Tacitus' Germanicus and the Commanders of Germania

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0045169/00001

Material Information

Title: Tacitus' Germanicus and the Commanders of Germania
Physical Description: 1 online resource (250 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Daly, Megan Marie
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2013


Subjects / Keywords: annals -- drusus -- germania -- germanicus -- tacitus -- varus
Classics -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Classical Studies thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation


Abstract: This dissertation examines the characterization of Germanicus in Tacitus’ Annals with respect to the characterizations of previous commanders of Germania. I analyze and compare the characters of Drusus the Elder, Quintilius Varus, and Tiberius as they appear in the Annals and the greater literary tradition and then consider how these characters affect Tacitus’ portrait of Germanicus. This approach thus compares Germanicus not with contemporaries but with predecessors and embraces not just the Annals but literature from various genres and periods. This dissertation therefore aims primarily to offer a new perspective from which Germanicus can be viewed by placing him alongside other military commanders. In doing so it uncovers the literature associated with the Roman generals of Germania and explores the portrayal of Rome’s relationship with Germania from the first century BCE onward. The introduction offers an overview of scholarship on Germanicus and explains the methodology of this study. The careful consideration of intertextuality, sources, and ancient characterization are key as the literary portraits of Drusus, Varus, Tiberius, and Germanicus are constructed. For reference basic historical information is provided in the introduction and excerpts from the literary traditions surrounding each commander are offered in the appendices. The middle three chapters focus on each commander in turn. The portrayal in the Annals is first considered, then the portrayal in the literary tradition pre-dating Tacitus followed by the portrayal in the literary tradition contemporaneous with and postdating Tacitus. Each chapter offers portraits of its commander both within and outside of the Annals and considers how those portraits affect Tacitus’ characterization of Germanicus.  Germanicus is thus placed in a new context: he is examined not with the typical characters of the Annals such as the emperor Tiberius, Drusus the Younger, or Arminius, but with less prominent characters who nevertheless have a heavy impact on Germanicus. He is also examined on a large timeline: he is compared to predecessors through analysis of literature spanning hundreds of years. From this perspective Germanicus claims a different position in Roman literature. He takes on a human quality identifiable to every generation.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Megan Marie Daly.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local: Adviser: Pagan-Wolpert, Victoria Emma.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID: UFE0045169:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0045169/00001

Material Information

Title: Tacitus' Germanicus and the Commanders of Germania
Physical Description: 1 online resource (250 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Daly, Megan Marie
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2013


Subjects / Keywords: annals -- drusus -- germania -- germanicus -- tacitus -- varus
Classics -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Classical Studies thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation


Abstract: This dissertation examines the characterization of Germanicus in Tacitus’ Annals with respect to the characterizations of previous commanders of Germania. I analyze and compare the characters of Drusus the Elder, Quintilius Varus, and Tiberius as they appear in the Annals and the greater literary tradition and then consider how these characters affect Tacitus’ portrait of Germanicus. This approach thus compares Germanicus not with contemporaries but with predecessors and embraces not just the Annals but literature from various genres and periods. This dissertation therefore aims primarily to offer a new perspective from which Germanicus can be viewed by placing him alongside other military commanders. In doing so it uncovers the literature associated with the Roman generals of Germania and explores the portrayal of Rome’s relationship with Germania from the first century BCE onward. The introduction offers an overview of scholarship on Germanicus and explains the methodology of this study. The careful consideration of intertextuality, sources, and ancient characterization are key as the literary portraits of Drusus, Varus, Tiberius, and Germanicus are constructed. For reference basic historical information is provided in the introduction and excerpts from the literary traditions surrounding each commander are offered in the appendices. The middle three chapters focus on each commander in turn. The portrayal in the Annals is first considered, then the portrayal in the literary tradition pre-dating Tacitus followed by the portrayal in the literary tradition contemporaneous with and postdating Tacitus. Each chapter offers portraits of its commander both within and outside of the Annals and considers how those portraits affect Tacitus’ characterization of Germanicus.  Germanicus is thus placed in a new context: he is examined not with the typical characters of the Annals such as the emperor Tiberius, Drusus the Younger, or Arminius, but with less prominent characters who nevertheless have a heavy impact on Germanicus. He is also examined on a large timeline: he is compared to predecessors through analysis of literature spanning hundreds of years. From this perspective Germanicus claims a different position in Roman literature. He takes on a human quality identifiable to every generation.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Megan Marie Daly.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local: Adviser: Pagan-Wolpert, Victoria Emma.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID: UFE0045169:00001

This item has the following downloads:

Full Text




2 2013 Megan M. Daly


3 t o my brother Michael


4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my advisor Victoria Pagn for her many years of support in all things C lassics, but more specifically for sharing with me her passion for Tacitus. Her guidance has been vital in the completion of this project. She has encouraged me always to keep thinking deeper, wider, onward, and upward. I am i ndebted also to Andrew Wolpert, who througho ut my graduate years push ed me to think more critically and never to forget the influence of the Greek world. I would also like to express my gratitude to Lewis Sussman and Mary Watt, both of whom were inspirational in the early stages of my career and have since helped me through this most challenging task. I must also thank the rest of the Classics family at the University of Florida, in particular Mary Ann Eaverly, Jennifer Rea, Konstantinos Kapparis, and Jim Marks, for contributing in no small way to my development as a student, teacher, and scholar. I am in debt also to my colleagues, especially James Lohmar, Seth Boutin, George Hendren, Bob Brewer, and David Hoot, with whom I have spent countless hours talking about the classical world and how it affects us today. In addition, I would like to express my gratitude to the Center for Greek Studies at the University of Florida for funding my recent research trip to Germany which provided so much insight and inspiration for this project Furthermore, I thank Professor Herbert Benario for his encouragement and pleasant conversation regarding Tacitus and Germany. On a more personal note, I must thank Teresa Turner and my friends from the Williams and Badcock houses. I w ould not hav e made it this far without thei r friendship and su pport. I would like to thank Sifu and Sim u Jackson as well for teaching me about strength and showing me that nothing is impossible Finally, I thank m y family for their love and for believing in me


5 TABLE OF C ONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTI ON ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 11 Review of Literature ................................ ................................ ................................ 11 Methodology ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 15 Intertextuality ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 15 Sources ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 18 Character ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 22 Historical Background ................................ ................................ ............................. 25 Drusus ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 25 Varus ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 27 Tiberius ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 27 Germ anicus ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 28 2 GERMANICUS AND DRUSUS ................................ ................................ ............... 30 Germanicus and Drusus in the Annals ................................ ................................ ... 31 Drusus in Pre Tacitean Authors ................................ ................................ .............. 39 ................................ ................................ .... 52 ................................ ................................ ............................ 58 Drusus and Tiberius ................................ ................................ ......................... 60 ................................ .......................... 63 Drusus in Parallel and Post Tacitean Authors ................................ ........................ 68 Drusus and Germanicus in Germania: A Topographical Comparison .............. 71 ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 74 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 80 3 GERMANICUS AND VARUS ................................ ................................ .................. 81 Germanicus and Varus in the Annals ................................ ................................ ..... 81 Varus in Pre Tacitean Authors ................................ ................................ ................ 93 Varus the Person ................................ ................................ ............................ 109 Varus the Bad General ................................ ................................ ................... 111 Varus the Victim ................................ ................................ ............................. 115 Varus in Parallel and Post Tacitean Authors ................................ ........................ 119 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 141 4 GERMANICUS AND TIBERIUS ................................ ................................ ........... 142


6 Germanicus and Tiberius in the Annals ................................ ................................ 142 Tiberius in Pre Tacitean Authors ................................ ................................ .......... 147 Tiberius the Superhuman Commander of Germania ................................ ...... 148 The Familial Piety of Tiberius ................................ ................................ ......... 157 The Scarcity of the Pre Tacitean Tradition ................................ ..................... 158 Tiberius in Parallel and Post Tacitean Authors ................................ ..................... 165 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 170 5 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 174 APPENDIX A THE LITERARY TRADITION OF DRUSUS ................................ .......................... 185 Periochae ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 185 138 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 185 139 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 185 140 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 185 141 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 185 142 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 185 Strabo ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 186 13 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 186 6 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 186 Velleius Paterculus ................................ ................................ ............................... 187 2.95.1 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 187 2.97.2 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 187 Horace ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 188 Carm. 4.4.1 28 ................................ ................................ ............................... 188 Carm. 4.14.1 13 ................................ ................................ ............................. 18 8 Valerius Maximus ................................ ................................ ................................ 189 17 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 189 Seneca the Younger ................................ ................................ ............................. 190 Polyb. 15.5 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 190 Marc. 6.3.1 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 190 Marc. 6.4.1 6.5.3 ................................ ................................ ............................ 191 Consolatio ad Liviam ................................ ................................ ............................. 193 13 20 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 193 85 94 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 193 Florus ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 193 2.30.23 8 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 193 Suetonius ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 194 Claud. 1.2 5 ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 194 Cassius Dio ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 196 54.22.1, 3 4 ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 196 54.32.2 33.2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 197 55.1.3 55.2.2 ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 197 55.2.3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 199


7 Orosius ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 199 6.21.12 7 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 199 B THE LITERARY TRADITION OF VARUS ................................ ............................. 201 Strabo ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 201 25 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 201 Seneca the Elder ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 201 Controv 1.3.10 ................................ ................................ ............................... 201 Velleius Paterculus ................................ ................................ ............................... 202 2.117 20 ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 202 Manilius ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 207 Astron. 1.896 905 ................................ ................................ ........................... 207 Pliny the Elder ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 207 HN 7.150 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 207 Frontinus ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 207 Str. 3.15.4 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 207 Str 4.7.8 ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 208 Florus ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 208 2.30.29 39 ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 208 Suetonius ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 210 Aug 23.1 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 210 Tib 16.2.3 18.1.6 ................................ ................................ ........................... 210 Calig 3 1.1 ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 211 Cassius Dio ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 212 56 .18 25 ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 212 57.20.1 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 220 Orosius ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 220 6.21.26 7 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 220 C THE LITERARY TRADITION OF TIBERIUS ................................ ........................ 221 Strabo ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 221 9 ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 221 10 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 221 6 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 221 Velleius Paterculus ................................ ................................ ............................... 221 2.97.4 ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 221 2.104.3 110.3 ................................ ................................ ................................ 222 2.115.5 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 227 Pliny the Elder ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 228 7.84 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 228 7.149 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 228 Valerius Maximus ................................ ................................ ................................ 228 17 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 228 Ovid ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 229 Fast 1.637 50 ................................ ................................ ................................ 229


8 Consolatio ad Liviam ................................ ................................ ............................. 229 271 82 ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 229 Suetonius ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 230 Tib 7.3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 230 Tib 9.1 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 230 Tib 16 20 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 231 Cassius Dio ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 233 55.2.1 5 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 233 55.6.1 5 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 234 55.8.1 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 235 55.9.1 ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 236 55.27.3 5 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 236 55.28.5 31.1 ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 237 Eutropius ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 239 7.9 ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 239 Orosius ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 240 6.21.22 5 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 240 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 241 Texts and Translations ................................ ................................ .......................... 241 Secondary Sources ................................ ................................ .............................. 242 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 250


9 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Megan M. Daly May 2013 Chair: Victoria Pagn Major: Classical Studies Annals with respect to the characterizations of previous commanders of Germania. I analyze and compare the characters of Drusus the Elder, Quintilius Varus, and Tiberius as they appear in the Annals and the greater literary tradition and then consider how these characters affec This approach thus compares Germanicus not with contemporaries but with predecessors and embraces not just the Annals but literature from various genres and periods. This dissertation therefore aims primarily to offer a new perspective from which Germanicus can be viewed by placing him alongside other military commanders. I n doing so it uncover s the literature associated with the R oman generals of Germania and explore s the portrayal of relationship with Ge rmania from the first century BCE onward The introduction offers an overview of scholarship on Germanicus and explains the methodology of this study. The careful consideration of i ntertextuality, sources, and ancient characterization are key as the liter ary portraits of Drusus, Varus, Tiberius, and Germanicus are constructed. For reference b asic historical information is provided in


10 the introduction and excerpts from the literary traditions surrounding each commander are offered in the appendices T he mi ddle three chapters focus on each commander in turn. The portrayal in the Annals is first considered, then the portraya l in the literary tradition pre dat ing Tacitus followed by the portrayal in the literary tradition co ntemporaneous with and postdating Ta citus Each chapter offers portraits of its commander both within and outside of the Annals and considers how tho Germanicus. Germanicus is thus placed in a new context: h e is examined not with the typical characters of the Annals such as the emperor Tiberius, Drusus the Younger, or Arminius, but with less prominent characters who nevertheless have a heavy impact on Germanicus. H e is also examined on a large time line: h e is compared to predecessors through analysis of literature sp an n ing hundreds of years. From this perspective Germanicus claims a different position in Roman literature. He takes on a human quality identifiable to every generation.


11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Germanicus is an enigma. He is popularly known as a ch arming young leader who died before his time, but it is difficult to say much more about him without sparking controversy. Ancient authors have left a portrait clouded with ambiguity especially concerning h is political savvy, military strategy, leadership skills, and relationship with Tiberius. Tacitus is no exception. His depiction of Germanicus in the first three books of the Annals allow s plenty of room for interpretation and Tacitean scholars have certainly offered many po ints of view over the years T his study however, offers a fre sh approach: Annals is analy zed alongside the other major Roman commanders of Germania: Drusus, Varus, and Tiberius. 1 The ultimate goal is to understand German icus through an understanding of who his predecessors were and how Germanicus and fits into the picture of Roman Germania In order to achieve this goal, a deep investigation of the literary traditions be hind Drusus, Varus, and Tiberius is essential so when Tacitus uses these characters in his own text to flesh out the character of Germanicus, we can understand the full effect achieved through intertextualities. Review of Literature The sometimes hero som etimes failure figure of Germanicus has roused comments from just about every major Tacitean scholar since Walker who noted 1 I define Germania as Tacitus does at Ger 1.1: Germania omnis a Gallis Rhaetisque et Pannoniis Rheno et Danubio fluminibus, a Sarmatis Dacisque mutuo metu aut montibus separatur is separated from the Gauls and the Rhaetians and the Pannonians by the Rhine and Danube rivers, from of Tacitus are m y own. All Latin text of the Annals comes from Fisher (1906). Text and translations of other authors are adopted as noted. I will follow the lists of abbreviations for authors and works found in e philologique and OCD


12 Germanicus, give him virtues so as to render him Ti as the romantic hero of the first hexad. 2 Syme believed that Tacitus could have found reason to criticize Germanicus, yet chose to follow the encomiastic tradition 3 Daitz calls nd observes a great contrast between him and Tiberius 4 It was not until 1968 that Shotter argued for a less idealized and more balanced portrayal of Germanicus. Suddenly Germanicus was allowed to have faults and scholars began to re analyze his charac terization. In his commentary, Goodyear and enthrall his readers 5 From this middle ground, Ross shifts to the next extreme: he believes that Tacitus subtly undermines the ng the Pan no nian revolt. In his opinion, Germanicus does not come out of the mutiny a hero. Too many flaws show. 6 Rutland agrees, and although she gives Germanicus credit for his fair reputation as a leader in the field, she believes that Germanicus otherw ise acted on quick emotions, often avoided responsibility, and was too nave. She does not think 2 Walker (1952) 118 20. 3 Syme (1958) 418. 4 Daitz (1960) 37, 48. 5 Goodyear (1972) 240 1. 6 Ross (1973).


13 Tacitus idealized Germanicus. 7 And so from the early 1950s to the late 1980s, the scholarly views of the Tacitean Germanicus moved from one extreme to the othe r. to Tiberius Walker notices that Germanicus is given virtues which are opposite of those of Tiberius; Daitz s ees a black and white contrast between the two ; Martin observes that Tacitus even uses different stylistic features to heighten the distin ction between the two men 8 The stress between emperor and adopted son is unmistakable. this previ ous scholarship. Pelling clearly states the several problems surrounding although the resul basic traits 9 And so while Germanicus acts consistently, sometimes he comes out looking like a success sometimes a failure. But what impression is Germanicus meant to leave on the reader? Pelling lists the main scenes which tend to relate ambiguous are unsatisfying and claims that a better answer may lie in a close examination of continues to be a very attract ive topic, Germanicus interacts with other characters as 7 Rutland (1987). 8 Walker (1952) 118; Daitz (1960) 48; Martin (1981) 116. 9 Pelling (1993) 61.


14 example, Pelling notices that the actions of Germanicus and Agrippina sometimes mirror later actions of Piso a 10 Germanicus also pairs up nicely with Arminius, the young headstrong leader of the Germans. Germanicus may appear impetuous and wild when looked at in this way. readers should not insist on reading Germanicus in just one way, whether as good hero, horrible failure, Tiberian foil, or so on. Germanicus is a complex character and can be seen from many different angles. Part of Ge physically and temporally. As Pagn explains, Tacitus uses the scene at Teutoburg to show Germanicus not only pushing the boundaries of the empire, but also pushing the boundaries of tim e: he seems to travel back to 9 C.E. as he surveys the battlefield. When Germanicus again pushes boundaries by c rossing the Weser (Visurgis) river at 2 .7 9, Pagn sees akin to the actions of Alexander the Great or Caesar. 11 aristocrat 12 She says of him and Corbulo: Still, they are imagined as lonely, anachronistic figures, out of step with their contemporaries and out of place in the imper ial center with its pernicious trends. At the edges of the empire on the British, German, and 10 Pelling (1993) 72. 11 Pag n (1999) 312. 12 Shumate (2012) Shumate (2006) 122 7, esp. 124 n. 43 on Germanicus.


15 Parthian frontiers they find a field where they can practice the republic an virtues that h ave long since fallen out of fashion in the capital 13 Like Corbulo, Germanicus does not fit in with his own times, and thus he becomes an outsider, a lone man on the periphery. The recent work of Pelling, Pagn, and Shumate seemingly quiets discussion on many topics of the Tacitean Germanicus, but it also opens many new doors. Pelling encourages readers to view Germanicus not just alongside Tiberius, but also with Piso and Arminius. But with the temporal and peripheral approaches of Pagn and Shumate in m ind, I believe we can look farther still. Tacitus often uses shadowy, less noticeable characters in his text, characters of the past. If we can identify these characters and use them as a lens through which to view Germanicus, we may find yet another facet of tively connected with the past 14 Methodology In order to Varus, and Tiberius, we must examine the sources which discuss these men and the We must also take into consideration ancien t ideas concerning characterization. Intertextuality Levene neatly expresses the importance o f intertextuality in his recent book: 13 Shumate (2012) 498. 14 Pelling (1993) 73.


16 No issue is more central to contemporary scholarship on Latin literature than the ways in which Latin authors allude to and rework their predecessors, and the consequences of th is for how they are to be read. 15 As Conte explains in his work The Rhetoric of Imitation when the reader s a mind full of literature with him. 16 So as Tacitus pulls a character from the past into his text, he essentially pulls in any impressions his readers may have of that character from earlier literatu re. When Tacitus mentions Drusus or portra ys Germanicus acting like Drusus an ancient reader may think back to cer tain poems of Horace The modern reader, however, may not be so quick to catch the references, unless he or she happens to have a strong knowledge of Horace The modern reader thus enjoys the text differently and less fully than the ancient reader, until such intertextuality is excavated. And so this study must enter the realm of allusion, intertextuality, and intersubjectivity. 17 Although the pursuit of these literary links is highly rewarding and important to a comprehensive understanding of a text, this realm is often dangerous. Grey areas abound: how do we decide if something is allusion, intertextuality, reference, topos or something else? 18 How do we detect intended allusion or accidental confl uence? 19 Can we be sure of the source of a given allusion? 15 Levene (2010) 82. 16 Conte (1986) 29. 17 Intersubjectivity supposedly occurs 18 For a discussion of allusion and intertextualiy, see Levene (2010) 83; for allusio n and reference, see Hinds (1998) 21; for allusion and topos see Hinds (1998) 34. 19 Hinds (1998) 17


17 Levene divides these scholars into conservatives and radicals. Conservatives seek out instances where one text seems to link with another in some way by the intention of the author. Radicals also se ek out such places, but intention is not necessary. Every text has the potential to reflect another whether the author truly meant it or not. Naturally each side has its criticisms of the other: would enable them to distinguish genuine textual relationships from mere scholarly pin down a series of fluid connections to a specific but unprovable intention inside the mind of the author. 20 Each of the two extremes is problematic. Hinds unfolds deeper complexities concerning allusion as he investigates it alongside reference and topos and explores the relationship between author and reader. 21 Ultimately, Hinds admits that the connotes authorial intention, which is impossible to know. If we focus on intertextuality i nstead of allusion, we can abandon intention 22 And intention is mostly irrelevant in this study anyway. Intention suggests purpose, but more important is result. I wish to investigate not how Tacitus wanted us to view Germanicus, but how we perceive t he Germanicus that Tacitus portrayed My goal is not to argue that Tacitus intentionally took his material from a certa in author and thus created a certain effect, but rather to show that an attentive reader can read Tacitus alongside other authors, make some profitable observations concerning similarities in content, and in the end walk away with an enriched view of Germa nicus and the Annals 20 Levene (2010) 83. 21 See Hinds (1998) 17 51. 22 Hinds (1998) 47 8.


