[15] Idem annus alio quoque luctu Caesarem adficit alterum ex geminis Drusi liberis extinguendo, neque minus morte amici. is fuit Lucilius Longus, omnium illi tristium laetorumque socius unusque e senatoribus Rhodii secessus comes. ita quamquam novo homini censorium funus, effigiem apud forum Augusti publica pecunia patres decrevere, apud quos etiam tum cuncta tractabantur, adeo ut procurator Asiae Lucilius Capito accusante provincia causam dixerit, magna cum adseveratione principis non se ius nisi in servitia et pecunias familiares dedisse: quod si vim praetoris usurpasset manibusque militum usus foret, spreta in eo mandata sua: audirent socios. ita reus cognito negotio damnatur. ob quam ultionem et quia priore anno in C. Silanum vindicatum erat, decrevere Asiae urbes templum Tiberio matrique eius ac senatui. et permissum statuere; egitque Nero grates ea causa patribus atque avo, laetas inter audientium adfectiones qui recenti memoria Germanici illum aspici, illum audiri rebantur. aderantque iuveni modestia ac forma principe viro digna, notis in eum Seiani odiis ob periculum gratiora.
15 The same year brought still another bereavement to the emperor, by removing one of the twin children of Drusus, and an equal affliction in the death of a friend. This was Lucilius Longus, his comrade in evil days and good, and the one member of the senate to share his isolation at Rhodes. Hence, in spite of his modest antecedents, a censorian funeral and a statue erected in the Forum of Augustus at the public expense were decreed to him by the Fathers, before whom, at that time, all questions were still dealt with; so much so, that Lucilius Capito, the procurator of Asia, was obliged, at the indictment of the province, to plead his cause before them, the emperor asserting forcibly that “any powers he had given to him extended merely to the slaves and revenues of the imperial domains; if he had usurped the governor’s authority and used military force, it was a flouting of his orders: the provincials must be heard.” The case was accordingly tried and the defendant condemned. In return for this act of retribution, as well as for the punishment meted out to Gaius Silanus the year before, the Asiatic cities decreed a temple to Tiberius, his mother, and the senate. Leave to build was granted, and Nero returned thanks on that score to the senate and his grandfather — a pleasing sensation to his listeners, whose memory of Germanicus was fresh enough to permit the fancy that his were the features they saw and the accents to which they listened. The youth had, in fact, a modesty and beauty worthy of a prince: endowments the more attractive from the peril of their owner, since the hatred of Sejanus for him was notorious.
[16] Sub idem tempus de flamine Diali in locum Servi Maluginensis defuncti legendo, simul roganda nova lege disseruit Caesar. nam patricios confarrc atis parentibus genitos tres simul nominari, ex quis unus legeretur, vetusto more; neque adesse, ut olim, eam copiam, omissa confarreandi adsuetudine aut inter paucos retenta (pluresque eius rei causas adferebat, potissimam penes incuriam virorum feminarumque; accedere ipsius caerimoniae difltcultates quae consulto vitarentur) et quoniam exiret e iure patrio qui id flamonium apisceretur quaeque in manum flaminis conveniret. ita medendum senatus decreto aut lege, sicut Augustus quaedam ex horrida illa antiquitate ad praescentem usum flexisset. igitur tractatis religionibus placitum instituto flaminum nihil demutari: sed lata lex qua flaminica Dialis sacrorum causa in potestate viri, cetera promisco feminarum iure ageret. et filius Maluginensis patri suffectus. utque glisceret dignatio sacerdotum atque ipsis promptior animus foret ad capessendas caerimonias decretum Corneliae virgini, quae in locum Scantiae capiebatur, sestertium viciens, et quotiens Augusta theatrum introisset ut sedes inter Vestalium consideret.
16 Nearly at the same date, the Caesar spoke on the need of choosing a flamen of Jupiter, to replace the late Servius Maluginensis, and of also passing new legislation. “Three patricians,” he pointed out, “children of parents wedded ‘by cake and spelt,’ were nominated simultaneously; and on one of them the selection fell. The system was old-fashioned, nor was there now as formerly the requisite supply of candidates, since the habit of marrying by the ancient ritual had been dropped, or was retained in few families.” — Here he offered several explanations of the fact, the principal one being the indifference of both sexes, though there was also a deliberate avoidance of the difficulties of the ceremony itself.—”. . . and since both the man obtaining this priesthood and the woman passing into the marital control of a flamen were automatically withdrawn from paternal jurisdiction. Consequently, a remedy must be applied either by a senatorial resolution or by special law, precisely as Augustus had modified several relics of the rough old world to suit the needs of the present.” It was decided, then, after a discussion of the religious points, that no change should be made in the constitution of the flamenship; but a law was carried, that the flamen’s wife, though under her husband’s tutelage in respect of her sacred duties, should otherwise stand upon the same legal footing as any ordinary woman. Maluginensis’ son was elected in the room of his father; and to enhance the dignity of the priests and increase their readiness to perform the ritual of the various cults, two million sesterces were voted to the Virgin Cornelia, who was being appointed to succeed Scantia; while Augusta, whenever she entered the theatre, was to take her place among the seats reserved for the Vestals.
