were encouraged t o  seek sanctuary, at  as  noted  f l e e t o t h e German  t h e s t a t u e o f A u g u s t u s , and a l t h o u g h  they  t h e y w e r e n o n e t h e l e s s c o n s i d e r e d t o h a v e c o n t e m p l a t e d s u c h moves  ( T a c . Ann.  5 . 3 a n d S u e t . Tib.  5 3 . 2 , b o t h o f whom c o n s i d e r t h e  charges  fabricated). T a c i t u s - assumes t h a t Agrippina,  since after  L i v i a a c t e d as a b u l w a r k  L i v i a ' s d e a t h i n A . D . 29 T i b e r i u s  d e n o u n c e d A g r i p p i n a and N e r o p u b l i c l y , might  be e x p e c t e d , b u t  [Gaius 1 0 . 1 ]  the death o f  Livia:  been s a t i s f a c t o r i l y  et  and S e i a n u s  impudicitiam"  c o n t u m a c e m animum"  chronological difficulty,  and  ( T a c . Ann.. 5 . 3 . 3 - 4 .  s u g g e s t s t h a t A g r i p p i n a was . t r i e d  on t h i s  and b a n i s h e d  w h i c h has not  e x p l a i n e d , s e e M . P . - C h a r l e s w o r t h CPh 17 [ 1 9 2 2 ]  G e l z e r RE " J u l i u s " c o l .  attacking  c h a r g i n g t h e m , n o t w i t h t r e a s o n as  Nero w i t h "amores iuvenum et  Agrippina w i t h "adrogantiam o r i s Suetonius  against Tiberius  yet 260-61;  3 8 2 ; t h e p r o b l e m was n o t n o t i c e d b y M a u r e r ) .  analysis  of the  charges a g a i n s t A g r i p p i n a and N e r o , see p a r t i c u l a r l y  Criminal  Trials  pp.  was g u i l t y  of  c o n s p i r a c y , but  a v o i d open r e v o l t i n TAPhA 62 is  9 8 - 1 0 3 , where i t  [1931]  on t h e p a r t  is  suggested that  family  F o r an Rogers  o f Germanicus  t h a t dummy c h a r g e s w e r e l a i d a g a i n s t them of their  supporters  1 4 1 - 6 8 ; t h e most r e c e n t  R . A . Bauman Impietas  the  before  in Prinoipem  p r o s e c u t e d along w i t h h i s mother  (see a l s o R o g e r s '  treatment  [Munich,  and b r o t h e r ,  of the  1974]).  treason  Instead of  D r u s u s was u s e d a s a  to  article trials  being tool  against Nero: Seianus played on.his jealousy- of h i s older brother,  encouraging  him t o hope f o r  4.60.4-6).  the s u c c e s s i o n , i f  Since Tacitus i s not.extant  Nero were d i s p o s e d o f for  the t r i a l  ( T a c . Ann.  and c o n v i c t i o n  and N e r o i n A . D . 2 9 , and D i o o n l y i n b a r e f r a g m e n t s  that  are  of.Agrippina chronologically  63  imperfect, one o f  it  is  impossible to reconstruct  t h e " a c c u s e r s - was A v i l l i u s f l a c c u s - . , l a t e r  treatment  of  t h e A l e x a n d r i a n J e w s was t o  ( P h i l o in flaao.  3.9  riots  during Gaius'  after  the  prevent  trial  [518]; reign,  on f l a c c u s ' cf.  island of  responsibility  but not date i s  Pandateria  (Suet.  (Tac.  1.53.1;  Ann.  Drusus,.no  pp.. 1 4 - 2 3 ) .  ( S u e t . Tit.  if  late  64).  inferred Tib.  f r o m Tib.  this  S u e t . Aug.  longer  of  61.1).  mentis  suicide. their  at  (Tiberius  length  p.  208).  " p l a c e him at 6.23.4-6).  trial  while  His remains burial  ( S u e t . Tib.  must h a v e t a k e n p l a c e a f t e r cf.  Furneaux 1.624,  n.  2).  i n p r i s o n Drusus acted the p a r t  simulans],  correct  quasi per dementiam").  when h e s a y s t h a t  (cf..  were  (Suet.  Tib. on exile  "it  The f o l l o w i n g  the  publica-  According of  a madman  However, p a r t  seems e x t r e m e l y  during the  starve  state"  of Seianus,  r e l e a s e Drusus  C'dueem p o p u l o . i m p p n e r e " :  B u t i n s t e a d h e was a l l o w e d t o  and  i n s a n e , and t h a t  overthrow  i n a n e m e r g e n c y M a c r o was t o  of  probable  d e a t h was a g r i m n e c e s s i t y o f  year,  the head o f the p e o p l e "  54.2),  F u r n e a u x ad l o c ) ,  t h e p r i n c e became a c t u a l l y  concluded that his  t h e r e was a rumour t h a t  the  a n y u s e t o S e i a n u s , was c o n v i c t e d o n an unknown  that during h i s imprisonment Tiberius  the  A g r i p p i n a was i m p r i s o n e d  a p p e a r s t o b e an i n t e r p o l a t i o n  Marsh, i s no doubt  to  65.3).  in that year:  (Ann. 6 . 2 4 . 2 ) ,  statement  Immediately  5 3 . 2 ) , where her. mother J u l i a had a l s o b e e n i n  i n A . D . 30 ( h i s  ("[alienationem  Alexandrian  N e r o was e x i l e d t o  s u c c e s s f u l l y enough t o p r e v e n t  t i o n o f V e l l e i u s ' work to Tacitus  problems  any i s needed, o f  c h a r g e and i m p r i s o n e d i n t h e basement o f t h e p a l a c e probably  the  whose  o f A g r i p p i n a and N e r o , T i b e r i u s t o o k g r e a t p r e c a u t i o n s  P o n t i a , w h e r e i n A . D . 31 he c o m m i t t e d  the  for  that  of Egypt,  cause,Gaius considerable  S m a l l w o o d Legqtio  of Germanicus' family  scattered,  We do know  the p r e f e c t  t h e m b e i n g s e e n by. t h e p o p u l a c e — p r o o f ,  popularity  54.2;  those events.  Tac.  t o d e a t h two y e a r s  and Ann., later,  64  surviving  his  6.23.4;  Ann.  burial  last  eight  d a y s by- e a t i n g  S u e t . Tib. . 5 4 . 2 ) .  (Dio  58.22.5).  Suetonius points with Tiberius  but  53.2).  Seianus  before  Tacitus  starvation  (cf.  buried  is  i n doubt  quite  i n Augustus'  auxos  S e a g e r Tiberius-  were s c a t t e r e d  about  t h e \ two p r i n c e s ,  pp.  auxos  to  suggest  that  Gaius here  Ann.  to  "quo. magis p i e t a s  c o l l e c t e d the  Tib.  her  as  suicide.  allow her to  be  58.22.5).  aUToyexpta. aveAopevos:  Journ.. 4 [ 1 9 3 3 ]  solely  (Suet.  Suetonius describes i t  circumstances,.refused  bad w e a t h e r ,  as-  233-34).  According to  ..  C h a r l e s w o r t h Comb. Hist.  must r e s t  denounced, the Emperor  M a u s o l e u m a t Rome ( D i o  j o u r n e y was made d u r i n g  without  t h e manner o f h e r d e a t h , w h e t h e r  i n the  i e iT'Aeuaas KCU  of  (Jae.  D r u s u s , on 18 . O c t o b e r . A . D . -33 ( T a c .  or e n f o r c e d , but  naturally  mattress  i n s i g h t . ' . (Tib. 6 1 . 1 ) ,  she had t h o r o u g h l y  was v o l u n t a r y  Tiberius,  3.5  not  too,  R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r . t h e deaths  A g r i p p i n a d i e d soon a f t e r 6.25.5),  stuffing of his  His remains,  out w i t h c o n s i d e r a b l e  and not  the  108-9). remains  15.1)  (Gaius emineret"  Dio i s ,  of  Suetonius the  (cf.  M.P.  course,  wrong  of both his brothers,  since  D r u s u s h a d d i e d a t Rome. P a n d a t e r i a a n d P o n t i a . a r e two s m a l l b u t lying  in  the  Bay of. P u t e o l i  mainland  (Strabo  place of  exile  daughter  Julia,  2.5.19;  for two  o p p o s i t e F o r m i a e , about  5.3.6;  women o f  moderately populated  the  of Gaius'  P l i n y HN 3 . 6 . 8 2 ) . . imperial.family:  250.stades The f o r m e r  in  addition  s i s t e r s were i m p r i s o n e d  there  from was a  to  t o be c o n f i n e d  on t h e  970-972.  ( T a c . Ann.  14.63.1;  [Sen.]  Octavia  the favourite  Augustus'  (see on C h a p t e r  3 . 6 Is v r i c r o v ) , a n d N e r o ' s w i f e . O c t a v i a was l a t e r island  islands  and  executed  65  Is  3.5  TO  funerary  TQQ  AuyOvCTTOU uvfiua KareGeTO;  inscriptions  183 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  of Agrippina  perhaps h i s There i s  mention  remains could not  e v i d e n c e , however,  ( e . g . , ILS  the  villa  3.21.5;  circus  games i n h e r h o n o u r  of  a bull  from G a l l i a  (Suet.  which Suetonius (Tib. 5 3 . 2 ) ,  by the A r v a l s  date  are u n c l e a r ,  3.5  oiarrep I v  [1939]  triumphal  (cf.  emphasis o f the  the  Quinta  (Livy  29.14.12).  Imp.  BMC  Suet.  Maurer  26  (Gaius  9;  used f o r  It  of Gaius'  58)  goes so f a r  family;  a t t e n t i o n to  but  t h e pietas  it  no.  figures  180). instigasacrifice  of  the  October).  15.1)  carrying  is  (Sen.  an a n n u a l  the  adds f u r t h e r  o f war  col.  2206-7),  tempting  as t o  from O s t i a  spoils  Caes. 3 7 . 2 ; RE " f e r c u l u m "  (p.  Rome  burial.  at. t h e  remains were c a r r i e d  in procession.  30).  annual  1.159,  to  p r o c e s s i o n and t h a t o f Magna M a t e r i n  divinity  E m p e r o r was d r a w i n g  and d e c l a r e d  occasion of  25 o r  Suetonius  vehicles normally  4.291-348);  459-62)  15.1; cf.  either  Rome on two feroula,  O v i d Fasti  stop w i t h her  she had been i m p r i s o n e d  = Smallwood n o .  the  between t h i s  p.  Transpadina).  was now made t h e  ITTIVIKCOIS K o a u n Q e i s :  similarity  i n the Mausoleum,  s a y s h a d b e e n d e c l a r e d nefastus  (CIL 6 . 3 2 3 4 6  w e r e a c c o m p a n i e d b y equites  Drusus.  ( s o B a l s d o n Gaius  memory d i d n o t  Gaius  and c o u l d s i g n i f y  procession  that of  t h a t m e m o r i a l s were e r e c t e d t o him o u t s i d e  s e e K. S c o t t , AJPh 60  tion of Tiberius  was b u r i e d  332-35.  (ILS 180 a n d  i s no r e c o r d o f  i n the palace  at Herculaneum where  de Ira  Her b i r t h d a y ,  The  that he, too,  piety- towards h i s mother's  He d e s t r o y e d  P l a t n e r a n d Ashby- p p .  there  be found  187, an i n s c r i p t i o n  Gaius'  see  and N e r o a r e b o t h e x t a n t  84a and 8 5 a ) , b u t  S i n c e S u e t o n i u s does not  F o r the Mausoleum o f A u g u s t u s ,  to in  a  and  see a planned 204 B . C .  suggest  w o u l d b e more  of his  that  an  (cf.  intentional  likely  that  ancestress, Claudia  66  3.6  TQUS  6V  xe <j>£UYOVTqs  auxous KaxxryaYe;  F o r a discussion o f  the  Tiberian prosecutions Agrippina's  supporters,  187-94;.206-8. was f i r s t  s e e yiarsh. Tiberius  The c o n c e p t o f  devised by f . B .  suggests that i t of Tiberius  and  a "party"  1-25.  supporters,  3.6  (earlier)  his  For a b r i e f  ITTX xiunoxxaav  attempted  to  Tiberius'  death  restrain  Gaius  xi  and o f  "party" aristoc-  o f some o f  Agrippina's  a t t i t u d e of hers that  pp.  after  against  similarity  to  causing her death. in imperial  [236]; cf.  99-100).  Perhaps i t  that  d e c i s i o n s , as when s h e  (cf.  was b e c a u s e o f  D i o 6 0 . 5 . 1 ; S u e t . Claud.  i n s t e a d from the p a l a c e those  on  2 9 . 1 ; on t h i s  point,  this  11.2).  ( S u e t . .Gaius 2 3 . 2 ) ,  accusations levelled against 3.3).  The  provoked her death  w i t h p o i s o n , a n d t h a t he r e f u s e d t o . a t t e n d  h e r s e l f had t a k e n no p a r t i n t h e (ibid.).  appears  his  h e r d d e a t h he n e g l e c t e d t o p a y h e r s u c h honours  c a s e o f G e r m a n i c u s ' d e a t h ( c f . . T a c . • Ann.  father  It  S u e t . Gaius  Gaius by our s o u r c e s , t h a t . h e  perhaps even hastened i t but watched i t  accuse Gaius of m a l t r e a t i n g  from r e l e a s i n g Herod A g r i p p a immediately  as he h a d b e s t o w e d u p o n h i s m o t h e r charges brought  a u x G ks a v a y K r i v eicouaiou 0 a v a x o u  interfere  ( J o s . AJ 1 8 . 6 . 1 0  s e e M e i s e Untersuohungen  Gaius'  the  who  m o d i f i e d b y W. A l l e n , . . J r . , i n TAPhA 72  B o t h D i o and S u e t o n i u s  Antonia s e v e r a l times t r i e d to  the  while  233-50),  s o n D r u s u s was f a v o u r e d b y t h e h i g h e r  d i s c u s s i o n of the prosecution  grandmother  in  [1925/1926]  s e e on C h a p t e r 19.1..KaxFiyopriKex .  Kaxecrxricre:  striking  Tiberius  t o A g r i p p i n a : and G e r m a n i c u s  was s u p p o r t e d by- t h e " l e s s e r " . n o b i l i t y ,  IKEIVTIV x £ Y a p  funeral  loyal  166-88; Seager  M a r s h (Am. .Hist. Rep. .31  r a c y ; M a r s h ' s v i e w s were s l i g h t l y (1941)  pp.  of  Tiberius  her bear and  What, i s m o r e ,  f u n e r a l , o f G e r m a n i c u s , . h e r own son  and  a Livia  Antonia and  67 Nor d o e s • i n s c r i p t i o n a l  evidence support  A n t o n i a d i e d on 1 M a y - A - D .  Suetonius.  o n l y s i x weeks a f t e r  Gaius'  s u g g e s t s - by- p l a c i n g t h e  Madman"  G a r z e t t i L'impero  birthday  37 dFasti  October of  Journ.  4 [1933]  Tfacras r j i a ^ O e i p a s :  pp., 8 8 - 8 9 ) .  Further,  At the time of G a i u s '  4.75.1; cf.  6.15.1; Dio 58.28.1),  the  following  to  58.28.1]).  This rather  traditional  o n l y by Dio  (cf.  no m e n t i o n  L.  Cassius  Longinus  charge of  (AJ 1 9 . 2 . 5 by T a c i t u s ,  [RE " J u l i u s " c o l .  392]  notes  2.17.4];  of improper  to  accept the suggestion of  relations  as T i b e r i u s '  b a s e e x p l a n a t i o n needed t o be found f o r I  am n o t  that Gaius'  [ T a c . Ann.  which  c o n v i n c e d by- t h e  Ahenobarbus  (Tac.  Ann.  6.15.1;  Dio Gaius  1  j o i n e d w i t h an a c c u s a t i o n (Gaius  description.of cf.  Gaius'  Willrieh  grief  Caligula  i n the  desire for them  together  while  Seneca incest  at  the  p. .291).  B a l s d o n , who e x p l a i n s t h e s e sisters  of  24.1),  (most s i g n i f i c a n t l y )  It  stories  same way as h e  devotion  to  his  s e c l u s i o n , a n d s o some  (Gaius  arguments o f C o l i n  incest with Drusilla,  sisters  i s made against  o b s c e n i t i e s on C a p r e a e : G a i u s '  f a m i l y - was as e x c e p t i o n a l  her  C h a p t e r 1 1 . 1 ; she had  and S u e t o n i u s  between G a i u s and h i s  does t h o s e o f T i b e r i u s '  3),  t h a t S e n e c a makes no m e n t i o n , o f  death of D r u s i l l a tempting  (cf.  incest  P h i l o , or  in his  [Cons. Polyb.  is  [204]),  w h e r e one w o u l d m o s t e x p e c t i t ,  is  year  three  J u l i a t o M. V i h i c i u s  C h a p t e r 2 2 . 6 - 7 , where i t  i s made o f i t  the  Charlesworth  accession, his  and D r u s i l l a t o M. L e p i d u s  Josephus  (cf.  A g r i p p i n a to Cn. Domitius  S u e t . Hero 6 . 1 ) ,  p r e v i o u s l y been m a r r i e d  homosexuality),  year,  108-9).  were m a r r i e d , ( T a c . Ann.  43],  that  was c e l e b r a t e d b y t h e A r v a l s . ( C I L 6 . 2 0 2 8 c = S m a l l w o o d n o .  Comb. Hist.  (Gelzer  and  e y e r t t i n h i s s e c t i o n on " G a i u s  would h a r d l y have been wise if, Gaius had t r u l y hated h e r  3.6  of Dio  Ostiens.es =. E(}J p .  a c c e s s i o n and not. a f t e r  as Suetonius (.cf-  the statements  pp.  41-42).  (Latomus  with his  last  13 [ 1 9 5 4 ]  408ff.)  three marriages,  is  68  a reflection it  of his  devotion  to the  was a r o y a l d y n a s t i c m a r r i a g e  gpuvernait  l.'.Egypte:  c'etai.t  cult  of  p.  W i l l r i c h Caligula  99, n. pp.  l e ' r o i , d'Egypte qui  ( e . g . , F e r r e r o Women p p .  f a s c i n a t i n g but  commandait  charge of  absurd a r t i c l e  (Meraure  de France  1.5  not  o n l y on p h y s i c a l r e s e m b l a n c e s , b u t p a r t i c u l a r l y deux s o n t  cabotins, plaisantins, (p.  " l a s a l a c i t e e x a s p e r e e , l e s moeurs c o n t r e n a t u r e ,  As h i s  a v e r s e r l e sang et  final  Tiberius'  on t h e d a y o f h i s  fails  53).  longuement  212-16)  roquentins,  they both  etc."  t h e b i r t h o f N e r o , as i f accession.  penchant f o r  "moral"  possess  (p.  le  214). from  Gaius had been prompted t o  The m o r a l r e s e m b l a n c e s show t h e  theory  depensiers  l e gout des i n c e s t e s ,  souffrir,  a  that  He b a s e s h i s  argument he n o t e s t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e n i n e months  death to  historians'  a. f a i r e  118;  o n w h a t he s e e s as  213);  408]).  account  p.  [1913]  own,son b y A g r i p p i n a .  a. o u t r a n c e e t d e b a u c h e s a u d e l a de t o u t e m e s u r e "  penchant  4 [1933]  i n c e s t , H. M a z e l has s u g g e s t e d i n  f u t u r e E m p e r o r N e r o was G a i u s '  "tous  qui  ( e . g . , Meise  accept the t r a d i t i o n a l  the  similarities:  Journ.  1 8 4 - 2 0 7 . ; Kornemann Doppelprinzipat  the  that  a. Rome" [ p .  