18 Sources In order to find intertextualities and resurrect hidden we must ask what sources Tacitus may have had available to him. 23 There are fortunately many sources which were available, which he most lik ely read, and which are still extant to us. For Drusus, the main sources i nclude Horace, Livy, Strabo, Velleius Paterculus and the Consolatio ad Liviam Varus may be found in Strabo, Velleius, Manilius, Frontinus, Seneca the Younger, and Pliny the Elder. For Tiberius we have Strabo, Velleius, Pliny the Elder, Valerius Maximus, Ovid, and the Consolatio ad Liviam Various minor and fragmentary works may offer some assistance as well. 24 These sources will t. Of the sources which were available, which he most likely read, and which are not extant to us, there are a few which we still need to keep in mind. Aufidius Bassus wrote a Bellum Germanicum which was highly praised by Quintilian, and a full length hi story which perhaps began as early as the death of Caesar and extended into 25 Pliny the Elder composed a work in 31 books picking up where 23 The first chapter of Dev illers (2003) will be indispensable for this task. As Devillers (2003) 7 8 points out, Tacitus only states a few of his sources by name, and so we must use detective work to speculate about which texts were probable or possible sources. Potter (2012) 128 e xplains the difficulty of source necessarily said what...A reasoned account of the obvious sources of the Annals alone reveals the use of more than sixty literary texts ranging from the works of men whom Tacitus regarded as major historians to section of the upper strata in Roman imp erial society, and their output consists of works ranging from the personal memoirs of emperors and empresses, through the specialized treatises offering information about geography and ethnology, many of them composed by Roman generals in retirement looki 24 Devillers (2003) 133 4 notes the importance of records like the Tabula Hebana and Tabula Siarensis 25 Quint. Inst. 10.1.103; Syme (1958) 274 5 speculate s about the scope and content of these works but admits that such matters are uncertain; Devillers (2003) 12 Histories may not have treated much of the German wars since these would have been addressed in his earlier work.


19 Aufidius left off. 26 This leaves open the possibility that he too covere d a portion of 27 He also wrote a Bella Germaniae that was 20 books in length and may have stretched from the Roman encounters with the Cimbri and Teutones at the end of the second century BCE into the reign of Claudius. 28 The influence of Bella Germaniae on the Annals however, is debatable, 29 although it seems that such a work would have been invaluable to Tacitus. 30 Servilius Nonianus is also commended by Quintilian, but more importantly he is applauded for his history of Rome by Tacitus himself at Annals 14 .19 ( ... Serv ilius... mox tradendis rebus Romanis celebris et elegantia vitae, quod clariorem effecit ... ) 31 Servilius had been both a senator and a consul ( 35 CE ) under Tiberius He was also a 26 Plin. Ep 9 summarizes the reasons behind the possibilities, either the catastrophe of Sejanus, AD 31, or somewhere between 47 reign. 27 Plin. Ep 3.5. Syme (1958) 288 9 unknown, as expressed by Ash (2011) 3 civi naturally unknown. Wilkes (1972) 183 believes Tacitus may be assumed that the thirty and tireless research which are such a feature of his last work, the Naturalis Historia This alo ne does not 28 Devillers (2003) 17. It has been speculated that this work may have shown favor towards Drusus the Elder and Germanicus since it was written during the ti me of Claudius and Agrippina the Younger. See Devillers (2003) 19 and Syme (1958) 288. 29 Marincola (1997) 47, for example, writes that the Bella Germaniae wars in AD 4 useful to Tacitus. However, Syme (1958) 288 9 and Rives (1999) 36 7 Tac. Ann 1.69 and Suet. Calig 8.1 2 seem to suggest that the work stretched at least to the beginning of ign. 30 For more on these lost works of Pliny, see Ash (2011) 3 4 and Devillers (2003) 20 2. Based on Annals may have been more heavily influenced by the Bella Germaniae than the early books. 31 Quint. Inst 10.1.102 ; Syme (1958) 274 5 Syme (1958) 277 believes that the vir consularis cited by Suet. Tib 61.6 as an author of an annalistic history might refer to Servilius.


20 respected orator and proconsul of Africa around 47 CE. Syme suggests that the se credentia ls make him an attractive source for a writer like Tacitus. 32 Some other authors whose relevant works are not extant and who may have affected Tacitus include Seneca the Elder, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Gaetulicus, Tiberius, Agrippina the Younger and poets like Albinovanus Pedo 33 Seneca the Elder wrote a history which extended from the beginning of the civil wars into his own lifetime. 34 It seems he wrote about Tiberius, including his death, but there is no indication that he was hostile to wards Tib erius. 35 Gaetulicus lived during the reigns of Tiberius and Caligula and is supposed to have been a flatterer of Caligula Although his place as a writer is debated, it is possible he had knowledge which Tacitus could have used. 36 Not only was his father a f riend of Tiberius, bu t he himself was consul in 26 CE More importantly, Tacitus writes at Annals 6.30 about his role as commander of the legions in Upper Germania, his con nection with Lower Germania thro ugh his father in law Lucius Apronius and the 32 Syme (1958) 276. 33 Devillers (2003) lists many other possible sources whose contribution to the literary tradition is debatable. For example, men like Corbulo and Antistius Vetus served in Germania and wrote autobiographies. Although their work may not necessarily focus on events in Germania, they may still have offered some useful information to the tradition. Tacitus was certainly aware of these men (see Devillers [2003] 37 40). According to Devillers (2003) 41, Caecina, the governor of Germany, may have contributed inform ation about Germania, although no known literary work has been attributed to him. Biographies may also have contributed to the literary tradition of Germania and her leaders. Devillers (2003) 43 cites bibliographies of Germanicus and Corbulo as possible so urces of information. Devillers (2003) Chapter 1 also reminds us that lost pamphlets, poetry, letters, and even celebratory songs composed for triumphs would have contributed to the traditions surrounding men like Drusus, Tiberius, and Germanicus. 34 Seneca the Younger hints at the span of this history in De Vita Patris fra g ment 1, lines 5 7: quisq uis legisset eius historias ab initio bellorum ciuilium, unde prim um ueritas retro abiit, paene usque ad mortis suae diem ... 35 Suet. Tib 73.2 relates info biases of Seneca towards the imperial court, see Devillers (2003) 30 1. 36 Gaetulicus is cited at Suet. Cal ig 8. See Devillers (2003) 33 for more on his role as a possible source.


21 great esteem that he seemed to have earned from a great many people 37 Both Tiberius and Agrippina the Younger wrote autobiographical works which may have affected Annals and the larger literary tradition in unique ways. Moreover, Devillers has asserted that poets like Albinovanus Pedo likely offered poetic tones to the tradition. He cites several dramatic scenes con c erning Germanicus, particularly the shipwreck disaster at Annals 2.23 4 and the German campaigns at Annals 1.55 71, as evidence of poetic influence. 38 Finally, Devillers reminds us that documents like the acta S enatus acta diurna as well as letters, speeches, and family archives would presumably have been available to authors like Tacitus who were contributi ng to the literary traditions surrounding Drusus, Varus, Tiberius, and Germanicus. 39 W e must remember that such a wide variety of work s, although lost to us, may have been very influential to Tacitus and the tradition at large 40 37 Gaetulicus is mentioned also at Ann 4.42 and 4.46. See Wilkes (1972) 185 for more information on his life. 38 Devillers (2003) 130. Devillers (2003) 53 points out that Pedo served under Germanicus (some have identified him as the Pedo mentioned by Tacitu s at Ann 1.60) and thus likely had a bias in favor of the general and portrayed him kindly. Pedo composed an epic style work concerning the exploits of Germanicus (see Sen. Suas 1.15 for the fragment; Courtney [2003] 315 19; Hollis [2007] 372 81.) but he has also been cited in the past by Joseph Scaliger as a possible author for the Consolatio ad Liviam This would presumably mean that he had contributed greatly to the literary traditions surrounding not only Germanicus but also Drusus and Tiberiu s. His authorship of the consolatio however, has been highly debated and now is generally rejected (s ee S choonhoven [1992] 38 n. 78, OCD 28). His value as a poet is mentioned by Quint. Inst. 10.1.90. 39 Devillers (2003) 54 69. In particular, Devillers (20 03) 57 8 believes the acta Senatus would have been used for affairs relating to Germany, the triumph of Germanicus, the discussion between Tiberius and Germanicus at Ann 2.26 concerning the campaign, and the posthumous honors of Germanicus. Devillers (200 3) 64 points out that Tacitus at Ann. 3.3 turned to the acta diurna to find information about the Germanicus mentioned at Ann 2.41 (Devillers [2003] 66). 40 Devil lers (2003) 11 names Pliny the Elder, Aufidius Bassus, and Servilius Nonianus among the five most invoked sources of the Annals The other two, Fabius Rusticus and Cluvius Rufus, likely served as important sources for the later books of the Annals Tacitus perhaps gestures at the influence of Aufidius and Servilius on his work at Dial 23. He cites Pliny openly at Ann 1.69, 13.20, and 15.53.


22 And finally, there are some Annals which need to be considered, since it is possible the writers of these later texts used the same sources as Tacitus. These authors include Cassius Dio, Su etonius, and Florus 41 In the case of Cassius Dio, f or example, man y scholars since Schwartz have noted similarities suspected that the two authors worked with a common source. 42 The exact source, or sources, however, are unknown, but we can still use kind of information might be missing from the literary tradition. I n a discussion of sources must push beyond literary prosopography and ask not just who pulated them 43 For this project we will consider how Tacitus may have manipulated sources to influence the portrayal of character. Character Once I have isolated the passages pertaining to Germanicus, I will take into rayal as well as ancient theories and of intertexts affects characterization, particularly of Germanicus. 41 Syme (1958) 271 86 Syme (1958) 271 undertakes the same type of ana 42 See the Cassius Dio entry in RE ; Martin (1981) 204 6; Devillers (2003) 27 adds that this unknown author may even have been critical of Tiberius and sympathetic towards Germanicus. Syme (1958) 272 historical t radition about a ruler at Rome was not formed and transmitted, during the first and second 43 Potter (2012) 128 30.


23 Poetics raises three particular q uestions. In C hap ter 2 Aristotle explains that an author represents his characters as better than in real life, or as worse, or as they are. From this, we must ask how past characters might help Tacitus idealize, discredit, or fairly portray Germanicus. In C hapter 9 Arist otle discusses the license of authors to write not only about things which have actually happened, but also to address the possible or the probable. This raises the question of how past characters might help Tacitus suggest what Germanicus could have becom e had he lived his life charact er, particularly in C hapter 8 tempts us to ask how Tacitus may use past characters to paint Germanicus as tragic. 44 In the Rhetoric Aristotle discusses the differences among the young man, the old man, and the man in prime of life. 45 When we encounter Germanicus, it seems he is a young man who is attempting to cross over into his prime: when he first appears in es the mutiny in Germany with a certain amount of impetuosity and n avet, but over the course of b ooks 1 and 2 we can see Germanicus perhaps character does change and mature past characters might help show change. In hi s Nichomachean Ethics Aristotle discusses excess, deficiency, and mean The golden mean is of great importance in the discussion of virtue and character 46 For 44 On tragedy in the Annals ty of Germanicus in Annals 1.31 51, see Fulkerson (2006). 45 Arist. Rh. 2.12 4 (Loeb edition). 46 Arist. Eth. Nic. book 2. See Arist. Eth. Nic. 2.5 for excess, deficiency, and mean.


24 example, exces s courage is foolhardiness and defi ciency of courage is cowardice 47 The mean is the goal of a good man, but it is difficult to attain For our purposes, we may characters helps p lace Germanicus along a scale of success perfect achievement? Does Germanicus come out of the text looking good, bad, or a mix of the two? which also will be of use in our study. Ferguson in his 1913 article lists several methods which Tacitus uses for characterization, the fifth bein 48 He offers Germanicus and Tiberius, Tiberius and Augustus, and Agrippina the Y ounge r and Antonia as some examples of characters placed in high contrast. Thus it will be important for us to note contrasts as well as comparisons made between Germanicus and other characters in the Annals Daitz stresses the importance of lineage, action, c haracter contrast, and interplay technique of characterization. He notes, for example, how placed 49 As for character contrast and interplay of ch aracters (which Daitz defines as ), 50 he focuses only on how Germanicus and Tiberius pair up together, but there is certainly room for us to investigate character contrast and interplay of characters with German icus. 47 Arist. Eth. Nic. 2.8. 48 Ferguson ( 1913) 3 49 Daitz (1960) 34; Tac. Ann 1.33. 50 Daitz ( 1960) 50


25 Historical Background 51 Drusus Nero Claudius Drusus was born in 38 BCE to Tiberius Claudius Nero and Livia Drusilla. 52 He was their second child. His older brother was the future emperor Tiberius. band and married Octavian. Yet he was taken in by his stepfather Octavia n and given the expected privile ges. In 19 BCE he was granted permission to run for public office s five years befo re the normal age requirement, and i n 18 BCE he became quaestor. In 15 BCE he teamed up with his brother Tiberius to conquer the R h aeti and Vindelici and thus improve Roman control across the Alps. 53 He also began the construction of a road across the Alps, the road which later would be completed by his son Claudius and named via Claudia Augusta. His first son, Germanicus, was born in 15 BCE. In 13 BCE Drusus was sent to govern Gaul where he carried out a census. On the kalends of August in either 12 or 10 BCE he dedicated an altar to Roma and Augustus at Lyon ( Lugdunum ) the administrative center of Tres Galliae. Beginning in 12 BCE Drusus took charge of Roman military affairs in Germ any. His main bases were located at Xanten (Vetera) and Mainz ( Mogo ntiacum ) He fought the Usipetes and Sugambri, two of the major tribes settled between these two bases along the Rhine. He then sailed north to the Frisii through a canal which he dug and to 51 For secondary source information on Drusus, Varus, Tiberius, and Germanicus, see Syme (1958; 1986); Levick (1990); Ferrill (1991); Shotter (1992); Wells (2003); Murdoch (2006); Seager (2005); Eck (2007). For relevent stemmata see Syme (1986) tables III and XXVI. 52 Suet. Claud and its timing are discussed by Simpson (1988). 53 Hor. Carm. 4.4.


26 which he gave h is name : the Fossa Drusiana 54 He encoun tered also the Bructeri and Chauci in this year. While sailing again in the northern waters his boats were stranded by the tide, but he was assisted by the friendly Frisii. In 11 BCE Drusus was named urban praetor but he did not stay in Rome. He ventured out once again against the Usipetes, then crossed the river Luppia (Lippe) and approached the Weser ( Visurgis ). By this time Drusus had made great headway and had developed many Roman bases in Germania, including at the modern locations Nijmegen, Xanten, M oers Asberg, Neuss, Bonn, Mainz, Holsterhausen, and Oberaden 55 He was rewarded for his deeds with an ovatio and ornamenta triumphalia His military endeavo rs in 10 BCE were more modest than those of previous years. As proconsul he fought against the Chatt i, but then returned to Rome. In 9 BCE he served as consul, but again spent his time in Germania. He encountered the Chatti, Marcomanni, and Cherusc i and marched as fa r as the Elbe R iver ( Albis ) He died that summer from injuries associated with a fall fro m his horse. Tiberius was able to be Rome and laid to rest in the Mausoleum of Augustus A cenotaph was set up at Mogo ntiacum and can still be seen today. For his achieveme nts he and his descendents were given the surname Germanicus. Much of what he accomplished in Germania, however, was erased with the disaster of Varus in 9 CE. 54 Suet. Claud. 1. 2. 55 For the Roman military ou tposts in Germany, see Wells (1972) and Brewer (2000) Chapter 4.


27 Varus Publius Quin tilius Varus was born to a patrician family of little importance, but he was able to gain favor through marriage connections. Varus and Tiberius were consuls in 13 BCE, and their wives were sisters. Both women were daughters of Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa. If these connections to Augustus through Tiberius and Agrippa were sisters also married well. His sister Quinctilia was married to Sextus Appuleius, a nephew of Augustus, c onsul in 29 BCE and proconsul of Asia around 23 21 BCE. 56 Thus Varus was able to form ties close to Augustus and his political career took off. After his consulship, Varus went on to become proconsul of Africa around 7 or 6 BCE. Thereafter he was legate in Syria and became involved in affairs in Judaea. He is most infamous, however, for his defeat in Germania in 9 CE. While marching with three legions through the Teutoburg f orest, Varus was ambushed by the Cheruscian leader Arminius. The Romans were oblitera ted and the Varian disaster became a great control of the province, but the Roman foothold in Germania would never be the same. Tiberius Tiberius Iulius Caesar Augustu s was born on November 16, 42 BCE to Tiberius Claudius Nero and Livia Drusilla. He was their first child. His younger brother was Drusus, born in 38 BCE. When Tiberius was three and perhaps almost four, his mother and father divorced and Livia married Octa vian. Tiberius and his brother Drusus were raised by their father until his death in 33 BCE, and then were transferred into 56 Reinhold (1972) 119.


28 en the special privile ges. In 23 BCE he became quaestor five years be fore the normal age requirement In 20 BCE he began to handle affairs in Armenia. In 15 BCE he teamed up with his brother Drusus to conquer the R h aeti and Vindelici. While Drusus was campaigning in Germania from 12 to 9 BCE, Tiberius spent this time subdui ng Pannonia. When Drusus fell ill in 9 BCE, Tiberius rushed to his death bed, then accompanied his body back to Rome for funeral rites. Since Drusus was dead, Tiberius carried out campaigns in Germania from 9 to 7 BCE. From 6 BCE to 2 CE he spent his time in Rhodes in what seemed to have been a voluntary exile. In 4 CE Tiberius was adopted by Augustus and Tiberius in turn adopted his nephew Germanicus. Tiberius also became active once again in military affairs and returned to Germania to campaign from 4 to 6 CE. From 6 to 9 CE he was in Pannonia and Illyricum suppressing revolts, and after the Varian disaster of 9 CE he returned to Germania a third time in an attempt to secure Roman control in the area. He returned to can in general be considered successful. In 14 CE he became emperor and never again took the field or even t raveled to Germania 57 Germanicus Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus was born in May of 15 or 16 BCE to Nero Claudius Drusus and Antonia. He was adopted by his uncle Tiberius in 4 CE and his name was thus changed to Germanicus Iulius Caesar. His military career began in Pannoni a under Tiberius in 7 9 CE. H e also served under his uncle in Germania in 11 57 Tiberius talks about going out to visit the legions at Ann 1.47 and 4.4. At Ann 2.47 when Maroboduus asks Tiberius to help him against the Cherusci, Tiberius send s him a harsh reply and then sends Drusus. Tiberius likewise sends his sons out in his stead at Ann 1.47. At Ann 3.34 Drusus remarks that princes must travel often, then talks about how much Augustus traveled. At Ann 1.46 the people compare Augustus to Tiberius: they criticize the latter for not going out to see the armies when the former had traveled even when he was feeble. See Syme (1958) 423.