[17] Cornelio Cethego Visellio Varrone consulibus pontifices eorumque exemplo ceteri sacerdotes, cum pro incolumitate principis vota susciperent, Neronem quoque et Drusum isdem dis commendavere, non tam caritate iuvenum quam adulatione, quae moribus corruptis perinde anceps, si nulla et ubi nimia est. nam Tiberius haud umquam domui Germanici mitis, tum vero aequari adulescentes senectae suae impatienter indoluit accitosque pontifices percontatus est num id precibus Agrippinae aut minis tribuissent. et illi quidem, quamquam abnuerent, modice perstricti; etenim pars magna e propinquis ipsius aut primores civitatis erant: ceterum in senatu oratione monuit in posterum ne quis mobilis adulescentium animos praematuris honoribus ad superbiam extolleret. instabat quippe Seianus incusabatque diductam civitatem ut civili bello: esse qui se partium Agrippinae vocent, ac ni resistatur, fore pluris; neque aliud gliscentis discordiae remedium quam si unus alterve maxime prompti subverterentur.
17 In the consulate of Cornelius Cethegus and Visellius Varro, the pontiffs and — after their example — the other priests, while offering the vows for the life of the emperor, went further and commended Nero and Drusus to the same divinities, not so much from affection for the princes as in that spirit of sycophancy, of which the absence or the excess is, in a corrupt society, equally hazardous. For Tiberius, never indulgent to the family of Germanicus, was now stung beyond endurance to find a pair of striplings placed on a level with his own declining years. He summoned the pontiffs, and asked if they had made this concession to the entreaties — or should he say the threats? — of Agrippina. The pontiffs, in spite of their denial, received only a slight reprimand (for a large number were either relatives of his own or prominent figures in the state); but in the senate, he gave warning that for the future no one was to excite to arrogance the impressionable minds of the youths by such precocious distinctions. The truth was that Sejanus was pressing him hard:—”The state,” so ran his indictment, “was split into two halves, as if by civil war. There were men who proclaimed themselves of Agrippina’s party: unless a stand was taken, there would be more; and the only cure for the growing disunion was to strike down one or two of the most active malcontents.”
[18] Qua causa C. Silium et Titium Sabinum adgreditur. amicitia Germanici perniciosa utrique, Silio et quod ingentis exercitus septem per annos moderator partisque apud Germaniam triumphalibus Sacroviriani belli victor, quanto maiore mole procideret, plus formidinis in alios dispergebatur. credebant plerique auctam offensionem ipsius intemperantia, immodice iactantis snum militem in obsequio duravisse cum alii ad seditiones prolaberentur; neque mansurum Tiberio imperium si iis quoque legionibus cupido novandi fuisset. destrui per haec fortunam suam Caesar imparemque tanto merito rebatur. nam beneficia eo usque laeta sunt dum videntur exolvi posse: ubi multum antevenere pro gratia odium redditur.
&nb
sp; 18 On this pretext he attacked Gaius Silius and Titius Sabinus. The friendship of Germanicus was fatal to both; but in the case of Silius there was the further point that, as he had commanded a great army for seven years, had earned the emblems of triumph in Germany, and was the victor of the war with Sacrovir, the greater ruin of his fall must spread a wider alarm among others. Many considered his offence to have been aggravated by his own indiscretion: he boasted too loudly that “his troops had stood loyal while others were rushing into mutiny; nor could Tiberius have retained the throne, if those legions too had caught the passion for revolution.” Such claims, the Caesar thought, were destructive of his position, and left it inadequate to cope with such high deserts. For services are welcome exactly so long as it seems possible to requite them: when that stage is left far behind, the return is hatred instead of gratitude.