as an u g l y r u m o u r  4 6 ; . C h a r l e s w o r t h Carrib. Hist.  291-92); but'a.few  As an e x t e n s i o n t o  or by h i s s u g g e s t i o n  Q'Ce n ' e ' . t a i t p a s l e p r i n c e r o m a i n  M o s t w o u l d now d i s m i s s : t h e . c h a r g e o f i n c e s t Untersuehungen  Isis,,  action  ancient  t y p e s more t h a n a n y r e a l s i m i l a r i t i e s ,  and M a z e l  t o m e n t i o n t h e m o s t d a m a g i n g p i e c e . o f . e v i d e n c e o f a l l : when a s k e d b y  A g r i p p i n a w h a t name h e w o u l d s u g g e s t f o r h e r new s o n , G a i u s s h o w e d h i s affection  for  t h e b o y a n d h i s m o t h e r b y p r o p o s i n g t h a t he b e c a l l e d C l a u d i u s ,  " q u o d turn C l a u d i u s i n t e r  3.6  ludibria  aulae e r a t "  ( S u e t . Nero  6.2).  Is vriQXJV. r a s 6oo KaTebcAei.gev: . A g r i p p i n a a n d J u l i a w e r e e x i l e d t o Pontian i s l a n d s i n A . D . 39,  because o f improper  relations  w i t h Lepidus  the  ostensibly  ( C h a p t e r 2 2 . 8 - 9 ; S u e t . Gaius  29;  69  Nero 6 . 3 ) , whose w i f e t r u e cause o f t h e i r unwittingly;  D r u s i l l a had d i e d the previous  h a n i s h m e n t w;as r e a l i z e d b y S u e t o n i u s  guessed by P h i l o  having taken part  3.7  i n Lepidus'  conspiracy against Gaius They-were  later  TfccTTTTOv  upooxovouaCz:  TSV aUToav  attendant frequent  (Gaius 2 4 . 3 ) a n d  (for.the  conspiracy,  T i b e r i u s h a d adopted G a i u s '  T a c . Ann. 4 . 3 8 ) . is unlikely  before h i s actual  Cf. Dio 56.46.3-4.  such as temples  Dio's ordering  funeral  ( c f . T a c . Ann. 1 . 1 0 . 8 ,  deum d i x i t " ) .  Normally,  E m p e r o r was r e q u i r e d however, Tiberius'  f  despite  with  that  et caelestes religiones  divine  questionable, deification "ceterum  decernuntur",  ut plerique  neque p o s t e a , s e n a t u s p o p u l u s q u e  a t t h e m i n t i n Rome t h o u g h t .to  Emperor's head r a d i a t e A u g u s t u s and T i b e r i u s -  with.a  star  Ann.^ .  dicunt, ....propitium  o f the e l e v a t i o n o f . t h e  ( c f . D i o 5 6 . 4 2 . 3 ; 5 6 . 4 6 . 2 ; S u e t . Aug. 1 0 0 ) .  by i s s u i n g c o i n s on.the  its  e t mox c o n s e c r a t i o " ; a n d HA  t o o , some v i s i b l e p r o o f  some o f f i c i a l s  deification  is  honour  Tiberius*  of Augustus:  1 8 . 3 : "denique, priusquam f u n u s c o n d e r e t u r ,  q u o d numquam a n t e a f a c t u m f u e r a t  late  together  o f these events  o f C l a u d i u s : " C l a u d i o censorium funus  "Marcus"  two• divi  and p r i e s t s ,  The p r i n c i p a l  t h a t Gaius would have r e q u e s t e d T i b e r i u s '  s e p u l t u r a more p e r f e e t a , ' . t e m p l u m 13.2.6,  Germanicus  55.13.2).  xC Auyouerraj xiuaW:-  distinctions  father,  c l a i m t h a t he d i s l i k e d t h e t h o u g h t • o f . b e i n g . c o n s i d e r e d  since i t  the  The  r e c a l l e d by Claudius  was d e i f i c a t i o n ,  (cf.  11).  60.4.1).  (Dio  3.7  (Chapter  (Leg.. 1 2 . 8 7 [ 5 5 8 ] : ) — t h e y ' w e r e s u s p e c t e d o f  s e e o n C h a p t e r 2 2 . 5 rouTOUAisccv). (Dio  year  dead  It -appears,  anticipate  r e v e r s e o f w h i c h , was p i c t u r e d  on e i t h e r  side, indicating  the  (BMC Imp. 1 . 1 4 6 , . n o . 1'= S m a l l w o o d n o . 1 2 4 ) .  70  Later (cf.  an a l m o s t  identical  H. M a t t i n g l y  10  JRS  c o i n was m i n t e d w i t h o u t [1920]  3 7 ; G...G-. B e l l p n i  the  two  flanking  i n Aufstieg  und  stars Niedergang  2.1.1043-1044).  3.7  VUKTOS TE es- Triv TTOAIV TO  oGua aCiToO ecraY^Y'^"  Dio's brevity point  G a i u s was d i s h o n o u r i n g Rome u n d e r disprove Tiberi  cover of  this;  carried  "itaque  laetissimo  This  Fratrum  (E§J p .  and e a r l y m o r n i n g xiii.1.219-220;  3.8  of  altaria  quamvis  et victimas  as i s  clear  confusion of  43)  the  give  dates  found i n  29 M a r c h .  G a r z e t t i L'Impero p .  (cf.  date  into  enough d e t a i l habitu  ardentisque (Gaius  this  that  h i s body  et  13).  funus  T h e b o d y was ardentis  inscriptions:  the  a s 28 M a r c h , w h i l e  C l e a r l y the n i g h t  to  taedas  from S u e t o n i u s ' phrase  r e c o r d the  2 9 t h a r e meant  suggests  gives  lugentis  o b v i o r u m agmine i n c e s s i t "  (CIL 6 . 2 0 2 8 )  Arvalium  by- b r i n g i n g  Suetonius fortunately  a Miseno movit  e x p l a i n s the  Ostienses  [1933]  ut  i n t o Rome a t n i g h t ,  taedas.  Fasti  darkness.  p r o s e q u e n s , tamen i n t e r  densissimo et  Acta  t h e memory- o f T i b e r i u s  on  of  the  the 28th  D e g r a s s i Insoriptiones  Italiae  8 4 ; C h a r l e s w o r t h Comb. Hist.  4  Journ.  107-8).  ETTOinaaxo u e v  Y ^ P  kc  ^  JOYOUS  EIT* a u r C :  Again Dio suggests by the ness of h i s  Tiberius'  funeral  Comb. Hist.  Journ.  five  days a f t e r  non.  Apr.  suitable  4 [1933]  w i t h improper haste  107-8).  t h e body- a r r i v e d  f(unere)  splendid affair  was p e r f o r m e d  p(uhlica)  carried  eulogy- (Suet.  out Gaius  Yet i t  i n Rome (Fasti  e(latus) in  d i d not  the  e(st)").  (cf.  description  = E I J . p.  The b u r i a l ,  too,  o l d Roman m a n n e r a m i d t e a r s  1 5 . 1 ; J o s . AJ  18.6.10  [236];  that  Charlesworth  take place u n t i l  Ostienses  brief-  cf.  3 April,  43:  was  a  and w i t h Dio  "III  a  58.28.5.  71  For  comments, on t h e  Tiberius'  rhetorical  body-was p l a c e d i n  (ILS  164)  no l o n g e r  3.8  (con xou  ability-  of Gaius,  s e e on C h a p t e r  the Mausoleum o f A u g u s t u s ; h i s  cSriuov avauiuvrjcfKuv:  repyaviKOU xov  c a l l s - h i m vulgo  memory- o f h i s  father  him p a r t i c u l a r l y  t h a t made i t  given to J u l i u s 94,  n.  23)  notes the  noted [Dio  the  popularly  Gaius'  (cf.  is  r e i g n by C u r t i u s  who v i e w i t  as p o r t r a y i n g  b y no means u n i v e r s a l l y and H o h l  (RM 49  (Klio  31  [1938]  this  G i a  u s  t  15.2.)..  Meise  Gaius wanted to to  power  it  would  emphasize  change the  same d y n a s t i c  a c c e p t e d , however;  order.  cf.  (it  p. bear  s h o u l d be "Tiberius"  c h a n g e was  ever  60-61).  dated to  and Gage  honours  indicate  rename S e p t e m b e r  26-27; Maurer pp.  119-56)  made  (Untersuchungen  no e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e  [1934]  the  parentage  i m i t a t i o n of  G r a n d Cameo o f P a r i s ,  273-82).  was  Apparently- Gaius t r i e d to  been a p r o p o s a l  the  it  assume i m p e r i a l  (206-210)]  been  populace;  and a d d s t h a t  J u l y and A u g u s t ,  Rosborough pp.  interest  of the  c h o o s i n g S e p t e m b e r as t h e m o n t h t o  succession that  There i s , however,  accepted  Of r e l a t e d  of  4),  "Germanicus" i n  Gaius  following  had e a r l i e r  57.18.2]).  army).  (Suet.  importance  father:  dynastic  that there  epitaph  Germanicus had always  Gains to  [AJ 1 8 . 6 . 8  September to  and A u g u s t u s  t h e name o f G a i u s ' clearly  easy- f o r  popular w i t h the  t h e name o f t h e m o n t h o f  (Gaius  favorahilis  13; according to Josephus  (Gaius  simple  survives.  a hero Suetonius  19.3-5).  (REA 37  Their  early [1935]  in 165-84),  interpretation  B a l s d o n (JRS. 26  [1936]  is  152-60)  72  CHAPTER f O U R  4.1  lue^uicei;  upo?;. Trqvxa. e v q v x i p s  This- assessment o f G a i u s ' the  vary-.  Philo  ment. (" like  (Leg. 4 3 . 3 3 9 - 3 4 1 HV p e v x o i  Dio,  lists  view Gaius' to  end.  spirit  Kai Trpos x '  a number o f  f r o m one e x t r e m e  to  reign  the  (see f u r t h e r  —which are f o r  r e l i q u a ut  t h e most p a r t  A.D.  37, although  the  chronological  wilful,  eBouXexo  (57.1.1-2).  the  Chapter 3.1), (cf.  from  while  Chapter 26.4).  i n two d i s t i n c t  then,  beginning autocratic  even  late  Suetonius,  periods—"hac22.1)  (Gaius  death  in  October  (Chapter  3.6)  exact.  antitheses  Dio introduces  v  TrpoCTeiTOieixo  £Tre6uuei  the  xi,  character  of  KCU COV eXeyev  OUK T\E,\OV x o v a u x a p x o u v x a K a x a 6 n X o v wv (JjpoveT  While Tiberius  is  consciously deceitful,  Gaius i s  fickle,  and p e r v e r s e .  In the the  raV  actions  case of A n t o n i a ' s  ou u o v o v l^nXcoorev aXXot KOU u i r e p e g a ' A e v :  Nero to  and  B o t h D i o and P h i l o  de m o n s t r o n a r r a n d a s u n t "  i s b y n o means  Book 5 7 : " o u x e y^P ^  cos e i i r e i v  eivax"  4.1  in  ...")  s e p a r a t e d by the Emperor's i l l n e s s  With comparable r h e t o r i c a l Tiberius  (cf.  behaviour  a s we h a v e s e e n i n division  tempera-  e x a m p l e , he showed h i s  times .admirable  other hand, catalogues Gaius'  [551]).  good and e v i l  imperial powers  c o n d u c t was a t  t e n u s q u a s i de p r i n c i p e ,  ou6ev  6.34  As e a r l y as M a r c h - A p r i l A . D . 3 7 , f o r  i n A . D . 40 h i s  details  analysis of his  a X X a . Ttavxa xr\v $ucri\) c a u c r r o s  is  e x a m p l e s i l l u s t r a t i n g how t h e E m p e r o r c o u l d c h a n g e  other  the  one, although  gives a similar  as a c o n s t a n t m i x t u r e o f  by- a s s u m i n g a l l  on t h e  [595])  traditional  character  Gaius;  "iTpos-  UTfepegaXexo . . . "  x.ov T a i o v e x e i . v e v . (61.5.1).  cos § '  same w a y ,  and w i t h  same w o r d s , D i o  almost  compares  airag i^riXcoaai a u x o v £ i r e 0 u p r L O " e . 5  73  4.2  TrpCros. x e u g p i c r a s a u x o v  According to D i o ,  for  the  first  two  o f h i s r e i g n G a i u s made no a t t e m p t h o n o u r t h e memory o f h i s p r e d e c e s s o r , p r e f e r r i n g popular hostilityhis  felt  towards him  a t t i t u d e to Tiberius  criticizing admiration  his for  TO  his behaviour  ( s e e on C h a p t e r  fox  4.3  28;  behaviour,  x a y p a y y a x a auxwv. K a r a ^ X e ^ a s :  Chapter 6.3 xa ypayyaxa) •  cf.  Suet.  Gaius a b o l i s h e d the  charge  immediately  on h i s  restored i t  two  of  years  He s u p p o s e d l y b u r n e d t h e  incriminating  early in his. reign  ( s e e on  I n A . D . 3 8 , h o w e v e r , he p r o d u c e d t h e  original  as e v i d e n c e a g a i n s t t h o s e who h a d b e e n i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r o s e c u t i o n  family  (see C h a p t e r 1 0 . 8 ) .  the S e n a t e ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  4.4  and  16.8).  letters  his  of  30.2.  ( s e e on C h a p t e r 6 . 2 f a x e l y K A r i y a x a ) , b u t  (see Chapter  copies  however,  16.1-8).  maiestas  later  In A . D . 3 9 ,  the  changed: i n s t e a d  examples o f t h i s  x e xri.s ace(3e{as e y K A r i y a x a r r a u a a s :  accession  join in  to  a c t i o n s , G a i u s now s h o w e d s y m p a t h y , f o r h i s d i f f i c u l t i e s  Gaius  4.3  Chapter 6.7).,  i s s a i d to have c o m p l e t e l y  ws- I x O p o u s TOU T i g e p i o u :  4.2  (cf.  instead to  years  O t h e r s were used the  in trials  f o r maiestas  following  year to  (see C h a p t e r  e\K.6vas x e a r r a y o p e u a a s K a x ' apxcts y n S e v a a y x o u t c r x a v a i :  recording a letter  w r i t t e n on 19, A u g u s t A . D . 37 {ILS  f r o m . t h e Emperor  8792 = • S m a l l w o o d n o .  361).  prove  16.3).  That t h i s ment i s  i s shown by- an i n s c r i p t i o n  of  stateuntrue  himself, In r e p l y  to  74 an e m b a s s y - b r i n g i n g c o n g r a t u l a t i o n s -  from c e r t a i n  permission to erect  t o him,. G a i u s , w i t h a c e r t a i n  as w e l l  several statues  as concern f o r  the purse of  Greek s t a t e s  the p r o v i n c i a l s ,  modesty  gaye them l e a y e t o  s e t up s t a t u e s o n l y - a t O l y m p i a , . N e m e a , . D e l p h i , , and I s t h m i a the  and a s k i n g  (the s i n c e r i t y  d e l e g a t i o n i s u n n e c e s s a r i l y - ' q u e s t i o n e d b y - G e l z e r [EE " J u l i u s " c o l .  The c h o i c e o f s i t e s s h o w s . n o p a r t i c u l a r Emperor c o u l d a l l o w s t a t u e s  of himself  desire for at  divine  such p a n h e l l e n i c s i t e s  b e i n g a c c u s e d o f immodesty- ( s e e a l s o W i l l r i c h Caligula preventing precincts  the  o f any s t a t u e s  p.  116).  since  an  without Rather  G a i u s more l i k e l y  at a l l ,  386]).  than  forbade  t o be d e d i c a t e d to. h i m , p r e c i n c t s w h i c h would i n c l u d e s t a t u e s t o  him as a god. Suet.  erection  glory,  of  Tib.  Tiberius  2 6 . 1 ) , but  had begun w i t h the  like  G a i u s he l a t e r  same p r o h i b i t i o n  (Dio  5719.1;  gave i n t o t h e d e s i r e o f  some  to  w o r s h i p h i m ( s e e o n C h a p t e r 2 6 . 5 xiJov u e v npwa).  4.4  v a o u s eauxG  Cf.  S u e t . Gaius  of erecting  4.5  x a xe XPnyoixa . . . :  Cf.  Suet.  ad r a p i n a s calumniarum et  Suet.  Gaius  wasteful the  extravagance  incident  German e x p e d i t i o n 21.1-2).  of  see Chapters  convertit  animum v a r i o  genere." KOU  Josephus  igitur et  Gaius  28.1-4.  atque  egens  exquisitissimo  (AJ 1 9 . 2 . 5  [207])  xb S a r r a v G v x a e i s n 6 o v a s " ( c f .  these extravagances)..  The b e s t  example o f  f o l l o w e d by- r a p a c i o u s e x a c t i o n s was t h o u g h t t o b e  o f the b r i d g e  Chapters 17-18);  Chapter  a list  charge against  38.1: "exhaustus  Gaius  "f\ Trepi. x a axpeTa orrouSri  37 f o r  For the  temples t o h i m s e l f ,  auctionum et v e c t i g a l i u m  accuses Gaius o f  22.2-4.  a t B a i a e and i t s  and t h e n e x t  aftermath  i n A . D . 39  (see on  y e a r G a i u s was s u s p e c t e d o f , a r r a n g i n g  as a means o f e x p l o i t i n g , t h e w e s t e r n p r o v i n c e s  his  ( s e e on  75  CHAPTER F I V E  5.1  TO) TOU  TxgepCou epYo; K . X . A , : According t o T a c i t u s had.suspected„that  as h i s  successor p a r t l y  character,  at  l e a s t because of the  which, would enhance the memory.of  Suetonius  rejects  hindsight—but  this  belief  nonetheless i t  "acryevtos, UTrepgoXri  ca)YKpU(J)0ri"  IrJouXeue <Se  5.2  sight  5.2  <J>ao~t., x r \ v a p x u v  cos-  of  icat  everyone  auxC  xoi.s  Jews  prostitute, 30.203-206  (Chapter  and t u r n e d  to  it  that  (Suet.  historians,  successor:  xa xe lauxou xri. xou  rouou  He was n o t  once  A 9 0 7 ) was a t r a g i c  from A s c a l o n  pp.  255-56).  o n l y when h i s  always the  to  i s the  charms h a d f a d e d  favoured  plain  its  hatred  a  (Philo  companion o f G a i u s :  (Gaius  This  i s no doubt  (cf.  Leg. Philo  the  3 3 ) , when G a i u s h a d  E m p e r o r was g r e a t e r  as a, t r a g i c  same p e r s o n  for  He was o r i g i n a l l y  agree t h a t the  an A p e l l e s m e n t i o n e d 19.1)  actor  c o a s t o f J u d a e a , a town n o t e d  the Emperor's o r d e r s .  hesitating  Vesp.  Gaius i s  in  T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t he d i e d u n d e r t h i s  is unlikely  Vespasian  for  on  accused of k i s s i n g actors  as t h a t m e n t i o n e d b y S u e t o n i u s  A p e l l e s whipped Jupiter.  (PIR  acting  adds t h a t h e w a s t o r t u r e d a t same i n c i d e n t  moral  all,  27.1).  ( s e e S m a l l w o o d Legatio  [576]).  for  See C h a p t e r 2 . 5 .  opxncnrais:  x o v y o ^ v *k-ne\\r\v: A p e l l e s  the  depends, a f t e r  (58.23.4).  on t h e of  OITCOS  Tiberius  retrospect.  c h o i c e o f G a i u s as h i s  ecStoicev,  chose  people  unfavourable  Augustus, i n  became a k i n d o f m o t i f  and was a p p l i e d by D i o t o T i b e r i u s '  Augustus  latter's  (Tid. 2 1 . 2 - 3 ) - - i t  1.10,6),  {Ann.  punishment,  actor  i n the  Petr.  Sat.  than although  reign  64).  of  76  5.2  K.a\ I v T C '  firiuoaiu:  Sriuoaico seems, a n o d d w o r d i n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . Dip normally  o r aerarium  res-publica  fjp£.  o f which, i s a p p r o p r i a t e  5.3  (Chapte;?.'. 1 5 . 5 ' f M a s o n . Greek  here,  accompanied him "even w h i l e  u s e s TO Sriudcripv a s t h e e q u i v a l e n t  T h e sense'., h o w e v e r ,  from Augustus varietate is  20).  and a t t r i b u t e s  o f games, b a n q u e t s ,  omnes a n t e c e s s i t " ;  of which  There i s no doubt  5.4  axjuep  and a t r o c i o u s  with theatrical  performances,  i n both  F o r t h e number o f d a y s  under t h e J u l i o - C l a u d i a n s , see Balsdon  Life  p p . 244-48.  