Complete Works of Tacitus (Delphi Classics) (Delphi Ancient Classics Book 24)

by Publius Cornelius Tacitus

  [48] Sub idem tempus ut mors Sulpicii Quirini publicis exequiis frequentaretur petivit a senatu. nihil ad veterem et patriciam Sulpiciorum familiam Quirinius pertinuit, ortus apud municipium Lanuvium: sed impiger militiae et acribus ministeriis consulatum sub divo Augusto, mox expugnatis per Ciliciam Homonadensium castellis insignia triumphi adeptus, datusque rector G. Caesari Armeniam optinenti. Tiberium quoque Rhodi agentem coluerat: quod tunc patefecit in senatu, laudatis in se officiis et incusato M. Lollio, quem auctorem Gaio Caesari pravitatis et discordiarum arguebat. sed ceteris haud laeta memoria Quirini erat ob intenta, ut memoravi, Lepidae pericula sordidamque et praepotentem senectam.

  48 About the same time, he asked the senate to allow the death of Sulpicius Quirinius to be solemnized by a public funeral. With the old patrician family of the Sulpicii Quirinius — who sprang from the municipality of Lanuvium — had no connection; but as an intrepid soldier and an active servant he won a consulate under the deified Augustus, and, a little later, by capturing the Homonadensian strongholds beyond the Cilician frontier, earned the insignia of triumph. After his appointment, again, as adviser to Gaius Caesar during his command in Armenia, he had shown himself no less attentive to Tiberius, who was then residing in Rhodes. This circumstance the emperor now disclosed in the senate, coupling a panegyric on his good offices to himself with a condemnation of Marcus Lollius, whom he accused of instigating the cross-grained and provocative attitude of Gaius Caesar. In the rest of men, however, the memory of Quirinius awoke no enthusiasm, in view of his attempt (already noticed) to ruin Lepida, and the combination of meanness with exorbitant power which had marked his later days.

  [49] Fine anni Clutorium Priscum equitem Romanum, post celebre carmen quo Germanici suprema defleverat, pecunia donatum a Caesare, corripuit delator, obiectans aegro Druso composuisse quod, si extinctus foret, maiore praemio vulgaretur. id Clutorius in domo P. Petronii socru eius Vitellia coram multisque inlustribus feminis per vaniloquentiam legerat. ut delator extitit, ceteris ad dicendum testimonium exterritis, sola Vitellia nihil se audivisse adseveravit. sed arguentibus ad perniciem plus fidei fuit, sententiaque Haterii Agrippae consulis designati indictum reo ultimum supplicium.

  49 At the end of the year, Clutorius Priscus, a Roman knight, who had been presented by the emperor with a sum of money in return for a widely circulated poem deploring the death of Germanicus, was attacked by an informer; the charge being that during an illness of Drusus he had composed another set of verses, to be published, in the event of his death, with a yet more lucrative result. Clutorius, with foolish loquacity, had boasted of his performance in the house of Publius Petronius, before his host’s mother-in-law, Vitellia, and many women of rank. When the informer appeared, the rest were terrified into giving evidence; Vitellia alone insisted that she had heard nothing. However, the witnesses who supported the fatal charge were considered the more credible; and, on the motion of the consul designate, Haterius Agrippa, the last penalty was invoked against the culprit.

  [50] Contra M’. Lepidus in hunc modum exorsus est: ‘si, patres conscripti, unum id spectamus, quam nefaria voce Clutorius Priscus mentem suam et auris hominum polluerit, neque carcer neque laqueus, ne serviles quidem cruciatus in eum suffecerint. sin flagitia et facinora sine modo sunt, suppliciis ac remediis principis moderatio maiorumque et vestra exempla temperat et vana a scelestis, dicta a maleficiis differunt, est locus sententiae per quam neque huic delictum impune sit et nos clementiae simul ac severitatis non paeniteat. saepe audivi principem nostrum conquerentem si quis sumpta morte misericordiam eius praevenisset. vita Clutorii in integro est, qui neque servatus in periculum rei publicae neque interfectus in exemplum ibit. studia illi ut plena vaecordiae, ita inania et fluxa sunt; nec quicquam grave ac serium ex eo metuas qui suorum ipse flagitiorum proditor non virorum animis sed muliercularum adrepit. cedat tamen urbe et bonis amissis aqua et igni arceatur: quod perinde censeo ac si lege maiestatis teneretur.’