[19] Erat uxor Silio Sosia Galla, caritate Agrippinae invisa principi. hos corripi dilato ad tempus Sabino placitum, immissusque Varro consul qui patennas inimicitias obtendens odiis Seiani per dedecus suum gratifcabatur. precante reo brevem moram, dum accusator consulatu abiret, adversatus est Caesar: solitum quippe magistratibus diem privatis dicere: nec infringendum consulis ius, cuius vigiliis niteretur ne quod res publica detrimentum caperet. proprium id Tiberio fuit scelera nuper reperta priscis verbis obtegere. igitur multa adseveratione, quasi aut legibus cum Silio ageretur aut Varro consul aut illud res publica esset, coguntur patres, silente reo, vel si defensionem coeptaret, non occultante cuius ira premeretur. conscientia belli Sacrovir diu dissimulatus, victoria per avaritiam foedata et uxor socia arguebantur. nec dubie repetundarum criminibus haerebant, sed cuncta quaestione maiestatis exercita, et Silius imminentem damnationem voluntario fine praevertit.
19 Silius had a wife, Sosia Galla, who by her affection for Agrippina had incurred the detestation of the emperor. On these two, it was decided, the blow should fall: Sabinus could be postponed awhile. Varro, the consul, was unleashed, and, under the pretext of continuing his father’s feud, gratified the animosities of Sejanus at the price of his own degradation. The defendant asked a short adjournment till the prosecutor could lay down his consulate, but the Caesar opposed:—”It was quite usual for magistrates to take legal action against private citizens, nor must there be any infraction of the prerogatives of the consul, on whose vigilance it depended ‘that the commonwealth should take no harm.’ “ It was a characteristic of Tiberius to shroud his latest discoveries in crime under the phrases of an older world. With scrupulous gravity, therefore, as though Silius were on trial before the law, as though Varro were a consul or that state of things a commonwealth, the Fathers were convened. With the defendant either holding his peace, or, if he essayed a defence, making no secret of the person under whose resentment he was sinking, the indictment was presented: Sacrovir long screened through complicity in his revolt, a victory besmirched by rapine, a wife the partner of his sins. Nor was there any doubt that, on the charges of extortion, the pair were inextricably involved; but the entire case was handled as an impeachment for treason, and Silius anticipated the impending condemnation by a voluntary end.
[20] Saevitum tamen in bona, non ut stipendiariis pecuniae redderentur, quorum nemo repetebat, sed liberalitas Augusti avulsa, computatis singillatim quae fisco petebantur. ea prima Tiberio erga pecuniam alienam diligentia fuit. Sosia in exilium pellitur Asinii Galli sententia, qui partem bonorum publicandam, pars ut liberis relinqueretur censuerat. contra M’. Lepidus quartam accusatoribus secundum necessitudinem legis, cetera liberis concessit. hunc ego Lepidum temporibus illis gravem et sapientem virum fuisse comperior: nam pleraque ab saevis adulationibus aliorum in melius flexit. neque tamen temperamenti egebat, cum acquabili auctoritate et gratia apud Tiberium viguerit. unde dubitare cogor fato et sorte nascendi, ut cetera, ita principum inclinatio in hos, offensio in illos, an sit aliquid in nostris consiliis liceatque inter abruptam contumaciam et deforme obsequium pergere iter ambitione ac periculis vacuum. at Messalinus Cotta haud minus claris maioribus sed animo diversus censuit cavendum senatus consulto, ut quamquam insontes magistratus et culpae alienae nescii provincialibus uxorum criminibus proinde quam suis plecterentur.
20 Nevertheless, no mercy was shown to his estate: not that any sums were to be refunded to the provincial tribute-payers, none of whom lodged a claim; but the bounty of Augustus was summarily deducted and the claims of the imperial exchequer calculated item by item: the first instance in which Tiberius had given so sharp an eye to property other than his own. Sosia was driven into exile on the motion of Asinius Gallus, who had proposed to confiscate one half of her estate, while leaving the other to her children. A counter-motion by Manius Lepidus assigned a quarter, which was legally necessary, to the accusers, and the residue to the family. This Lepidus, I gather, was, for his period, a man of principle and intelligence: for the number of motions to which he gave a more equitable turn, in opposition to the cringing brutality of others, is very considerable. Nor yet did he lack discretion, since with Tiberius he stood uniformly high in influence and in favour: a circumstance which compels me to doubt whether, like all things else, the sympathies and antipathies of princes are governed in their incidence by fate and the star of our nativity, or whether our purposes count and we are free, between the extremes of bluff contumacy and repellent servility, to walk a straight road, clear of intrigues and perils. On the other side, Messalinus Cotta, with an equally distinguished lineage but a contrasted character, pressed for a senatorial decree ruling that magistrates, even if personally innocent and not aware of guilt in others, should be penalized for the misdeeds of their wives in the provinces precisely as for their own.