T \ S I K TOU au/t'Xou tov;  Gaius'  l o v e o f games a n d t h e t h e a t r e was  o f T i b e r i u s , who r e f u s e d t o f a v o u r o n e f a c t i o n  and w a s p r e v e n t e d b y h i s a u s t e r i t y - f r o m e n j o y i n g 57.11.5;  series  t h a t t h e Emperor was i n f a t u a t e d  in noticeable contrast attendance  Venturini  " d ' u n a enormita. u n i c a "  N e r o ) h e was a n a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a n t .  devoted to p u b l i c entertainment and Leisure  fecit"  o f e x a g g e r a t i o n , he a c c e p t s D i o  entertainments  games a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y  (like  also 43.2-45.4).  t o G a i u s an u n i n t e r r u p t e d  and p u b l i c  pp. 88-89).  with public  g e n e r i s ac m u l t i f a r i a m  ( c f - S u e t . Aug. 4 3 . 1 : " s p e c t a c u l o r u m e t a s s i d u i t a t e e t  hardly- r i g h t when, i n a passage f u l l  [Caligola  Apclles  I n h i s l o v e o f games a n d s h o w s , G a i u s was n o d i f f e r e n t  et magnificentia  uncritically-  i s clear:  C f , S u e t . Gains. 1 8 . 2 : " s c a e n i c o s l u d o s e t assidue et ;varii  a l s o Gaius  Terms p . 3 5 ) , n e i t h e r  h e was- c o n d u c t i n g p u b l i c b u s i n e s s . "  ITU TrdoTj. TTpo^ctTCt. . . . ;  Ccf.  of  T a c . Ann. 1 . 5 4 . 3 - 4 ) .  to the reluctant over the other  theatrical  shows ( D i o  77  5.4  (SuQKcAdvas  xi xoTs a v x i K a C e a T P j c o a i v :  The spectators' lack of enthusiasm for Gaius' favourites  at spectacles often caused him considerable anger; see Chapter 13.5.  5.4  Is-  ayuSvicruo; TTQMWV  Suetonius (Gaius  rrporlA0£V  54.1) gives an  almost identical l i s t of Gaius' athletic and theatrical performances. .His active participation i n games and shows was later emulated by- the Emperor Nero (cf. Dio 63.26.1).  5.5  wpxTiaocTo:  The-incident, according to Suetonius (Gains  54.2), involved  three senators of consular rank, who answered the summons in fear for their lives; "deinde repente magno tibiarum et,scabellorum crepitu cum p a l l i a tunicaque talari prosiluit ac desaltato cantico abiit." Nero i s said by Dio to have acted in a way so similar that both incidents might well be apocryphal (63.26.4).  Some (e.g., J. Crook Consilium  p. 39) see this, incident as a summoning of the Emperor's consilium Tfpooxous  xfis yepoucnas = primores  viri)  :  Principis (TOUS  i f so, i t i s one of only a few  instances that point to the existence of a consilium  at this time.  78  CHAPTER SIX  6.1  TOpovxcovev  fG'  oyve$p{co  .... ;  Cf, Suet. Qqius  14.1: "ingressoque urbem,  statim consensu senatus et irrumpentis i n curiam turbae, ... i u s axhitriumque omnium rexum i l l i permissum est." This speech, of Gaius, then, was delivered at h i s f i r s t meeting with the Senate late i n March or early- i n .April, the same meeting at which he granted the imperial t i t l e s  was  TO eruyeSpxov; 3.2).  (see on Chapter 1.2 Is  By- personally- receiving the imperial t i t l e s from the Senate when the equites  and plebs were present-.-though the l a t t e r may not have been i n v i t e d ,  i f we accept Suetonius' word irrumpentis  l i t e r a l l y — G a i u s was  perhaps  i n t e n t i o n a l l y basing his claim to power on'the same foundation as Augustus had claimed e a r l i e r : per consensum M.P.  Grenade  6.1  TfoAAa  universorvm  (cf. RG'3A.1; see further  REL 33 [1955] 53-54).  iKoAaKeuere:  • In his early relations with the Senate Gaius  was  careful to follow the precedents set by Augustus and Tiberius.  Although that body had i n e f f e c t lost a l l but i t s advisory  powers, yet by continuing to respect i t s dignitas  and.auotoritas the  Emperors could, with notable exceptions, win i t s co-operation, i f not i t s devotion (cf. Merivale 5.411; Hammond Augustan  Principate  pp. 121-31).  There i s no evidence i n our sources to support Venturini's suggestion (Caligola  p. 76) that from the beginning of h i s reign Gaius planned to  govern according to the concept of absolute o r i e n t a l monarchy based, not on any extraordinary power, but simply- on the auotoritas  of his own  family.  On the contrary, every h i s t o r i a n , despite his antipathy towards Gaius,- i s agreed that for the f i r s t s i x months or even two years of his principate he ruled t o l e r a b l y well (see on Chapter 8.1  vooticras).  of senators after t h i s period, see Chapter  23.3.  As for his treatment  79  6.1  K.ou. ux.os Kax TpgcjH.uos  autoov:  As a young boy i n the m i l i t a r y of the n o r t h ,  legionum senatus  alumnus- (Tac. Ann.  affectionate  t h a t b e l i e s t h e r a s h n e s s o f w h i c h he  The p e o p l e a s w e l l  epithets,  as the  uxa  6.2  nyepa;  f\y£ § 1  c a l l i n g him  by  e v e n when h e h a d become E m p e r o r ( c f .  S u e t . Gaius  13).  and c r i t i c a l  t h e s e , however, t h i n k i n g  of his youthfulness  KOX  TreyTrxov  exKoaibv e x o s . . . :  Assuming i n c l u s i v e reckoning f o r  d a y when he f i r s t  w i l l was o v e r t u r n e d  6.2  ( s e e on C h a p t e r s 3 . 2  ( s e e on C h a p t e r 7 . 2 TO.  12  the p e r i o d of first  four  days  s p e e c h as 28 M a r c h ,  a r r i v e d i n . R o m e a n d m o s t p r o b a b l y when T i b e r i u s ' Is TO c n J v e S p x o v ) .  ( s e e o n C h a p t e r 1.2  r o b s Iv TG SeauwTnpxw o v x a s ctTreAwev:  No d o u b t  the  first  p e r s o n he  f r e e d was - H e r o d A g r i p p a Chapter 8.2).  Among o t h e r s  r e l e a s e d at  this  time  (cf.  (see  Dio 58.27.2-3)  p r o b a b l y Gnaeus D o m i t i u s A h e n o b a r b u s and Y i b i u s M a r s u s who, t o g e t h e r Lucius A r r u n t i u s , Emperor; A r r u n t i u s not  w e r e i m p r i s o n e d e a r l y i n A . D . 37 f o r  impiety  s u c c e s s o r ( T a c . Ann.  circulation  o f works by T i t u s  6.47-48).  At the  were with  towards  had a l r e a d y committed s u i c i d e b e c a u s e , he s a i d ,  endure T i b e r i u s '  a l l o w e d the  Iv  G a i u s was b o r n o n 31 A u g u s t  m e n t i o n e d b y D i o , we a r e g i v e n t h e d a t e o f G a i u s ' the  them  1 3 . 6 veavxatce).  A.D. yeveQAxa).  is  army were f o n d o f  He s o o n became u n d e r s t a n d a b l y s e n s i t i v e t o both undignified  Gaius had been c a l l e d  1 . . 4 4 . 1 ) : h i . s . r e f e r e n c e t o h i m s e l f now;.as  alumnus- shows g r e a t t a c t  often accused.  camps  the  he  could  same t i m e  Gaius  L a b i e n u s , C r e m u t i u s C o r d u s , and  C a s s i u s S e v e r u s , . w o r k s whose p u b l i c a t i o n h a d p r e v i o u s l y b e e n b a n n e d b y A u g u s t u s and T i b e r i u s b e c a u s e o f  their  libellous  or r e p u b l i c a n  character  ' 80  (Suet. Tac.  16.1; cf.  Qqius  Ann.. 4 . 3 5 . 5  [Cordus];  This: general  10 p r .  Dio 56.27.1  5 [Labienus];  and T a c . Ann.  1.72.4  anyh.o-Hi.le a l l i a n c e , of  i n M e i s e ' s words, " d i e s w a r e n ' p o p u l a r e ,  K y x v x o s noyirtovios:  There i s q u i t e as w e l l  Dio's part.  The man f r e e d a t  P 564), but h i s brother could not  Seeundus i s for  P. Pomponius Seeundus  the  gesehi.ck.te und  a summary).  the  cf.  G a l l u s , w i t h o u t doubt  by h i s  brother  survive  (PIR  1  Pomponius  a n d by- h i s  on  (PIR  1  P 563);  and h i s  against  P. Pomponius  release  aftermath  of  Seianus'  friendship  own a d m i r a b l e  125  overthrow,  with a  character,  p.  Trials  certain  t h e s o n o r nephew o f . S e i a n u s ; b u t ,  supported  h e managed  to  Tiberius.  I n A . D . 33 P u b l i u s ' b r o t h e r Proculus'  sister,  Sancia,  were i n v a i n ,  Quintus undertook  as p a r t  the Emperor and so m i t i g a t e  of  an a t t e m p t t o  Publius' ordeal  the prosecution ingratiate  ( T a c . Ann.  and P u b l i u s r e m a i n e d i n p r i s o n u n t i l h i s  recorded here by-Dio t a k e n as r h e t o r i c a l Despite Dio's of  zugleich  117).  R o g e r s Criminal  P u b l i u s was a c c u s e d b y C o n s i d i u s P r o c u l u s o f Aelius  his  consulship.  (Ann. 5 . 8 ;  In A . D . 3 1 , d u r i n g  Quintus  Quintus  a c c u s a t i o n s and p r o c e e d i n g s  found i n T a c i t u s  r e i g n was  c l e a r l y - a c o n f u s i o n o f names h e r e ,  t i m e was n o t  have t a k e n p l a c e b e f o r e h i s  The a c c o u n t o f  [Severus]).  a s w h a t must be an o u t r i g h t m i s t a k e  this  and  t h o s e who may h a v e f e a r e d  auch. p o l i t i s c h n o t w e n d i g e M a s s n a h m e n " {JJntersuclmngen- p .  6.2  Dio 57.24.2-4  amnesty^ of. G a i u s a t ..the b e g i n n i n g o f h i s  necessary-to prevent revenge:  S e n e c a Contv.  the brothers  (whose p h r a s e " s e v e n , w h o l e y e a r s overstatement.  . . C f . G a r n s e y Social  comment t h a t P o m p o n i u s was j a i l e d  h e l d the  consulship u n t i l  after  the  of  himself  6.18.2).  .The  with efforts  release in A.D. later" Status  s h o u l d be pp.  14.7-48,).  ye0' UTraTeiav, death of  37,  Gaius:  neither Quintus  81  as consul  Chapter 29.5), p.  3).  for  suffectus  Gaius i n A . D . . 4 1  a n d P u b l i u s i n k.J). 44, (CTL 1 0 . 6 6 3 8 ;  Because Boisseyai.n cannot b e l i e v e  brother  w i t h the  other  but  also erred  t h a t D i o h e r e m u s t be r e f e r r i n g There  are,  P o m p o n i u s G r a e c i n u s , consul  p.  40);  and h i s  57.17.1; 42.1).  to  Smallwood p.  11.3806,;  that D i o not  only  different  Smallwood  confused  in their.consulships,  a completely  cf.  he  brother,  L.  one  suggests  Pomponius.  however,  (Fasti  = E§J p .  Consulares  died in  them:  Consulaves  P o m p o n i u s , F l a c c u s , c o n s u l i n A . D . 17  T a c . Ann.. 2 . 4 1 . 2 ; Fasti Flaccus,  . i n A . D . 16  suffectus  2;  41; cf.  (Dio  Suet.  S y r i a i n A . D . 33 ( T a c . Ann.  = E§J  Tib.  6.27.3).  As  G r a e c i n u s , . n o t h i n g more i s known o f h i m e x c e p t t h a t h e was a f r i e n d  Oyid  4.9).  (Pont.  indicates, shortly  if  it  after  It is  his  sufficed. A.D.  t o be a c c e p t e d , t h a t h i s  consulship:  if  P o m p o n i u s was  i t . were m e r e l y h i s  G r a e c i n u s , t h e n , who h e l d h i s  31, i s  hardly  this  c a s e we must  elder  although certain compositions autographs  of  the  consular status  UTraxeuiccos w o u l d  consulship  that  have  f i f t e e n years  (cf.  (Quint.  itself  reservation.,  error  before  about  must b e a c c e p t e d . that Dio  and t r a g e d i a n ( T a c . Dial.  p r a i s e d .his  1Q.1.98);  of  some w o r t h ,  .13.3; P l i n y Sp. erudition  as a h o b b y he i s  famous r e p u b l i c a n s  ( P l i n y HN  In  5.8).  whose b i o g r a p h y 3.5.3-4.;  more h i g h l y t h a n s a i d t o have  13.26.83).  the  intended  F u r n e a u x and K o e s t e r m a n n on T a c . Ann.  Pliny  critics  of D i o ' s apparent  error  assume, w i t h l i t t l e  seems, a poet  w r i t t e n by the  explanation  been o f f e r e d ,  Pomponius Secundus  He w a s , i t  imprisoned  suitable.  A l t h o u g h no p l a u s i b l e c o n s u l s h i p has y e t  of  m i g h t be s u g g e s t e d t h a t D i o ' s p h r a s e pe0' UTraxeiav  was i n t e n d e d b y t h e p h r a s e , t h e more t r a d i t i o n a l  P.  cf.  i n d e e d , two o t h e r . P o m p p n i i whose c o n s u l s h i p s w o u l d q u a l i f y  C.  for  (CIL 6 . 2 0 1 4 1 ;  was  7.17.11), his  collected  82  6.2  eTrxd  e x e a i . v Iv xw o i i c r i u a x v ;  *Q\O\S  Tiberius  often procrastinated  when  t r y i n g p r i s o n e r s ; ( c f . J o s : .4^18.6.5  [ 1 7 0 ] -; "SeopaixGv ..qtcpoaoews o^epvQffT.o.sv'fiV").  o f how:, a f t e r another  T h r a s y l l u s Had f a l s e l y - p r e d i c t e d  . D i o C58.27.2-3]  that Tiberius  tells  should  t e n y e a r s , the. Emperor was i n no h u r r y t o p a s s s e n t e n c e s  live  against  t h o s e who. h a d b e e n c o n v i c t e d — a n e g l i g e n c e , t h a t s a v e d t h e l i v e s o f s o m e . D e l a y s w e r e n o t a l w a y s : due. t o t h e E m p e r o r , h o w e v e r , certain  Lampo w h o s e t r i a l  16.128-129  On custodia  on.for  two y e a r s  as a form o f punishment,  ( P h i l o in  Place.  see Garnsey  Social  pp. 147-52.  Status  6.2  [536]).  itself:dragged  as i n t h e case o f a  x d xe e y K X r i y a x a xr\s acreBetas:  C f . S u e t . . Gaius  15.4: "pari  damnatos r e l i g a t o s q u e criminum,  s i quae r e s i d u a ex p r i o r e  tempore manebant,  The c a p i t a l  c h a r g e o f maiestas  our'sources  t o be t h e most p e r n i c i o u s  popularitate  restituit;  omnium g r a t i a m  ( c f . M a s o n Greek Terms p . aspect o f T i b e r i u s '  fecit."  2 7 ) , considered by reign,  is  defined  b y D i o a s . " x d ye ugpicrQcu rrpos x i v o s n KOI xb no"e(3no"0ax rrpos x i v o s " More s p e c i f i c a l l y i t  was s a i d t o i n c l u d e  against Augustus, T i b e r i u s , R.S.  Rogers, t r i a l s  or L i v i a  f o r maiestas  or high treason, including (cf.  R o g e r s Criminal  attracted  Trials  Roman h i s t o r i a n s ,  impression o f a growing state.  In f a c t ,  sedition p.  (Dio 5 7 . 1 9 . 1 ) .  i n the provinces It  In e f f e c t . ,  and m i l i t a r y  and p a r t i c u l a r l y  perduellio  mutinies  maj'este t h a t  T a c i t u s , who c r e a t e d t h e  cancer methodically, destroying  Tiberius'  to  there  a n d 82 c a s e s o f  i s t h e c h a r g e o f lese  directed  according  w e r e o f two t y p e s :  o r lese majeste;  190).  o f t h e 24 a t t e s t e d  one e a c h y e a r t h r o u g h o u t  any improper word o r a c t i o n  under T i b e r i u s  w e r e 24 c a s e s o f " l e s s e r " maiestas  (57.9.2).  the best  c a s e s ;,of l e s s e r maiestas-^-an principate--only  s i x resulted  o f t h e Roman average in  of  83  convictions.  It  a b o l i s h e d at  was.this  overdrawn:charge  the b e g i n n i n g  of his x u l e .  c i r c u m s t a n c e s - to. r e i n s t a t e For general pp.  Trials  it  Macsh.  Bauman Impietas- in Prinaipem. on C h a p t e r  6.3  Gaius'  mother,and brothers  in  Forum and b u r n e d , (Suet.  made c o p i e s (Chapters  Criminal pp.  consult  151-62; the  notes  strongboxes;  the  as w e l l  after  Gaius'  certain  witnesses  the p r o s e c u t i o n  as i n . c a s e s o f maiestas., he  calling  the  gods t o w i t n e s s  Deceitfully-,  conduct  in  this  matter  of  collected  t h a t he h a d  but perhaps w i s e l y ,  which he would . l a t e r  find  was n o t  and  not  he had useful  without  A c t i u m Augustus had d i s c o v e r e d damning c o r r e s p o n d e n c e he s u p p o s e d l y b u r n e d , t h e  hesitate  later  found  after  s h o w i n g them t o  letters  (Dio  60.4.5).  6.4  TO, T£ KpQViot;  t o make u s e o f them  letters, (Dio  but  Senate and t o  The f e s t i v a l  of the  actually  52.42.8).  p r e s e r v e d b y G a i u s and d e s t r o y e d  the  the  (Festus,  studies,  which incriminated  the o r i g i n a l s ,  16.3).  After  some and d i d n o t  beginning  2 8 9 - 9 5 ; Seagex Tiberius  who h a d c o - o p e r a t e d i n  15.4).  Gaius  and k e p t  10.8;  precedent. Antony's  by  .16.8).  [For more s p e c i f i c  These l e t t e r s , delatores  r e a d them  Gaius  16.8.  TU Y p d u u c t T a ;  the  that  majeste  u n d e r T i b e r i u s , ..see R o g e r s  pp;  Tiberius-  lese  ..Within t w o ! y e a r s h e w a s f o r c e d  C^ee[Chapter  s u r v e y s o f mqiestas  190-96;  of  t h o s e who w e r e i m p l i c a t e d  g o d , ( V a r r o LL 6 . 2 2 )  its  a n d was c e l e b r a t e d  c e l e b r a t i o n s were o r i g i n a l l y - h e l d  only by  name in  on the, day-when t h e Temple o f S a t u r n had been d e d i c a t e d P a u l i E x e r p t a 476 1-325]; cf... L i v y  kept  Claudius  them, but  Saturnalia derives  them  from  December, a t Rome  2 . 2 1 . 2 ; . M a c r . Sat. T . 8 . . 1 ) .  on a s i n g l e d a y , b u t  in  when . J u l i u s  The  Caesar  84  a d d e d two d a y s t o . D e c e m b e r , t h e Apparently- i t limit  was a l w a y s u n o f f i c i a l l y  by- an e d i c t  its  ( M a c r . Sat.  1.10.23).  Principate,  and t h e  Gaius  17.2; -Gelzer  added only- the abolished,  duration  6.4  three  [RE " J u l i u s " c o l . 3 8 9 ]  fourth day).  