29 CE. He held the consulship in 12 CE and was co mmander in chief in Gaul and Germania in 13 CE. In 14 CE he settled mutinies in Germania and then campaigned against the Marsi. In 15 CE he campaigned against the Chatti, Cherusci, Marsi, and Bructeri. He visited the Teutoburg forest where he buried remain By the end of the season he had successfully recovered some standards that had been lost by Varus, but he failed to defeat Arminius decisively In the next year, 16 C E, he led troops back into north l and other waterways and finally was victorious against Arminius after fighting two battles in and around the Idistavisian plain. The end of the campaign season, however, was met with disaster when the fleet suffered through storms on its return voyage. G ermanicus celebrated a triumph for his achievements in Germania in May of 17 CE, but instead of campaigning again in the north, he was sent east. He died there unexpectedly in 19 CE. Like his father he was popular and was believed to have had republican se ntiments. He was married to Agrippina the Elder and had nine children by her, many of whom had great impact on the course of Roman history. Germanicus himself, however, is best remembered for his deeds in Germania and for his popularity with the Roman peop le. Tacitus emphasizes these features of Germanicus in the Annals particularly through his use of Drusus, Varus, and Tiberius alongside Germanicus. It is to this topic that this project now turns.


30 CHAPTER 2 GERMANICUS AND DRUSU S When Germanicu s Julius Caesar took up the position of commander in chief in Germania in 13 CE, he had three examples before him: his own father Drusus, who had been so successful during his campaigns in Germania that he won the name Germanicus for himself and his descen dants; his uncle Tiberius, who had established a fairly admirable military career over the course of several campaigns in various places; and the general Quin tilius Varus who had been utterly defeated by Arminius just a few years earlier in 9 CE. Varus was known as a failure, the careless general who fell directly into a German ambush, the one who caused Augustus to cry out for his legions and henceforth discourage Roman activity in northern Germania. 1 Tiberius seemed capable enough, but always seemed to be overshadowed by others. Drusus was a hero, one of the first to beat back roaming German tribes, penetrate their territory, and repeatedly rout their forces in battle. Wh ich man was Germanicus to reflect ? Would he prove successful against such fierce peopl es and live up to the na me his father gave him, would he simply maintain the territor y, or would he cause another military disaster for Rome ? Ta citus raises this very question when he refers to the military careers of Drusus Tiberius, and Varus in Annal s 1 and 2 The noticeable presence of these three generals reminds the reader that Germanicus was walking ground that had been traveled before. Germanicus had the potential to become another Varus had he not been careful against Arminius; on the other hand, he had the opportunity to prove that he was just as 1 Suet. Aug. 23.


31 talented as his father. As Tacitus nar movemen t through the deep forests of Germania the ghosts o f Drusus and Varus seem to follow Germanicus By mentioning Drusus and Varus s o frequently and emphasizing instances when Germanicus faces similar situations Tacitus develops his character on a scale define Germanicus and Drusus in the Annals Drusus is mentioned in conjunction with his son Germanicus at Annals 1.3, 1.33, 1.43, 1.56, 2 .7 2.8, 2.14, 2.41, 2.82, and 3 .5. 2 In these passag es, Tacitus connects father and son through mention of family ties, through topographic ally through military ex ploits, and through the thoughts and words of the Roman peo ple. At Annals 1 .3 Ta citus introduces Germanicus among the family members in whom Augustus placed power. 3 Tacitus calls Germanicus Druso ortum the offspring of Drusus. This is not an uncommon w ay to introduce a new character. Daitz 4 T he combination of Druso ortum and the immediate mentio mmand on 2 Drusus is mentioned also at Tac. Ann 1.41, 4.72, and 6.51, but not in direct association with Germanicus, although at Tac. Ann 1.41 Drusus is called socer still a nominal connection being made between father and son. 3 Tac. Ann 1.3: at hercule Germanicum Druso ortum octo apud Rhenum legionibus inposuit adscirique per adoptionem a Tiberio iussit, quamquam esset in domo Tiberii filius iuvenis ..., assuredly he put Germanicus, son of Drusus, in command of eight legions on the Rhine and he order ed that he be adopted by Tiberius, although there was a young son in the household of Goodyear (1972) 114 point s out that the use of hercule narrative and he cites Tac. Ann 12.43.2 as its only other occurrenc e. Hercule seems to punctuate strongly Germanicum Druso ortum which follows. Concerning its use at the introduction 4 Daitz (1960) 34.


32 the Rhine reminds the reader of just how similar the son is to the father who was famous for his achievements in the Rhineland In addition, Tacitus writes that Augustus promoted Germanicus by ordering Tiberius to adopt him, in spite of the fact that Tiberius had a son of his own. Similarly, Tacitus writes just a few sentences earlier in Annals 1.3 that so favored by Augustus with high official title in spite of the fact that othe r family members w ere available 5 Germanicus is reintroduced at Annals 1. 33 with a list of more familial connections 6 Drusus agai n is part of his identification as Tacitus stresses for the paternity through the phrase Druso...genitus 7 Tacitus continues with an elabor ation of his ties to his father by commenting o n the strength of with the people and his supposed republican sentiments. 8 The people equate Germanicus with Drusus by placing in them both the same hope ( spes eadem ) of freedom. 9 Wh ile in the f ield Germanicus associates himself with his father twice through his own words. At Annals 1 .43 Germanicus is in the midst of an emotional speech to his 5 Tac. Ann 1.3 : Ti berium Neronem et Claudium Drusum privignos imperatoriis nominibus auxit, integra etiam tum domo sua He promoted Tiberius Nero and Claudius Drusus his stepsons with the title imperator while his own household was still intact. 6 Germanicus is briefly mentioned 3 times before Tac. Ann 1.33, at 1.7, 1.14, and 1.31 (to which Tacitus refers when he writes ut diximus at 1.33), but he does not emerge as a main character until the beginning of the German mutiny. 7 Tac. Ann 1.33 : ... ips e Druso fratre Tiberii genitus ... he himself was born of Drusus the brother of Tiberius... 8 Tac. Ann 1.33 : quippe Drusi magna apud populum Romanum memoria, credebaturque, si rerum potitus foret, libertatem redditurus; unde in Germanicum favor et s pes eadem memory of Drusus was great among the Roman people, and it was believed, if he had obtained power, he would have restored freedom; whence the same hope and favor existed in 9 Goodyear (1972) 251 believes that the republicanism attached to Drusus and Germanicus here provides


33 mutinous troops w hen he invokes Drusus directly. 10 While pater Druse is in t he vocative case, Germanicus calls on the imago and memoria of Drusus for support. 11 He hopes the recollection or me mory of his successful military father will encourage the troops to aid him in his own success. He similarly call s on his father again at Annals 2 .8, but in a more private scene. When visiting Germ anicus prays for exemplum and memoria to help him in his endeavors. 12 G ermanicus acknowledges that he is undertaking the same venture ( eadem ausum ) as his father, namely navigation on the northern ocean. 13 In both passages Tacitus portray s Germanicus invoking abstract representations of Drusus for aid in activities in which Drusus succeeded. However, at Annals 1.43 Drusus is invoked in front of a crowd w ith the hope of manipulating its behavior, whereas at Annals 2.8 the invocation of his father seems more personal to Germanicus and perhaps shows filial piety. Goodyear notes the difference between these two 3) Drusus has progressed to semi 10 Tac. Ann 1 .43: tua, dive Auguste, caelo recepta mens, tu a, pater Druse, imago, tui memoria isdem istis cum militibus, quos iam pudor et gloria intrat, eluant hanc maculam irasque civilis in exitium hostibus vertant Your spirit, divine Augustus, received into heaven, your ghost, father Drusus, and the memory o f you with these same troops, whom now shame and ambition penetrate, may they clean away this dishonor and turn civil violence towards destruction for the enemy. 11 Imago is not an effigy of Drusus, still preserved in the le gionary camp, but, as memoria 12 Tac. Ann 2.8: ... f ossam, cui Drusianae nomen, ingressus precatusque Drusum patrem ut se eadem ausum libens placatusque exemplo ac memoria consiliorum atque operum iuvaret e pleased to help him with his example and the memory of his insight and accomplishments as he 13 According to Cass. Dio 54.32.2, Drus us was the first Roman to navigate the northern ocean (see Furneaux [1896] 299). At Tac. Ann 2.8 Germanicus is about to travel through the same waters, and this is what is meant by eadem ausum


34 Annals 2.8. 14 However, Annals 1.43 seems to place Drusus on par with divus Augustus (note dive Auguste also in the vocative), thereby suggesting his semi divine status in this earlier passage as well. Memoria and eadem are important recurri ng words in these passages. At Ann als 1 memoria with the people causes them to project certain expectations onto Germanicus, the same expect ations they had for Drusus. At Ann als 1 .43 Germani cus assume memoria i s also strong with the troops when he invokes it in a speech with the hopes that it will help him through his difficulties. At Ann als 2 memoria more privately when he is in Germania faced with the reality of pursuing the same feats as his father. Through the repetition of memoria and eadem Drusus follows Germanicus through the text At the same time, Germanicus seems like a reincarnation of his father as he reenacts aspects career. At Ann als 2 .14 Germanicus punctuates a rousing speech to his troops with the reminder that he is treading the same path as his father and uncle and he entreats them to make him a victor in th e same lands which they had stri ve n to conquer : propiorem iam Albim quam Rhenum neque bellum ultra, modo se patris patruique vestigia prementem isdem in terris victorem sisterent now the Elbe was closer than the Rhine and there was no war beyond, if only they support him as he treads the footsteps of h is father and uncle to be a victor in the same lands. Ann 2.14 Isdem again express es the similarity of experience between Drusus and Germanicus, but also powerful here is the word vestigia This word in connection with isdem in terris reinforces the fact that Germanicus is 14 Goodyear (1981) 207.


35 I ndeed Germanicus is walking the same ground and visiting the same sites his father visited. Top ography links the two men At Annals 1 .56 vestigia appears again as Germanicus builds his camp on the s ame site where his father had placed his entrenchments 15 Although the vestigia in this sentence belong to the praesidii and not to Drusus, it is still understood by the word paterni that Drusus had tread upon this very site. 16 As Germanicus walks where Drus us had walked, he rebuilds what Drusus had built. This is not the only time Germanicus visits the very ground on which his father left a mark. At Annals 2 destroyed, he rebuilds it: 17 He then celebra tes funeral games in another sign of filial piety. 18 The act of rebuilding what his father once built at Annals 1.56 and 2.7 further reinforces Germanicus as a recreation of Drusus. Not only does Germanicu s dare the same military endeavo rs and visit the same places but he builds the same structures in 15 Tac. Ann 1.56 : ... positoque castello super vestigia paterni praesidii in monte Tauno expeditum exercitum in Chattos rapit ... garrison on Mount Taunus he hurried lightly arme 16 Furneau x (1896) 254 and Goodyear (1981) 76 believe that this may be one of the forts which Cass. Dio 54.33.4 says Drusus built. Wells (1972) 225 6 tells us that Schmidt first identified the location of this fort at Friedberg, but that later excavations cast doubt Drusus and Germanicus must have produced marching 17 Furneaux (1896) 298 and Goodyear (1981) 206 explain that this altar was either commemorative or was set up for the worship of Drusu manes perhaps set up where Drusus died (the location is vaguely given by Val. Max. 5.5.3, Cass. Dio 55.1.4). Furneaux (1896) 298 postulates its location near the middle the Rhine (to which Dio refers at 55.2.3), which according to Suet. Claud 1.3 also had decursiones ceremonial running, associated with it. 18 Tac. Ann 2.7 : tumulum tamen nuper Varianis legionibus structum et veterem aram Druso sitam disiecerant. restituit aram honorique patris princeps ipse cum legionibus decucurrit They had, however, thrown down the mound recently erected for the legions of Varus and the old altar of Drusus. He restored the altar and for the honor of his father the leader himself with h is legions celebrated funeral games


36 the same places Thus Tacitus reinforces these similarities between father and son through the words eadem memoria vestigia and the motif of rebuilding At Annals 2 .41, Germanicus walks where Drusus surely would have walked had he lived a longer life: in the triumph. 19 Seeing Germanicus honored in such a way causes the people once again to associate father with son. Drusus was once favored by the people also but this did not save him from bad fortune 20 Although the word memoria is not used here, the memoria of Drusus is being recalled by the people ( reputantibus ) and projected onto Germanicus as they look upon him Walker writes that father Drusus is 21 The passage ends with a more genera l statement concerning the bad fate of those loved by the people, a statement which also father. The people associate Drusus with Germanicus twice more ( 2.82 and 3 .5 ) At Annals 2.82, just as at 1 .33, father and son are associated by their r epub lican views. 22 It 19 introduce 20 Tac. Ann 2.41 : sed suberat occulta formido, reputantibus haud prosperum in Druso patre eius favorem vulgi, avunculum eiusdem Marcellum flagrantibus plebis studiis intra iuventam ereptum, brevis et infaustos populi Romani amores But a latent fear was lurking for those reflecting on how the favor of the people in the case of his father Drusus was hardly fortunate, how his uncle Marcellus, with the zeal of the people inflamed, was snatched away while still in his you th, how short lived and unfortunate were the favo 21 Walker (1952) 68. 22 Tac. Ann 2.82 : vera prorsus de Druso seniores locutos: displicere regnantibus civilia filiorum ingenia, neque ob aliud interceptos quam quia populum Romanum aequo iure complecti reddita libertate agitaverint What the old men said about Drusus was absolu tely true: that rulers dislike


37 is believe d that Drusus and Germanicus suffered the same fate because of these views, thus their deaths are once again equated. 23 Suspicions that Tiberius may have been tus may have 24 From the perspective of the seniores Since the people have thus equated Germanicus and Drusus, they expect Germanicus to be paid funeral ho nors similar to tho se of Drusus Just as at Annals 2.82 the way Augustus treated Drusus is again being compared to the way Tiberius treats Germanicus. The people are surprised when they see a contrast between the two ceremonies. 25 Both men, whom the people loved and in whom the people placed their hopes, lived similarly and died suddenly. But as Woodman and Martin point out, the circumstances of t heir deaths were significantly different: since Germanicus had died months before and hundreds of miles away, a state funeral perha ps was not possible in r epublican intentions in their sons, and that they were cut off for no other reason than because they hinted at embraci ng the Roman people on equal terms 23 Walker (1952) 123 makes note of this passage as an example where echoes of the past have a strong vision of fath 24 Furneaux (1896) 377 cites Suet. Claud 1 which relates and rejects the rumor that Drusus was himself, employs 25 Tac. Ann 3 .5: Fuere qui publici funeris pompam requirerent compararentque quae in Drusum cuicumque nobili debito s honores contigisse There were those who expected the ostentation of a public funeral and compared the honors and magnificence Augustus had bestowed on Drusus the father of Germanicus...but not even the honors customarily owed to any nobleman befell


38 honors. For this reason Woodman and Martin believ e this reference to Drusus is T. has strong ly implied through out the prece ding narrative that Germanicus was indeed treated very like his father, an implication which the present 26 Tacitus certainly does seem to make a notic e able effort to bring Dru sus and Germanicus into comparison in this passage Whether the thoughts of the people are portray Germanicus alongside Drusus Thus Tacitus binds Drusus and Germanicus in various ways, not only through direct mention of familial ties, but also thro ographic ally through mention of their similar military exploits and travels, and through the similar feelings of the Roman people towards both By binding father and son together, Tacitus augments the character of Germanicus, creating in him a more exper ienced military leader, a more r epublican hero, and a greater favorite of the people. whe n the reader has only the text of the Annals in mind. However, the ancient reader would already have had ideas about Drusus fro m other texts and may have recall ed and projected these ideas while reading about Germanicus in the Annals Germanicus versions of Drusus as well. If Tacitus identifies Germanicus with Drusus, then what do we know abo ut Drusus from other texts that can help us understand our r eading of Germanicus as a character who reflects Drusus ? To answer this question we will 26 Woodman and Martin (1996) 98.


39 examine other authors who write about Drusus, or ganize their information thematically, then consider how this information might influence our reading of the Tacitean Germanicus. Drusus in Pre Tacitean Authors When attempting to reconstruct the Drusus tradition from pre Tacitean works, there are three important things to keep in mind: first we must realize that not all works day are extant to us. W e must consider the possibility that Tacitus and these early authors used some of these missing sources. The information offered by pre Tacitean authors may give a clue as to what kind of information may have been available to Tacit us and how he might be manipulating that information for his own characterization. Second, these pre Tacitean authors may have influenced Tacitus directly. His Germanicus as Drusus char acterization may be based on these very passages. Such intertextualitie s may have altered the way the character of Germanicus was viewed. Third, some pre Tacitean authors may have had direct personal connections to Drusus or his family. This can raise questions of bias and accuracy, matters which are important to think about if these texts are going t o influence the reading of Tacitus. One of the earliest lit erary works to mention Drusus i Ab Urbe Condita It work. 27 The books co ncern ing Drusus, 138 42, of course do not survive in the original 27 tha possibility that it ended with the defeat of Varus in 9 CE. He further explains that Livy may have wished to write 150 books which covered time all the way up to interrupted by his death. Stader (1972) 299 states that books 121 142 covered the period 42 to 9 BC (see also the chart on 306).


40 full form, but the Periochae offer summaries of their content (see Appendix A p.185 ) Drusus is first mentioned in book 138 when he is credited with subduing the R h aeti with Tiberiu s, and with se tting up a census. In book 139 Drusus is said to have fought Germanic tribes and to have suppressed an uprising in Gaul sparked by the census In book 140 Drusus is said to have subdued more Germanic tribes, specifically the Cherusci, Tencteri, Chauci. In Rhine are given eulogy, and funeral are cover ed. Here the Periochae Ab Urbe Condita end. This all too brief portrayed Drusus as a successful military leader, an important player in involvement with Germania and Gaul, and a well honored man. T he Periochae represent pieces of the full work of Livy which Ta citus would hav e known and accessed 28 What information not included in the Periochae and coloring th e full work might have had regarding Drusus we cannot know, but from the summaries we can see that Livy seems to have written extensively about Drusus at th e end of his work to the point that entire books appear to revolve solely around him. 29 The information shared here may have rung in the minds of readers as they read passages about Annals 28 At Ann 4.33 Tacitus perhaps compares his work to that of Livy. Devillers (20 Tacitus considered Livy to be among t he historians he speaks of at Ann. 1.1. 29 Walsh (1961) 7 believes that the Periochae stand in the for eground of Periochae books 138


41 e effect it may have had on his portrayal of Drusus? Syme insinuates that Livy played into the propaganda of Augustus, 30 Walsh and Petersen, however, reject this view. Walsh states that the re is no evidence that Livy 31 Annals 4.34 where it is written that Augustus called Livy a Pompeian because of his great praise of Pompey, but that this was no hindrance to their friendship. 32 It seems that Augustu s was tolerant s and that Livy was not necessarily under the spell of Augustus. 33 34 35 Conte takes middle ground and 36 Perhaps Livy is not categorized as one of the historians of Annals 1.1 who wrote with flattery. Perhaps he wrote about Drusus factually and without sycophancy. 30 these 31 Walsh (1961) 11, 14. 32 Petersen (1961) 441. 33 34 ttempting to justify, or to attack, the policies and aims of Augustus, although like any other creative writer, he does reflect to some extent contemporary 35 See Luce (2009) 46 7 for tho ughts on Livy and Augustus. 36 Conte (1994) 369.