  50 Opposition came from Manius Lepidus, whose speech ran thus:—”If, Conscript Fathers, we regard one point only, — the enormity of the utterance by which Clutorius Priscus has defiled his own soul and the ears of men, — neither the cell, nor the noose, nor even the torments reserved for slaves are adequate to his punishment. But if, while vice and crime are limitless, the penalties and remedies of both are tempered by the sovereign’s moderation and by the example of your ancestors and yourselves; if there is a difference between fatuity and villainy, between evil-speaking and evil-doing; then there is room for a proposal which neither leaves the defendant’s guilt unpunished nor gives us cause to rue either our softness or our hardness of heart. Time and again I have heard our prince express his regret when anyone by taking his own life had forestalled his clemency. Clutorius’ life is still intact: he is a man whom to spare can involve no public menace; whom to slay can create no public deterrent. His occupations are as futile and erratic as they are charged with folly; nor can any grave and considerable danger be expected from a person who by betraying his own infamy insinuates himself into the favour not of men but of silly women. Expel him, however, from Rome, confiscate his property, ban him from fire and water: this is my proposal, and I make it precisely as though he were guilty under the law of treason.”

  [51] Solus Lepido Rubellius Blandus e consularibus adsensit: ceteri sententiam Agrippae secuti, ductusque in carcerem Priscus ac statim exanimatus. id Tiberius solitis sibi ambagibus apud senatum incusavit, cum extolleret pietatem quamvis modicas principis iniurias acriter ulciscentium, deprecare tam praecipitis verborum poenas, laudaret Lepidum neque Agrippam argueret. igitur factum senatus consultum ne decreta patrum ante diem [decimum] ad aerarium deferrentur idque vitae spatium damnatis prorogaretur. sed non senatui libertas ad paenitendum erat neque Tiberius interiectu temporis mitigabatur.

  51 A single ex-consul, Rubellius Blandus, concurred with Lepidus: the remainder followed Agrippa’s motion; and Priscus was led to the cells and immediately executed. This promptitude drew a typically ambiguous reprimand from Tiberius in the senate. He commended the loyalty of members, who avenged so sharply insults, however slight, to the head of the state, but deprecated such a hurried punishment of a verbal offence. Lepidus he praised; Agrippa he did not blame. It was therefore resolved that no senatorial decree should be entered in the Treasury before the lapse of nine full days, all prisoners under sentence of death to be reprieved for that period. But the senate had not liberty to repent, nor was Tiberius usually softened by the interval.

  [52] C. Sulpicius D. Haterius consules sequuntur, inturbidus externis rebus annus, domi suspecta severitate adversum luxum qui immensum proruperat ad cuncta quis pecunia prodigitur. sed alia sumptuum quamvis graviora dissimulatis plerumque pretiis occultabantur; ventris et ganeae paratus adsiduis sermonibus vulgati fecerant curam ne princeps antiquae parsimoniae durius adverteret. nam incipiente C. Bibulo ceteri quoque aediles disseruerant, sperni sumptuariam legem vetitaque utensilium pretia augeri in dies nec mediocribus remediis sisti posse, et consulti patres integrum id negotium ad principem distulerant. sed Tiberius saepe apud se pensitato an coerceri tam profusae cupidines possent, num coercitio plus damni in rem publicam ferret, quam indecorum adtrectare quod non obtineret vel retentum ignominiam et infamiam virorum inlustrium posceret, postremo litteras ad senatum composuit quarum sententia in hunc modum fuit.

  52 The consulate of Gaius Sulpicius and Decimus Haterius followed: a year of quiet abroad, though at home there was uneasiness against the luxury which had broken all bounds and extended to every object on which money can be squandered. But other extravagances, though actually more serious, could as a rule be kept private by concealing the prices paid: it was the apparatus of gluttony and intemperance which had become the eternal theme of gossip and had awakened anxiety lest a prince of old-world thriftiness might adopt too harsh measures. For, when the point was mooted by Gaius Bibulus, it had been maintained by his fellow-aediles also that the sumptuary law was a dead letter; that the prohibited prices for articles of f
ood were rising daily; and that the advance could not be checked by moderate methods. The senate, too, when consulted, had referred the question without any discussion to the emperor. But Tiberius, after debating with himself repeatedly whether it was possible to arrest these uncurbed passions, whether such an arrest might not prove an even greater national evil, and what would be the loss of dignity should he attempt a reform which could not be enforced, or, if enforced, would demand the degradation and disgrace of his most illustrious subjects, finally composed a letter to the senate, the drift of which was as follows: —