errs in  festivities  a practice  the  eikovot  (.Dio  60.25.8). unofficially i n two poems the. g i v i n g  F o w l e r Roman  of  Festivals  268-72).  o g o X o v Trap" l i c d a x o u K . T . A . . :  If  The G r e e k d r a c h m a o f s i x o b o l s was  Dio i s being accurate,  from a d e n a r i u s to  a sestertius  t h a t he u s e s 6 g o A o s , t h e smallest nothing  Ttov  TO  clarify- his  piTripecrt.ov  (RG 1 5 . 4 ) .  t h e Roman d e n a r i u s Gaius reduced the  (2 ,1/2 a s s e s ) .  It  s m a l l e s t G r e e k c o i n , as t h e  Roman c o i n , t h e as. to  of  then,  use o f  is  the  (j)epovTa)V:  of  64.2.1)  the  of traditional  equally  equivalent  Two o t h e r p a s s a g e s ( 4 6 . 3 1 . 3 ;  possible the do  word.  In  2. B . C . t h e r e w e r e more t h a n  recipients  A.D.  Gaius  f i f t h d a y was  often continued  (cf.  (Suet.  suggesting that  that, i s r e f l e c t e d  m e n t i o n e d h e r e by- D i o  early  t h e Iupenalis  S o m e t i m e a f t e r . A . D . 37 t h i s  the  the  ( 1 4 . 7 2 . ; 7 9 ) : t h e s e two. e x t r a d a y s . w e r e d e v o t e d t o  sixteen asses.  6.4  f o r A u g u s t u s ; was f o r c e d .to  d a y s , b e g i n n i n g o n 17 D e c e m b e r  equivalent  gift  accordingly.  o n l y - t o b e , r e i n s t a t e d b y C l a u d i u s i n A . D . 45  sigillaria, pp.  longer.,  f i f t h b y G a i u s , who c a l l e d i t  s e v e n d a y s . (Sat. 1 . 1 0 . 2 4 ) ,  of Martial  to  was i n c r e a s e d  A f o u r t h day-was- a d d e d s o m e t i m e i n  Macrobius mentions that for  festival  There were p e r h a p s a q u a r t e r  37 ( s e e on C h a p t e r 2 . 2 ITTI TTI . . . ) .  of  of  the  200,000  g r a i n dole i n the  a million  people e l i g i b l e  city by-  85  6.5  KqxccAy6evxa)V . . . ;  For  the' phrase, c f . . C h a p t e r 2Q. 1 : "xobs x p x e  apxovxois- K q x q A u c q s . " 2 (PTE. A 3 2 )  Acerronius Proculus P 218)  6.5  is  Kax'  referred  to  and C . P e t r p n i u s P o n t i u s N i g r i n u s  a l s o i n S u e t . Tib.  'exos u i r a x e u e t v :  In r e f u s i n g  7 3 . 2 and D i o  twice  f r o m 23 B . C . u n t i l  (TJio 5 3 . 3 2 . 3 ; RG  a n d 2 B..C. s o l e l y t o his  A.D.  of  taking  taking was n o t  as h i s  Augustus held h i s  for  the  him.with  h i m as t h e inspiring  in pointing  nephew D o m i t i u s  (the  out  that Gaius'  in  Despite his rejection  life his  Meise  the  three in  destroying him). of r i d i c u l e , to  the  (Untevsuohungen  p.  part By  Gaius  monarchy, succession  101)  is  a t t i t u d e t o h i s u n c l e C l a u d i u s and h i s  as a p o t e n t i a l  of  as  as a s u c c e s s o r ,  someone e l s e t h e h o p e f o r  G a i u s must h a y e e x p e c t e d t o  was c o n s u l i n  hope b e f o r e  only possible heir  f u t u r e Emperor Nero)  Emperor c o n s i d e r e d e i t h e r  5 B.C.  s o n s o f G e r m a n i c u s ; a n d S e i a n u s as  (see a l s o bn C h a p t e r 6 . 7 u n d x e u a e v ) .  particular,  same c u s t o m f o r  c o l l e a g u e h i s u n c l e C l a u d i u s , an o b j e c t  as a v o i d i n g t h e d a n g e r o f  correct  the  only  consulships of  (Drusus b e i n g honoured not  inflate  s o much i n d i c a t i n g  by  c o l l e a g u e s G e r m a n i c u s i n A.D.. 1 8 , D r u s u s  regent  the Emperor's p l a n to  established  G a i n s and L u c i u s C a e s a r t o p u b l i c  2 1 , a n d S e i a n u s i n A . D . 31 as t h e p o t e n t i a l  the p r a c t i c e  Tiberius followed  as h i s  1  58.27.1.  h i s d e a t h i n A . D . 1 4 , was c o n s u l  14.1).  introduce  intended successors.  consulships,  but  4.4;  (PIR  t o h o l d an a n n u a l c o n s u l s h i p G a i u s  was f o l l o w i n g A u g u s t u s , who,  The c o n s u l ' s h i p o f Cn'.  disproves successor.  the  As:for Claudius  in  o u t l i v e M m . ' b y many y e a r s .  annual magistracy  eyery year of h i s reign  any i d e a t h a t  except A . D .  at this  38.  time,  Gaius  86  6.5  a u x o s OTOTeucje;  Gaius took o f f i c e (Suet.  = Smallwood p.  Ostienses ship,  6.6  s e e on C h a p t e r 7 . 9  e v T E x o \ s i.TTueucri:  2;  as consul  Qayus 1 7 . 1 ; Acta Arvalium cf.  CXL 1 0 . 7 9 6 ) .  on 1 J u l y  suffeotus  a E£J p . . 4 3 ;  For the-length, of h i s  F o r the'. p h r a s e , c f . . P l u . Pomp..  always h e l d i n g r e a t honour b y the w h e n e v e r he e n t e r e d t h e t h e a t r e  14.6.  chosen to  Suetonius mentions  requested permission to shoulders; of  Claud.  6.1).  imperial  Seianus.  Lepidus  TOTE TrpGrov:  life  i n f i r m i t y to  (Chapter  offer  their  for  overthrow  the  Gaius compliments  for  quashing  As a c h i l d C l a u d i u s had s u f f e r e d  ( E . F . L e o n [TAPhA 79 <?1948> 7 9 - 8 6 ]  cerebral palsy).  Because o f  A l t h o u g h A u g u s t u s was o n c e t e m p t e d t o  farther  from v a r i o u s  t h a n an a u g u r a l p r i e s t h o o d  physical throughout  attributes Claudius'  these, his  family  c o n s i d e r e d him  a public career  (Suet.  Claud.  allow, him t o  Uonovum he a p p a r e n t l y - t h o u g h t b e t t e r  h o w e v e r , h a d some a m b i t i o n ,  the  23.2-5).  p h y s i c a l l y - and m e n t a l l y i n c a p a b l e o f  ouvsus  equites  Rome on  a i l m e n t s , remnants o f w h i c h remained w i t h him adult  Emperor.  I n A . D . 39 he was a g a i n c h o s e n as a member o f , a n e q u e s t r i a n  conspiracy of  his  he was  o n c e , when t h e  a n d a g a i n when T i b e r i u s was b e i n g c o n g r a t u l a t e d  rise  dignity  family,  e q u e s t r i a n order, b e f o r e the  c o n v e y - A u g u s t u s ' body- f r o m N o l a t o  the  C l a u d i u s was  Because o f the  o c c a s i o n s - (Claud. 6 . 1 ) :  e m b a s s y a n d was s e n t t o G a u l t o  6.6  (Suet.  represent the  two o t h e r  Despite  e q u e s t r i a n s , who w e r e a c c u s t o m e d t o  e v e n t h e m o s t : o v e r l o o k e d member , o f t h e  several times  consul-  Suq x £ urtcnf.  n e g l e c t shown h i m by- h i s own f a m i l y ,  attached to  Fasti  (Suet.  of  it  Claud.  enter  on t h e  2.1).  imperial  and a d v a n c e d h i m n o 4.7).  Claudius  and o n c e a s k e d h i s u n c l e T i b e r i u s  to  himself, suggest  87  h i s name f o x t h e from the  consulship; his  r e q u e s t was r e f u s e d , and a l a t e r  S e n a t e t h a t he be g i v e n t h e h o n o u r o f v o t i n g  was a l s o r e j e c t e d obscurity-;  (Suet.  a knight,  5-6,).  Claud.  though head o f the  6.7  = EctJ p .  Consulares  UTOTGUcrev:  Cf.  He was- b o r n i n G a u l on 1 A u g u s t  as a b i d b y t h e 7.1). dangex,  in  howevex,  All  contxacts  paxtially  choice of Claudius for  his  suppoxt  involved Claudius in  t o have been h e l d i n  fox statues  of  if  contempt: expense  p.  290).  slave to bxing  It  i s pxobably txue,  a capital  chaxge a g a i n s t  fox being  is  6.7  death,  TToAAa e T r a Y Y e X o p e v o s ;  16.1-8.  (Chaptex 6 . 1 ) .  in  Txotte"  Claudius  ( J o s . AJ  19.1.2  the.Empexox's  a  [13]); sentence  thoughts  i s - fxom T a c i t u s .  He n o d o u b t . , x e p e a t e d m u c h o f w h a t he h a d s a i d his  eaxliex  Claud.  t h a t Gaius once a l l o w e d  s u c h a c l a i m to knowledge o f  as u n a c c e p t a b l e fxom h i m as i t  dilatoxy  (Suet.  b u t when J o s e p h u s a d d s t h a t G a i u s was d i s a p p o i n t e d when u n a b l e t o h i s u n c l e to  gives  23.3;  (Gaius  somewhat e x a g g e x a t e d :  too,  of  Suetonius  W i l l x i c h ' s woxds, Gaius txeated C l a u d i u s "fiix einen v o l l e n d e t e n (Caligula  (Claud.  a c e x t a i n amount  the Emperor's brothers  appeax g e n u i n e ,  colleague  o f . t h e e q u e s t r i a n ordex  He was a l m o s t xemoved .fxom o f f i c e  these s t o r i e s  cf.  S u e t o n i u s i s no d o u b t  jokes played by Gaius at h i s  8 ; Nero 6 . 2 ) .  letting  9.1).  seeing Gaius'  f o x he seems s t i l l  s e v e x a l examples o f Claud.  in  15.2.  Empexox t o w i n t h e  The p o s i t i o n ,  ( S u e t . ' Claud.. 2 . 1 ;  37).  S u e t . Gaius  right  in  C l a u d i an h o u s e . ,  10 B . C . Fasti  consulaxs  U n t i l , A . D . 3 7 , t h e n , he r e m a i n e d  K a i T e a u a p a K O V T a exTi gegicoiaos:  6.6  among t h e  motion  Fox h i s  inauguxal  speech to  the  cxiticism of Tibexius,  Senate thxee  in  months  see on C h a p t e x s  4.2;  88 K a x ' exos. a u x a a v a y i Y V w o K e a G a i :  6.7  The m o t i v e to  It  was a c u s t o m t o r e a d c e r t a i n  first that of  meeting of the this  this  speech of  practice.  the  of  fear  senators i s  a t t r i b u t e d by  hardly-required.  s p e e c h e s of. A u g u s t u s a n d T i b e r i u s  Senate i n the'hew. y e a r  (Dio 6 0 . 1 0 . 2 ) .  also Dio 61.3.1  (Nero).  at  the  The d e c r e e  G a i u s . s h o u l d b e i n c l u d e d w a s n o more t h a n a Cf.  Dio  continuation  89  CHAPTER SEVEN  7.1  TO npwov T O ' x p u AuyouaTOU;  [RE " J u l i u s " c o l .  388]  b e g a n on 19 A u g u s t ,  the  the s h r i n e soon a f t e r  t e m p l e was t h e and T a c i t u s  "contemptu  ambitionis  Suetonius,  on t h e  only five  Palatine,  farther  death  21).  his  site  Even i f  of  completion.  but  structure,  behind the  did not  T i b e r i u s d i d not  erect  some  records Tiberius  dedicate  cf.  it  2.49).  the b u i l d i n g had to be  finished  actually  was r e a d y f o r  at  the  foot  temple.  complete dedication  however,  Basilica  B e c a u s e of t h e  complete  the  Palatine  recently  it  slope of  t h o u g h t t o be  clivus of  buried  I u l i a and n e a r t h e p r e s e n t p i a z z a pp.  any d e s c r i p t i o n  185-95; Lanciani  of t h e  temple  is  was  the  i s now r e c o g n i z e d as an atrium  l a c k of a r c h a e o l o g i c a l e v i d e n c e a n d  references,  from a  C a s t o r , t h e v i c u s T u s c u s , and t h e  t h e T e m p l e of A u g u s t u s i s  121-23).  Until  of the northwest  Ccf- L u g l i Ii Centvo Monumentale  s c a r c i t y of l i t e r a r y  is  Dio  erected by  (Ann. . 6 . 4 5 . 2 ; . b u t  p a s s i n g over the  pp.  and. Excavations  there  the  to  (Gaius 2 2 . 4 ) , who d e s c r i b e s t h e u n i t i n g o f  palace, while  Consolazi.ohe  none o f  t h e T e m p l e o f A u g u s t u s i s known o n l y  between the Temple o f  west,  dedication  death.  w i t h the b u i l d i n g  This  2-3;  the  death, but  (Dio 5 6 . 4 6 . 3 ) , but  an p e r s e n e c t u t e m "  after  Suetonius  Victoriae. Domitian's  1  o n l y e n t i r e l y new b u i l d i n g  and C a p i t o l i n e b y a b r i d g e identified  celebrations for  he m u s t a l m o s t h a v e d o n e s o , s i n c e i t  months  sections  L i v i a and T i b e r i u s h a d u n d e r t a k e n  other hand, claims that  The a p p r o x i m a t e passage of  the  (see b e l o w ,  a d d s t h a t he c o m p l e t e d i t  (Tib. 4 7 ; Gaius  temple,  Gelzer  37  saw the work t h r o u g h to  (57.10.2),  the  A-D.  anniversary of Augustus  Augustus'  doubt whether T i b e r i u s  by Gaius  August  suggests that  evidence supports this, date).  that this  T h e t e m p l e was d e d i c a t e d on 3 0 - 3 1  della Ruins  the dependent  90  e n t i r e l y - on t h e e v i d e n c e o f If  it  i s t o he i d e n t i f i e d  1.137,  no.  pediment cxlvi) this is  116),  then i t  coins.  Here, too,  w i t h the  temple  has c o n v i n c i n g l y d i s p r o v e d t h i s soon before  69),  and was I o n i c  and a quadriga  pp.  Dictionary  7.1  xr\v  (BMC Imp.  identification, dedication.  (BMC Imp.  on t h e  uncertainty.  See L u g l i ,  cit.;  above  1, p p .  grounds  i n . the  P l a t n e r and A s h b y  e m v i K i o v o"xoAr\v evrSus:  und  Eiedergang  Topographical  G a i u s was f o n d o f w e a r i n g t r i u m p h a l  his  campaign i n  the North  (cf.  S u e t . Gaius  K0  au<fu OaAeTs f \ a a v :  I.e.,  both parents  be l i v i n g ; Apes 1 7 3 5 ; "au<J>ox£po\s TOXS Yoveueri same r e q u i r e m e n t  erat  7.1  et matrimi  Sqecularium  icon.. f\ gcuArt . . . ;  dress,  able  to  5 2 ; see b e l o w ,  in  17 B . C . ; " p u e r .  et p u e l l a e t o t i d e m  - IBS  correct  5050 = E§J n o .  He r e p e a t e d t h i s  when h e s a y s t h a t  the  of  each c h i l d had  S c h o l i a s t to  a n d , m a i d e n s who w e r e t o  [X]XVII quibus  sing  (Acta  See a l s o C h a p t e r  banquet  The  denuntiatum  carmen c e c i n e r u n t " 32).  to  Aristophanes'  6aXi\oov icon. unSevos yp,$aviau£vps."  of D r u s i l l a ' s birthdayno doubt  cf.  h a d b e e n made o f t h o s e . y o u t h s  Carmen Saeculare  patrimi  Sacrorum  157,  4).  OCTOI y e ^  Horace's  p.  62-65.  do s o f o l l o w i n g  7.1  that  pediment  e v e n b e f o r e h e was l e g i t i m a t e l y  section  the  cxxxviii;  1.153., n o . .41; c f .  Qcf. C . G . B e l l o n i i n Aufstieg  loc.  Imp.  (BMC  M o r e . l i k e l y the. temple  hexastyie decorated,.with sculpture  on t h e fastigium  2.1.1044-1045).  some  on a c o i n o f T i b e r i u s  Mattingly  the  t h a t r e p r e s e n t e d on a c o i n o f G a i u s  no.  is  was C o r i n t h i a n h e x a s t y l e w i t h s c u l p t u r e  and a h i g h c u r v e d w a l l , b e h i n d .  c o i n was i s s u e d t o o  there  16.10.  i n A . D . 3 9 , on t h e  occasion  (Chapter 1 3 . 9 ) . • Suetonius  t h e s e meals were p r o v i d e d to  the  is  91  senatorial  and e q u e s t r i a n o r d e r s  included,  as D i o s u g g e s t s , t h e n i t  ration  food rather  of  (Cfaius 1 7 . 2 ) .  If  the  must h a v e b e e n as r e c i p i e n t s  t h a n as p a r t i c i p a n t s , i n  any- f o r m a l m e a l  1 8 . 2 ; " p a n a r i a cum o . b s o n i o v i r i t i m d i v i s i t " ;  Gaius  common p e o p l e of  (cf-  present  at  o f Rome's upper c l a s s e s , them, repeated the  (Dip 6 0 . 7 . 4 ) . (Vienna,  first  year of his  see H. K l o f t  Tiberius'  xexxapaKOVxaicis;  Pvincipis  .  birthday  outdo h i s p r e d e c e s s o r .  section 3).  the normal  seven to  i n two h o u r s Yet  I  cannot  five  time  We know t h a t G a i u s was  fond  (Suet.  4.3);  Gaius  18.3),  h e was c o n s c i o u s l y  f o r t y r a c e s c o u l d be run i n comment  (8.78.13);  a d a y b y r e d u c i n g t h e number o f ( S u e t . Bom.  of  that  amusements  Certainly  t h i r t y heats without  a hundred races i n t o  races  -  i n one d a y seems an e x t r e m e number e v e n i f  day: M a r t i a l mentions  races  h a d b e e n c e l e b r a t e d i n A . D . 31 w i t h t h e r u n n i n g  a l l - d a y racing interspersed with other f o r t y heats  which  xexxapoxovxaicis  c o n t e s t s , w h i c h seems t o h a v e b e e n t h e n o r m a l : number a t  t r y i n g to  fit  Gaius  reign  xexpcVis,  The MS r e a d i n g i s  day.  (Dio 5 8 . 1 2 . 8 ; 6 0 . 2 3 . 5 ; see b e l o w ,  but  for  t h a t t h e o c c a s i o n demanded a d o u b l i n g o f t h e number o f  h e l d the previous  of  Suet.  1970).  grounds  only ten  own  Liberalitas  . B o i s s e v a i n emends t o on t h e  extra  C l a u d i u s , who must h a v e b e e n  custom i n the  For such distributions,,  xfi. 6e ucrrepa ica\  7.2  for  an  and J o s . AJ'• 1 9 . 1 . . 1 6  [ 1 3 0 ] ) . ' T h e s e b a n q u e t s . o b v i o u s l y p r o v e d o f . some v a l u e i n w i n n i n g the support  were  Domitian  laps for  and Commodus o n c e h e l d  a could  each from thirty  (Dio.72.16.1). accept Boissevain,'s- r a t h e r  tenuous reason f o r  t h e MS r e a d i n g o f x.expaicvs, a f i g u r e . . w h i c h . m a k e s p e r h a p s had the r i g h t  i d e a i n suggesting the  perfect  insertion  of  sense.  rejecting Reimar  a second EiKoaoxis;  92  I  s u s p e c t , however,  might four See  that  be anomalous.  7.2  once p o i n t e d that  of  autou:  There i s  Gaius;  p.  for  the  K a i , which  o c c a s i o n on w h i c h  became c u s t o m a r y - ( D i o  G a i u s was b o r n . o n  3 T , A u g u s t A . D . 12  this  and 2300 = E§^P. p ,  5 1 ; S u e t . Gaius  insult  but  insignificant  t h e man was t h r o w n  8. l ; » c f .  Dio  story- t h a t  legionary (Const.  