42 perhaps even used it as a source or guide, we do not have definite evidence of this. 37 But most of aders certainly would have rea d immensely popular in its day and stood as one of the commanding histories of Rome. 38 When encountering references to Drusus and descriptions of German military affairs in read Roman would have likely thoug Drusus character described therein. 39 Drusus also is mentioned (see Appendix A p. 186 ) associations with certain areas. Wh en he co vers the area between the Rhine and Elbe he Bructeri on the river Ems (7.1.3 .8 13 ) 40 When he brings up the river Salas, he writes that it wa s between this river and the Rhine that Drusus, while carryi ng out a successful c ampaign, died. He adds that Drusus had subdued many tribes and islands along the coast, citing specifically the Burchanis (7.1.3 .52 6 ). 37 Though Syme (1958) 146 asserts that Tacitus may have had Livy in mind at times and he reminds us that Tacitus praised Livy openly at Ann. 4.34 (1958) 202, he does not include Livy in his discussion of Taci possibly used by Tacitus. 38 Ep. 2.3.8 for the anecdote of the man who trav eled a great length just to see Livy. 39 It must be conceded that perhaps only the most educated of Romans would have been familiar with the people like the first, third, and fourth, were most likely to be the portions of Livy read in full and committed to must have been of less interest. 40 and he speculates that it happened perhaps in 12 BCE when Drusus traveled as far as the ocean.


43 When reading about Drusus in Strabo we must consider how geography and characters fit together. If Strabo is concerned mainly with geography, why does he 41 Since Drusus was a d riving force behind the conquests of 12 9 BCE, he merits at least brief attention. As a geographer, Strabo can help us understand location, specifically where Drusus was when certain things happened to him, a detail which many other sources frequently forg et to state or leave unclear. Strabo was also a man of the Augustan age, and even though he traveled much, he seems to have spent a great deal of time in Rome. 42 Although he had many a c quaintances in the city, including Cn. Calpurnius Piso, a friend of Augu stus and Tiberius, Dueck believes that Strabo probably did not personally know many of the leading figures he names. 43 But the fact that he was alive and probably in Rome during kes him an important source 44 He was no doubt privy to all the news which came in from Germania at that time, and he may have even been present when Drusus was honored in the city and laid to rest after his death. Horace ( see Appendix A p. 188 ) is also a man of the Augustan age, but unlike Strabo, we know that he had connections to the most important leaders of Rome. According to Suetonius ( Vita Horati ; cf. Porphyrio on Carm 4.1.1) Horace wrote his 4 th book of Carmina 41 Dueck (2000) 157. 42 Dueck (2000) 85 6. 43 Dueck (2000) 88. 44 If Strabo was indeed in Rome during the years 20 BCE to at least 7 BCE as Dueck asserts, then he paign.


44 for their achievements. 45 Th e poems which chiefly serve this function are 4.4 and 4.14. If Horace was being pushed to write about Drusus and Tiberius, how forced are the encomiastic statements in Carmina these poems as artificial or unn atural in tone, or would they have viewed them as a certainly impossible to know. We must keep in mind, however, that as Horace writes about Drusus in 4.4 and 4.14, he is partic ipating in Augustan propaganda. 46 Carm i n a 4.4 begins in grand Pindaric fashion, likening Drusus to an eagle and a lion cub. 47 offering gran deur through two parallel simil es which cascade along majestically for 28 lines to conclude with Nerones 48 A connection is made in typical panegyric fashion 18 22, this epinician provides the read er with a lofty image of the mighty commander Drusus. 49 Pindarizing lines 1 50 Johnson similarly questions this ode and wonders whether 45 Carmina 4, see Fraenkel (1957) 364, 410; White (1993) 128 32. 46 For more about how these odes relate to other forms of Augustan propaganda, especially the Ara Pacis see Benario (1960). 47 For more on Pindaric elements in this ode and for an in depth analysis, see Johnson (2004) 98 114. 48 Fraenkel (1957) 426. 49 For possible explanations of lines 18 22, see Fraenkel (1957) 428 30. Fraekel (1957) 430 suggests that Horace may be using these li especially if he could be sure that Drusus would take the point and appreciate the indirect compliment 1. 50 Lyne (1995) 201.


45 Horace is writing serious epinician or a parody. He ultimately concludes that Horace is tactfully affirming, denying, and the n 51 accomplishments from talents and virtues learned or inborn, in this ode he surely emerges as a figure praiseworthy in multiple respects. Carm ina 4.14 is not nearly as focused on Drusus as 4.4, but it still offers some praise to him in conjunction with Augustus and Tiberius. 52 The lofty style in this poem is like that of 4.4: a long, unbroken opening filled with Pindaric grandeur. 53 Augustus is the addressee of this ode, and when Drusus is praised for his military accompli shments, Augustus receives praise through him. 54 Indeed Drusus must be seen as an admirable figure himself if he is considered an adequate conduit through which to honor Augustus. Velleius wrote after Horace during the time of Tiberius, and his work is als o influenced by the empe r or (see Appendix A p. 187 ) It is clear that Velleius had a lofty impression of Drusus. Like other authors, Velleius describ es military achievements in Germania st the R h aeti and Vin delici, record ing his success es against strongholds as well as in the field, adding that more damage was done to the enemy than to the Romans, and that Drusus was able to prevail in spite of a difficult foe ( 2.95.1 2). This praise once again underscore s Dr talent in military affairs. While the information offered by the Periochae and Strabo is 51 Johnson (1969) 171, 179. 52 Carmina 4.14 is directed more towards praise of Tiberius than of Drusus, and Fraekel (1957) 431 in fact labels it as an epinician for Tiberius, the counterpart to 4.4, the epinician for Drusus. For an in depth analysis of 4.14, see Johnson (2004) 181 98. 53 Fraenk el (1957) 432. 54 Fraenkel (1957) 431.


46 quite brief and uncolored, Velleius provides the reader w ith a sparkling image of Drusus at 2.97.2 3. This passage is the lengthiest extant description of Drusus physical traits. He is praised highly in regards to his leadership talents, his personality, and his appearance. Then his success and early death are mentioned. Why would Velleius speak so highly of Drusus ? First one must consider 55 His paternal grandfather was a wel l respected Roman knight who s er v ed as praefectus fabrum under Tiberius Claudiu s Nero. 56 Velleius makes sure to mention the singularem amicitiam which existed seems he was praetor equitum in the Rhine army in the years preceding 4 CE, when his son Velleius took over his post (2.104.3). Sumner deduces that if amicitia existed between and between Velleius and Tiberius, there is likelihood that it also existed between and Tiberius, perhaps i n a military context. He concludes Later may have come service under Tiberius (and his 57 personally or at least heard stories about his life and accomplishments while stationed also probably heard much about in that part of Germania. He may have 55 Sumner (1970) 265. 56 Sumner (1970) 263 4. 57 Sumner (1970) 265.


47 seen some of the importa nt sites associated with Drusus and may have known men who had served under him. T he same year Velleius succeeded his father as praetor equitum in the Rhine army, Tiberius was adopted by Augustus and then sent to the Rhine himself as supreme commander. 58 As Tibe Velleius traveled 59 Upon returning to Rome in 6 CE, Ve lleius was elected quaestor, perhaps with the help of Tiberius. 60 With a revolt in Pannonia and Illyricum soon following, Velleius was sent to deliver troops to Tiberius (2.111.3), and after returning to Rome he was sent back again as a legatus Augusti (2.1 11.4). At the end of 8 CE Tiberius departed for Dalmatia leaving Velleius behind to serve under Marcus Lepidus, but the two were reunited when moved south to join Tiberius in Dalmatia (2.115.2). Velleius r returning to Rome. He participated in the praetorship as one of the candidati Caesaris 61 Sumner postulates that he may have even held further positions later on in life. 62 All this is to say Velleius was active in military and political affairs at the beginning of the first century CE and had a good relationship with Tiberius. This could accou 58 Sumner (1970) 268. 59 Sumner (1970) 270. 60 Sumner (1970) 271. 61 Sumner (1970) 274. 62 Sumner (1970) 276 7.


48 Drusus. But does his connection with Tiberius and his family force him to be biased, or does his connection enable him to speak more accurately about Drusus? Sumner and Woodman have suggested that Velleius may not deserve the harsh criticism he has received from scholars over time. His contribution to Roman history is often underestimated. His focus on the person of Tiberius in the latter part of book 2 has led scholars like Syme to label his work as panegyr ic 63 Although he had an attachment to Tiberius, his history reflects many of the same traits found in the works of other, well respected historians. Although early Roman authors l ike Fabius Pictor and Cato the E lder avoided the practice, later writers lik e Cicero, Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus embraced in their works portraits of important individuals and oftentimes centered their narratives military affairs of the end of the first century BCE, requires a heavy presence of the commander in chief Tiberius should not so quick ly be labeled as b iased. H is connection of Drusus. Valerius Maximus was also alive and writing during the reign of Tiberius. 64 He completed his collection of stories in 31 CE (see Appendix A p.189 ) 65 But little about his life is known. He tells us himself that he was friends with Sextus Pompeius, consul in 14 CE. He was not rich. It does not seem that he had any connections to Tiberius, however 63 Syme (1971) 48, 33. See Woodman (1977) 28 56 for a background on this accusation. 64 to Tacitus. 65 Walker (2004) xiii.


49 this cannot be argued from silence. What can be said with certainty is that Valerius promoted the mos maiorum with his stories. 66 One of the more touching examples displaying the relationship between Drusus and Tiberius comes from Facta et Dicta Memorabilia 5.5.3 This story is meant to illustrate the special connection which ought to exist between brothers. Valeriu s writes that Tiberius had such great affection for his brother that when he heard of hi s illness, he quickly made a dangerous journey to reach him. Valerius proceeds to describ e the kindness Drusus showed his brother upon his arrival and concludes his sto appropriately be placed beside theirs than the love of Castor and Pollux 67 A similar picture of brotherly love appears in the words of Claudius in Consolatio ad Polyb ium (see Appendix A p. 190 ) Seneca designs a t ragic scene when he po rtrays the successful military commander Drusus The troops so loved Drusus that they wished to claim his body, but Tiberius led by example and checked his own grief so that the troops might restrain themselves. This passage not only sheds more light on the perception of Dr but it also illustrates the emotional attachment his troops and brother had to him. Consolatio a d Marciam (see Appendix A p p 190 1) praises Drusus for his accomplishments, but is primarily focused on the sadness his death brought to the people and most of all to Livia. The fact that Seneca uses Drusus more than once as an 66 Conte (1994) 381. 67 Val. Max. 8: his scio equidem nullum aliud qua m Castoris et Pollucis specimen consanguineae caritatis conuenienter adici posse


50 exemplary candidate for dee p mourning years after Drusus had actually died speaks to the power his name carried for the Romans even in the middle of the first century CE. When reading the s e passage s of S eneca, one must remember that they come from the genre consolatio The very gen re in which he works demands that t he author deal with his subject in a dramatic but delicate way. The deceased of any consolatio is surrounded by the tragic and the emotional, and is certainly presented in a flattering light. 68 Seneca, however, is writing years after Drusus, Augustus, and even Tiberius. He does not have to worry about the pressures of writing under the eyes of these men, but he does have Nero. Nero was the great grandson of Drusus, so anything Seneca wrote involving Drusus was likely to be of interest to Nero. Seneca had to extract information about Drusus from another source and then exercise caution about this material and its arrangement. Much more elaborate in its expression of mourning for Drusus is the Consolatio ad Liviam de Morte Dr usi (see Appendix A p. 193) This pseudo Ovidian piece is puzzling not only in its authorship, but also in its date. Most scholars, however, argue for dates that are pre Tacitean. 69 This poem shows sadness for the loss of the beloved son of Livia and a leader of the people. One of the more poignant passages describes (85 94) Tiberius, weeping and disheveled from grief, sits with his brother until his last moment. Here we can again observe the closeness of the two brothers, but u 68 For a brief background on the consolatory tradition, see Gibson (2006) xxxi iv. 69 For a discussion of possible dates for this text, see Schoonhoven (1992) Chapter 2. Scho onhoven (1992) 39 suggests a date of 54 CE and rejects the possibility that the piece was written during the Renaissance.


51 resses his depth of mourning mores a nd res gestae are prominent (13 20) He is hailed as a Roman exemplum excellent in war and peace, and his deeds near the Alps and in Germania are praised. This passage indicates that upon his death, Drusus was particularly remembered for his good characte r, his military an d political accomplishments, his bond with his brother, and his duty to Rome. Many similar statements of praise are made throughout the entire C onsolatio It is impossible to know if the author of the Consolatio ad Liviam had any conne ct ions to the imperial family since the author is questionable. In his commentary 70 If t his work is indeed pre Tacitean, perhaps the author knew Livia, Tiberius, or even Drusus personally, thus creating a heartfelt poem of imperial mourning. W e must remind ourselves however, that the work is a consolatio By convention it is meant to be overly dramatic and it is meant to portray the deceased in a perfect light. These works may have been known to Tacitus, but it is difficult to know how they may have influenced his text since he discusses none of them dir ectly. 71 It seems reasonable for example, to think that Velleius, a man who gained senatorial rank and wrote a summary of Roman history, was referred to by Tacitus. 72 But Devillers believes 70 Schoonhoven (1992) 37. See Schrijvers (1988) for some background on some of the arguments concerning the date. 71 The only author of this group mentioned directly by Tacitus is Livy ( Ann 4.34). Tacitus extols him as a 72 See Syme (1958) 277 for this suggestion.


52 him. 73 Pag n, however, has recently made a convincing argument that Tacitus did his own text. 74 Whatever the case, we must keep in mind the poss ibility that the works of these authors were extant i tion on Drusus that These early authors, then, are writing at various times before Tacitus, with various purposes in v arious genres. Each author also is writing under the close watch of an emperor and is dealing with certain pressure s and expectations, either directly or texts has the pot ential to amplify parts of the Annals Let us now turn to examine these early primary sources thematically, and investigate what overarching messages they send about Drusus. When these earlier authors write about Drusus, the main features which surface are his military accomplis hments, his good character, his relationship with Tiberius, his death, and the resultant mourning. These are the same sort of features Tacitus focuses on when he writes about Germanicus in the Annals M ilitary A ccomplishme nts Drusus is best remembered for his military accomplishments. Almost e very source above, at least in passing, mentions the victories he won for Rome. 75 The 73 Devillers (2003) 32. 74 See Pag n (2010) 141 56, especially 152 3. 75 his purpose, which is to demonstrate brotherly love between Drusus and Tiberius. Auth ors as late as


53 Periochae outline his career from R h aetia (book 138) and Gaul (book 139) to the Rhine and its various tribes (books 139 142) Strabo mentions his naval victory over the Bructeri ( and credits him with the subjugation of most of the German tribes along the Rhine ( 6) Velleius praises him for his deeds against the R h aeti and Vindeli ci (2.95.1 2) and the Germans (2.97.3) Horace likewise cites his victory over the R h aeti and Vindelici ( Carm. 4.4.17 28) and then against the Genauni and the Breuni ( Carm. 4.14.10 1 ) (15.5) and particula rly emphasizes the extent of his incursion into Germania ( Ad Marciam 6.3.1), while the C onsolatio ad Liviam cites his deeds against the Suevi and Sicambri (311 2) and lists the many other places and peoples he encounte red (384 92). Throughout these descrip subjugation of his foes the ir ferocity, the ease of his victories, and the glory that he brought to Rome. Periochae book 140 suggests thorough domination by naming several tribes subdued by Drusus, and then adding aliae gentes ( Cherusci, Tencteri, Chauci aliaeque Germanorum trans Rhenum gentes subactae ). 76 Strabo says Drusus conquered not only most of the tribes near th e Rhine, but also many islands (7.1.3 .54 5 ). At 2.95.2 Velleius uses the word perdomuerunt to describe the thorough defeat of the R h aeti and Vinde lici by Drusus and Tiberius. At 2.97.3 Velleius calls Drusus the conqueror of Germania and writes that he caus ed its tribes much bloodshed ( Sed illum magna ex parte domitorem Germaniae, plurimo eius gentis variis in locis profuso sanguine ). Orosius associate great military achievement with Drusus: at 6.21.12 7 Orosius stresses not only the 76 Cf. Orosius 6.21.12 7 where many conq thorough domination by adding that the Marcomanni were slaughtered almost to the point of extinction.


54 Horace expresses complete subjugation more metaphorically in his descriptions of the eagle and the lion cub ( Carm. 4.4.1 16) then calls the Vindelici consiliis iuuenis reuicta e ( Carm. 4.4.24) At Carmina 4.14 .13 Horace uses the word deiecit to describe what C onsolatio ad Polybium 15.5 the depth of nia is implied with the phrase intima Germaniae recludentem while in the C onsolatio ad Marciam it is said that Drusus brought the standards to a place so deep into Germania that the people there hardly knew the Romans existed (6.3.1). I n the Consolatio ad Liviam Drusus is praised along with Tiberius for the many peoples which they routed so often ( pulsus totiens hostis 38 4). Towards the end of the poem Drusus is called ignoti victor Germanicus orbis (457) a title which surely asserts the completeness of his military success. When the conquered are fierce, the accomplishment s of the conqueror seem greater, and Drusus is frequently depicted facing a fierce foe. 77 At 2 .95.2 Velleius writes that Drusus defeated gentes locis tutissimas, aditu difficillimas, nu mero frequentes, feritate truces At Carmina 4.4 .22 3 the Vindelici are described as diu / lateque uictrices cateruae At Carmina 4.14 .10 1 Drusus easily defeats the Genaunos, implacidum genus, / Breunosque veloces Seneca portrays Drusus subjecting gentes ferocissimas to Roman rule. Ye t Drusus conquers with ease. At 2.95.2 Velleius states that Drusus caused much damage to the enemy and little damage to the Romans ( maiore cum periculo quam damno Romani exercitus plurimo cum earum sanguine ). In the Consolati o ad Liviam he sets the enemy to flight and brings new glory to Rome ( inque fugam barbara terga dedit, / Ignotumque tibi meruit, Romane, triumphum, / Protulit in 77 This concept can be seen also in texts as late as Orosius. At 6.21.12 7 Orosius emphasizes the strength, size, and courage of the Germans as well as their feritas


55 terras imperiumque novas 18 20 later in the consolatio when the author predicts their everlasting fame: Facta ducis vivent operosaque gloria rerum: Haec manet, haec avidos effugit una rogos. Pars erit historiae totoque legetur in aevo Seque opus ingeniis carminibusque dabit. won glory of his exploits; this abides, this alone escapes the greedy pyres. It will be a part of history, and will be read in every age, and will be a theme for writers and for poets. (365 8) 78 invoking the memoria the troops have of him (Tac. Ann 1 .43, 2 .8). Germanicus hopes that his own military accomplishments will also be successful and pra ys to his father for his aid (2 .8). As Germanicus attempts the same endeavors, he strives for the same loits by visiting some o f the same locations and rebuilding the same structures Drusu s transferred to Germanicus. Certain passages in the Annals concerning Germanicus call to mind these military features of Drusus from earlier auth ors. For example, according to Periochae book 138 and 139 Drusus conducted a census in Gaul early in his career ( A Druso census actus est 138; et tumultus, qui ob censum exortus in Gallia erat, componitur 139). When reader s of Tacitus comes upon Germanic us conducting a census in Gaul at Annals 1 .31 ( regimen summae rei penes Germanicum agendo Galliarum censui tum intentum ) and Annals 1 .33 ( Interea Germanico per Gallias, ut diximus, census accipienti ), they might 78 Text and translation from Mozley (1929).


56 be reminded of Drusus engaging in this same activity in the same place in approximately the same phase of his career. 79 As Drusus experiences a tumultus shortly after conducting the census in Gaul ( Periochae 139), Germanicus faces a mutiny ( Tac. Ann 1 .31 49). However, from Annals 1 .50 onwards through the end of the German campaigns (2.26), Tacitus portrays es reminiscent of Drusus The attack against the Marsi at Annals 1 .50 51 is such a complete slaughter (though Tacitus concedes that the foe was drunken and unsuspecting) that no harm is done to the Romans ( sine vulnere milites 1 .51, cf. Vell. Pat. 2.95.2 maiore cum periculo quam damno Romani exercitus ). With encouragement from Germanicus, the troops proceed to defeat the Bructe ri, Tubantes, and Usipetes Their success gives the men confidence as they are station ed in their winter camp ( 1 .51). The Drusus ed several more times in book 2 a s Germanicus matures in military compete nce. At Annals 2 .1 8 when Germanicus fights Arminius and the Cherusci, he earns a great victory without bloodshed ( magna ea victoria neque cruenta nobis fuit ). There is a massive slaughter covering a great span of time and space and a trophy is raised. As the German tribes regroup ( 2 .19), Germanicus prepares for another victory by discov ( 2 .20). 80 Germanicus rides into battle encouraging his troops to slaughter, and indeed he insists on complete 79 See Furneaux (1896) 222: Drusus in 12 BCE was the first to revise the census which Augustus had insti tuted in 27 BCE. Germanicus later revises it again. 80 Devillers (2003) 148 writes that the fact the Germans are able to regroup for another battle shows that to be.


