Tiberius's reign Flashcards
Why does Tacitus want to highlight the dangers of succession and dynasty?
How does he do this?
he lived and wrote under the tyrannical Domitian an saw the tumult caused by the flavians and julio claudians. he was a senator ho wanter the restoration of republic so he gives a ‘what if account’ if succession took a different course to Germanicus - who he believed a better successor and advocate for republic. this is executed by using Germanicus as a foil for Tiberius, highlighting all his flaws and raising germanicus to a pedastal.
significance of how Tiberius, Germanicus and Drusus quell revolt?
Tiberius hides and sends people in place; cowardly, removed, arrogant
Germanicus uses wife and kids to guilt soldiers; shows significance of women, understanding of soldiers, empathy and planning
Drusus is babysat by sejanus, chances using a lunar eclipse - unpredictably pays off
who is Germanicus’ father, wife and mother
father: drusus, tiberius’ brother
mother: Antonia (younger), M. Antony’s daughter
wife: Agrippina (elder) Aug. Granddaughter
timeline of Germanicus’ life?
15BC - born
9BC - named Germanicus after father’s victories
AD4 - adopted by tiberius
AD7 - 11 - quaestor 5 yrs before legal age
AD12 - consul
AD13 - proconsul of germania inferior, superior + gaul - 8 legions (1/3 of roman army)
AD14 - 16 - campaigns in germany
AD17 - recieves eastern maius imperium, awarded a triumph
AD18 - reorganised provinces of asia minor
AD19 - died in Antioch; poison?
What does Tacitus annals 1.61-2 tell us of Germainicus and rememberance of the varrus disaster?
he wanted to pay respects to the dead soldiers, provoking the emotions of his men. it shows how empathetic, virtuous and respectful he was - opposite of tiberius (cold, callous removed)
what did Germanicus do in the varrus camp according to Tac. 1.61?
why does tac. emphasise these actions?
visited camp with men + marched through - shows atrocities caused by barbaric german tribes (human sacrifice) lead by survivors of the massacre.
reinforces Germanicus’ bravery and confrontation on the front line (opposing tiberius portrayal) and stresses the dangers of german campaigns. This amplifies the victories of Germanicus and advocated for expansion into germany in his own time - tac. was govenor of germany and wanted more resources; germany was full of dangerous tribes but didn’t have the promised riches that incited eastern campaigns.
he buried the victims alongside the men, showing compassionate leadership, 6 years on
What quote from tac. 1.61 sums up tacs portrayal of tiberius and germanicus?
what does this portray about tiberius?
thereby he earned tiberius’ dissaproval. perhaps this was because the emperor interpreted every action of germanicus unfavourably
shows tiberius’ cruelness and germanicus’ greatness; indicates tiberius haspersonal animosity towards germanicus and that he is miserable, jealous and cowardly
What position was piso sent to the east with germanicus as?
Why did Tiberius keep this vague?
Germanicus was sent as commander in cheif for the east, piso was sent as his advisor and governor of Syria .
Tiberius didn’t state whether or not germanicus was his superior but insinuated that piso answered primarily to him, and possibly didn’t see himself as an inferior.
What did piso think of germanicus and why was he sent?
Piso as a mature senator, staple of republic was sent to babysit the prince of Rome. He saw germanicus as a petulant child; where germanicus was warlike and rash, he was systematic and diplomatic.
What did piso do that angered germanicus?
Was this a good decision?
He withheld legions from germanicus when he was tasked to talk with the parthians and Armenians, forcing the Caesar to deal with things without starting a war - and ultimately good decision. Germanicus tried to justify that had things gone south he would be left in the lurch and tried to force an apology out of piso for denying his orders and suggesting Tiberius adopted him unwillingly.
Piso responded that he was an advisor - not to be ordered around and that he was telling the truth.
How did germanicus die?
Supposedly in Antioch via poisoning, Tiberius believes that Livia was to blame, germanicus thought it was piso but no one is sure…
when did tiberius accend? how old was he?
AD 14 age 56
when did tiberius die, how old was he?
AD37, age 76
who kills agrippa post. and why?
probably augustus due to his poor behaviour, however, its likely that tiberius didnt put up a fight as it legitimised him by getting rid of augustus’ male bloodline
how did julia die?
it is speculated that tiberius witheld her rations while in exile and she died of starvation - previously, her life was quite pleasnt despite the lack of freedom
what did the mutinies show about agrippina major?
she was to lead the opposition to tiberius by badgering germanicus to overthrow him until he died in AD 19
when did germanicus die?
when did drusus die?
germanicus - AD 19
Drusus - AD 23
what does tiberius do in AD 26
he retires from rome to his villa on capri - livia remains at rome and sejanus becomes his only form of contact.
who is really running the empire after tiberius leaves rome?
arguably, its between sejanus and the senate - the senate start squabbling as soon as he leaves and sejanus is hungry for power
this indicates tiberius’ poor relationship with the senate.
what does collin wells say about the senate under tiberius?
if had not existed before his reign, it would not have existed at all - ie. it didnt do anything or serve a real purpose; it was just there as an obsolete institution that has always traditionally been there
what was sejanus known as to tiberius?
when was his rise and fall?
‘socius laborum’ the partner of my labour; they had a similar relationship to augustus and agrippa.
he rose up and was wiped out in the period AD15 - 31
when does livia die?
what does her remaining in rome tell us?
dies in AD 30, after not seeing her son for c. 4 years. this suggests a breakdown in their relationship - i speculate either tiberius just got sick of her or she poisoned someone she shouldn’t have
what were Maiestas trials?
treason trials - anyone who even made a joke about tiberius’ incapabilities opened them up to be trialled for treason upon penalty of death.
they were used for senators to dissapear each other subtly and are also an indicator of tiberius’ parranoia
who does tiberius keep linking himself to?