Sap.  18.4),  (Gaius  cf.  8.1-5),  of  father,  AJ'Ph 66  Suda s . v .  publioa  a view rather  b u t he m i s t o o k  Elder  ( f.  S u e t . Gaius  c  KaAAiyoXas).  surprisingly  The m i s t a k e was p e r h a p s at  the  (Suet.  h e l d by 8.1),  time  of his  Gaius  8.1;  for (Suet.  the Seneca  and T a c i t u s  T h i s w a s , as S u e t o n i u s  i m p o s s i b l e , s i n c e G e r m a n i c u s was n o t  epigrams popular  [1945]  Tibur,  historians.  same n a m e , who h a d d i e d i n b o y h o o d  P l i n y the  h a v e b e e n b o r n in castris  acta  the  c o n s u l s h i p i n A . D . 12.  since in  same as  t o t h e b e a s t s (HA  was commonly b e l i e v e d t h a t h e h a d b e e n b o r n i n  camp o f h i s  1.41.3;  (Ann.  his  older brother It  someone  1.2).  L e n t u l u s G a e t u l i c u s s a i d t h a t h e was b o r n a t  7-8.2).  60.27.2).  6.2298  The p l a c e o f h i s b i r t h was- d i s p u t e d e v e n b y c o n t e m p o r a r y  Gaius  twenty-  (CIL  t h e E m p e r o r C o m m o d u s . t h a t h i s b i r t h d a y was t h e  "Commodus" 1 0 . 2 ; c f ,  Gaius h i s  otherwise  320.  an i n t e r e s t i n g  out. t o  first  a number t h a t t h e r e a f t e r  and Leisure  x d yeveQXxa  56.26.1),  s h o u l d he p l a c e d b e f o r e  T h i s , t h e n , , w o u l d be t h e  r a c e s were h e l d , B a l s d o n Life  it  noted  i n Germany u n t i l an e a s y one t o  after  make,  a c c e s s i o n G a i u s was s a i d for  these v e r s e s , see A.  to Taylor  4 0 8 - 1 0 ) . • S u e t o n i u s , who a l o n e s e e m s . t o . h a v e c o n s u l t e d  on t h i s  town t h i r t y m i l e s  problem,  south of  found t h a t Gaius had been born a t . A n t i u m ,  O s t i a (Qaius  8.2).  the a  7.3  ws irou tcoa e f i o g e v a u x y :  F o r example, Suet. commisit  circi  7.3  (Chapter  Tnv T p o m v  cum. e G e l o t i a n a  500 b e a r s  and 500 L i b y a n b e a s t s were  Libycae  ferae  a r e most  1 8 . 3 ; P l i n y HN 8 . 1 8 . 4 5 - 4 7 ) ,  The f u l l e s t  description  i n A.D. 39, slain  commonly l i o n s (Ov. a l t h o u g h t h e terra  to a v a r i e t y o f beasts from northeast  vrnreuae'o;  apparatu  postulassent."  o f D r u s i l l a ' s birthday-  c f . S u e t . Gaius  here perhaps r e f e r s  18.3; "(sc. c i r c e n s e  In honour  13.9; cf. 60.7.3).  5.178;  Fasti  7.4  et subitos,  p r o s p i c i . e n t e m p a u c i ex pxoxlmi.s Maeniani.s  apKTOus TexpaKoaias:  Gaius  Africa.  of this  traditional -  d i s p l a y o f mock c a v a l r y c h a r g e s i s t o b e f o u n d i n V e r g i l ' s Aeneid i n honour  5 . 5 5 3 - 6 0 3 , where i t  of Anchises.  T h e game was p r o b a b l y o f p r e - R o m a n o r i g i n ,  Ascanius i s s a i d t o have r e v i v e d i t it  i s associated with the funeral  game i s f i r s t  mentioned i n the time o f S u l l a  thereafter  occurred regularly  (Suet.  it  Claud.  21.3).  Historically,  families  divided Caes. 5.560)  into  (Dio 43.23.6;  s e e R . D . W i l l i a m s Aeneid  4 9 . 4 3 . 3 ; T a c . Ann. 1 1 . 1 1 . 5 ) .  t w o tuxmae, o n e o f maiores  and t h e o t h e r  3 9 . 2 ; Aug. 4 3 . 2 ; Tib.. 6 . 4 ) ; Y e r g i l ' s r e f e r e n c e h a s l e d t o some u n c e r t a i n t y  Augustus  ( c f . B a l s d o n Life  about  and Leisure  the  the time o f Claudius V pp. 145-47.  The p a g e a n t was p e r f o r m e d b y t h e y o u n g s o n s o f p a t r i c i a n noble)  whence  ( P l u . Cat. Mi. 3 . 1 ) , a n d  at least u n t i l  On i t s o r i g i n ,  for  when h e e s t a b l i s h e d A l b a L o n g a j  w a s b o r r o w e d b y t?ie Romans ( V e r g . Aen. 5 . 5 9 6 - 6 0 1 ) .  game  (or perhaps  They were  o f minores to three  (Suet.  t r o o p s (Aen.  t h e game's o r g a n i z a t i o n  under  p . 3 2 7 ; BE " L u s u s T x o i a e " c o l .  2059-2067). Its  origin  seems t o h a v e b e e n a t l e a s t  u s u a l l y performed  at t h e d e d i c a t i o n  partly  o f a temple  religious,  (e.g.,  f o r i t was  Dio 51.22.4:  Temp  94  of  C a e s a r ) o r a t s a c r e d games  Augustus, however, to  the public  the  saw i t  (Suet.  (e.g.Dio  a s a custom u s e f u l  Aug. 4 3 . 2 ; ] ,  and, i t  J u l i a n gens, w h i c h c l a i m e d d e s c e n t  Dio 54.26.1: dedication 55.10.6;  7.4  TO  apua  four  Traditionally  young  added t o ' t h e  from the T r o j a n r o y a l  tunica  TOIS  starting  palmata.  (Livy 5.41.2).  dignity  house  of  (e.g.,  See a l s o D i o 5 3 . 1 . 4 ;  f o r the chariots  (Suet.  the other  magistrates;  C l a u d i u s , who p e r f o r m e d  ueTo; TGV  cruviepewv  in this  the duty  TWV  was n o r m a l  i n A - D . 31 ( D i o 5 8 . 7 . 4 ) .  any o t h e r  priesthood,  we must  between  was t h e p r i v i l e g e  relinquished  of a  a mappa a s t h e  this  honour  11.193t o one  was p e r h a p s h i s c o l l e a g u e ,  Gaius  1 8 . 1 ; Claud.  7).  Together w i t h S e i a n u s and h i s s o n , G a i u s was made a p r i e s t  Tiberius  p . 56  see Versnel op. c i t . p p . 101-15.  Nero 2 2 . 2 ; J u v . 1 0 . 3 6 - 4 2 ;  Auyoucnreioov;  for  o v e r C i r c e n s i a n games  o r c o n s u l t o drop  case i t (Suet.  It  For the r e l a t i o n  Under t h e Empire i t  During h i s consulships Gaius often  sodales  nobles  ( c f . V e r s n e l Triumphus  presiding  a n d t h e pompa circenses,  nvtoxois dueanunvev:  signal  chariot  the magistrate  praetor  7.4  inevitably  RG 2 . 9 ( C r e e k ) ; D i o 5 6 . 3 4 . 2 .  h o r s e s t o draw t h e t r i u m p h a l  t h e pompa triumphalis  of  for introducing  F o r t h e e x p r e s s i o n , c f . M a s o n Greek Terms p . 7 7 ;  TO TropinKOV;  wore t h e t r i u m p h a l  195).  Apollinares),  59.11.2.  and n o t e s ) .  7.4  ludi  o f the Theatre o f M a r c e l l u s ) .  , only  48.20.2;  Since there  by  i s no e v i d e n c e o f h i s h o l d i n g  assume t h a t h e was t h e n made o n e o f t h e  Augustales-,. a c o l l e g e t h a t h a d b e e n e s t a b l i s h e d i n A . D . 14 ( D i o  56.46.1).  F o r t h e terms  ouviepeus a n d 0iaowns (= s o d a l i s ) , s e e M a s o n  95  Qpeek Terms p .  117.  D i o u s e s AuyouoTreioi. e l s e w h e r e o n l y o f  s p e c i a l l y - s e l e c t e d s o l d i e r s o f Nero  7.5  KCU yap KcJXCt'A'Ae <$ei.vGs; .  (G,aius 5 5 . 1 ) . ,  was p a r t i c u l a r l y - s e n s i t i v e t o  d u r i n g p e r f o r m a n c e s b y M n e s t e r ; " s i q u i s a l t a n t e , eo v e l detrahi  7.5  i u s s u m manu s u a  of  (61.20.3).  According to Suetonius .  a corps  Gaius  distractions  leviter  obstreperet,  flagellabat."  icou Trpb xoO Ka8frj<ovxos xpovou:  Gaius' in  r e g a r d i n g the remarriage of widows.  suspension of mourning d i d  fact violate  The r e g u l a t i o n  the i n t e n t that  not  of the  law  a woman c o u l d  not  r e m a r r y w i t h i n t e n m o n t h s o f h e r h u s b a n d ' s d e a t h was s i m p l y a p r e c a u t i o n to  e n s u r e t h a t s h e was n o t p r e g n a n t by- h i m  Theod. 3 . 8 . 1 , w h e r e t h e i n t e r v a l months). of this  7.7  l a w was m a i n t a i n e d , e v e n i f  Gaius'  ex ' " shows wcr  traditional  own c h o i c e o f  reputable;  affectation: intectis  7.7  that the  d e c o r u m was  t h e n o r m a l Roman oaloei.in  a t t e n t i o n i n Egypt b y t r a v e l l i n g  It  is  foreign  "pedibus  2.59.2).  T h e iravnyupeis w e r e ludi .pub l i c i  pp. 568-93).  in  To w e a r  p u b l i c was c o n s i d e r e d  cum G r a e c i s a m i c t u ' V ( T a c . Ann.  und Kultus  purpose  not.  ( S u e t . Gaius.52).  UTT/o Tfou ^uyouaTou ev x a i s OepivaAs TravrryupeCTi;  W i s s o w a Religion  twelve  " a c modo i n c r e p i d i s , v e l c o t u r n i s , modo  Germanicus a t t r a c t e d  et p a r i  LV  Cod.  f o o t w e a r was s a i d o f t e n t o be d i s -  s p e c u l a t o r i a c a l i g a , nonnumquam s o c c o m u l i e b r i " almost anything but  3.2.11; 5.9.1; cf.  b e f o r e r e m a r r i a g e was e x t e n d e d t o  D i o ' s p h r a s e "av ye ur\ ev yacrxpi  dvUTroSriTOis:  (Digest  (cf.  s u r p r i s i n g t h a t Augustus  the  96  w o u l d go b a r e f o o t ,  s i n c e he i s  increase his height  7.8  ( S u e t . Aug.  T « T £ TrppaKe^dXcu.a;  7.8  TrrXous:  T h e pileus  appeared at  soft  S m a l l w o o d Legatio  p.  seat-cushions which  the C i r c u s Maximus i n ( S u e t . . Aug.  was c o m m o n l y w o r n a t  e v y e Troxe e s UTrepBoXriv e T r e ^ X e ^ e :  194-; c f .  "gladiatorio  munere r e d u c t i s  e m i t t i quemquam v e t a b a t "  7.8  TS 6 i p i 3 i T O ) p { ( o :  [Gaius  S u e t . Aug.  A.D. the  230 fire  It  82.1).  cruelty  interdum f l a g r a n t i s s i m o  sole  in  this  velis  Its  where t h e  roof,  s u p p o r t e d b y beams  l o n g , had t h e w i d e s t , span o f any b u i l d i n g  magnificent  votes  an e l e c t i o n , was b e g u n b y A g r i p p a  ( D i o 5 5 . 8 . 3 - 4 ; P l i n y - HN 3 6 . 2 4 . 1 0 2 ) .  66.24.2).  for his  C o n s t r u c t i o n of the D i r i b i t o r i u m ,  o f A . D . 8 0 , and i t s  entertainments  26.5).  completed i n 7 B . C . by A u g u s t u s .  l a r c h 100 f e e t  19.1).  A c c o r d i n g t o S u e t o n i u s , G a i u s was  were counted a f t e r and  the  4 . 5 . 1 ; RG  f e s t i v a l s and  known r a t h e r respect;  to  73).  or " r o y a l box" erected by-Augustus  (see  7.8  have f a v o u r e d h i g h - s o l e d shoes  T h e s e w e r e pulvini-, first  pulvinav  s a i d to  It  i n Rome b e f o r e  was s e r i o u s l y damaged b y  r o o f was n e v e r r e b u i l t  w o u l d have been most s u i t a b l e  of  (Dio  f o r performances before  small  crowds. Until  1934 i t  was t h o u g h t t h a t t h e D i r i b i t o r i u m was t h e  o f the S a e p t a , where the  actual, yoting  took place  (cf.  t h e o r y - was r e j e c t e d when a newly- d i s c o v e r e d f r a g m e n t Romae s h o w e d t h e b u i l d i n g  adjacent to  second s t o r e y  Dio 53.23.1).  o f , t h e Forma  t h e s o u t h end o f t h e S a e p t a ,  This  Urbis between  97 the Pantheon and the Temple of l s i s (cf. Lanciani Ruins pp. 47-48; Jordan Top.ogrqphie 293; p.  and-Excavations  1.3.558-564; Nash. P i c t o r i a l Dictionary  Lugli Monumenti 3.96-105.; Platner and. Ashby Topographical  2.291-  Dictionary  151).  7.8  iKptwuevco:  " F i t t e d with. benches-*.-? ;Cf. ,Dio 43.22. 3;. .0eaxpbv T I n  KUvrryexiKOv iKoiucas."  <Suo xe un.cn; <a\  7.9  nyepais doofieica:  Dio errs i n the length of Gaius' consulship.  perhaps was after 43;  7.9  xois  as  to be expected, on. his birthday-., 31. August, two months exactly  entering on  Fasti  He resigned i t ,  i t (Suet, Gains  Ostienses  - Smallwood p.  TrpoaTroSe6eiYue\ms  Is  17.1;  Claud.  2; no.  auxnv:  7; Acta  Arvalium  = E§J  p.  31).  The two suffecti  who  took o f f i c e  on 1 September were A. Caecina Paetus (PIR  2  C 103)  and C. Caninius Rebilus  = Smallwood no. 31). was  Colin's theory  (PIR  2  C 393)  (Fasti  Ostienses  (Latomus 13 [1954] 403-4) that Paetus  chosen consul by Gaius because his father had fought under Germanicus  on the Rhine i s untenable, since Dio here states c l e a r l y that these had already-been appointed by Tiberius. Rebilus, cf. Tac. Ann,  13.30.3.  suffecti  For Paetus, c f . Dio.60.16.6; f o r  98  CHAPTER EIGHT  vocrngas  8.1  his  rule,  WT.OS-  uev  O c t o b e r A . D . 37  tLe Emperor's h a b i t s boys  a n d women,  scholars.  of  P h i l o says t h a t  (Leg. 2 . 1 4  vocros  [548]).  He a t t r i b u t e s  over-indulgence,  refers  sees G a i u s '  to  "i  vizi  sudden i l l n e s s  h e a l t h combined w i t h the  constant  senza p r i n c i p i  morali"  t  col.  " D e r Kb'rper b r a c h u n t e r  389-390]:  Ausschweifungen of  Gaius'  (Aspects  zusammen").  apparently  make a n a c c u r a t e  writers,  applicable  to  anything  There  is  considerable  potentially  damaging,  considered going statement nervous  avoids  that  into  d i s e a s e , c a l l e d comitialis s.v.  pf  J u l i a n gens f r o m J u l i u s  Caesr. 4 5 . 1 ; Gaius  50.2;  comitia"),  cf.  "to  was an u n d o u b t e d  Gelzer  recurrent  delicate "debole,  Genilssen und s i c k n e s s and  "alcoholic  hardly  recorded  appoocrria,  malady. from a minor,  records  attacks  t h a t he  (Gaius of  ancients  M a x a n o n Tiberius  epileptic',")'.  the  50.2),  that (Fest.  p,  33; "Drusus  epilepsy; It  is  adolescent  I's:  that  this  a  hereditary de  Gaius  and G e r m a n i c u s '  likely  though  often  Sign.  a n d w h o s e symptoms w e r e e x h i b i t e d  C a e s a r down t o  all  intoxication"  v a g u e symptoms  brain"  morbus b y t h e  97),  D i o , who c o u l d  a serious  Suetonius  to  [RE " J u l i u s "  this  the word  cleanse his  Germanicus, had f i t s s u s p i c i o u s l y l i k e Caligula,  419-21).  to  of  Italian  p.  a man who was  of  from the  illness  inherited  that Gaius suffered  typical,  Verb., the  pp.  epilepsy.  retirement  "prohibere  of  so, too,  result  the  (Caligola  den ihm zugemuteten  diagnosis  evidence  eighth, month  among s e v e r a l  as a r e s u l t  the problem by u s i n g  form of  the  the  with.  and debauchery- w i t h  innominab.ili"  as t h e  from e n n e r v a t i o n  suggests  baths-,  supporters  87-88;  of Roman History  by e a r l i e r  in  T . S . Jerome would e x p l a i n  senseless acts  of the Study  be e x p e c t e d to  hot  dissoluteness of pp.  (L Impero  G a i u s was s t r u c k  a gapeia  a theory- w h i c h has found  Venturini  and G a r z e t t i  arreOave:  ouic  b y many CSuet.  son, son, inherited  99  weakness, led to J.  s u d d e n weight o f u n a c c u s t o m e d  combined with, the  a more s e r i o u s n e r v o u s c o l l a p s e t h a n he h a d h i t h e r t o  Lucas- (AC 36 [ 1 9 6 7 ] - 1 5 9 - 8 9 )  e p i l e p s y , but  I  b y a t t r i b u t i n g the  Willrieh  i l l n e s s to  Caesonia  (Suet.  statement  about  Was v a r i e d — i s  the.beginning  of a love potion  Two r e c e n t  (1971/1972)  News o f G a i u s '  14.2), while  for it  attempts  s i c k n e s s caused great a nightly  i n the p r o v i n c e s g r i e f  3.15-21  [548-549]).  is  character  ( P h i l o Leg. often  45.356  and t h a t ,  to diagnose Gaius'  illness  (1972/1973)  outside  the p a l a c e  of his  their  own  e forsennate").  the  (Suet. even  (Leg. 4 . 2 2 . [ 5 4 9 ] :  the  salvation  recovery spread,  the in  [598]). i l l n e s s marked the  ( e . g . , Y e n t u r i n i Caligola  pazzb f u r i o s o ,  J/n f a c t ,  are:  327-29.  change i n  Gaius'  as w i t h T i b e r i u s , h i s mask o f h y p o c r i s y was now  lo rida al potere,  it  i s u n l i k e l y t h a t s h e was  was m i x e d w i t h a n x i e t y :  As t i d i n g s  assumed t h a t t h i s  away t o r e v e a l t h e M o n s t e r che  as  consternation throughout  vigil  rumour  surprising  and r e j o i c i n g were i m m e a s u r a b l e , and s a c r i f i c e s were o f f e r e d  gratitude It  The  a d m i n i s t e r e d to him by  J e w s saw t h e s u r v i v a l o f t h e E m p e r o r as n e c e s s a r y f o r  relief  position  unaccustomed  of his reign.  2 2 3 - 2 5 ; M . G . . M o r g a n CW 66  A t Rome c r o w d s k e p t  ( P h i l o Leg.  of  on C h a p t e r . 2 3 . 7 MiAoov{av) — a  chronologically improbable,  K a t z CW 65  Gaius  118) t a k e s t h e m i d d l e  one whose s e x u a l a p p e t i t e was s u p p o s e d l y as s t r o n g  h i s m i s t r e s s so e a r l y .  Empire.  p.  a combination of the s t r a i n s  50.2; cf.  Gaius  Gaius'  con c l us i o m t h a t , t h e E m p e r o r was  (Caligula,  power w i t h e x c e s s i v e c e l e b r a t i o n s at t h a t h i s i l l n e s s was a r e s u l t  experienced.  admirably .discusses the evidence f o r  cannot agree w i t h h i s  p s y c h o p a t h i c as w e l l .  R.S.  responsibility,  P h i l o i s the  p.  97: "una  infermita  a v i d o d i sangue e d i v e n d e t t e only authority  "pexagaAoov irpbs TO arxdapov,  stripped  crudeli  t o make s u c h a c l a i m  ua'AjVov <$£ ny cruveaici'aCev  ayplOTriTa TO? TfAdauaTi Tris unoicpt.creojs a v a ^ n v a s " ) , b u t  he c o n t r a d i c t s  himself  100  a short  time  later  (Leg. 8 . 5 9  [554]).  