57 victory by discouraging th e taking of captives and promoting full extermination of the enemy ( orabatque insisterent caedibus nil opus captivis, solam internicionem gentis finem bello fore 2 .21). Total victory is achieved once again with much blood lost by the enemy ( ceterae ad noctem cruore hostium satiatae sunt 2 .21). Germanicus proclaims this success with the phrase debellatis ...nationibus inscribed on a monument ( debellatis inter Rhenum Albimque nationibus exercitum Tiberii Caesaris ea monimenta Marti et Iovi et Augusto sacr avisse 2 .22 ) continues even after the disasters experienced by his fleet ( 2 .23 4). As he advances his enemies dare not face him, or if they do, they are repelled ( 2 .25). The Roman s under Germanicus are considered invincible ( quippe invictos et nullis casibu s superabilis Romanos praedicabant 2 .25). Perhaps oth ers were equally convinced of Germanicu s ability to achieve complete victory, since it was thought that just one more camp aign season might bring the war to a close, but Tiberius refuses and recalls him to Rome (2.26) 81 For the sake of appearances the war is considered finished ( 2 .41). Later on Tacitus seems to imply that Germanicus, like Ale xander, would have completely subdued his enemy if only he had not been hindered ( 2 .73). Drusus, although he enjoyed much military success in Germania is also unable to bring the German campaigns to a full close. As we will see, Drusus also may have been recalled 81 See Devillers (2003) 148 9 concerning the favor for Germanicus shown in this passage.


58 by the emperor from his province, but our pre Tacitean sources merely report that h cut his o perations in Germania short. 82 haracter In addition to his military success, these early sources highly praise character. Horace praises Augustus for raising a stepson with such a great mind and character ( quid mens rite, quid indoles 4.4.25 ). Consolatio ad Marciam sserted not only that he was a great leader but that he would have been a great emperor as well. This statement is followed by remarks about the love he gets from the people, the respect he gets from his enemies, and the fact that he died for his country. His triumph like funeral parade nicely caps off what looks like a portrait of the perfect war hero. The Consolatio ad Liviam as dictated by its genre, naturally offers repeated praise for the deceased. N ear the opening of the poem Drusus is hailed as exe mplum iuvenis venerabile morum (13). And later he is awarded superlatives and is identified with spes and gloria ( maximus ille quidem iuvenum spes publica vixit / Et qua natus erat gloria summa domus 365 6). H is many virtues connect him to his brother Tib erius ( nec tu, tot turba bonorum, / Omnis cui virtus contigit, unus eras 79 80 ) And at the end of the poem a statement which echoes Tiberius is really meant: Est tibi (sitque precor) multorum filius instar (471). This positive chara c terization of Drusus seems to prefigure Germanicus. In fact, mind, it sounds li ke it describes him quite well. Woodman analyzes Velleius passage on 82 Suet. Claud 1.5 hints at this rumor of Augustus recalling Drusus. More about this passage will be discussed below.


59 Drusus into three part s: six character, one and a half campaign, and one line on his death. 83 Tacitus focuses on these same feature s when he describes Germanicus. ingenium and comitas immediately after commenting on how the people equate d the young man with his father ( Ann 1.33) A fter his death Germanicus ( Ann 2.73 ) (Vell. Pat. 2.97.2 3) is noted for his virtues, his beauty ( corpora decoro cf. Vell. Pat. pul chritudo corporis ), and his death at around 30 years of age ( haud multum triginta annos egressum cf. Vell. Pat. agentem annum tricesimum ). He is also said to have been kind to his friends ( mitem erga amicos cf. Vell. Pat. adversus amicos aequa ) and is remembered for d oing damage against the Germans but not quite completely subjugating them ( praepeditusque sit perculsas tot victoriis Germanias servitio premere cf. Vell. Pat. illum magna ex parte domitorem Germaniae, plurimo eius gentis variis in locis p rofuso sanguine ). 84 emphasize their good nature, their mil itary accomplishments in Germania and their premature deaths. A nother telling character sketch of Germanicus occur s in the Annals at 2 .13 when Tacitus describes Germanicus sneaking around the military camp to hear what his own 83 Woodman ( 1977) 43. 84 Tac. Ann 2.73: sed hunc mitem erga amicos, modicum voluptatum, uno matrimonio, certis liberis egisse, neque minus proeliatorem, etiam si temeritas afuerit praepeditusque sit perculsas tot victoriis Germanias servitio premere s, had restraint in pleasures, one wife, and legitimate children, and was no less a fighter, even if rashness was lacking and he was hindered from suppressing Germany which he had struck down


60 troops are saying about him. 85 Germanicus is praised not only for noble features (cf. Vell. Pat. pulchritudo corporis ) but for his level headedne ss (cf. Vell. Pat. par sui aestimatio inimitabilis ). Also, the comitas which Tacitu s uses to describe Germanicus (1.33, 2.13, 2 .72) seems very much like the morum certe dulcedo ac suavitas of Drusus (Vell. Pat. 2.97.3). Upon his death, Germani character is praised once more. 86 Comitas is emphasized again, as well as his physical appearance and good rapport with others. T he word venerabilis is used for Germanicus, just as it is used for Drusus in the Consolatio ad Liviam (13), a nd the grandeur an d dignity attributed to Germanicus surely makes him an exemplum like Drusus (13). Overall, both father and son are chara c terized as model Roman leaders. Drusus and Tiberius It is interesting to note that Drusus rarely is mentioned without his brother Tibe rius. Indeed the two brothers were often involved in military affairs simultaneously, thus writers could hardly praise one without bringing up the other. Periochae book 138 says that Drusus defeated the R h aeti alongside his brother. Velleius also witness ed their partnership in this undertaking (2.95.1). Tiberius even appears in 85 Tac. Ann. 2.13 : fruiturque fama sui, cum hic nobilitatem ducis, decorem alius, plurimi patientiam, comitatem, per seria per iocos eundem animum laudibus ferrent reddendamque gratiam in acie faterentur the leader, another his appearance, many his patience, his kindness, his same demeanor in serious and light hearted matters and they admitted that thanks ought to be paid back in ba 86 Tac. Ann 2.72 : tanta illi comitas in socios, mansuetudo in hostis; visuque et auditu iuxta venerabilis, cum magnitudinem et gravitatem summae fortunae retineret, invidiam et adrogantiam eff ugerat, So great was his kindness towards allies, his mildness towards enemies; he was venerable in appearance and voice alike, while he upheld the gra ndeur and dignity of the highest fortune, he escaped envy and arrogance.


61 Velleius writes that his personal beauty was second only to that of his brother ( nam pulchritudo corporis proxima fraternae fuit 2.97.3). A fter Horace finishes praising Drusus directly, he praises Augustus for nurturing not just Drusus, but both boys ( quid Augusti paternus / in pueros animus Nerones 4.4.27 8 ). Valerius Maximus presents Tiberius and Drusus as exemplary brothers, like Castor and Pollux. When he h eard of self in danger, riding non stop even As for C onsolatio ad Polybium portray s Tiberius stepping up and The Consolatio ad Marciam And both the C onsolatio ad Liviam 169 72 and the Consolatio ad Polybium as well as Periochae book 142 attest that it was Tiberius who was with Drusus when he died and then oversaw the transpor t of the body back to Rome. The Consolatio ad Liviam binds the two brothers together repeatedly. At the very opening of the poem Livia is hailed mater Neronum no longer (1). She only has half ( dimidium ) of that title and no longer has to ask uter? (6) when someone refers to her son. Many other words and phrases throughout the work bind the brothers as a close pair, like alter ( duplicis sors altera partus 121; maior an alter 150) and pars ( pars Neronum 145; pars partus 472). Thus the Consolatio ad Liviam implies a close bond between the two brothers. Considering the close ties between Drusus and Tiberius, the animosity shown Germanicus by Tiberius is s hocking. Tacitus himself when he first introduces Germanicus calls this animosity iniquae (1 .33 ) Tacitus makes several references to the


62 apparent animositie s between uncle and nephew. At Ann als 1 .52 Ti berius disapproves of the way Germanicus handles the troops after the mutiny. Tiberius is also not happy about G the Teutoburg f orest and one of the speculat ed reasons is that Tiberius interpreted unfavorably (1 .62) Tiberius al so shows displeasure with Ger manicus when he visits Egypt Not only did Germanicus break sanctions of Augustus by visiting there without permission, but Tiberius also (2 .59). Tacitus shows more animosity betwe en uncle and nephew by suggesting that Tiberius was jealous of Germanicus. At Ann als 2 .5 Tiberius is eager to move Germanicus to the troublesome East where he might encounter dangers. Germanicus equently wis hes to hasten victory in Germania ( 2 .5). W hen he achieves success, he erects an inscription with debellatis inter Rhenum Albimque nationibus exercitum Tiberii Caesaris ea monimenta Marti et Iovi et Augusto sacravisse 2 .22) but not his own, partly for fear of jealousy ( 2 .22). 87 When Tiberius recalls him to Rome, Germanicus perceives the true reason to be jealousy ( 2 .26). disingenuous feelings for Germanicus are obvious especially when Germanicus is sent to the East. Pis o is said to have been put in place to thwart him, possibly by the order of Tiberius ( 2 .43). By this point Tiberius animosity seems clear to others and for his nephew makes people favor Germanicus even more ( 2 .43). The stressed rela tionship between Tib erius and his nephew even extend s 87 omission of information can be in the interpretation of the text.


63 suspicions of Tiberius were supposedly whis pered by the dying commander (2 .72). surprise the rea der who is familiar with the repeated references to the brotherly love of Tiberius for Drusus expressed by earlier authors. This disparity may serve to increase the shock effect one gets when reading about Tiber son in th e Annals The fact that an uncle should act in such a way towards a nephew Drusus Death and M ou rning for Drusus At Annals 3 of Germanicus. comparison. According to Periochae book 142, Drusus dies on the frontier of the empire from an accident: he falls from his horse and injures his leg. He lingers f or thirty days before he passes. Velleius points to fatorum iniquitas (2.97.3). Germanicus also dies on the frontier and also unexpectedly F ortune does not smile on Ger manicus either. He lingers on for what seems to be a significant am ount of time: he falls ill at Ann als 2 .69 and remains in precarious health long enough for Piso to hesitate, disperse wishers at Ant ioch, and travel to Seleucia Germanicus seems to get well during this time ( recreatum ), only to fall ill again ( aegritudinem, quae rursum Germanico acciderat 2 .69). Piso is denounced by Germanic us and leaves Syria immediately but has time to make it to K os before he hea eath ( Ann 2.70, 2 .75). Meanwhile, Germanicus has some time in which his spirits are raised ( 2 .71) before he regresses towards his death. Although Tacitus compresses


64 wavering condition suggest that Germanicus actually was sick for a considerable period of time. Thus both father and son suffer for a long time before their passing, and as Germanicus has Agrippina at his bedside ( 2 .72), Drusus has his brother Tiberius. Ye t in a way, Tiberius is present at both deaths. He is physically in attendance at Consolatio ad Liviam ence at Germani Ann als 2 .72 Tiberius is present as a whisper, a fear just before Germanicus expires ( alia secreto per quae ostendisse credebatur metum ex Tiberio other things were said in secret, through which he was believed to have shown his fear of Tib erius ). As noted by Strabo ( 7.1.3 ) and in Periochae book 142, Drusus dies on campaign. According to Consolatio ad Polybium 15.5 and Consolatio ad Liviam 169 170, h is soldiers are distraught and wis h to claim the body themselves Yet Tiberius makes sure the body returns to Rome for its proper rites ( Periochae book 142, Seneca Consolatio ad Polybium 15.5, Consolatio ad Liviam 171 76). Germanicus also dies on campaign, but his body does not return intact. His wife Agrippina is the escort, and the body is cr emated Tiberius rushed out to meet his b rother and was sure to escort his body to Rome; yet he shows little concern for Germanicus and does not go out to meet the procession ( 3 .2). Indeed he does not even go to the city gates ( 3.5) or lea ve the palace (3 .3). Moreover, he does not see to it that Germanicus receive full rites. Tacitus points out that Germanicus, in contrast to Drusus, does not even receive the honors of a nobl eman, and the people notice (3 .5).


65 e city, the people mourn deeply. In the Consolatio ad Liviam the city groans ( Urbs gemit 181) and grief is public ( luctus...publicus 66). Crowds weep ( Obvia turba ruit lacrimisque rigantibus ora / Consulis erepti publica damna refert 199 200) and people of all ages mourn ( Omnis adest aetas, maerent iuvenesque senesque 203). The whole city grieves ( Invenit tota maeror in Urbe locum 294) and indeed the pain could fill the ages ( Iste potest implere dolor vel saecula tota 77). The same widespread grief ca n be seen at Consolatio ad Marciam 6.3.1. Not only provinces, too, are affected ( ingens ciuium prouinciarumque et totius Italiae desiderium ). People come from all over as if to see a triumph instead of a funeral. Mourning for Germanicus is just as extensive, if not more so. On his deathbed Germanicus states that even strangers will weep for him ( flebunt Germanicum etiam ignoti Ann 2 .71), and his predicti on seems immediately t rue. At Ann als 2 .72 the province, surrounding peoples, and foreign kings show sorrow at once. When news of Annals 2 .82, he is associated with Drusus through the statement that rulers dislike civil minded sons. Then the reaction of the people is given. The city closes down ( desererentur fora, clauderentur domus ) and there are groans ( passim silentia et gemitus 2.82 ). When Agrippina arrives in Annals 3 .1, mourning is again widespread. Not only do Agrippina and her retinue show continued grief, but for him in Consolati o ad Polybium 15.5 at Annals 3 .1 many office r s and men who served under Germanicus are present. As Germanicus predicted, many strangers


66 attend ( multique etiam ignoti vicinis e municipiis ). Mourners come out in crowds ( maerentium turba ) and one cannot tell the laments of kin sman from those of strangers, neque discerneres proximos alienos, virorum feminarumve planctus ). As the procession moves towards Rome ( 3 .2), the people are in black ( atrata ), they make offerings, and they show thei r pain with tears and crying ( lacrimis et conclamationibus dolorem testabantur ). mourning, Tiberius speaks at Ann als 3 .6 in a way which Consolatio ad Polybium He sets a limit on mourning, saying that after initial grief, the heart must be strengthened. He proceeds to relate many themes that echo the Consolatio ad Liviam He cites examples of famous people who have mourned and been mourned, he states that death even touches the imperial family, and he asserts that excessive grief is not befitting of the imperial family (cf. Consolatio ad Liviam 59 70, 473 4 ). Although Tiberius essentially delivers his own miniature consolatio here and echoes themes from the Cons olatio ad Polybium and Consolatio ad Liviam his motives are different from those that underlie these other two works. He is not genuine in his attempt to comfort the people, but rather Tacitus states that his purpose is to suppress the talk of the people ( utque premeret vulgi sermones ), especially those who in Annals 3 I ndeed at Annals 3 .5 the people observe that the way Tiberius treats Germanicus does not correspond to the way Augustus treated Drusus. Our e arlier sources allow us Periochae book 142, Augustus ertainly the man who nurtured the Drusus in Horace Carmina 4.4 grieved greatly when he lost this heir. In the Co nsolatio ad Livam


67 88 At Annals 3 .5 the people wonder why there are no laudations and tears for Germanicus ( ubi illa veterum instituta, propositam toro effigiem, meditata ad memoriam virtutis carmina e t laudationes et lacrimas vel doloris imitamenta ? on the bier, the songs commemorating the memory of his virtue and eulogies and tears ). grieve over his loss. Livia is of course the addressee of the Consolatio ad Liviam so she is portrayed several times in deep mourning. At the beginning of the poem she must see Drusus return to the city during his funeral instead of his triumph (25 36). At the end of the poem she can scarcely eat or drink without the comfort of Augustus and Tiberius (417 22). She is encouraged by the author to control her grief as is befitting to her station (350 4; 473 4). Control of grief is an expected subject in a con solatio and it appears in the Consolatio ad Marciam as well. At 6.3.2 Livia is pained repeatedly as pyres of others remind her of her own loss, but once Drusus is laid to rest, her grief is put aside and Livia acts as a model mourner. At 6.4.1 6.5.3 Livia is beseeched to behave as an exemplary mourner for the sake of all those around her. Perhaps Livia in the Annals tries to follow this advice. L ike Tiberius, she does not leave the palace upon t possible r easons: either public grieving was considered below her station ( inferius maiestate sua rati si palam lamentarentur Ann 3 .3), or she was afraid of revealing her joy. Knowledge of her portrayal in the consolationes might tempt one to believe the former, a lthough Tacitus compel s his reader to believe the latter. 88 Drusus / A magno lacrimas Caesare quartus habet, 71 2; Et voce et lacrimis laudasti, Caesar, alumnum, 209; Denique laudari sacrato Caesaris ore / Emerui, lacrimas elicuique deo, 465 6.


68 The section of the C onsolatio ad Liviam 327), is really quite tender and recalls the grief felt for Germanicus by Agrippina. Although Antonia was not presen t by the side of her dying husband as Agrippina was, the author of the C onsolatio ad Liviam describes how Drusus wished her there and called out to her as he was dying and his tongue was growing cold (307 8). Germanicus also devote s his last words to his w ife ( Ann 2.72). Like Agrippina ( Ann 2 .73), Antonia was 6), and was left with children (one of whom was Germanicus himself) a 4). Both men are greatly grieved by their wives long after their deaths. Thus both Drusus and Germanicus are mourned deeply by the people, the military, and their wives. Earlier sources seem to show that Drusus was deeply mourned also by Tiberius and Li via, and so one might expect them also to show sorrow and compassion when his son passes. But when the opposite happens in the Annals and Germanicus is not mourned by Tiberius and Livia, at least not openly, their reaction to Germanicu uch more appal ling, and Tacitus is thus able to make Tiberius and Livia appear that much more guilty and villainous. Drusus in Parallel and Post Tacitean Author s Thus far we have examined p re Tacitean authors who may have influenced Tacitus directly, or may have used the same sources as Tacitus. Not all early sources concerning Drusus are extant, but the remaining authors can help give us an idea of what information might be missing to us. Authors that are contemp oraneous with and later than Tacitus can also help us fill in the missing pieces of the Drusus tradition on which Tacitus was building. It is important to consider what some of these later author s


69 say about Drusus since they too may have obtained informati on from the same sources used by Tacitus Flor us, Cassius Dio and Suetonius all lived and wrote at the sam e time or shortly after Tacitus All three authors cover the affairs of Drusus in enough detail to show that Drusus was still a person worth talkin g about in the second century CE. When contemporary and n ear contemporary authors mention Drusus in their texts, they bring Drusus into the minds of readers so Drusus stands out more readily when they pi ck up Of particular interest in these authors are detai ls about his activity in Germania Annals may have been reminded of these passages while following Germanicus on his own journey through Germania and while reading about the aftermath of since Tacitus seems to encourage such connections. It seems difficult, for instance, to the funeral honors of Drusus when Tacitus writes about honors to those of Germanicus, especially since Tacitus is brief about the details of ancestors and things which later generations invented (3 .5), he seems to invite the reader to reach back into their knowledge stores to supply further information with which to make their own comparison between Drusus and Germanicus. With extra information t becomes amplified and suggestions of dishonor against Germanicus become all the more grave. complement each other may suggest that these authors used the same sources as


70 Tacitus. Syme notes Suetonius and Dio go in harmony with Tacitus. Detail and selection, emphasis and 89 Syme plays with the idea that Tacitus and Dio may have w orked from a common source, but he remains skeptical, arguing that there are a few similarities between the two, but many differences. 90 passages in Dio (and also in Suetonius) derive from the ultimate source, or rather sources, of Taci tus, too many unknown factors are involved. 91 Devillers also is skeptical when discussing the supposed common source of Tacitus and Dio, but still notes the possibil i Ignoti. 92 These parallel and post Tacitean sources also remind us that we are reading sources about Drusus which are no longer available to us, thus there may be more intertextuali ch w e simply cannot decode. But we can try to identify passages where Tacitus seems to be making character connections and then try to amplify our knowledge of those passages with what does exist in other authors. Florus and Cassius Dio offer similar informati on about Drusus. They both relate ements and activities in Germania in great detail. Therefore we will use in Germania to those of his father. Our focus will be topographic al. Suetoni us offers some of the same sort of 89 Syme (1958) 271. 90 Syme (1958) 271 3. See also Potter (2012). 91 Syme (1958) 273 4. 92 Devillers (2003) 27.