[21] Actum dehinc de Calpurnio Pisone, nobili ac feroci viro. is namque, ut rettuli, cessurum se urbe ob factines accusatorum in senatu clamitaverat et spreta potentia Augustae trahere in ius Vrgulaniam domoque principis excire ausus erat. quae in praesens Tiberius civiliter habuit: sed in animo revolvente iras, etiam si impetus offensionis languerat, memoria valebat. Pisonem Q. Granius secreti sermonis incusavit adversum maiestatem habiti, adiecitque in domo eius venenum esse eumque gladio accinctum introire curiam. quod ut atrocius vero tramissum; ceterorum, quae multa cumulabantur, receptus est reus neque peractus ob mortem opportunam. relatum et de Cassio Severo exule, qui sordidae originis, maleficae vitae, sed orandi validus, per immodicas inimicitias ut iudicio iurati senatus Cretam amoveretur effecerat; atque illic eadem actitando recentia veteraque odia advertit, bonisque exutus, interdicto igni atque aqua, saxo Seripho consenuit.
21 Next there was treated the case of Calpurnius Piso, a man of birth and courage: it was he who, as I have stated already, had exclaimed to the senate that he would retire from the capital as a protest against the cabals of the informers, and, contemptuous of the influence of Augusta, had dared to bring Urgulania before a court and to summon her from under the imperial roof. For the moment, Tiberius took the incidents in good part; but in his heart, brooding over its grounds for wrath, though the first transport of resentment might have died down, memory lived. It was Quintus Granius, who charged Piso with holding private conversations derogatory to majesty; and added that he kept poison at his house and wore a sword when entering the curia. The last count was allowed to drop as too atrocious to be true; on the others, which were freely accumulated, he was entered for trial, and was only saved from undergoing it by a well-timed death. The case, also, of the exiled Cassius Severus was brought up in the senate. Of sordid origin and mischievous life, but a powerful orator, he had made enemies on such a scale that by a verdict of the senate under oath he was relegated to Crete. There, by continuing his methods, he drew upon himself so many animosities, new or old, that he was now stripped of his estate, interdicted from fire and water, and sent to linger out his days on the rock of Seriphos.
[22] Per idem tempus Plautius Silvanus praetor incertis causis Aproniam coniugem in praeceps iecit, tractusque ad Caesarem ab L. Apronio socero turbata mente respondit, tamquam ipse somno gravis atque eo ignarus, et uxor spont
e mortem sumpsisset. non cunctanter Tiberius pergit in domum, visit cubiculum, in quo reluctantis et impulsae vestigia cernebantur. refert ad senatum, datisque iudicibus Vrgulania Silvani avia pugionem nepoti misit. quod perinde creditum quasi principis monitu ob amicitiam Augustae cum Vrgulania. reus frustra temptato ferro venas praebuit exolvendas. mox Numantina, prior uxor eius, accusata iniecisse carminibus et veneficiis vaecordiam marito, insons iudicatur.
22 About this time, the praetor Plautius Silvanus, for reasons not ascertained, flung his wife Apronia out of the window, and, when brought before the emperor by his father-in-law, Lucius Apronius, gave an incoherent reply to the effect that he had himself been fast asleep and was therefore ignorant of the facts; his wife, he thought, must have committed suicide. Without any hesitation, Tiberius went straight to the house and examined the bedroom, in which traces were visible of resistance offered and force employed. He referred the case to the senate, and a judicial committee had been formed, when Silvanus’ grandmother Urgulania sent her descendant a dagger. In view of Augusta’s friendship with Urgulania, the action was considered as equivalent to a hint from the emperor: the accused, after a fruitless attempt with the weapon, arranged for his arteries to be opened. Shortly afterwards, his first wife Numantina, charged with procuring the insanity of her husband by spells and philtres, was adjudged innocent.
[23] Is demum annus populum Pomanum longo adversum Numidam Tacfarinatem beilo absolvit. nam priores duces, ubi impetrando triumphalium insigni sufficere res suas crediderant, hostem omittebant; iamque tres laureatae in urbe statuae et adhuc raptabat Africam Tacfarinas, auctus Maurorum auxiliis qui, Ptolemaeo Iubae filio inventa incurioso, libertos regios et servilia imperia bello mutaverant. erat illi praedarum receptor ac socius populandi rex Garamantum, non ut cum exercitu incederet, sed missis levibus copiis quae ex longinquo in maius audiebantur; ipsaque e provincia ut quis fortunae inops, moribus turbidus, promptius ruebant, quia Caesar post res a Blaeso gestas quasi nullis iam in Africa hostibus reportari nonam legionem iusserat, nec pro consule eius anni P. Dolabella retinere ausus erat iussa principis magis quam incerta belli metuens.
Complete Works of Tacitus (Delphi Classics) (Delphi Ancient Classics Book 24) Page 254