necessary temporal break i n Gaius c o n f l i c t i n g nature specific  incident  he c o n s i d e r s t h e A.D.  39  8.1  the  (Qaius- 5 1 . 1 ) .  change i n . G a i u s  1  late  Gaius'  For t h i s  r e c o v e r y , was i n  TTLS v e d x n x o s  (Dio 7 8 . 1 7 . 1 ; c f .  Lucius i n  be a p p o i n t e d t o  66,  (cf.  first  new h o n o r a r y  what  Gaius Caesar i n  5 B . C . and h i s  the  imperial, family  ( D i o 5 5 . 9 . 9 - 1 0 ; T a c . Ann.  61, 68, 69; cf.  the s u c c e s s i o n that  356).  there  a l s o E$J no.  one, for  it  was  It  is  significant  J.P.V.D.  8.1-  ecrrfo\n0 evict:  B a l s d o n . JRS  26  [1936]  63a, 65,  interpreted, successor  i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t G a i u s '  brothers,  the  1 5 2 - 6 0 ; M e i s e Untersuchungen  the  Senate h i s  adopt G e m e l l u s , p r o b a b l y d u r i n g h i s his  1.3.2;  Tiberius'  Gaius had e a r l y d e c l a r e d to  that body s h o r t l y a f t e r  to  for  Nero and D r u s u s , o r t h a t G a i u s h i m s e l f were e v e r a p p o i n t e d t o Ccf.  Latin  i s . TrpoicpiTOs  position  p.  4.767-768).  of the  as an i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e E m p e r o r ' s c h o i c e o f Life  did  iuventutis  princes of  in  for  ( s e e P a r e t i Storia  The a p p o i n t m e n t was a s i g n i f i c a n t  G r e e n i d g e Roman Public to  57.8.2).  2 B , C . were t h e  this  informally,  attitude  this  of the Emperor's  The n o r m a l . G r e e k t r a n s l a t i o n  1 0 7 , 1 3 9 , 140 = E§J n o .  ILS  67, 75).  albeit  to  the  i n A . D . 38 o r e a r l y  some w a y a r e s u l t  p h r a s e princeps  RG 14.2;  but not  other hand, i n h i s desire  a s s u m p t i o n . t h e r e i s no p r o o f  any  does a t t r i b u t e  Moreover, Josephus dates  character to  [ 2 5 6 ] ) . ' D i o , on t h e  xfis veoxriTOs TrpOKpi6eVTa:  brother  latter  a n t i t h e s i s , s u g g e s t s - t h a t G e m e l l u s ' , d e a t h , o c c u r r i n g as i t  shortly after illness.  behaviour:  1  conduct to mental i n f i r m i t y ,  i n October  (AJ 1 8 . 7 . 2  effective  of his  N e i t h e r D i o nor Suetonius sees  first  a r r i v a l , , i n Rome ( P h i l o Leg.. A.21  S u e t o n i u s r e c o r d s t h a t G e m e l l u s a s s u m e d t h e toga v i r i l i s ,  was  position  .p. 9 7 , n.  intention  to  meeting w i t h [549]). appointed  40).  .  101  princeps 15.2). in  a n d was a d o p t e d b y G a i u s a l l  iuventutis,  A g a i n , e v e j s i n c e Augustus adopted h i s C'o$ °9  17 B . C .  T  £ V  p.  Caligula  113).  (Gaius  g r a n d s o n s , G a i u s and L u c i u s ,  Si.oiSoxous.Trls h,pyr\s. aTfod'eigcts:, \ v ' n x x o v eTrigouXeuTiTou. /  according to Dio 5 4 . 1 8 . 1 ) , intended successor.  on t h e same d a y  It  such a distinction  was t a k e n t o  must h a v e b e e n s o i n t h i s  P h i l o ' s statement  case  (Leg,. 5 . 2 8 - 2 9  indicate  (so, too,  [550])  that  the  Willrieh  the  adoption  was- a c l e v e r p l o y - , s i n c e "-ft yelp "o\ou TravxeAns lgouo~ta Kaxoi x.ous XGV ;  TCOUOAWV v o u o u s a v d i c e i x o u . i T a x p i , " shows o n l y - a m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f  an E m p e r o r ' s  powers: Gaius could—and indeed did-—dispose of Gemellus without recourse patria  (on t h e  potestas  N i c h o l a s Roman Law p p . two h o n o u r s  immediately  Gemellus  a position  to  l e g a l a s p e c t s of, t h e a d o p t i o n , 119-20). after of  t h a t G a i u s was m o t i v a t e d d e s i r e to  ensure the  among p o t e n t i a l That the is  adoption  Rosborough pp. suicide  8.1  (cf.  his  great  to  matter  of  p.  In words t h a t  family-  not  irreverent,  than  his  struggle  time before Gemellus'  'et  on i n s c r i p t i o n s  annulled after  te  for  death (cf.  Gemellus'  289).  to  x o u x o v c a r o K x e v e i s . KCU ere cA!\oi.'" if  a short  l a t e r became n o t o r i o u s ,  once p r e d i c t e d  imprudent,  suspect  b y any c o n s i d e r a t i o n o t h e r  was p e r h a p s f o r m a l l y  i.nquit,  these  elevated  i s no r e a s o n t o  the P r i n c i p a t e by a v o i d i n g any  occurred only  it  a s an a d u l t  of  power.  W i l l r i e h Caligula  ' " o c c i d e s hunc t u , '  recognition  absence o f any mention o f i t  27-28):  avexpnoxxxo•  formal  J o l o w i c z and  the simultaneous r e c e i p t  e m i n e n c e , and t h e r e  in this  stability  aspirants  i n d i c a t e d by the  1  Certainly  cf.  to  the Emperor  Tiberius  G a i u s t h a t he w o u l d m u r d e r G e m e l l u s ; alius"'  ( T a c . Ann.  (Dio 5 8 . 2 3 . 3 ) . another to  (since a s o l d i e r would thereby  violate  kill his  6.46.8);  Since i t  was  '"cro  considered  a member of• t h e oath to  the  xe  imperial  Imperial  102  House  [cf.  suicide; pathos,  W i l l r i c h . Caligula  but  p.  289]),  he l a c k e d any- e x p e r i e n c e w i t h d e a t h .  Philo tells  The any It and  {Leg. 5 . 3 0 - 3 1  [550];  cf.  behaviour,  3.10  in Place. of  witnesses sent  by  s p o t he p l u n g e d  in  [518-519]), in  cannot be d e t e r m i n e d w i t h any a c c u r a c y .  must have o c c u r r e d b e t w e e n t h e E m p e r o r ' s , i l l n e s s i n O c t o b e r A . D .  37,  24 M a y A . D . 3 8 , when a n o t h e r was c o - o p t e d i n G e m e l l u s ' p l a c e among t h e (CIL 6 . 2 0 2 8 c = E§J n o .  3; W i l l r i c h  [Caligula  b u r i e d i n the Mausoleum o f A u g u s t u s , f o r h i s 172 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  pp.  290-91]  illness).  e p i t a p h was f o u n d n e a r b y  Philo, too,  s  s u i c i d e was t h e p a r t he p l a y e d i n  comments t h a t  (Leg. 4 . 2 3  recent honours p a i d to  s u i t a b l e to four  Macro,  take Gaius'  of Gaius'  [549]).  If  p l a c e on t h e t h r o n e .  they a l l  t h e r e was a c o n s p i r a c y ,  he  too however,  c a n d i d a t e most  Indeed, the enforced s u i c i d e s  may h a v e b e e n p a r t On t h e  from the b e g i n n i n g of Gaius': r e i g n ,  1 1 6 - 1 7 ; W i l l r i c h Caligula its  enforced  close associates within a brief period--Gemellus, Silanus,  r e p l a c e him w i t h h i s newly adopted s o n .  none o f  official  g r o u n d s t h a t G e m e l l u s was  G e m e l l u s w o u l d make h i m t h e  and E n n i a — s u g g e s t t h a t  Gemellus  the  a c o n s p i r a c y against the Emperor, but  r e a s o n as f a b r i c a t e d o n t h e  young t o be i n v o l v e d  (ILS  88).  e Y K ^ n y a a u x S euarfayuyv &  dismisses the  must be  He was p r o b a b l y  explanation of Gemellus'  of  of  considerable importance  wrong i n p l a c i n g G e m e l l u s * d e a t h b e f o r e G a i u s '  the  commit  a passage f u l l  a n d when shown t h e  date of Gemellus'' death, which i s  analysis of Gaius'  Arvals  8.1  In  how: t h e y o u t h aske.d t h e o f f i c i a l  G a i u s where he s h o u l d s t a b h i m s e l f , the sword  G e m e l l u s was o r d e r e d t o  p.  112.  of  existence of  a plot  to  a party  of  s e e M e i s e Untersuchungen  With the exception of A v i l l i u s  a d h e r e n t s can be i d e n t i f i e d ,  but  pp.  Flaccus,  t h e y p r o b a b l y i n c l u d e d many  103  who h a d a c t e d a g a i n s t A g r i p p i n a . of  failure  to win Gemellus a share  t h e E m p i r e on T i b e r i u s ' d e a t h , M e i s e . c o m m e n t s . " l a g d i e s n i c h t  Charakter der Erbregelung, 'Gemelluspartei,' Macros"  (p.  sondern a l l e l n  der Jugend i h r c s  of  an d e r M a c h t l o s i g k e i t  29.1),  during his  i l l n e s s , he named D r u s i l l a h i s h e i r according to  s a y s t h a t he made h i s Drusilla with his Chapter 28.7]). who s e e s i t  pp.  (Doppeiprinzipat Drusilla's  position  until  taken  it  p.  243, n.  76).  it  is  clear  to  Gaius'  that Gaius'  (Caligola  a direct  credible  provision  until  e a s t e r n customs  the  100-101.)  i l l n e s s would prove  for  the'succession  (cf.  but  his  D i o ' s words  fatal  Principate that a  a n d b y Hammond, who (Augustan  Principate  of his  actions,  already  Drusilla,  who  See B a l s d o n .Gaius p .  makes t h e p l a u s i b l e  hoping t h a t Gaius.'  Kornemann,  she s h o u l d have  everyone but  her death.  [cf.  b o t h by  s u s p i c i o n s , w h i c h may- h a v e h a s t e n e d a n  even a f t e r  well  sister  suggestion  a p p e a r a n c e s and i m p l i c a t i o n s  c a u s e d him to. f e a r  as  [7.12]  later  share i n  Qaius  that  o f h i s ' power  procedure  suggestion that  was n o o r g a n i z e d c o n s p i r a c y - , b u t . t h a t G e m e l l u s and h i s  inclusion  son  two y e a r s  should.become a f a t h e r ) ,  imitation of  favourite pp.  his  he i s . c o n f u s i n g G a i u s '  as a r e v o l u t i o n a r y  a temporary  Whatever the  remain h i s  Venturini  his heir,  a woman h a v i n g  was o n l y  impending nervous breakdown, was t o  instead,  5 1 - 5 3 ; Kornemann makes t h e  Gaius h i m s e l f  attributes  trusted  daughter by Caesonia, born almost  as a n e x a m p l e o f  detected  S u e t o n i u s .(Gains 2 4 . 1 ; when E u t r o p i u s  daughter  This i s  found  against poison , (Suet,  and by- O c t o b e r A . D . 3 7 . h e s o l i t t l e  as h i s p r o p e r t y ,  or  Vorgehen  are  G a i u s grew^ s u s p i c i o u s , o f G e m e l l u s when h e  on h i s b r e a t h w h a t h e t h o u g h t . t o be an a n t i d o t e  son,  der  K a n d i d a t e n u n d dem g e s c h i . c k t e n  a s u s p e c t e d conspiracy-, however embryonic,  S u e t o n i u s as w e l l .  23.3;  am  116.).  Reflections in  Of i t s  supporters  and w e r e p r e p a r i n g  37;  there  were  the  ground  "(5s KCU T r j ^ a P p W T i q a O x o u . £<j>.e6peuVas");  of D r u s i l l a in this  intrigue  is  absurd.  104  Whether the  conspiracy existed in  he o b v i o u s l y f e l t his  death,.  was  not  of the  competitors  Les itudes  eastern practice  the  of  crown: T i b e r i u s  1.6.1;  30 [ 1 9 6 2 ]  of his  N e r o , whose c l a i m t o Hammond Augustan  the  39).  forced  but  (Tacitus'  primum [1939]  throne  appeared l e s s 243, n.  only like  a n c e s t r y , was t o b e m u r d e r e d strong  A V T i d x y TE T 2 ' A V T I O X O U :  p o s s i b l e to  but  Lesuisse  (Dio 6 1 . 7 . 4 ;  by  cf.  7 5 ; G a r z e t t i L'Impero p . . 8 9 ;  Pareti  4.768).  the problems of  than  23 y e a r s  174; L.  By h i s  d e c i s i o n to restore  certain  client  k i n g d o m s , G a i u s showed c o n s i d e r a b l e of  as  facinus  C l a u d i u s ' son, B r i t a n n i c u s ,  imperial  p.  relatives  the precedent  17  cf,  The Roman E m p e r o r s  eliminating  had s e t  88;  C l a u d i u s was s p a r e d b y G a i u s  direct  Principate  36,6).  c f . . J . B e r a n g e r RED  supposed s t u p i d i t y ;  Gemellus a v i c t i m  3  for  of Ann.  classiques  because of h i s  8.2  the  s a f e t y and so  172 3 S m a l l w o o d n o .  w i t h t h e e x e c u t i o n of. A g r i p p a Postumus  novi prineipatus  Storia  epitaph.(JDS'  2 7 - 2 8 ; H i r s c h f e l d Hermes 25 ,[1890]  had been q u i c k t o - a d o p t  earlier  to h i s  imagination,  a d o p t i o n was u n d e r s t a n d a b l y s u p p r e s s e d and  r e c o r d e d on t h e p r i n c e ' s  potential  or simply i n Gaius'  t h a t . G e m e l l u s was a t h r e a t  The m a t t e r  Rosborough pp.  fact  imperial  d e p e n d on t h e  assume t h e  administration.  co-operation of  ( S u e t . Aug. provincial  48).  Augustus had p r e f e r r e d  semi-independent  princes  immense e x p e n s e o f g a r r i s o n i n g new p r o v i n c e s  he a l w a y s c o n s i d e r e d t h e s e k i n g d o m s  as i n t e g r a l  For T i b e r i u s ' , a t t i t u d e to  administration  client  parts  rather  the  Empire  and h i s Provinzialpolitik  a n a l y s i s o f the. E m p i r e ' s  relation-  s h i p s w i t h e a s t e r n m o n a r c h s c a n b e f o u n d i n M. P a n i , Roma e i re  d'Oriente  des Tiberius  da Augusto  a Tiberio  (B'ari,  a valuable  wherever  (RG 2 7 . 2 ) ,  of  kingdoms,  i n g e n e r a l , s e e W. O r t h , Die,  (Munich, 1970);  appreciation  1972),  105  C. J u l i u s A n t i o c h u s the 17  son o f Antiochus ( T a c , Ann.  2,42,7).  province  under  so u n t i l  A . D . 37.  Gaius,  to  When A n t i o c h u s  the  taxes  original  (cf.  of p r e s e r v i n g monarch of  a valuable  13.37.2).  and l a t e r  In  the  gave a s s i s t a n c e t o T i t u s  in  to  made a p r o v i n c e  once a g a i n .  difficult  J o s . AJ  client  19.5.1  kingdoms  the next  of to  Syria,  16.3).  only  a short  while  I n A . D . 41 h e  loc.  received  least,  cit.;  Dio  followed 60.8.1).  31 y e a r s , A n t i o c h u s  proved  I n A . D . 53 he h e l p e d s u b d u e w i l d  Cilician  coast of C i l i c i a Tracheia the  Parthians  ( T a c . Ann.  ( T a c . Hist.  (Tac. 13.7.1;  2.81), 5.1).  i n A . D . 72 he was d e p o s e d and. h i s  to  revolt  It  and is,  kingdom  f r o m Rome; s u c h an a c c u s a t i o n  and J o s e p h u s comments t h a t he i s n o t -(BJ 7 . 7 . 1 - 3  'AypCiTTOV ..TF0V....J0U ""Hpojfiou e y y o v o v :  and a g r a n d s o n o f H e r o d t h e  although  He h a d b e e n a c c u s e d b y C a e s e n n i u s P a e t u s ,  of planning  believe,  from  (IGRR 4 . 9 4 0 )  Caesavis  some t i m e a t  (Jos.  realm  another kingdom,  [276]).  t h e war w i t h t h e Jews  discover that  c h a r g e was b a s e d o n f a c t  8.2  and gave h i m y e t  remained  w a r s he s u p p o r t e d V e s p a s i a n ( T a c . Hist.  then,surprising  •governor  and i t  a  Commagene was a p r o v i n c e ,  Gaius  Commagene f o r  a i d e d Rome a g a i n s t  civil  2.56.5),  o f amicus  (Suet.  who h a d b e s i e g e d A n e m u r i u m on t h e  12.55),  death i n A . D .  r e c e i v e d back h i s p a t e r n a l  sesterces  o f Rome.  his  was  y e a r t h e k i n g d o m was c o n s t i t u t e d ( T a c . Ann.  Commagene f o r  ally  and a d v i s o r ,  Commagene u n t i l  l a n d b a c k f r o m C l a u d i u s , who., f o r  policy  himself  known  friend  c o l l e c t e d b y Rome w h i l e  Gaius d e p r i v e d him o f i t  As d e p e n d e n t  Ann.  governor.  appears to have r u l e d  w h i c h one i s n o t  tribes  The f o l l o w i n g  some 100 m i l l i o n  Antiochus  Gaius'  149), ./Gaius'  he a l s o a c q u i r e d t h e h o n o r a r y t i t l e  amounting  his  2 (PIR. I  who h a d r u l e d  a praetorian  and w a s . g i v e n a l l  before  III,  IV  certain  that  is the  {219-240]).  M. J u l i u s A g r i p p a  (PIR  son o f A r i s t o b u l u s  and B e r e n i c e ,  2  I  G r e a t , was e d u c a t e d a t Rome w i t h t h e  131),  the  children  106  of the i m p e r i a l brought  family.  His friends-hip w i t h D r u s u s , the s o n : o f  him c o n s i d e r a b l e i n f l u e n c e  i n A . D . 23 he r e t u r n e d t o well-known him to  ambition  live  spent to win the  and r e p o r t e d t o  large  An u n f o r t u n a t e  [168];  18.6.6  of  all  [126]).  T h e r e he  a m o u n t s o f m o n e y , m o s t o f w h i c h he Emperor  comment w h i c h he o n c e made t o  [ 1 8 4 - 1 9 4 ] ; . BJ 2.9.5  [178-180]).  freed by Gaius s h o r t l y a f t e r  of his  it  his  (Jos.  Gaius—that overheard  treason  T h e r e he  (Jos.  remained  a c c e s s i o n ( J o s . AJ  was s e v e r a l y e a r s b e f o r e A g r i p p a g a i n e d  grandfather's, t e r r i t o r y .  ( J o s . BJ 2 . 9 . 6  [28];  18.4.6  [106];  was A b i l a ,  E u s e b i u s Led.  [181];  I n A . D . 37 h e was g i v e n o f P h i l i p , who h a d d i e d  P h i l o in Place.  notice  5.25  [520]).  i n P h i l o Leg.  grandfather,  16.3).  6.40  The J o s . AJ  p r e v i o u s l y r u l e d b y L y s a n i a s (AJ,IB.6.10  [237];  c f , .AJ 1 9 . 5 . 1  [275]).  The t r i b u t e  which  P h i l i p h a d b e e n , h e l d on d e p o s i t , ( J o s ; AJ  [523]).  to  r e c e i v e from the Senate p r a e t o r i a n  and  18.4.6  B e c a u s e , h e h e l d Roman c i t i z e n s h i p t h r o u g h  he was e l i g i b l e  ( P h i l o in Place.  