7 1 detail but then turns to focus heavily Drusus and Germanicus in Germania : A Topographic al Comparis on Florus, a near cont emporary of Tacitus, includes a rather large section about Drusus and the German war (2.30.23 8 see Appendix A p. 193 ) The passage mainly follows D listing the tribes he encountered and t racing his steps through Germania The passage ends with his death and the honor awarded him by the senate. Cassius Dio an author writing a bit later than Tacitus, writes extensively about Dru sus in several passages and relates his military career in great detail (see Appendix A p p 196 9) 93 Dio describes the actions of Drusus and Tiberius against the Rhaetians (54.22.1, 3 4) and Germania against various tribes (54.32.2 33.2) What is perhaps most valuable from Florus and Dio is the detail with which Drusus are recorded. It seems as though these f the information from our earlier authors, invites comparisons betwee journey in Germania footsteps and if he is in fact rebuilding what his father built. We can corroborate the words eadem and vestigia and the recurring concepts of rebuilding which s how up so often in the Annals 93 it impractical to cite them all fully in this chapter. Other passages of Dio concerning Drusus include 48.44, 54.10, 54.19, 54.25, 54.35, and 54.36.


72 Florus starts Drusus off against the Usipetes, Tencturi, and Catthi, the tribes which inh abit the area just north of Mogo ntiacum Germanicus fights the Usipetes too in 14 CE ( Ann 1 .51), but not before he attacks the Marsi ( Ann 1 .50). In 15 CE Germanicus was decreed a triu mph and then set out for Germania in the spring ( Ann 1 .55). He built his n chmen ts and then turned his attenti Catthi; Ann 1 .55 6). Germanicus also fights wi th the Cherusci starting in 16 CE and Tacitus makes it clear that Germanicus is patro l Ann 2 ( Ann 2 .8) and then proceeds to portray Germanicus invoking Drusus ( Ann 2 .8). 94 Th e Cherusci show clear arrogance when the y bring to battle chains with which to bind defeated Romans, but Germanicus ends up slaughtering them instead ( Ann 2 .17 8). Florus reports that t he Cherusci and fellow tri bes act with similar arrogance towards Drusus : they lay claims on spoils as if their victory is certain, but Drusus ends up utterly defeating them. After these victories, both commanders are able to travel freely through Germania Drusus goes a s far north as the Weser ( Visurgis) and Elbe (Albis ) Rivers, he builds in several locations, a nd he penetrates the Hercynian f orests. 95 Germanicus wanders through the countryside only to find a fear ful enemy who either dares not encounter Germanicus o r suffers deva stating defeat ( Ann 2 .25). The Germans have been cow ed much like the mild 94 Wells (1972) 111 suggests the possibility that Germanicus was at Vechten just before setting sail Ann 2.8 to fossa Drusiana with Vechten as a base made the amphibious operations of Drusus and Germanicus possible (116). 95 of intensive search has failed to produce evidence to support Florus' statement that Drusus established over fifty such forts on the Rhine bank alone ."


73 Germans in Fl people. Dio the Batavians on his way to Sugambrian territory. Germanicus uses the is land of the Batavi as well at Ann als 2 .6 when he designate s it as a rende z vous for his fleet. While manicus makes his way to a besie ged fort on the river Lippe ( Ann 2 .7). Germanicus does not enco unter the besie gers, but he does repair the altar of Drusus which had been damaged by them. Once his fleet arrives, Germ anicus where he invokes his father. He then moves through the lakes and ocean to the river Ems down the Rhine, crossing through lakes, invading the Chauci beyond the Ems 96 Both commanders experience difficulties while usi ng these waterways: Dio recounts how German i cus runs into disaster at Ann als 2 .23 4 when his troops are shipwrecked by a sto rm while sailing down the Ems to the ocean. They find themselves pushed out into the ocean or onto islands, and the Angrivarii offer aid as they restore some ransomed soldiers to Germanicus. Their unfamiliarity of the northern waters causes both commanders trouble in their expeditions and compe ls them to accept help from the local tribes. Dio makes much of the fact tha t Drusus marched to the Weser and would have crossed it had he not been for inconveniences caused by lack of supplies, winter, and 96 Wells (1972) 96 explains that the fossa Drusiana allowed both Drusus and Germanicus access from the


74 bees. Germanicus r eaches the Weser as well at Ann als 2 .9, and it is this very area Germanicus acknowl edges that this area holds a special significance for himself and his fath er when he says to his troops that t he Elbe is now closer than the Rhine and there is no war beyond, provided that they set him up for victory in the same lands as he is following in the footsteps of his father and uncle ( propiorem iam Albim quam Rhenum neque bellum ultra, modo se patris patruique vestigia prementem isdem in terris victorem sisterent Ann 2 .14). Both Germanicus and his father push the boundaries of the empire, bringi ng Roman conquest far north to the area of the Weser It seems Florus and Dio, then, confirm to a deeper extent that Germanicus and Drusus did indeed live through many of the same experiences in Germania Suetonius, another near contemporary of Tacitus, writes with simi lar detail about but focuses mor (see Appendix A p. 194) At Claudius 1 .2 he begins his narrative about Drusus by describing his na val accomplishments in Germania. He continues on t o tell about Dru Germania. Some of his offices and honors are listed before his death is reported Suetonius then desc o us honors. strong military spirit is made. F inally Suetonius closes his narr ative on Drusus with an anecdote about his republican views and his relationship with Augustus. Dio also provides details about the events .1 2. He starts by reporting bad omens wh ich prec several buildings including the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, are damaged by storms. But Drusus ignores these signs and heads for the territories of the Chatti, Suebi, and Cherusci, crosses the


75 Weser, and reaches the Elbe River. There he mee ts a figure similar to that en countered in Suetonius : a female of abnormal size forbids him from marching forward. Dio continues with a list of more strange events which surrounded the death of Drusus: wolves prowling and howling, two youths riding through the camp, women wailing and stars shooting through the sky. Then he relates the reactions of Augustus and Tiberius to th T cremation, and placement into the Mausoleum of Augustus fol low His final note on D rusu 97 M any of the same details related by p re Tacitean authors and Suetonius can be found in Dio 55.1 2, but Dio knits them together into one smooth narrative Dio, then, as the latest of the authors studied in this chapter, certainly accessed the earlier Drusus tradition and seems to represent a nice culmination of the information offered in earlier authors. The information concerning omens, however, seems to be preserved in Dio only. Perhaps these omens were mentioned by authors now lost to us, authors who may have had a great deal of other things to say about Drusus which Tacitus may have s of hol es exist in the pre Tacitean Drusus tradition. Another anecdote which cannot be found in pre Tacitean authors is the story related by both Suetonius and Dio of the large barbarian woman. Like Dio ( 54.32.2 33.2 ) the waterways of G ermania by mentioning the North Sea and the fossa Drusiana which Germanicus was to use during his campaigns. Also as in Dio ( 54.32.2 33.2 ), Suetonius explains that Drusus coul d 97 This cenotaph i s located at Mainz, ancient Mogo ntiacum. Eutropius mentions it brie fly at 7.13.1.


76 have gone farther into Germania A vision of a woman, howeve r, prevent ed his advance. Suetonius surprisingly does not embell ish this story but instead discu ss es honors and offices won by Drusus after t his journey north. Dio, however, elaborates on the tale to the point of even providing the words spoken by the woma n, words including quality, but he does not wish to discredit it. This comment suggests that Dio has retrieved this anecdote from some source or tradition and is not claiming it as his own. Whether he took it from Suetonius or whether he and Suetonius both used an earlier source now lost to us is unknown. It is possible, however, that this story also stands as evidence that the Drusus tradition which would have existed in Tacit down to us incomplete. Nonetheless Tacitus would surely have used this Drusus tradition to its full potential for his own purposes. 98 This story of a female apparition appearing to the commander calls to mind the dream of Germanicus at Annals 2 .14 in which his grandmother Augusta comes to him bearing a beautiful garment. This female vision does not hinder Germanicus but instead encourages him to rouse his troops and head out to victory against Arminius and the Cherusci. Suetonius writ es that for his accomplishments Drusus was given an ovatio with triumphal honors and a consulship. Germanicus is awarded similar honors once he finished his campaign season. At Annals 2 .41 Germanicus celebrates a triumph, and the people are reminded of how Drusus, who also was favored by the people, had come 98 At Germania whether he took it from a lost part of the earlier tradition is unknown.


77 to an unfortunate end. At Annals 2 .42 Tiberius nominates Germanicus and himself for the consulship, and at Annals 2 .53 Ger manicus begins this consulship while setting out to the East where he would meet his end. According to Suetonius, Drusus similarly takes the consulship just as he sets out for the campaign which would bring his death. Suetonius and Dio leading men of the towns and colonies t o Rome where it was laid to rest in the Campus Martius. 99 Brundisium to Rome. People from surrounding towns come out to show respect to him ( Ann 3 .1 2) and his ashes are carried by t ribunes and centurio ns ( Ann 3 .2). His oleum in the Campus Martius ( Ann 3 .4 cf. Dio 55.2 ). But the people notice that Germanicus does not receive the pomp which Augustus gave Drusus ( Ann 3 .5). Suetonius s ays that Augustus delivered also composed a laudatory inscription and a memoir of his life. Dio mentions two eulogies, one by Tiberius and one by Augustus. Perhaps this is the sort of y ask ubi... meditata ad memoriam virtutis carmina et laudationes ...? ( Ann 3 .5). Suetonius tells us that after Drusus died, several monuments associated with him were and the army raised a mo nu ment to him and institut ed an annual ceremony. An arch wa s also erected on the Appian Way ( Claud 1.3) Dio mentions sta tu es of Drusus in addition to his arch 99 Tib. 7.3: Drusum fratrem in Germania amisit, cuius corpus pedibus totus itinere praegrediens Romam He lost his brother Drusus in Germany and conveyed his


78 and cenota ph (55.2.3) These monuments to Drusus recall the monuments to Germanicus discussed at Annals 2 .83: a cenotaph wa s built at Antioch where h is body was burnt, and a mound wa s raised at the actual location of his death. Arches we re erected at Rome on the Rh ine, and on Mount Amanus. 100 common with the way Germanicus died according to Tacitus. Suetonius reports that Drusus was open about his desire to restore the Republic and that other au thors consequently thought that there was animosity between Drusus and the emperor. 101 Suetonius also reports the rumor that Drusus was poisoned by Augustus when he did not retu rn from his province. This scena rio certainly would seem familiar to anyone a c qua inted with the Annals When Germanicus died, many people believed that his political beliefs were responsible for his downfall. They believed that he, like his father, had attracted the hostility of the emperor because of his civil mindedness ( Ann 2 .82). I ndeed Germanicus and Tiberius were not always in agreement. Ge r manicus, too was recalled from Germania by the emperor, and Germanicus at first was not eager to obey ( Ann 2 .26). In the long run, however, he returned to Rome, but wa s sent out to the East only to fall ill. It is asserted th at he may have been poisoned ( Ann 2 .69, 2. 70), and that the em peror may have been involved ( Ann 2.43, 2 .72). Although Suetonius discourages such rumors against Augustus, Tacitus seems to encourage such rumors against Ti berius. 100 For mention of these arches, see Tabula Siarensis frag. 1 lines 9 34; Potter (1987) 269 76. 101 Goodyear (1972) 251 connects Ann 1.33 with Ann 2.82, Suet. Claud 1.4, and Suet. Tib 50.1 in a discussion


79 One interesting note made by Suetonius about Drusus concerns his behavior on the battlefield. Suetonius says that Drusus often pursued enemy leaders at great personal risk. This is another anecdote which does not exist in the earlier tradition bu t makes a significant contribution to the characterization of Drusus and his military personality. Readers of Tacitus might see this same intensity in Germanicus at Annals 2 .21 when he rouses his troops by taking his helmet off in battle. Although he is no t directly pursuing any enemy leader, he is still taking great personal risk in order to promote victory. One further passage of Suetonius deserves some consideration. At Tiberius 50 .1 Suetonius offers an interesting anecdot hi s brother: Odium aduersus necessitudines in Druso primum fratre detexit, prodita eius epistula, qua secum de cogendo ad restituendam libertatem Augusto agebat, deinde et in reliquis. 102 He first showed his hatred of his kindred in the case of his brother Dru sus, producing a letter of his, in which Drusus discussed with him the question of compelling Augustus to restore the Republic, and then he turned against the rest. 103 Th is passage suggests that Augustus jus as described by Tacitus in the Annals all because of the republican dispositions of the two men Although this passage contradict s the tender brotherly relationship attested in so many other sources on Drus us, it seems to support the duplicity of the Tiberius as seen in 102 commended him to the peopl e at large, it was not taken seriously by Augustus and the prudentiores consider Ann 1.34 ( Sed Germanicus quanto summae spei propior, tanto impensius pro Tiberio niti ) and Ann 1.35 ( at ille moriturum potius quam fidem exueret clamitans ). 103 Text and translation from Rolfe (1913).


80 Annals when Tiberius tries to display affection for Germanicus, but ends up showing his hatred instead. At Ann als 1 .52 Tiberius tries to praise Germanicus to the senate, but his words do not seem to come from the heart. Similarly, at Ann als 2 gesture is not sincere and Tiberius in truth is eager to get rid of G ermanicus. At Ann als 3 .3 Tiberi inste ad Tacitus suggests his hypocri s genuine in the Annals and they perhaps are not genuine in Suetoni Tacitus and Suetonius may be working from a version of the tradition in which Tiberius and Drusus do not exemplify the ideal brotherly love as portrayed by Valerius Maximus and others. Knowledge of this piece of Suetonius perhaps shows tha t Tacitus wa s not the only one painting a grim portrait of Tiberius. Conclusion Throughout the many Germanicus scenes in Annals 1 of Drusus encourages readers to compare father to son. In addition, when Tacitus writes he a ctivates a body of knowledge in his readers which reaches as far back as Livy and Strabo. The information offered by these others authors reinforces emphasize that Germanicus is like his father in character, military accom plishmen ts, and even death. Germanicus is amplified when associated with his father His good character increas es when associated with character; his exploits in German ia seem more like a grand inheri tance; the treatment he receives from Tiberius appears more heinous; his death feels twice as tragic.


81 CHAPTER 3 GERMANICUS AND VARUS Just as Tacitus compares Germanicus to Drusus he simultaneously contrasts him with Quin t ilius Varus. 1 Germanicus assume d his command on the Rhine in 13 CE and the references to him in so many disparate texts demonstrates tha t the disaster remained prominent in the Roman memory for quite some time Ger manicus was under great pressure to repair the damage and return Roman power in Germania back to the way it was when his father governed there. Tacitus doe s not miss opportunities to write Varus in to the background of the Annals to show what Germanicus had the potential to become, but what he ultimately was able to escape Germanicus and Varus in the Annals Varus is mentioned twelve times in the first two books of the Annals at 1.3, 1.10, 1.43, 1.55, 1.57 8, 1.60 1 1.65, 1.71, 2.7, 2.25, 2.41, and 2.45 6 2 In these passages, Tacitus brings Varus into the action and alo ngside Germanicus in three ways: he appears not only in the speeches of Germanicus himself but also in the words of Arminius and Segestes; h e is compared to Germanicus topographically th rough military exploits; his name is mentioned in connection with the recovery of military standards 1 text (1906) a OLD an earlier form. 2 Devillers (2003) 210 observes that while Varus plays an important role in the Annals he is not Germania possibly due to the time during which this latter work was written.


82 At Annals 1.3, Tacitus introduces Varus a s the reason for the war against the Germans. 3 Tacitus makes it clear that th disgrace d the R omans, a disgrace that had to be undone. Thus Varus is immedia tely presented as a driving force behind Varus is mentioned again when the German leaders Arminius and Segestes are introduced ( Ann 1.55 ) break s from its ch r onological timeline and the story of Varus is told: Segestes have encouraged him to prevent it by arresting the German leaders, but Varus meets his end at the hands of Arminiu s anyway. 4 Varus plays an important role in the background of Arminius and S egestes, and his mention at their introduction suggests th at when Germanicus, as th e new Roman commander of Germania encounters these two character s, he will inevitably be associ ate d wit h Varus. This passage might even serve as a warning, stating that Germanicus should be more careful than Varus as he When Germanicus meets Segestes face to face at Annals 1.58, the story of Varus is related again th rough the words of Segestes 5 Segestes emphasize s not only 3 Tac. Ann 1.3: bellum ea tempestate nullum nisi adversus Germanos supererat, abolendae magis infamiae ob amissum cum Quintilio Varo exercitum quam cupidine proferendi imperii aut dignum ob praemium No war remained at this time except against the Germans, for the sake of dispelling the disgrace of the army lost with Quintilius Varus rather than with a desire of extending the empire or for the 4 Tac. Ann 1.55: ... Segestes ...suasitque Varo ut se et Arminium et ceteros proceres vinciret: nihil ausuram plebem principibus amotis; atque ipsi tempus fore quo c rimina et innoxios discerneret. sed Varus fato et vi Armini cecidit nd Arminius and the other chiefs: the people would attempt nothing with their leaders removed; and there would be time for him by which he could distinguish between the guilty and the innocent. But Varus fell by fate and the violence of Furneaux fato at Ann 1.55. 5 Tac. Ann 1.58: ergo raptorem filiae meae, violatorem foederis vestri, Arminium apud Varum, qui tum exercitui praesidebat, reum feci. dilatus segnitia ducis, quia parum praesidii in legibus erat, ut me et


83 goal in this speech is to prove his dedication to the Romans. He hopes that his story will show that he was loyal to V arus a nd thus suggest that he will also be loyal to Germanicus. Varus and the issue of loyalty come up again when Germanicus gives his speech in front of his mutinous troops. 6 I n his own words Germanicus compare s his hypothetical death to the death of Varus. 7 He accuses his soldiers of being ready to allow his death but being driven to avenge the death of V arus. Germanicus tests his r asting their loyalty to him with their loyalty to Varus. By depicting himself as Varus, a commander killed by treachery, Germanicus tries to instill discipline in his men. He uses Varus as a tool of manipulation to rouse his soldiers to a certain course of action. Varus will be manipulated by the German commanders as well. At Annals disaster to encourage his fighters. He exclaims that the Romans they are fighting are 8 men are roused by these Arminium et conscios vinciret flagitavi daughter, the violator of your treaty, to Varus, who at the time was presiding over the army. I was put off by t he inertia of the leader, and since there was little protection in the laws, I entreated that he imprison 6 Tac. Ann 1.43: cecidissem certe nondum tot flagitiorum exercitu meo conscius; legissetis ducem, qui meam quid em mortem inpunitam sineret, Vari tamen et trium legionum ulcisceretur died while not yet conscious of such great shame in my army; you would have chosen a leader, who certainly would have allowed my death to go unpunished, neverthel ess would have avenged the death o f 7 Cass. Dio 57.20.1 2 also associates the death of Varus with the death of Germanicus. 8 Tac. Ann 2.15 : nec Arminius aut ceteri Germanorum proceres omittebant suos quisque testari, hos esse Romanos Variani exercitus fugacissimos qui ne bellum tolerarent, seditionem induerint; quorum pars onusta vulneribus terga men to witness that these were the Roman troops of Varus, men quick to flee and who, lest they tolerate