Augustus, through family, action, celebration etc and especially coins. it suggests how insecure he was about hip position and how parranoid he was that it would be revoked
who were delatores?
informants or sycophants - they would report people for treason trial regardless of severity or truthfulness, sometimes using the trialls as a weapon
what was the incentive to report someone for treason trial?
50% of the accuseds’ estate would go to the informer and the other half to the emperor - this was why seneca said that all the treason trial threats ended in death - they were almost certain to be found guilty, so onyone called up would kill themselves beforeso their family would still posess the estate.
who had their names damned after they died?
what does this mean?
caligula, nero, sejanus and interestingly domitian. memoiare damnatio meant to condem the memory of or to us, attempt to eradicate them from history - hence so little about sejanus is known
What does vell pat commend about tibs reign? (2:126.1)
Made Augustus a god through religious devotion, not just name, eliminated corruption from political life ( no more scheming in elections, conspiracies, factions etc.)
Average stuff where not lies - got rid of elections all together, sheeting not possible; factions worse than ever in maiestas trials
Vell pat 2:126.1 on restoration of republican institutions?
Magistrates recovered authority; senate, majesty and law courts solemnity. Everyone now compelled to do what’s right if not they are punished accordingly - shows Rome working as it should, however this was not the case. Magistrates were just show positions, likewise the senate had no real purpose and hence they could not be majestic or authoritative. Law courts also corrupt evidenced by treason trials
vell. pats digressions on social coherency under tib?
2:126.1
“good deeds admired, evil deeds punishesd”, upper + lower classes getting on, stable price of corn, no foreign threat - genersl peace and order.
These are all average conditions established under augustus rule - beginning quote suggests tiberius had some kind of god like qualities. clearly links him with augustus but really clutching at straws to praise him
also, there was disruption to the grain supply although he brought in more than augustus
what does vell list in praise of tib.?
2:126.1
restored cities of asia, showed generosity, lessened provincial extortion, punished criminals, meritocratic system.
everything was working as it should in a stable and monotonous way. highlights vell.s obligation to portray tib well as he aggrandised the most inane of achievements
bar his response to the fire and earthquake, tib was known for being frugal and ungenerous and provincial govenors now exercised more control, so most of this is just a lie.
howdoes vell. show tib.s diplomacy and intelligence in 2:129.1
summones Rhascupolis to rome to prevent war with thrace after he murders his co ruler nephew. he is tried for murder and condemed.
shows strategy, diplomacy and might of roman legal system portraying republican image.
again, minor achievement. - was a good emperor, just not impressive
Importance of pomponius flaccus in vell. 2:129.1?
shown to be working and helping tib as a consul - republican system working as it should, emphsising senates importance.
clearly senate was not important and flaccus made minor contributions. he was also a family friend of vell whom this white up may have protected from maiestas trials
what does vell. say about drusus libo trial in 2:129.1?
tib dealt with it effciently as member of senatorial jury (republican image) not empreor - disposing of “ungrateful revolutionary”
shows tib to be doing the bare minimum but portrayed as an act of wonder
also first instance of major maiestas trial - vell conveniently omits this fearing that tib was acting out of private interest
vell. 2:129.1 views of germanicus/tib. relationship?
tib taught ger. everything he knew, heaped on honour and triumphs, recalled him out of love after he conquored germany, tib was reason for his victories.
tacitus suggests that tib onl grudgingly adopted ger, recalled him from germany while having a year left to complete the siege out of jealousy and parranoia and was completely opposite in character to ger.
vell 2:129.1 on tib granting largesse to plebs and bail outs to senators?
claimed he was extremely generous to the people and maintained status quo and noble families by granting bails that was sufficient for them to remain senators over the threshold but not encourage excess.
plebs said to resent the senatorial grants and tib was notorious for being tight with money
vell. pat 2:129.1 on tibs handling of foreign threats?
dealt with swiftly - got rid of marboduus, sacrovir + florus julius, along with tacfarinas.
contradicts earlier suggestion rome was free from external threat, tacitus also attacks him for not keeping senate informed on theses campaigns and yt another example for tib being praised for other generals’ work or just doing the minimum expected.
vell. 2:130.1 on tibeius building work?
cites examples of building work done prior to tibs reign or completed in the first year or so that he didnt implament - reinforces his austere policy. vell. lies outright again here.
how does tac begin ann. 4.1?
sarcastically. “ninth year of national stability and domestic prosperity” and accuses him of becoming tyrannical or employing tyrannical men to power - emplying his proximity to sejanus
how does tac. ann. 4 portray sejanus in early life?
prostituded himself out to men to join Augustus’ grandsons’ suite, manipulating tibs friendship and making himself the only one he felt he could trust and freely speak to,
essentially wholeheartedly evil and manipulative
how is sejanus portrayed as an adult in tac. ann. 4?
“audacious character and untiring physique”, scecretive, both arrogant and servile. hiding a lust for powere beneath an unnassuming exterior, relentlessly working or engaging in self destruction.
this is the character description sallust gives of cataline, a relentless, cunning and personable and charismatic figure who would endanger rome. essentially, he’s the antihero
how does tac emphasise sejanus’ threat to rome in ann. 4?
“this was rather heavens anger against rome - to which the triumph of sejanus and his downfall too were catastrophic”
echoes plutarch’s portrayal of the marius sulla rivalry and presents him as a divine threat to the whole of rome