three  [593]);  a c c u m u l a t e d amount was p r o b a b l y n o w g i v e n t o A g r i p p a S u e t . Qaius  a  41.326  Hist.. 2 . 4 . 1 ; b u t  the e r r o r  had been c o l l e c t e d s i n c e the d e a t h o f  [108];  for  Herod A n t i p a s ,  c o n s i s t e d o f T r a c h o n i t i s , G a u l a n i t i s , and B u t a n a e a ( c f .  added t o t h i s  the  impossible  of his brother-in-law,  of Herod's kingdom, the t e t r a r c h y  earlier  tetrarchy 18.2.1  ; His  [228-236]).  third part years  [ 3 5 2 ] ) made i t  sooner Gaius.would.be ruler—was  D e s p i t e D i o ' s comment h e r e , control  [143-147]).  t h e E m p e r o r , who h a d A g r i p p a i m p r i s o n e d f o r  s i x months, u n t i l  18.6.10  19.8.2  after Drusus-death,  o f G a i u s , whom h e . s a w as t h e n e x t  the sooner T i b e r i u s d i e d , the  for  ( J o s . AJ 1 8 . 6 . 1 - 2  the t e t r a r c h y  o f .borrowing  favour  [167]).  AJ 1 8 . 6 . 5  c a p i t a l , but  t o Rome i n A . D . 36, ( J o s . ' A J 1 8 . 5 . 3  continued h i s habit  AJ 1 8 . 6 . 4  the East  ( e . g . , J o s . AJ  in Galilee,  a n d he r e t u r n e d  i n the  Tiberius,  his  honours  107  In t h e 38 ( b u t for  second year of Gaius'  cf,  Merivale  5,388-389),  h i s kingdom, promising  [ 2 3 8 ] ; on A g r i p p a ' s pp.  Legatio  trip  17-19).  to  reign,  But h i s  new r o l e  Gaius e x i l e d him to B a l s d o n : Gaius  [245-256];  BJ 2 . 9 . 6  t o Rome t o  a town i n  p.  120)  his  II  (pp.  277-90)  the  the  ask f o r  Pyrenees (cf.  and gave h i s  [181-183]).  treats  l e a v e Rome  ( J o s . AJ cf.  18.6.11 Smallwood  a s k i n g a r o u s e d t h e , envy- o f  d o c u m e n t e d b i o g r a p h y - b y H.W.. Ho.ehner Appendix  autumn o f A . D .  t o h i s new k i n g d o m , v i a A l e x a n d r i a ,  Instead,  18.7.2  the  r e t u r n as s o o n as p o s s i b l e  H e r o d A n t i p a s , who t r a v e l l e d  299-304;  in  Agrippa, obtained permission to  tetrarch  pp.  probably  lands  a kingship  as  Willrich  Caligula  to Agrippa  F o r Herod A n t i p a s ,  well.  ( J o s . AJ  see the  [Cambridge,  (Herod Antipas  the  well  1972]):  t h o r n y p r o b l e m of. t h e b o u n d a r i e s  of  tetrarchy. A g r i p p a was f o r t u n a t e t o b e b a c k i n  Rome e a r l y  i n A . D . 41  (for  the  c/  date  of his  Claudius  arrival,  in  cf.  s e c u r i n g the throne  kingdom o f J u d a e a , lands of h i s  his  death i n A.D. 44, h i s  Tac.  Hist.  Ann.  12.23.2).  5.9.5),  Roman Empire  8.2  of  grandfather  (Dio  6 0 . 8 . 2 ; J o s . AJ  M.P. Charlesworth  (Five  Men;  life  of J u l i u s  Both Philo  ch.  1)  their  joint  will,  adoption.  adopted by T i b e r i u s  his  Character  gives  the  only  12,87  [558];  Studies, from  all At  19.9.2  into Syria  [362]; (Tac.  the  reliable continuous X  Agrippa.  (Leg...  same, e r r o r  cf.  (Qaius  S m a l l w o o d ad l o c . ) 15.2;,23.3;  b y naming G a i u s and G e m e l l u s j o i n t h e i r s , They were, (cf.  to  gave  [274-275]).  ( J o s . AJ  was i n c o r p o r a t e d  S u e t o n i u s make t h e Tiberius'  19.5.1  later  1936]  the h e l p he  L e b a n o n : he now h e l d  years  TOV O,$£\$QV:  as- i f  of  k i n g d o m was made a p r o v i n c e  and f i v e  [Cambridge,  the  for  was r e w a r d e d w i t h t h e . a d d i t i o n  S a m a r i a , and t h e m o u n t a i n s  the  account  on C h a p t e r 2 4 . 1 coaTrep . . . ) ,  in  P h i l o Leg.  fact, 4.23  also  and  29,1), suggested  c o u s i n s , s i n c e Germanicus had been [549]).  108  8.3  IIOUVTXIOS §e T ^ p d v i o s IIOTITOS :  Cf.  Suet.:  Gaius  periturum pueris  tradidit,  verbenatum infulatumque  quoad p r a e c i p i t a r e t u r Social  Status  criminals, a n d opus  8.3  it  ex a g g e r e . "  "is  f o u n d a s an a l t e r n a t i v e (p.  que f e r r o 27.2).  salute  this  incident  to  fight  cf.  9 - 1 0 , who r e f e r s salute The t w o in  8.4  the  incidents, later  "pro new:  then Dio i s  spectavit-  (Suet.  an E m p e r o r ' s r e c o v e r y , that  s e e R.  though i n t r i g u i n g ,  Antinous  died in  M . P . C h a r l e s w o r t h PBA  40),  effective  23  REA  (1930)  32  a sacrifice this  are h a r d l y p a r a l l e l .  6 $£ c5r\ iT£V0Epos OIUTOU MapKOS "CiAavos :  (GIL 1 0 . 6 6 3 9 = E§J p .  was  as a S p a n i s h c u s t o m :  Lugand  a n d was s o h o n o u r e d b y H a d r i a n f o r  Empire, cf.  however,  14.2).  Gaius  a s i m i l a r p r o m i s e o f devotio i s mentioned  (Gaius  exaggerating  besides Atanius,  aegri"  "votum  multas p r e c e s "  (1937)  reason For  M. J u n i u s . S i l a n u s  seems t o h a v e e x c e l l e d i n  pro (69.11.3).  devotio  124-25.  8 3 2 ) , consul 15  victim:  operam p r o m i s e r a t ,  salute  same  i l l - c o n s i d e r e d obsequiousness.  to D i o ' s b e l i e f  imperatoris  poor  relegatio  G a i u s f o u n d what must h a v e b e e n t h e most  any f u r t h e r  On v o w s made f o r  for  seems t o b e t h e  w i t h o u t naming the  to. A t a n i u s ,  5 3 . 2 0 . 2 - 4 , where i t  V a l . Max. 2 . 6 . 1 1 ) .  way o f p r e v e n t i n g  but  There were o t h e r s  as g l a d i a t o r s  (Dio  agerent,  see Garnsey  punishments,,  n i s i victorem. et post  does r e f e r  Such s e r v i l e d e d i c a t i o n s were n o t made t o A u g u s t u s  other  sua g l a d i a t o r i a m  when he s a y s t h a t b o t h men d i e d . who o f f e r e d  to  S u e t o n i u s r e c o r d s what  dimicantem nec d i m i s i t  If  cunctantem  was a more n o r m a l p u n i s h m e n t  story, ab e o , q u i p r o  as a p e n a l t y ,  se  138).  ^ATOAUOS TE TVS E E K O U V S O S :  exegit  e a de c a u s a , . ; v o v e r a t ,  On b e a t i n g  136-41: although i t  fine"  qui  yotum r e p o s c e n t e s p e r v i c o s  pp.  ... a n d t h e  27.2: "alteram,  (PIR  in A.D.  suffectus  flattery  I  of  Tiberius,  109 once p r o p o s i n g  t h a t monuments  of  tribunioia  rather t h a n b y t h e c o n s u l s ( T a c . .Ann. 3,57.2.)'. He d o e s seem t o  potestas  h a v e h a d some i n f l u e n c e voluntarySilanus  exile  that E m p e r o r , , f o r when h i s b r o t h e r w e n t i n t o  with  because of  adultery-with  successfully- intervened  His as  s h o u l d be d a t e d b y t h e h o l d e r s  position  that  as. G a i u s '  Julia,  with Tiberius  include him,  S i l a n u s improve h i s Antonia,  t r y i n g to  granddaughter,  on h i s , b e h a l f  ( T a c . Ann.  father-in-law-involved  f a c e d b y G e m e l l u s : any- a t t e m p t t o  invariably  Augustus',  either  situation  him i n  r e p l a c e the  as p a r t i c i p a n t  character  o r as v i c t i m . ,  and c o n d u c t  same d a n g e r  Emperor  by- t r e a t i n g G a i u s a s h i s  improve h i s  the  3.24).  would Nor  did  own s o n a n d ,  like  ( P h i l o Leg. 9.62-65  [554-555]). . H i s d o w n f a l l c a m e , a c c o r d i n g t o S u e t o n i u s , when he r e f u s e d to  follow  G a i u s o n a s e a - v o y a g e a n d s o was. s u s p e c t e d o f p l o t t i n g  (Gains  23.3).  during  Gaius'  suicide;  but  This  voyage to if  it  i s most  for  likely  whatever, i t s  the immediate  suspicion that  refused  ( T a c . Agr.  4.1:  death,  conceived in A.D.  for  Gaius  unwilling the  to  23.3; c f . admit  Tacitus  occurred  seeing his  c a s e and committed S e n . Apoaol.  Gaius  in  Graecinus  refusal  as  the  s o n A g r i c o l a was realized  s u i c i d e by; c u t t i n g , h i s  throat  11.2). .The p o p u l a c e , s a y s P h i l o , w e r e  i n Gaius..'  son-in-law  least  asked  S i l a n u s , however,  administration.,  d e a t h o f S i l a n u s b y s a y i n g t h a t he h a d no r i g h t  o v e r one who h a d b e e n h i s  at  was i m p l i c a t e d  a charge against him, but  i s wrong i n  it  Silanus'  38).  or wrongly,  G r a e c i n u s was a l i v e when h i s  any i n j u s t i c e  death,  B a l s d o n .Gaius p .  39 o r 40: c f . AE 1946.94).  the hopelessness of h i s  must h a v e  w i t h G e m e l l u s and M a c r o .  Graecinus to bring, forward  cause of h i s  (Suet.  (cf.  cause of h i s  Silanus, rightly  a suspected conspiracy together Julius  significance,  P a n d a t e r i a and P o n t i a , s e v e r a l months b e f o r e  was n o t  gave G a i u s grounds It  incident,  revolution  (Leg.  to  and  justified  c l a i m any  influence  .10.66-73 [555-556.]). As w i t h  110  Gemellus, p.  t h e d a t e o f S i l a n u s ' - d e a t h i s unknown  1 8 8 ) ; and l i k e w i s e ,  A.D.  h i s s u c c e s s o r a s an A r v a l ,was a p p o i n t e d  Legatio o n 24 May  38 {CIL 6 . 2 0 2 8 c =. S m a l l w o o d n o . 3 ) . On t h e f r e q u e n t  troubles  and e x e c u t i o n s  C l a u d i a n Emperors, c f . D. M c A U n d o n  8.5  ( c f . Smallwood  o f S i l a n i under  a l l the J u l i o -  AJph 77 ( 1 9 5 6 ) . 1 1 9 - 2 3 .  e K K A n r o v TTOTE OUT' a u x o u S i K a g o u , ;  Among t h e p r i v i l e g e s  voted  to  A u g u s t u s i n 30 B . C . was t h a t exercising appellate on t h e o t h e r a practice  hand,  jurisdiction  dictionem  d i s c u s s i o n o f appellatio  pp.  Tiberius,  always d i s c o u r a g e d a p p e a l s t o t h e Emperor i n c i v i l  t h a t was f o l l o w e d b y G a i u s , ( S u e t .  liberam i u r i s  2.106-108;  (Dio 51.19.7;. c f . 52.33.1).  of  Gaius  et sine s u i appellatione  16.2: "magistratibus  concessit").  For a  u n d e r t h e J u l i o - C l a u d i a n s , s e e Mommsen  Hammond Augustan  Staatsr.  1 8 3 ; G r e e n i d g e Roman Public  Principate.^.  cases,  Life  3 8 2 - 8 5 ; J o l o w i c z a n d N i c h o l a s Roman Law p p . 4 0 0 - 4 0 1 .  xP  8.5  u c r o u v  W x o v upoBaxov o v o y d c e i v :  G a i u s made t h e r e m a r k , father-in-law,  not of h i s  b u t o f M. J u n i u s 2  Silanus, cf.  T a c . Ann. 1 3 . 1 . 1 ) . .  rather to  c o n s u l i n A . D . 46 a n d p r o c o n s u l  than  The e p i t h e t  a s a mark o f r e s p e c t ,  Q . F a b i u s M a x i m u s on a c c o u n t  o f A s i a i n A . D . 54 (PIR  was g i v e n o u t o f s c o r n f o r h i s a p a t h y  although  i t had o r i g i n a l l y  of h i s gentle  disposition  Aur.  Vict.  8.6  e v T r i Tdgei. TTIS, apxn.s rlv Jipgav. .diTO$o;{veQ'6oi\;  been  applied  ( P l u ; Fab. 1 . 3 ;  Yir. III. Al).  Augustus had o f t e n seniority  voting,  I 833;  n o t o n l y t o keep t h e s e n a t o r s  alert  o f rank  ( S u e t . Aug. 3 5 . 4 ) ,  ignored during  but also  Ill  t h a t he m i g h t first to  obtain  a l e s s b i a s e d o p i n i o n by.-not  (Pip 54.15.6).  Dio suggests that  L e p i d u s , who was a l w a y s a s k e d f o r  same e x p l a n a t i o n o f G a i u s ' voting  (Suet.  course,  could i f  after  all  opinion. illusion  the  other  In  similar  of free  i n meetings  8.7  too,  xrtv xe  h i s vote  of o f f i c e ; . ' ' i t  t h e r e b y would speak l a s t that Gaius,  t h e p r a c t i c e was i n  9.2).  Claud.  to  is,  law t o  delayed v o i c i n g his  of  vote own  :  the  sentiments  1.74.5-7).  T h e r e i s n o a g r e e m e n t among o u r s o u r c e s concerning Gaius'  J u n i a C l a u d i l l a . , t h e d a u g h t e r ' o f M. S i l a n u s .  first  marriage,'to  D i o r e c o r d s t h e m a r r i a g e as  t a k i n g p l a c e i n A . D . 35 a t A n t i u m , w i t h T i b e r i u s , p r e s e n t  6.39.2).  of  a v o i d s y c o p h a n c y and t o p r e s e r v e  auxou £K6a'Aojv:  know f r o m T a c i t u s t h a t  point  sway them b y h i s  Ann.  this  C l a u d i u s , who  The i m p o r t a n t  Tac.  insult  Suetonius gives  he w i s h e d - b e h e l d b y t h e  Senate (Dio 5 7 . 7 . 4 ; c f .  Guyaxepa  an  to. the o l d p r o c e d u r e  c o n s u l a r s , and s o w o u l d , n o t attempts  fact  was an i n s u l t t o  speech, -Tiberius had often  of the  last.  decision to revert  a c c o r d i n g to p r i o r i t y  c a s t i n g h i s own v o t e -  (58.25.2),  t h e E m p e r o r was on t h e m a i n l a n d a t t h e  and we  time.(Ann.  T a c i t u s , h o w e v e r , h a s a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d t h e u n i o n i n A . D . 33  (Ann. 6 . 2 0 . 1 ) , a n d S u e t o n i u s c l a i m s t h a t G a i u s was m a r r i e d b e f o r e he became pontifex  i n A . D . -31 (Gaius 1 2 . 1 ) .  Suetonius i s r e f e r r i n g  [p.  105], Dip  divorce.'  (but  cf.  is  to the b e t r o t h a l . ,  two o r f o u r y e a r s l a t e r , specific  It  l i k e l y that either  and t h a t t h e w e d d i n g t o o k  i n A . D . 33 o r 35.  B a l s d o n Gains p .  i s the only a u t h o r i t y  to  It  15; W i l l r i c h  and. G e l z e r . {RE " J u l i u s " c p l .  Tacitus  383]  all  is  place  i m p o s s i b l e t o b e more  [Caligula  p.  104], Dessau  favour A.D. 33).  s u g g e s t t h a t t h e m a r r i a g e ended  T a c i t u s ; m e n t i o n s t h a t C l a u d i l l a was dead, b e f o r e G a i u s '  (Ann. 6 . 4 5 . 5 ) , . a n d i s s u p p o r t e d i n t h i s  or  • in accession  b y Sue t o n i u s , who a d d s t h a t  her  112  death occurred during contradict daughter  (Gaius 1 2 . 2 ) .  (Leg. 9 . 6 3  assumes f o r  [555]).  The weight :  of;the  d i v o r c e ; perhaps only: for  C l a u d i l l a the  same f a t e  seems  long a f t e r  to  his  evidence suggests that  the  sake o f u n i f o r m i t y  s u f f e r e d by G a i u s ' . n e x t  Dio  he  two w i v e s .  eyripe K o p v n A i a v . ' O p e a r C A ' A a v : S u e t o n i u s , :who c a l l s h e r L i v i a O r e s t i l l a , gives  how G a i u s t o o k h e r t h e s e as l a t e r  embroideries of  p.  40).  of  t h o s e o f Romulus, and A u g u s t u s  suited his 23.7).  h e r engagement t o  f o u r t h marriage, to  This is  e^topiae:  40 t h a t  Piso  relations listed  Balsdon r i g h t l y  P i s o i n order to marry.the  the  (Suet.  Emperor  loc.  cit.,),  same C . P i s o who w a s i n v o l v e d i n t h e  ( T a c . Ann.  1 5 . 4 8 ; and F u r n e a u x ad  D i o a b b r e v i a t e s the. a c t u a l  events.  after  it  o n l y a few d a y s , but  willing  (Gaius  Gaius  style  conspiracy  against  loc).  The m a r r i a g e was d i s s o l v e d  was n o t  until  after  2 5 . 1 ; CIL. 6 . 2 0 2 8 - 2 0 4 8 = S m a l l w o o d n o .  June A . D . illicit  4-10: Piso  among t h e A r v a l s f r o m 24 M a y A . D . . 3 8 , . when he w a s - c o - o p t e d t o  difficult  to  break  s o c o u l d h a r d l y be c h a r g e d w i t h a d u l t e r y .  the  is  take  off. e a r l y i n J u n e ' A . D . -40).  a c c e p t s u c h an a c c u s a t i o n , s i n c e . n e i t h e r  P i s o w a s , a s far a s i s . k n o w n , m a r r i e d a t  have  (see C h a p t e r  and O r e s t i l l a w e r e b a n i s h e d , a l l e g e d l y f o r m a i n t a i n i n g  (Suet.  of  sees  would e q u a l l y w e l l  a pregnant M i l o n i a Caesonia  t h e p l a c e o f M. S i l a n u s , u n t i l , t h e Acta is  versions  comment on t h e o c c a s i o n , t h a t h i s m a r r i a g e was i n t h e  N e r o i n A . D . 65  8.7  different  t h e p r o b a b l e f a c t ' t h a t O r e s t i l l a was  terminate  Gaius'  two s l i g h t l y  f r o m h e r h u s b a n d (Gaius 2 5 . 1 ) .  to  It  P h i l o , however,  t h e s e two wh.en h e s a y s t h a t S i l a n u s d i e d n o t  i s wrong about the  8.7  childbirth  time  of  their  O r e s t i l l a nor banishment,  M e i . s e .QJntersuchungen  i.S p e r h a p s c o r r e c t when he s a y s t h a t G a r u s f o r b a d e t h e  couple to  p.  and  104)  have  113  sexual relations if  Lollia  with., each, o t h e r ,  l a t e r • should, haye a  Piso returned (Scholiast suffect  Implicated  5,109);  he m a r r i e d the  without waiting  the y e a r i s unknown, but  a low-born  for  the  be  Status  Augustus n o r m a l l y  pp.  reproached  N e r o , he c u t  must h a v e b e e n a  the veins  ( T a c . Ann.  husband.  in his  arms  ,15.59).  allowed e x i l e s twenty slaves  a c c o m p a n y them  150-52.  consulship  under C l a u d i u s are accounted  Emperor's executioners  freedmen t o  it  woman whom he t o o k f r o m , h e r  conspiracy against  (SeWa S o u A o u s :  G a r n s e y Social  Emperor would n o t  t o Rome u n d e r C l a u d i u s a n d s u b s e q u e n t l y , h e l d a  on J u y .  