84 words and demand action. 9 Thus for the troops of both Germanicus and Arminius, the name of Varus is meaningful and inspiring holds and they use it accordingly. Twice Varus ame is invoke d by the German commanders against e ach other Arminius uses the memory of Varus as a weapon against Maroboduus and encouragement for his men. 10 He calls Maroboduus a coward and a traitor, and exclaims that he should be killed with the same hostility with which Varus was killed By projecting Varus onto Maroboduus, Arminius can vilify him and lessen any resistance in the Germans who might be hesitant to treat Maroboduus, one of their own chieftains, as an enemy. This strategy is particularly important for Arminius at this stage of the war sinc Arminius needs to solid ify the loyalty of these tribes Varus was their common enemy in the past, so his name unite s these tribes in the present. Arminius justifies violence against Maroboduus not only by making him appear Roman, but by likening him to one of the worst Ro man commanders of Germania 9 Tac. Ann 2.16 : Sic accensos et proelium poscentis in campum, cui Idistaviso nomen, deducunt fired up and demanding battle, the men 10 Tac. Ann 2.45: contra fugacem Maroboduum appellans, proeliorum expertem, Hercyniae latebris defensum; ac mox per dona et legationes petivisse foedus, proditorem patriae, satellitem Caesaris, haud minus i nfensis animis exturbandum quam Varum Quintilium interfecerint fugitive, one inexperienced in battles, one who was protected by the hiding places of the Hercynian forest, and who soon through gifts and ambassadors sought a treaty, a traitor of his fatherland, an agent of Caesar, one who ought to be put away with hardly less hostile spirit than that with which they killed


85 M aroboduus retaliates at Annals 2.46 and turns V against A rminius. 11 He wishes to promote his new ally Inguiomerus by centering the glory of the Cherusci on him and devaluing Arminius, the Cheruscian leader on the opposing side. He does urred Arminius is also characterized by madness and arrogance, features which make him into an even less attractive leader. Maroboduus is employing Varus in much the same way as Arminius and f or much the same purpose. The opposing German leader is degraded so that the loyalty of the troops remains intact and desertion to the enemy does not seem attractive. Arminius also uses Varus to promote violence against Caecina and his troops. At Annals the Romans, Arminius identifie s Caecina and his men with Varus and his legions to incite the Germans 12 By calling out his name, Arminius almost seems either to turn back time to when Varus wa s still alive or to resurrect Varus to make him present at the battle Past meets present in an overlap of time as Tacitus creates a sort of d j vu name. Arminius insinuates that victory can be achieved n ow as easily as it was before. The memory of Varus is deeply embedd ed in this war. He is the underlying reason for it, he is the motivation of the troops, he is i n the speeches of the leaders, h e is in the thoughts and words of everyone. No one wants to b e like Varus, but they are 11 Tac. Ann 2.46: vaecordem Arminium et rerum nescium alienam gloriam in se trahere, quoniam tres vagas legiones et ducem fraudis ignarum perfidia deceperit attributed to himself the glory of another, because he entrapped with treachery three wandering legions 12 Tac. A nn 1.65: legiones exclaiming, behold Varus and his legions entrapped again in the same fate!


86 eager to make their enemies like Varus. T he mention of Varus a nd his legions beli ttle s the Roman forces of Germania Tacitus is careful ab out the extent to which he insert s t he memory of Varus into the Annals H e cannot project Varus onto Germanicus direct ly, not only because this will but also because it simply will not align with historical fact Germanicus did not experience any disaster ev en Germania but Tacitus can show that Germanicus was in the same dangerous s ituation as Varus and had the potential to fare just as miserably. By suggesting that his character could have become like Var us but instead was able to steer away from that path, he portrays Germanicus as an even better character, one who can rise above dangers and triumph where others fail. Thus t h rough out Annals 1 and 2 Tacitus makes places Varus in con texts with Germanicus through other characters, but Varus is not directly compared to Germani cus himself. S ometimes it escapes. Instead, Germanicus swerves away from disaster and then veers far from the anti Varus, the one who appears to undo the damage Varus caused. He does this by recovering spoils and standards lost during the Varian disaster and finding it unnecessary to rebuild V At Annals 1.57 Germanicus is making successful progress in Germania : he is successfully end s a siege, and he captures the wife of Arminius. Yet there is one instance when Germanicus could have ended up like Varus. son, Segimundus, is among them. Tacitus reveals t hat during the revolt in Germania


87 Segimundus had rejected his role as a priest and joined the rebels. He was only now reporting to the Romans because of his father. Tacitus uses the word adductus 13 genuine feelings towards the Romans may still not match those of his father, but Germanicus receives him with kindness anyway. At this point Germanic us opens himself up to treachery and does not su fficiently protect himself again st the same type of deceit that brought down Varus. If had been false and if he had been so bold, he could have used this opportunity to plot against German icus. He could have become the next Arminius, and Germanicus could have been taken by surprise and made to be like Varus, a commander deceived b y a German claiming alliance. Germanicus demonstrates on this occasion that he ha s not learn ed mistake. He trusts a German of uncertain loyalty Luckily Segimundus did not repeat the tre achery of Arminius. A greater amount of caution is exercised At Annals son. s on, 13 Tac. Ann 1.57: addiderat Segestes legatis filium, nomine Segimundum: sed iuvenis conscientia cunctabatur. quippe anno quo Germaniae descivere sacerdos apud aram Vbiorum creatus ruperat vittas, profugus ad rebellis. adductus tamen in spem clementiae Romanae per tulit patri s mandata benigneque exceptus cum praesidio Gallicam in ripam missus est Segimundus by name: but the young man was held back by a feeling of guilt. Indeed in the year in which the Germans revolted, having been ma de a priest at the altar of the Ubii he had broken the fillets and fled to the rebels. Nevertheless induced into hope of Roman mercy he bore the mandates of his father and


88 14 In this passage deeds committed against Varus affect the trust extended by Germ anicus. At the end of Annals 1.57 Germanicus recovers some spoils which had been taken 15 This sentenc e which depicts Germanicus reversi ng loss under Varus caps a long series of positive events for the new commander of Germania He has already experienced some successful encounters against the Germans, he has He extends kindness to a troublesome German, but suffers no adverse results. By concluding this paragraph with t he retrieval of spoil s lost un der Varus, Tacitus can bring to attention how opposite the experiences of Germanicus are in Germania compared to the experiences of Varus Germanicus continues to recoup more losses of the Varian disaster as he moves closer t o th e Teutoburg f orest. At Annals 1.60 he finds the eagle of the nineteen th legion and thus erases some of its shame. 16 The los s suffered under Varus is rectified and the nineteen th is Roman again. Although the recovery of items lost under Varus makes Ger manicus look like he is repairing what Varus did, Tacitus still tential to become a 14 Ta c. Ann 1.71: data utrique venia, facile Segimero, cunctantius filio, quia Quintilii Vari corpus inlusisse dicebatur had abused t he corpse of Quintilius Varu 15 Tac. Ann 1.57: ferebantur et spolia Varianae cladis, plerisque eorum qui tum in deditionem veniebant praedae data who were coming to surrender, were being 16 Tac. Ann 1.60: interque caedem et praedam repperit unde vicesimae legionis aquilam cum Varo amissam. ductum inde agmen ad ultimos Bructerorum, quantumque Amisiam et Lupiam amnis inter vastatum, haud procul Teutoburgiensi saltu in quo reliquiae Vari legionumque insepultae dicebantur whence among the slaughter and loot he found the eagle of the twentieth legion which had been lost with Varus. Thence the column was led to the boarder of the Bructeri, and all that was between the rivers Amisia and Lupia was ravaged, hardly far from the Teutoburg forest in which t he remains of Varus and


89 Varus by depict foot steps. Germanicus is liken ed to Varus through the places he visits and through military exploits. At the en d of Annals 1.60 Germanicus is very close to the Teutoburg f orest, which Tacitus reminds us is the very site where is not timid ; in fact, he is aggressive against the Germans by laying waste to the surrounding area. Germanicus shows the power of his Roman forces in the place where Varus had shown their greatest vulnerability. Germanicus con tinues to trace the steps of when he enters the Teutoburg f orest at Annals 1.61. Annals that suggests three men here, but he passes over the site to visit the horrors of the battlefield. The ghastly evidence of the disaster is still quite visible: Tacitus describes pieces of weapo ns and horses; even remnants of the soldie rs themselves are still present: skulls are displayed on the trees. As Tacitus provides these details the battle comes alive. T he words of survivors also help Germanicus and his troops relive the disaster as if they had been in the battle themselves, or as if the battle were reoccurring with them in it. 17 Tacitus collapses together the time be tween 9 CE and 14 CE. 18 Several scenes of the battle are reenacted by the survivors: own end. Germanicus is thus caught in a scene of death and must act in order to prevent himself from becoming associated with Varus. Before he h ad even entered the 17 Tac. Ann 1.61: et cladis eius superstites, pugnam aut vincula elapsi, referebant hic cecidisse legatos, illic raptas aquilas; primum ubi vulnus Varo adactum, ubi infelici dextera et suo ict u mortem invenerit the survivors of this disaster, having slipped away from the fight or escaped capture, recalled that here where by an unlucky han 18 For the collapse of time in Tac. Ann 1.61, see Pag n (1999) 310.


90 site Germanicus already showed eagerness for rectifying the situation at the Teutoburg f orest : Igitur cupido Caesarem invadit solvendi suprema militibus ducique desire to pay funeral rites to the soldiers and their leader consumed Caesar (Tac. An n 1.61). The words invadit and solvendi are key here. Invadit implies how deeply invested Germanicus feels in this matter and how strong his desire is for helping Varus and his men. Invadit implies that he is pierced to the core about paying the final respects to Varus. Solvendi implies a n undoing By giving Varus and his men their proper rites the disaster will be over once and for all and Germanicus can end or even reverse some of the pai n and shame that Varus caused. While Varus made ghosts out of his men, Germanicus puts them to rest by bur y ing them With Va rus and his men buried, they can finally stop haunting the Romans. Thus at Annals 1.62 Germanicus buries the dead. His soldiers cle arly identify with the lost legions: they consider them coniunctos and consanguineos German also become more enraged revenge or a second battle through which to redeem themselves. Tiberius perhaps is worried that their visit to the Teutoburg f orest ma hesitant and fearful to fight, that perhaps they will now be afraid of beco ming like legions. 19 Indeed although Germanicus has traveled through the treacherous Teutoburg f orest unscathed, he still ha s much fighting to do in Germania so his potential o f beco ming like Varus, an ming like the three legions, still lingers on. 19 ( Ann. 1.62).


91 Tacitus then narrates a dream to show that Germanicus has not quite avoided the danger of becoming like Varus. At Annals 1.65 h is general Caecina dreams of a blood smeared Varus reaching and calling out to him. 20 Pellin g notes the im danger of re 21 A nother Varian disaster may be close at hand and Varus seems to attempt to come back to life by reaching out for Caecina. Yet Caecina refuses this fate. He does not obey ( obsecutus ) Varus but repulses ( reppulisse out of the swamp, grab hold of the command, and retake the battlefield has been denied. 22 With the spirit of Varus himself having been thw arted, G ermanicus has escaped the danger of becoming like V arus. V arus has been laid to rest at last. Therefore when Germanicus finds at Annals sees no need to rebuild it. 23 The mound served as a re minder of the Varian disaster, but now thanks to Germanicus the Romans can move past that disaster and no longer need 20 Tac. Ann 1.65: ducemque terruit dira quies: nam Quintilium Varum sanguine oblitum et paludibus emersum cernere et audire visus est velut vocantem, non tamen obsecutus et manum intendentis reppulisse in blood and immersed in the swamp and to hear him as if he were calling, nevertheless he did not yield and he repulsed n (1999) 315 notes he still walks the earth, haunting Caecin a in a restless dream (1.65.1 2). Just as Germanicus and his troops violated the boundary between living and dead, so Varus continues to transgress the boundary 21 Pelling (1997) 207. 22 Woodman (1988) 174 notes that the next day brings a near re so often in the Aeneid and the battle seems to be go bloodshed, the greed of the Germans for looting saves the Romans from slaughter. Perhaps here the Romans come closest to another Varian disaster. 23 Tac. Ann 2.7: tumulum tamen nuper Varianis legionibus structum et vetere m aram Druso sitam disiecerant. restituit aram honorique patris princeps ipse cum legionibus decucurrit; tumulum iterare haud visum altar of Drusus. H e restored the altar and for the honor of his father the leader himself with his legions celebrated funeral games


92 this monument for its remembrance. Besides, Germanicus just recently built a new Annals 1.62, one that actuall y serves the purpose of burial. decision not to rebuild this mo und signifies that he has reversed the damage of the Varian disaster to such an extent that the Romans no longer need to grieve for it through this monument. It also sever s any link between Germanicus and Varus. When Germanicus rebuilds the altar of Drusus, it shows a bond between father and son. Through the act of rebuilding, Germanicus shows himself as the new Drusus. decision not onument shows how unlike Varus he is, how his chances of becoming like Varus have been destroyed. Two final passage s further demonstrate Germanicu s Varus. Germanicus makes successfu l attacks against the Germans and learns that anot her eagle lost by Varus is nearby and ready for the taking. 24 Once again Germanicus is presented with an opportunity to undo the damage of Varus and t o win back Roman honor 25 Perhaps Germanicus earns even more credit because the information about the eagle came from a German leader who had surrendered to him. Germanicus reversal of the Varian disaster is complete when at Rome an arch is dedicated to the recovery of the standards lost with Varus. 26 This recovery is 24 Tac. Ann 2.25: ipse maioribus copiis Marsos inrumpit, quorum dux Mallovendus nuper in de ditionem acceptus propinquo luco defossam Varianae legionis aquilam modico praesidio servari indicat himself with greater forces attacked the Marsi, whose leader Mallovenus, who recently had surrendered, revealed that an eagle of a legion of Varus was buried in a nearby grove and that it was protected by a 25 The insult the Romans suffered when their standards were captured by the Germans is related by Tacitus at Ann 1.61: referebant...utque signis et aquilis per superbiam inluserit 26 Tac. Ann 2.41: Fine anni arcus propter aedem Saturni ob recepta signa cum Varo amissa ductu Germanici, auspiciis Tiberii ...dicantur temple of Saturn was dedicated for the recovery of the standards lost with Varus, under the leadership of Germanicus and the 30.


93 undoubtedly an important victory for the Ro mans, one that shows their success over the for all to see. The building of a structure stands for o ff icial acknowledgement that Germanicus has completed the task of repairing the damage of Varus, just as he was sent to do according to Annals 1.3 27 Thus the character of Varus is a driving force in the Annals until Germanicus lays his memory to rest by his ability to avoid or reverse appearing frequently in the text alongside Germanicus but never being directly compared to him, Varus a dds depth to the character of Germ anicus and emphasizes his success. Germ anicus could have become like Varus, but instead he manages to undo everything Varus did and erase s the shame of Varus from the Roman mind. Varus in Pre Tacitean Authors The study of pre Tacitean authors help s reveal the literary tradition concerning Varus that writing and thus helps us better understand how Varus fits into the Annals and Just as with the literary tradition of Drusus there are a few things to keep in mind while att empting to reconstruct the 27 The recovery of military s tandards was an important accomplishment and indeed merited elaborate or he took great pride in the achievement, declaring that he had recovered without a struggle what had formerly been lost in Res Gestae 29 describes also the recovery of standards lost by other generals and a sense of dominance over the Parthians. victory not only for the Romans over a foreign people but as a victory that makes up for a past loss. Also like Germanicus, Augustus is honored for his achievement with a triumphal arch (Cass. Dio 54.8.3, Zanker [1988] 187). Barnes (1974) 21 mentions the glory earned by Augustus when he retrieves from the Parthians the standards lost by Crassus and Antonius. Zanker (1988) 186 writes about the failure of Crassus and Antony in the East the worth of the Roman virtus The retrieval was celebrated on coins (Zanker [1988] 186; Barnes [1974] 22; Wallace Hadrill [1986] 77 8), in the construction of a small round temple to M ars Ultor in which the standards were thereafter housed (Zanker [1988] 186), and on the breastplate of the Augustus of Prima Porta (Zanker [1988] 188 92).


94 tradition of Varus Not all works that contributed to the early tradition of Varus are extant now, but Tacitus may have used some of these missing sources. The examination of pre Tacitean authors may hint at what kind of information may have been available to Tacit us and how he might have used that information for his own purposes Second, Tacitus may have used these pre Tacitean authors directly. These very passages may have had a great influence on what Tacitus wrote in his own text. In turn, t hese intertextualities may have affected the way the character of Germanicus was viewed. T hird, many of these authors were contemporaries of Varus and were alive when the disaster happened. Their personal impressions of Varus and the disaster then are important to consider when analyzing these texts in conju n ction with Tacitus. One of the earliest works to mention Varus Geographica (see Appendix B p. 201 ) At the beginning of book 7 Strabo discusses the area beyond the Rhine. After covering the var ious Germanic rivers and tribes over the Bructeri and his death, he begins to write about Roman encounters wi th the Germanic tribes. He cites legions. Misplaced trust is identified as the cause. Strabo then immediately suggests ted the opportunity for Germanicus to celebrate a great triumph. career and his disaster in Germania, and he lived long enough to see what kind of effect it had on Romans over the years. For example, he knew the disaster was one of the most serious losses the Romans had suffered in Germania (indicated by the superlativ e Str., and he knew how to put the Varian disaster in According to Dueck Strabo may


95 have r emained in Rome until the end of his life, and so it is possible that he was there egions reached the city in 9 CE but also when Germanicus celebrated his triumph on May 26, 17 CE. Strabo does, after all, go into detail about exactly which famous German men and women were in the procession. 28 If this is true and Strabo has personal experience concerning the disaster of Varus and the triumph of Germanicus it is no surprise that he would highlight them in his geography the Varian disaster is his own or if it belongs to his time. Either way, the thought may have influenced Tacitus to portray Germanicus as t he general who inherited Germania from Varus and set things right. and Germanicus does indeed beg the reader to make this connection. The words they afforded the younger Ger m ( Str. 9 ) in particular imply a cause and effect relationship between Varus disa 29 Controversiae 1.3 .10 concerning the woman and the Tarpeian rock (see Appendix B p. 201) When declaim ed against the words of Cestius, Cestius retorted harshly and 28 Str. 7.1.4 .19 25; Dueck (2000) 85 6. 29 Text and translations of Strabo are from Jones (1924).


96 30 the next generation to haunt his son. 31 Seneca eyond. He is believed to have written the Controversiae sometime in the 30s CE, around the time 32 work is focused on the rhetorical, Varus slip s in to th e text throu gh his son, the younger Varus. Also l ike Strabo, Seneca the Elder gives us a hint of how the disaster lasted in the minds of Romans who lived on after 9 CE. We can tell that it was defin itely a sensitive subject: it could be used vindictively, and Seneca writes that upon hearing the insult, everyone disapproved. 33 Seneca introduces in law of Germanicus and only a very 34 The young Julia Livilla The two were distant relatives, but the marriage never occurred since the young Varus was caught up in a treason trial in 27 CE. 35 Although the marriage connection never became officia l, Seneca mak es the association. In an anecdo te that is sneak in both Germanicus and 30 Se n. Controv 3: ista neglegentia pater tuus ex ercitum perdidit Text and translations of Seneca the Elder are from Winterbottom (1974). 31 Sen. Controv Filium obiurgabat, patri male dixit 32 Sussman (1978) 92 3. 33 Sen. Controv 2: Cum multa dixisset, novissime adiecit rem quam omnes i mprobavimus 34 Sen. Controv Varus Quintilius, tunc Germanici gener ut praetextatus 35 Syme (1986) 59, 149, 315, 327.