  [53] ‘Ceteris forsitan in rebus, patres conscripti, magis expediat me coram interrogari et dicere quid e re publica censeam: in hac relatione subtrahi oculos meos melius fuit, ne, denotantibus vobis ora ac metum singulorum qui pudendi luxus arguerentur, ipse etiam viderem eos ac velut deprenderem. quod si mecum ante viri strenui, aediles, consilium habuissent, nescio an suasurus fuerim omittere potius praevalida et adulta vitia quam hoc adsequi, ut palam fieret quibus flagitiis impares essemus. sed illi quidem officio functi sunt, ut ceteros quoque magistratus sua munia implere velim: mihi autem neque honestum silere neque proloqui expeditum, quia non aedilis aut praetoris aut consulis partis sustineo. maius aliquid et excelsius a principe postulatur; et cum recte factorum sibi quisque gratiam trahant, unius invidia ab omnibus peccatur. quid enim primum prohibere et priscum ad morem recidere adgrediar? villarumne infinita spatia? familiarum numerum et nationes? argenti et auri pondus? aeris tabularumque miracula? promiscas viris et feminis vestis atque illa feminarum propria, quis lapidum causa pecuniae nostrae ad externas aut hostilis gentis transferuntur?

  53 “On other occasions, Conscript Fathers, it is perhaps preferable that, if my opinion is needed on a matter of public policy, the question should be put and answered when I am present; but in this debate it was better that my eyes should be withdrawn; otherwise, through your indicating the anxious features of members who might be charged with indecent luxury, I too might see and, so to speak, detect them. If our active aediles had taken me into their counsels beforehand, I am not sure but that I should have advised them to leave vigorous and full-blown vices alone, rather than force matters to an issue which might only inform the world with what abuses we were powerless to cope. Still, they have done their duty — and I could wish to see every other magistrate as thorough in the discharge of his office. But for myself it is neither honourable to be silent nor easy to be outspoken, because it is not the part of aedile or praetor or consul that I act. Something greater and more exalted is demanded from a prince; and, while the credit of his successes is arrogated by every man to himself, when all err it is one alone who bears the odium. For on what am I to make my first effort at prohibition and retrenchment to the ancient standard? On the infinite expanse of our villas? The numbers — the nations — of our slaves? The weight of our silver and gold? The miracles of bronze and canvas? The promiscuous dress of male and female — and the specially female extravagance by which, for the sake of jewels, our wealth is transported to alien or hostile countries?

  [54] ‘Nec ignoro in conviviis et circulis incusari ista et modum posci: set si quis legem sanciat, poenas indicat, idem illi civitatem verti, splendidissimo cuique exitium parari, neminem criminis expertem clamitabunt. atqui ne corporis quidem morbos veteres et diu auctos nisi per dura et aspera coerceas: corruptus simul et corruptor, aeger et flagrans animus haud levioribus remediis restinguendus est quam libidinibus ardescit. tot a maioribus repertae leges, tot quas divus Augustus tulit, illae oblivione, hae, quod flagitiosius est, contemptu abolitae securiorem luxum fecere. nam si velis quod nondum vetitum est, timeas ne vetere: at si prohibita impune transcenderis, neque metus ultra neque pudor est. cur ergo olim parsimonia pollebat? quia sibi quisque moderabatur, quia unius urbis cives eramus; ne inritamenta quidem eadem intra Italiam dominantibus. externis victoriis aliena, civilibus etiam nostra consumere didicimus. quantulum istud est de quo aediles admonent! quam, si cetera respicias, in levi habendum! at hercule nemo refert quod Italia externae opis indiget, quod vita populi Romani per incerta maris et tempestatum cotidie volvitur. ac nisi provinciarum copiae et dominis et servitiis et agris subvenerint, nostra nos scilicet nemora nostraeque villae tuebuntur. hanc, patres conscripti, curam sustinet princeps; haec omissa funditus rem publicam trahet. reliquis intra animum medendum est: nos pudor, pauperes necessitas, divites satias in melius mutet. aut si quis ex magistratibus tantam industriam ac severitatem pollicetur ut ire obviam queat, hunc ego et laudo et exonerari laborum meorum partem fateor: sin accusare vitia volunt, dein, cum gloriam eius rei adepti sunt, simultates faciunt ac mihi relinquunt, credite, patres conscripti, me quoque non esse offensionum avidum; quas cum gravis et plerumque iniquas pro re publica suscipiam, inanis et inritas neque mihi aut vobis usui futuras iure deprecor.’