in  the  child.  c o n s u l s h i p s i n c e a l l .the ov&inayii.  Ironically,  8.8  so t h a t  ( e . g . , Dio 56.27.3).  or See  for.  114  CHAPTER NINE  9.1  WTTO'TOI:  See', o n Index.  For Asprenas' x o i e i n the s u c c e s s f u l conspiracy  o f A . D . 4 1 , see o n . C h a p t e r 29.1 wvcjuoaav. [1954]  4Q4-4Q5) h a s p o i n t e d o u t  e x i s t e d b e t w e e n t h e suffecti  9.1  o'pKOi  01  the  o f t h i s y e a r and t h e  The c u s t o m o f m a g i s t r a t e s  during the d i c t a t o r s h i p  of  family  is  first  o f C a e s a r ( A p p . S C 2.106  oath  to  mentioned i n  45  [442]).  The  w a s - r e p e a t e d , p o s t h u m o u s l y , on 1 J a n u a r y 42 B . C . b y t h e T r i u m v i r s 47.18.3), to  the  and t h e r e a f t e r  CDio 5 1 . 2 0 . 1 )  and a g a i n i n  24 B . C .  lifetime (Mo  time.  when e n t e r i n g  to swear to  yet  offices  T a c . Ann.  After  Gaius'  1.72.2;  S u e t . Tit.  Because the o m i s s i o n o f  not  of  the  the r e s u l t a damnatio  lex de Imperio  Pub l i e Life  9.1  an o f f i c i a l  memoriae,  Is  p.  (Dio  29 B . C .  a l t h o u g h t h e y had p r o b a b l y  always r e q u i r e d  o b s e r v e t h e acta  magistrates  of Augustus,  own a c t s , p a s t o r f u t u r e  (Dio  ignored i n the  annual  ceremony  t h e s e two E m p e r o r s f r o m t h e o a t h was  decree, this  and d i d n o t p r e v e n t  Vespasiani  Oaths  67.3).  d e a t h h i s acta,, t o o , . w e r e  (Dio 6 0 . 4 . 6 ) .  as  Tiberius  he a l l o w e d n o o a t h s t o b e t a k e n t o h i s  57.8.3-4;  are mentioned only i n  53.28.1),  become an a n n u a l e v e n t b y t h i s on t h e i r  oath  became s t a n d a r d p r a c t i c e u n d e r t h e E m p i r e .  acts of Augustus during h i s  that  of Germanicus.  swearing a formal  a ruler  13  (Latomus  connections by-blood or friendship  u p h o l d t h e acta B.C.,  Colin  form o f  c e n s u r e was n o t  as  grave  T i b e r i u s from b e i n g mentioned  Q.LS 244 s E§J p .  164).  S e e G r e e n i d g e Roman  36 3 .  xnv xrls p^icetqs v o u i Q x v :  Reimar i s probably- c o r r e c t  in reading  Is  x n v x r l s o p i c i a s vout.o~t.v. . The s u g g e s t i o n o f Naber  (Is  x n v opKwuoavav) i s  l e s s s a t i s f a c t o r y - , p r e s u p p o s i n g as i t  does  in  115  a. more s e r i o u s usage  9.2  error,  (cf.  37.30.3).  wuoootv;  Cf.  but  the  does at  oath  support  of  Dioni.an  t a k e n b y t h e A r y a l s on 12 '(J) January A . D .  6.2028b -  (CTL  l e a s t have the  32344 = S r n a l l w o o d . n o .  2).  38  See o n . C h a p t e r  3.5  xqs- -re e u y a s .  9.2  ids  TE  euxds:  Such, p r a y e r s w e r e t r a d i t i o n a l l y -  CPlu. Cio. 2 . 1 ) .  T h e ' icA.ivn. was- t h e  image o f  the  g o d was l a i d  during  couch  o r " Veotulus)  (Vectus which the  on 3 January  See C h a p t e r 2 4 . 6 .  ITTI TE Tr\v icXi'vnv TOU A i o s TOO! Ka-m.Tco'XfoiJ:  9:3'  delivered  on  (cf. V a l . M a x .  a leatisterniian  2.1.2).  E T r a i ' v o u TE a £ i a xdcSs:  9.4  T h i s s e c t i o n o f Chapter 9 has always a problem to  as  a d e m e n t e d madman a f t e r  o f Quidde  [Caligula  der Wunsch, Gutes  p.  A.D.  O c t o b e r A . D . 37  Forderer  z u w e r d e n u n d a l s \ g r o s s e r Mann a u f . d i e  (Caligola  a s s o c i a t e s ; there-was  a slight  acquire popularity-;  four  decent  from the hiatus  comment  Nachwelt  executions  of  i n h i s m a d n e s s ; h e was  or h i s few-praiseworthy  zu  of  o f which have been  G a i u s . was t r y i n g t o recent  nicht  popularer  administration  most p l a u s i b l e  .pp. 1 0 7 - 1 0 8 ) :  a p p e a r a n c e of d e s p o t i s m r e s u l t i n g  attempting to  (cf. t h e  s e i n e r Handlungen war  sondern der E h r g e i z , a l s  38 h a s b e e n e x p l a i n e d a w a y , , t h e  close  of  T h e r e a r e many- w a y s by- w h i c h G a i u s '  s u n p a r i z e d by - ' V e n t u r i n i the  illness  t h o s e s c h o l a r s who w o u l d s e e G a i u s  "Die Haupttriebfeder  zu s c h a f f e n ,  Bestrebungen hewundert kommen").  6]:  his  presented  actions  correct his desperately  were  116  deliberately- exaggerated by the sources, to afford a marked contrast with, h i s pernicious behaviour of the previous year.  No such, ingenious, d i s t o r t i o n s  of reality- are necessary, however, i f Gai.us' e a r l i e r conduct was, as the evidence suggests, creditable.  9.4  TOUS: xe 'XpYVOJpous xGv 6nuoqr(wv ^priucnrwv;  In t h i s matter, as- i n h i s publication of the names of  condemned men C h a p t e r 18.2), Gaius showed'his aversion to the kind of concealment that had caused so much discontent under h i s predecessor. It was probably- after h i s retirement to, Capreae,.that Tiberius had abandoned the  custom,•initiated by Augustus, of publishing regular reports of the  imperial accounts (Suet. Gains  16.1).  The format of these reports was  perhaps based on the accounts of the Empire and of imperial revenues and expenditures compiled by Augustus f i r s t during his serious i l l n e s s i n 23 B.C. (Mo 53.30.1-3; Suet. Aug. 28.1), and l a t e r just before h i s death (Dio 56.33.1-2; Suet. Aug. 101.4). the 387]  Such statements were probably the source of  information found i n Tac. Ann. 4.4 (Tiberius) and Jos. BJ 2.16.4 [365(Nero) (see Venturini Caligola  p . 108). When Gaius f i r s t published  these accounts, almost a year after his accession, he perhaps included a statement of expenditures during those months.; this might well explain the existence of two sets of figures for the. amount Tiberius had l e f t i n the treasury (see on Chapter 2.6 ovSe ...).  9.4  ETrripKeoe  xo'is;  CnytusQeTcn : Cf. Suet. Gaius 16.3; "multis. incendiorum damna supplevit."  Restitution f o r damage  caused by f i r e s i n Rome involved frequent and c o s t l y expenditures from the imperial purse.  Tiberius was-twice obliged to rebuild parts of the c i t y  117  destroyed.by- f i r e  ( T a c . Ann.  4.64.1 [A.D.  f i r e mentioned by-Dip i s p r o b a b l y the Ostienses  fox  21 O c t o h e r A . D . 38  27];  6.45.1  [A.D.  36]).  same as t h a t r e c o r d e d i n  (Smallwood n o .  31),  3.2).  Gaius"  behaviour during  c l a i m t h a t he l o n g e d f o r famem, p e s t i l e n t i a m , memorable  9.5-  (Gaius-  t h i s .incident'.'does nothing  some s o r t  the  as h a y i n g  t h e A e m i l i a n a , a, s u b u r b o f Rome n o r t h o f . t h e Campus M a r t i u s  This  destroyed  (cf.  to  Fasti  V a r r o RR  support  of public disaster--"exereituum  i n c e n d i a , hiatum  aliquem t e r r a e " - - t o  caedes,  make h i s  reign  31).  xou" l e xeXous . TOU, TWV x.meoso .oXt.YWS'pouvxos  '.'In  order  t o make a  revision of it  was n o t  n e c e s s a r y for. the Emperor t o h o l d the  w i t h potestas  aensoria.  h i s impevium  proconsulave  8.1-2).  Revision of  Republic,  the  Augustus f r e q u e n t l y to'conduct  the  lists  responsibility  became a f u n c t i o n  of  for  the Emperor ranks  55.31.2),  establishing  eventually  to for  eligibility-  i n c r e a s e membership, the  imperial  municipalities financial Principate  t h e decuviae  ( C i c . Clu..  s e v e r a l times  a board of  individual  senatus  knights  9 5 - 9 6 ; T . P . Wiseman Ristonia  t h e y possessed the  19 [ 1 9 7 0 ]  equestrian order  to  38.3;  free  In  for of  order recruits  the  Italian  requisite  Hammond  .Augustan  Tiberius  citizens  Dio in  67-71).  charge o f d e b a s i n g Rome's upper c l a s s e s ,  membership i n the  early  a i d him  knights  46; cf.  RG  32.3).  ( S u e t . Aug... 3 9 ) .  ( S u e t . Aug.  or  the  43.121), but  s e r y i c e , he e n c o u r a g e d l e a d i n g c i t i z e n s if  invested  was, under  ten senators to  orders,  (cf.  ( S u e t . , Aug.  s i n c e he r e l i e d . h e a v i l y o n . t h e  and a n c e s t r a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s pp.  equitum  the  consulship  ( P l i n y HN 3 3 . 1 . 3 0 ; S u e t . Aug.  t o b e e n r o l l e d a s equites.,  To a y o i d t h e restricted  civil  a c e n s u s o r a lectio  o f equites  of  c e n s o r s h i p o r be  made u s e o f h i s  o f the. p r a e t o r s  Augustus r e v i s e d the  examining the  Suetonius'"  of  the  118  t h i r d generation  ( P l i n y • HN. 3 3 . 8 . 3 2 ) ;  allowed r e g i s t r a t i o n , in, the for  this- reason t h a t Gaius  members.  Also,  he h a d s t r u c k  by-his  order  but  to  found i t  lapse  gave r i s e  upon t h e  ( J o s . AJ  19.1.1  equites  obligations  connection with h i s jury  f r o m the- r o l l s  to  It  the b e l i e f  as a means o f  (cf.  S u e t . Aug.  s c r u t i n y of the  p r e v i o u s l y - a d d e d a f o u r t h decuvia  ambition  of  G r e e n i d g e Roman Public A useful Republic to  survey of  this  223-26-—but  duty-,  at  least  9.5  despite i t s  e5  of  of knights,  (Suet.  w i t h the  Gaius  Life the  pp.  order,  places  severity  towards  devised wealth  he e r r s for  this  also revised setting  (HN 3 3 . 8 . 3 3 ) , of  development  period.  egoo  had  [Suet. in  the  200,000  1 6 . 2 ; Augustus  Aug.  order  distinction.  of  t h e decuriae  g i v e n by  from the  to  See  T . P . .Wiseman (His.toria arguments  late  McFayden."Jurisdiction"'  i n d e s c r i b i n g s u c h s e r v i c e a s a n onerous  icaV  TT\S  Gaius  In  403-404.  r e v i s i o n by Gaius i s  in  the sense of  their  same q u a l i f i c a t i o n  19 [ 1 9 7 0 ]  regarding  the  lifetime 71-83)  identification  t h e . l a t e R e p u b l i c and e a r l y - E m p i r e .  dpxris;  "...  from the whole E m p i r e , even  the p r o v i n c e s . " in  the  s o u g h t b y many.  equestrian judges,  those a s p i r i n g to p o s i t i o n s  equo publico  aTrdcJTis  primarily  r a n k s w i t h , new  fill this  he  sometimes heavy  38;.:3),, w a s s t i l l  list  h a s w r i t t e n a v a l u a b l e summary- o f . t h e o f equites  was  possession, o f ' t h e i r  The new p a n e l w a s - n e c e s s a r y , s a y s P l i n y  s a t i s f y - the  , It  the Emperor: p u r p o s e l y  getting  s e s t e r c e s as the property- q u a l i f i c a t i o n  pp.  and had t o  wasi n o d o u b t  that  equestrian order,  s y s t e m b y a d d i n g a f i f t h decuria  32.3]).  Tib.-. 4 1 ) .  reign  [3]).  Membership i n the financial  (Suet.  years of.-his  necessary to b o l s t e r .its  w i t h o t h e r s " ( S u e t . -Gains .16,. 2 ; 3 0 . 2 ) .  attacks  last  own m e t i c u l o u s - b u t r e a s o n a b l e r e v i s i o n o f  several knights  miscreants- that  i n the  a geographical rather  than  a purely  3  kayj\ i s  from  frequently  administrative  used provincia  119 D i o 47.20.2: ai egco apxou.), and h e r e t a k e s t h e p l a c e of.rtyeuovia  (cf.  mean irnpevi'm  Romanum ( c f .  V r i n d De Cassii.  Dionis  9.5- K a x e X e g a x o :  jocabuli-s,  but  £7Ti  S e e G r e e n i d g e Roman.Pub  lie  At that  latus  clavus  as a s y m b o l o f  still  had t o q u a l i f y  time  for  advance t h i s often  their  privilege  of property  the  Life  and a n c e s t r y were  365; A b b o t t Roman  p.  were still  Political  traditionally-  Claud.  distinctions,  until  they  came o f  expectations  considered  age  (Isid.  of wearing  far,  the  ( S u e t . Aug. 38.2), b u t  the Senate by h o l d i n g , the q u a e s t o r s h i p .  If  they remained i n the e q u e s t r i a n order  d e p r i v e d them o f t h i s  p r o m i s i n g y o u n g man o u t s i d e t h e  rank,as to  grant  well the  senatorial order,  [Suet.  latus  Claud. clavus  to  (although  24.1]). to  any  t h o s e whose c i t i z e n s h i p e x t e n d e d b a c k f o u r  24.1).  T h i s a d v a n c e m e n t , . . b a s e d on m e r i t  157; G r e e n i d g e Roman. Public  generations  and i g n o r i n g , o l d  was. e s t a b l i s h e d ; as a p o l i c y - b y - A u g u s t u s , who  e q u e s t r i a n s i n t o the  they  as G a i u s d i d , i t was  limited  make, up d e f i c i e n c i e s i n t h a t p.  By h i s  any- o f , t h e g r a d e s o f  t h e y were g i v e n t h e p r i v i l e g e  While i t was-the Emperor's p r i v i l e g e  projected  59).  xri.xfis- gouAeCase'X-ni.Si: • S o n s o f s e n a t o r s w e r e f o r m a l l y  9.4).  (Suet.  p.  (cf.  p p . .354, 382.  Orig.  Claudius  p p . 110-11;  The. i n t e r v e n i n g m a g i s t r a c i e s  equites  f a i l e d to  Terms  honorum..  the normal q u a l i f i c a t i o n s  Institutions  Terms  L a t i n .adlegere  of. t h e  t h e E m p e r o r c o u l d e l e v a t e a man t o  necessary-.  9.5  equivalent  72.5.1; M a s o n Greek  s e n a t o r i a l o r e q u e s t r i a n cursus omitted,  S e e ' M a s o n Greek  p p . 47--67.  The v e r b i s . t h e Dio  o f adleetio,  IGRR 4.566).  to  frequently  s e n a t o r i a l order b y a d l e e t i o , i n order  group  Life  ( S u e t . Aug. 40.1). . S e e B a l s d o n pp.  399-400.  to  Gaius  class  120 9.6  i d s ctpYqi.pecrv as;  Cf. Suet.. Gaius  16.2: "temptavit et comitiorum more  revocato s u f f r a g i a populo reddere."  Serious i n f r i n g e -  ment o f the power o f the people to choose t h e i r own magistrates began i n the  d i c t a t o r s h i p o f J u l i u s Caesar, whose p o l i c y i t was to d i v i d e the  candidates f o r a l l magistracies except the consulship between himself and the  popular assemblies CSuet. Ca.es."  to the oomitia  41.2).  Augustus restored the e l e c t i o n s 1  (Suet. Aug. 40.2), but c o n t r o l l e d most o f the r e s u l t s by  nominating o r commending candidates whom he favoured (Suet. Aug. 56.1). By- a l e x V a l e r i a C o r n e l i a o f A.D. -5, p r e l i m i n a r y s e l e c t i o n o f candidates for  the consulship and praetorship was given over to a board o f senators  and members of the equestrian decuviae-.,. a . l i s t o f whose nominees, the destinati,  was sent to the oomitia  P.R, Brunt JRS 51 [1961] 71-83).  f o r (automatic?) confirmation ( c f . In other areas, too, the people l o s t much  of t h e i r former power: they- retained the r i g h t to suggest changes i n the l e g i s l a t i o n brought before them--and sometimes Augustus d i d a l t e r laws i n accordance with, t h e i r wishes--but they were deprived o f any l e g a l j u r i s d i c t i o n (Dio 53.21.3; 56.40.4). The f i n a l and i n e v i t a b l e step, was taken by Tiberius i n the year he became Emperor; m a g i s t e r i a l e l e c t i o n s were t r a n s f e r r e d e n t i r e l y from the oomitia  t o the Senate, apparently evoking l i t t l e complaint from the people  but g i v i n g considerable r e l i e f to the senators, who were thus freed from the  expense of campaigning (Tac. Ann. 1.15.1-2).  Tiberius himself c o n t r o l l e d  the  appointment o f consuls (although, some think that the consular e l e c t i o n s  remained i n the hands, o f the people; c f . Greenidge Roman.Public  Life  p. 372;  but both Tac. Ann. 1.81 and V e i l . 2.126.2. suggest s t r o n g l y that the new arrangements applied to a l l magistrates); as f o r the other magistrates, those whom he recommended to the Senate were chosen automatically, while  121  s e l e c t i o n among, o t h e r s  o f h i s n o m i n e e s was l e f t , t o  T h e c o m p l e t e d s l a t e was t h e n p r e s e n t e d f o r oomitia  or the  centuviqta  magistracy  (Dio  oomitia  58.20.3-4).  o f e l e c t i o n s .under T i b e r i u s , a n d destinatio, CQ 16  28. ( 1 9 6 9 )  the  12  (1963)  the  status. of  the  unsolved problems  167-76; D.C.A.  16 . ( 1 9 6 7 )  lot.  to  s i g n i f i c a n c e , o f nominatio,  oommendatio, Shotter  2 0 7 - 3 0 ; and A.E. A s t i n .  863-74. the  elections to  the popular  s t o o d t o w i n some p o p u l a r i t y w i t h o u t  magistracies of which his assured him.  ratification  complex and s t i l l  s e e W. K. • L a e e y H i s t o v i q  By r e t u r n i n g  there  and o f  Senate or the  d e p e n d i n g ;on t h e  C1966) 3 2 1 - 3 2 ; B . M . L e v i c k Historia  Latomus  Gaius  automatic  tyihuta.,  For the  the  own p r i v i l e g e s  assemblies after  l o s i n g the  of. nominatio  T h e r e was n o more d a n g e r . o f p o p u