  54 “I am aware that at dinner-parties and social gatherings these things are condemned, and the call is for restriction; but let any one pass a law and prescribe a penalty, and the same voices will be uplifted against ‘this subversion of the state, this death-blow to all magnificence, this charge of which not a man is guiltless’! And yet even bodily ailments, if they are old and inveterate, can be checked only by severe and harsh remedies; and, corrupted alike and corrupting, a sick and fevered soul needs for its relief remedies not less sharp than the passions which inflame it. All the laws our ancestors discovered, all which the deified Augustus enacted, are now buried, those in oblivion, these — to our yet greater shame — in contempt. And this it is that has given luxury its greater boldness. For if you covet something which is not yet prohibited, there is always a fear that prohibition may come; but once you have crossed forbidden ground with impunity, you have left your tremors and blushes behind. — Then why was frugality once the rule? — Because every man controlled himself; because we were burghers of a single town; nor were there even the same temptations while our empire was confined to Italy. By victories abroad we learned to waste the substance of others; by victories at home, our own. How little a thing it is to which the aediles call attention! How trivial, if you cast your eyes around! But, Heaven knows, not a man points out in a motion that Italy depends on external supplies, and that the life of the Roman nation is tossed day after day at the uncertain mercy of wave and wind. And if the harvests of the provinces ever fail to come to the rescue of master and slave and farm, our parks and villas will presumably have to support us! That, Conscript Fathers, is a charge which rests upon the shoulders of the prince; that charge neglected will involve the state in utter ruin. For other ills the remedy must be within our own breasts: let improvement come to you and me from self-respect, to the poor from necessity, to the rich from satiety. Or, if there is a magistrate who can promise the requisite energy and severity, I give him my praises and confess my responsibilities lightened. But if it is the way of reformers to be zealous in denouncing corruption, and later, after reaping the credit of their denunciation, to create enmities and bequeath them to myself, then believe me, Conscript Fathers, I too am not eager to incur animosities. True, while they are serious — and often iniquitous — I face them for the sake of the state; but when they are idle, unmeaning, and unlikely to profit myself or you, I beg with justice to be excused.”

  [55] Auditis Caesaris litteris remissa aedilibus talis cura; luxusque mensae a fine Actiaci belli ad ea arma quis Servius Galba rerum adeptus est per annos centum profusis sumptibus exerciti paulatim exolevere. causas eius mutationis quaerere libet. dites olim familiae nobilium aut claritudine insignes studio magnificentiae prolabebantur. nam etiam tum plebem socios regna colere et coli licitum; ut quisque opibus domo paratu speciosus per nomen et clientelas inlustrior habebatur. postquam caedibus saevitum et magnitudo famae exitio erat, ceteri ad sapientiora convertere. simul novi homines e municipiis et coloniis atque etiam provinciis in senatum crebro adsumpti domesticam parsimoniam intulerunt, et quamquam fortuna vel industria plerique pecuniosam ad senectam pervenirent, mansit tamen prior animus. sed praecipuus adstricti moris auctor Vesp
asianus fuit, antiquo ipse cultu victuque. obsequium inde in principem et aemulandi amor validior quam poena ex legibus et metus. nisi forte rebus cunctis inest quidam velut orbis, ut quem ad modum temporum vices ita morum vertantur; nec omnia apud priores meliora, sed nostra quoque aetas multa laudis et artium imitanda posteris tulit. verum haec nobis [in] maiores certamina ex honesto maneant.

  55 When the Caesar’s epistle had been read, the aediles were exempted from such a task; and spendthrift epicureanism, after being practised with extravagant prodigality throughout the century between the close of the Actian War and the struggle which placed Servius Galba on the throne, went gradually out of vogue. The causes of that change may well be investigated. Formerly aristocratic families of wealth or outstanding distinction were apt to be led to their downfall by a passion for magnificence. For it was still legitimate to court or be courted by the populace, by the provincials, by dependent princes; and the more handsome the fortune, the palace, the establishment of a man, the more imposing his reputation and his clientèle. After the merciless executions, when greatness of fame was death, the survivors turned to wiser paths. At the same time, the self-made men, repeatedly drafted into the senate from the municipalities and the colonies, and even from the provinces, introduced the plain-living habits of their own hearths; and although by good fortune or industry very many arrived at an old age of affluence, yet their prepossessions persisted to the end. But the main promoter of the stricter code was Vespasian, himself of the old school in his person and table. Thenceforward, deference to the sovereign and the love of emulating him proved more powerful than legal sanctions and deterrents. Or should we rather say there is a kind of cycle in all things — moral as well as seasonal revolutions? Nor, indeed, were all things better in the old time before us; but our own age too has produced much in the sphere of true nobility and much in that of art which posterity well may imitate. In any case, may the honourable competition of our present with our past long remain!