97 Varus. Perhaps this suggests that the two German commanders easily came as a pair together in th e Roman min d, even in unexpected contexts. Of all the pre Tacitean authors Velleius Paterculus offers the most extensi ve details concerning Varus (see Appendix B p. 202 ) After a brief character sketch, Velleius outlines Varu s career by mentioning his behavior a s governor in S yria and his policy with the German tribes (2.117). H e then explains how the Germans and Arminius role in the disaster (2.118) The details of the disaster itself are given at 2.119: the troops, characterized with bravery and exp erience, are said to have met de struction in part because of the negligence of their general. Varus is shown prefer r ing suicide over well as the burial. Velleius discusses some of the aftermath of the defeat and then reflects on the cause: From all this it is evident that Varus, who was, it must be confessed, a man of character and of good intentions, lost his life and his magnificent army more through lack of judge ment in the comm ander than of valour in his s oldiers ( 2.120 ). 36 Varus is mixed, at times showing pity towards him, at other times highlighting his faults. lengthy c o nsidering the brevity or selection of subject matter he uses th roughout his history. 37 Velleius consciously allows himself to 36 Text and translations of Velleius are from Shipley (1924). 37 technical ways of describing the selection or the pruning down of subject 4; Bloomer (2011) 100 6 writes on festinatio ; and Lobur ( 2011) 208 9.


98 digress ( moram exigit ). 38 His Varus episode spans four sections, a significant amount of text when compared to the three sections given to the Battle of Actium for example (2.84 6) or the one section given to the Battle of Philippi ( 2.70 ) The reason for this prolonged and detailed account is perhaps because the disaster happened during his adult life and because he had an intimate knowledge of Germania 39 Velleius spent much of his early military career in Germania beginning in 4 CE when he succeeded his father as praefectus equitum in the Rhine army. 40 Alongside T iberius he became familiar with the Weser, Lippe, and Elbe and the tribes surrounding these rivers ( 2.105 6) By 6 CE Velleius was back in Rome and was elected quaestor but he did not stay in the city long. He was sent out by Augustus to aid Tiberius when Pannonia and Illyricum revolted ( 2.111) By 8 CE Tiberius Magius as a legate. Velleius was left by Tiberius in Pannonia to serve under Marcus Lepidus. The two forces joined in Dalmatia in 9 CE around the time of the Varian disaster ( 2.115) Velleius begins his acc Scarcely had Caesar put the finishing touch upon the Pannonian and Dalmatian war, when, within five days of the completion of this task, dispatches from Germany brought the baleful news of the death of Varus 41 Velleius would have been wi th Tiberius when news of the disaster reached 38 2.117.1; See also 2.41.1 when introducing Caesar; 2.108.2 when introducing Maroboduus; See Rich (2011) 73 n. 6. 39 Sumner (1970) 270 comments appropriately on the importance of the events Velleius experienced and th e corresponding attention he gives them in his history: By his association with Tiberius, Velleius was now at the centre of the most important and crucial events going on in the Roman world. This is reflected in a sharp expansion of his brief narration. I t takes him as long to cover the ten years from Tiberius' adoption to Augustus' death as it took for the previous thirty 40 Vell. Pat. 2.104; Sumner (1970) 264 5. 41 Vell. Pat. 2.117: Tantum quod ultimam imposuerat Pannonico ac Delmatico bello Caesar manum, cum intra quinque consummati tanti operis dies funestae ex Germania epistulae nuntium attulere caesi Vari...


99 him, and Velleius likely traveled with him to settle matters in Germania 42 According to Sumner, Velleius does not mention himself at all in the subsequent account of rescue operation to save the Rhin eland after the clades Variana Nevertheless he was there 43 Velleius himself tells us that he served with Tiberius for a period of eight or nine years starting from 4 CE, which means he would have still been present with him in 9 CE (2.104.3) Thus V elleius is able to write of Tiberius swooping in and setting things right: he strengthened garrisons, crossed the Rhine, and moved forward to open roads, lay waste to fields and homes, and mak e successful attacks against the enemy ; then he returned to wint er camp without suffering heavy losses (2.120) Velleius experienced the aftermath of the disaster firsthand, and so he was able (and probably eager) to write about it at length and in detail, down to each praiseworthy or culpable individual. Indeed the ty pe of information Velleius offers in these sections is interesting Velleius often likes to focus episodes of his history around personalities. 44 When Velleius c overs the Battle of Philippi ( 2.70 ) for example, he centers squarely on the deaths of Brutus an d Cassius. For the Battle of Pharsalia ( 2.52 3 ) naturally he spotlights Caesar and Pompey. The Battle of Actium ( 2.84 6 ) is perhaps solely s cription of the Varian disaster in that more than just the main characters are given attention. In his account of the Varian disaster, Velleius not only portrays Varus and Arminius, but he characterizes the armies and also pays attention to minor figure s, men like Eggius, 42 43 Sumner (1970) 273 4. 44 Woodman (1977) 28 56 tackles this topic at the be ginning of his commentary and argues that Velleius does not differ much from other Latin authors like Sallust or Livy in his tendency to focus on big personalities. Scholars like Elephante (1997), and Schmitzer (2000 h For a discussion of this topic in relation to Caesar, see Pelling (2011).

PAGE 100

100 Ceionius, Numonius, Asprenas, C aedicius, and even Caldus Caelius. Velleius was there after the battle to hear all of their stories and lock them away in his history. Did Velleius know Varus personally? It seems likely. Varus b egan his governorship of Germania in 7 CE, after Velleius had already finished his service there. But their paths may have crossed in Rome. Both men were held in high esteem by the imperial family: Velleius of course had ties of amicitia with Tiberius Germanicus, and Gaius Caesar, 45 and Varus was connected to Augustus and Ag rippa through his first marriage 46 It is tempting to believe that two men of such high standing would have met at some point. In any case, Velleius is our most valuable pre Tacitean source on the Varian disaster and on Varus himself not only because he was a contemporary but because he had had personal experience in Germania both before and immediately after the disaster. Manilius, like Velleius, suggests the role of fate in the Varian disaster (see Appendix B p. 207 ) In h is Astronomica M anilius asserts that the sky foretold of the slaughter through its lights, but that the message of the heavens was not heeded. ignore the signs of nature. Ve ry little when he wrote the Astonomica Our very passage (1.896 903) i s a terminus post quem Manilius writes after 9 CE so his floruit spans and into His work can r oughly be dated 45 Levick (2011) 3, 7 notes that Velleius and Germanicus shared the quaestorshi p and thus likely knew 2.101 and Sumner [1970] 265 6). 46 Reinhold (1972).

PAGE 101

101 to the second decade of the first century CE. 47 This means that he too was a contemporary of Varus and alive during the period of the disaster and its aftermath. The fury of the heaven s he describes and the fact that he picks the Varian disa ster as his prime exam ple suggests how grievous ly it was perceiv ed by Manilius and other Romans. events like the Varian disaster. Green notes that astrology was popular aroun d the beginning of the first century CE, and like Manilius, Germanicus had put out a text about the stars, his translation of Aratus. 48 T o the Romans, astrology was a science. 49 It offered a way of understanding the world. optimistic world view thu s: Human beings live in a kosmos a beautiful and well ordered whole ruled by (or identified with) a divine being. This god is well disposed towards humans, to whom he affords the opportunity to interact with him and to achieve perfection an d happiness through the contemplation of the workings of the heavens. 50 This suggests that the happiness a negotiation between him and a divine being. So i n his brief mention of Varus, Manilius seems to suggest that divine forces played a of nature and perhaps could have acted differently. Varus failed to interact with the divine or contemplate the signs given to him through the heavens. Thus his ability to negotiate h is fate slipped through his grasp and the divine force carried out the disaster 47 Volk (2009) 3 4, 138; Volk (2011) 4 5. 48 Green (2011) 137. 49 Green and V olk (2011) vii. 50 Volk (2009) 253.

PAGE 102

102 as planned. Manilius offers us the impression that Varus had the chance to c ontrol his fate, but he forfeit ed it. The Flavian writer Josephus mentions Varus not as the general of Germania but as the governor in Syria. In Bellum Judaicum Varus is present a few brief t imes in book 1 as a visitor of K ing Herod and a n overseer of is not much more than an observer and says or doe s little that teaches us about his character, other than react with some emotion at a speech of Antipater ( BJ 1.636). In and multiple revolts begin to spring u p, but he again does not have much col or as a character until he receives requests for aid from Sabinus ( BJ 2.66) Varus marches to Samaria but spares the city when he finds that it was not responsible for the trouble. Much of the damage that occurs here af ter is done by Arabs allied with Varus and not by Varus himself ( BJ 2.69 70). Once he notices their destructive behavior, he dismisses them ( BJ 2.76). Varus does, however, act violently himself when he burns Emmaus to the ground in revenge of the death of Arius ( BJ 2.71). When he reaches Jerusalem, he pardons the inhabitants and imprisons the less threatening of the rebels, bu t crucifies around two thousand others ( BJ 2.72 5). He then marches to Idumaea to put down some lingering rebels there, but they surr ender ( BJ 2.77 8). Of these, most are pardoned, except for those who were relatives of Herod. Once Jerusalem is settled he returns to Antioch ( BJ 2.79). 51 51 Antiquitat es Judaicae book 17, but those passages very closely echo what has been laid out here from Bellum Judaicum For similarities between AJ 17 and BJ 2 and thei r sources, see Schwartz (2002) 66 8.

PAGE 103

103 Jo invaluable because it gives us a glimpse of what er wa s like before he went to Germania or rather lack thereof, while governor of Syria does not prepare him well for the military situation of Germania According to Josephus, Varus was often dealing with unruly inhabitants who dispersed or surrendered before any battle ensued. They certainly were not comparable to the weather hardened war trained tribes of northern Europe. While settling the rebellions Varus ends up pardoning many people, and others are found completely innocent. When he arrives at Jerusalem, Varus merely has to show himself and the rebels are fr i ghtened away ( BJ 2.72). At Idumaea the rebels surrender before Varus takes any action ( BJ 2. 77). The mild level at which Varus o perates in these episodes perhaps gives us an idea of why Varus acted the w ay he did once he got to Germania The rebels Varus found around Jerusalem simply needed discipline and did not require battle. Perhaps Varus thought the Germans would be the same way when he decided to be more of a praefect us than a general towards them. Varus was not a military man at this earlier stage in his career, and he certainly did not develop into one later. But how accurate is Joseph hat was his bias and how reliable were his sources? Josephus was bo rn in 36 or 37 CE, years after the Varian disaster. He grew up in Jerusalem and belonged to a family of priests. In 64 CE he traveled to Rome, but he was back in Jerusalem in time to get mixed up in the revolt of 66. He commanded an ar my of Galilee in 66 7 was besie ged by Vespasian, and was captured by the Romans. He predicted that Vespasian would become emperor, and when this actually happened in 69, Josephus was released and accompanied

PAGE 104

104 Vespasian back to Rome where he lived out the rest of his days writi ng on an imperial pension. 52 him a valuable source for his own time period, but we can not underestimate the in erial pension, he had access to Roman archives ( A J 14.185 9, 265 7; 16.161, 164 78 ). 53 Perhaps he was able to gather his records on Varus there. But did he have a bias to add to this information? towards the Romans and how it affected his writing. 54 Many have detected his engagement in role in his text. 55 I f we are to believe him, Josephus at the beginning of the Be llum Judaicum claims in the typical historiographical manner that he writes without bias. 56 Still, a test may help clarify the matter. Nodet offers a comparison betwee n the Slavonic version of the w Greek account. 57 She notes significant diff erences. The Slav onic version is shorter and clear er and does not involve Sabinus the procurator of Syria. It does, however, state that Varus marched on the rebels upon reaching Jerusalem, that there was a battle, and that many died on both sides. 52 Bilde (1988) 20 1. 53 Bilde (1988) 62. 54 For a summary of arguments, see Bilde (1988) 174 6. For more recent views, see Curran (2011) and Gruen (2011). For Josephus and his attitude about being a Jew in Rome, see Goodm an (1994) 329 38. 55 119 23, 155, and Bilde (1988) 173 Bell ., which was intended to be a pro Roman and Flavian work of prop aganda, Josephus speaks at great length about his participation in the 56 Joseph. BJ 1.1. For more on historiographical statements concerning bias, see Luce (1989). 57 Nodet (2011) 275 7.

PAGE 105

105 Josephus The discrepancy is startling. Whether Josephus offers us an accurate picture of Varus is thus unknown. We must read his text with caution. Pliny the Elder briefly mentions Varu s when he lists many of the misfortunes suffered by Augustus during his career (7.147 ; see Appendix B p. 207 ) While enumerating political adversities, illnesses, other threats on his life, the loss of family members, and various difficulties with the iuxta haec Variana clades et maiestatis eius foeda suggillatio 7.150 ). 58 Varus makes it into most painful woes. Pliny is not a co ntemporary of Varus He was born during the reign of Tiberius in 23 or 24 CE, years after the Varian disaster but still within living memory. T he details of the slaughter were probably still known to him. Pliny began his military career at Mogo ntiacum in Germania in 47 CE. He had experience campaigning against the Chauci under Domitius Corbulo the Chatti in Upper Germania when Pomponius Secundus was governor and in Lower Germania alongside the young Titus Flavius Vespasianus 59 We even have an inscription that possibly links him to the Roman base at Xanten ( Vetera ) 60 Thus it seems he traveled widely all over Germania through his intimate involvement in Roman military affairs there He held three posts on the Rhine 58 Text and translations of Pliny the Elder are from Rackh am (1942). 59 Healy (1999) 5 6; Sallmann (1987) 109; Syme (1979) 746 50. 60 CIL xiii.1026: a metal phalera Plinio praefect

PAGE 106

106 between 4 6 or 47 and 58 CE. 61 Syme writes t and procurator had come to know well th e 62 D uring this time in Germania Pliny began to write his against the Germans 63 This gave Pliny the opportunity to cover the Varian disaster in full detail. F rom his own campaigns in Germania Pliny likely had heard many stories and probably visited sites associated with the slaughter. Coupled with his enthusiasm for rese arch, hi s personal experience in Germania made his account an authority on the subject. If the battle was covered at length in this historical work as we might expect there was surely no need for Pliny to make more than a brief mention of it in his Natura l History But now all but this tiny bit is lost to us. Strate gem ata ster (see Appendix B p p 207 8 ) Once the B attle of the Teutobu rg f orest ended and Varus was dead, the surviving Roman troops had to continue in Germania under other leaders. The g limpses that the Strate gem ata offe r of the aftermath of the Battle of the Teutoburg f orest make these leaders look like clever and careful military strategis ts, stark contrasts to Varus. Caecidius is one such leader who took charge after the Varian disaster. While facing a siege, he feared that the Germans would use gathered wood to burn their fortifications. Feigning a lack of fuel, he sends men out to steal some of the 61 animus princeps to Vespasian (Plin. Ep. 3.5.7), earned the title praefectus alae under him, and also held procuratorships in various places (the exact locations are uncertain). He was praefectus classi at Misenum at the end of his life (Healy [1999] 6 8; Sallmann [1987] 108). 62 Syme (1979) 743. 63 Pliny the Elder had a dream while at Mogontiacum in which Drusus the Elder appeared to him. He was thus inspired to write the 20 books of the Bella Germaniae (Plin. Ep 3.5).

PAGE 107

107 wood. The Germans consequently remove the wood and the Romans are safe from fire (4.7.8) A gain while being besie ged the Romans make sure to show their abundant food stores to their German captives before releasing them so that these captives would tell the besieg ing forces that an attempt to starve out the Romans would be hopeless (3.15.4) Once again the Rom ans avoid disaster, a feat that Varus could not manage. Frontinus lived roughly from the 40s to around 103 CE. He held various political offices and was an esteemed military man. 64 An inscription found at Xanten may even show that he at some time held a command in Lower Germania 65 So he seems a trustworthy source when it comes to military affairs. It is interesting that he never mentions Varus or the Varian disaster di rectly but twice refers to events happening in its wake. These two references to the Varian disaster are notable, however. Turner points Augustus, Claudius, Agrippa, and Germanicus, get no mention at all. 66 So while it may be no surprise that Varus himself is not named in his text, it seems remarkable that his men should show up twice. Arminius, however, makes a brief cameo in the work of Frontinus. When Frontinus discusses the afterm aths of battles, he notes that Arminius put the heads of his dead foes on spears and displayed them outside the enemy 64 According to Perkins (1937) 102 he was urban praetor for a short time in 70, suffect consul in 73, and governor of Britain in 74. Turner (2007) 426, 429 writes that he was proconsul of Asia in 84/5, curator aquarum in 97, suffect consul again in 98, and consul ordinarius in 100 65 CIL xiii. 8624; Perkins (1937) 102. 66 Turner (200 7) 432.

PAGE 108

108 fortifications (2.9.4). 67 This anecdote inject s the sting of Varus and his disaster into the text again, and again indirectly. These early authors, then, are writing at various times before Tacitus, with various purposes and in various genres. It is interesting to note that many of these early authors are not writing history like Tacitus but are writing what might be collectively described as academic or didactic works, works in which a historical episode like the Varian disaster may not be expected. We have geography with Strabo, rhetoric with Seneca the Elder, the heavens with Manilius, a natural history with Plin y the Elder, and military strate gy with Frontinus. These technical treatises are focused on very specific areas of knowledge yet they somehow manage to find a place for Varus. It nearly seems that no matter what the Romans living in the aftermath of the disaster were wri ting, they were able to include the infamous Varus in some way. This was the impact he had on the first century CE. These authors also offer us views of Varus from various points in his life time. Some, like Josephus and Velleius, give us an idea of what V arus was lik e before his disaster in Germania Some give us details about the disaster itself, and others give us information about the aftermath and reception of the disaster. They all contribut ed to a tradition of Varus that writing T hus knowledge of these texts has the potential to amplify parts of the Annals We now turn to examine these early sources thematically and investigate the overarching messages they send about Varus. When these earlier authors write about Varus, t hey a ppear to label him as a bad 67 Frontin. Str 2.9.4: Arminius dux Germanorum capita eorum, quos occiderat, similiter praefixa ad vallum hostium admoveri iussit those he had slain Text and translations of Frontinus are from Bennett (1925).

PAGE 109

109 general or as an unfortunate victim. O f all the early authors considered here Velleius offers the fullest body of information on Varus, so we will use him as our guide Our other authors will add information and build on th e foundation laid by his text. Varus the P erson These early sources give only character family, and ties to the imperial house. Velle ius offers by far the fullest de scription of Varus the person, and he in fact allows himself a digression with which to cover the personality of the general : Varus Quintilius in lustri magis quam nobili ortus familia, uir ingenio mitis, moribus quietus, ut corpore ita animo immobilior, otio magis castrorum quam bellicae adsuetus militiae, pecuniae uero quam non contemptor, Syria, cui praefuerat, declarauit, quam pauper diuitem ingressus diues pauperem reliquit; i s, cum exercitui qui erat in Germania praeesset, concepit esse homines, qui nihil praeter uocem mem braque haberent hominum, quiq ue gladiis domari non poterant, posse iure mulceri. Quo proposito mediam ingressus Germaniam uelut inter uiros pa cis gaudentes dulcedine iurisdictionibus agendoque pro tribunali ordine trahebat aestiua. Varus Quintilius, descended from a famous rather tha n a high born family, was a man of mild character and of a quiet disposition, somewhat slow in mind as he was in body, and more accustomed to the leisure of the camp than to actual service in war. That he was no despiser of money is demonstrated by his gov ernorship of Syria: he entered the rich province a poor man, but left it a rich man and the province poor. When placed in charge of the army in Germany, he entertained the notion that the Germans were a people who were men only in limbs and voice, and that they, who could not be subdued by the sword, could be soothed by the law. With this purpose in mind he entered the heart of Germany as though he were going among a people enjoying the blessings of peace, and sitting on his tribunal he wasted the time of a summer campaign in holding court and observing the proper details of legal procedure. Vell. Pat. 2.117.2 4 Velleius mentions but fills in no parti cular details. Instead he discuss es both physically and mentally, a friend more of leisure than of battle, and desirous of money even at the expense of others. Velleius does not paint Varus as a good leader either for Syria or for Germania

PAGE 110

110 Varus seriously misjudges the Germans and fails to use his army and his time properly. Rather than engaging in the needed military activity, he wasted time with legal procedure. To punctuate further the insinuation that Varus was not the ideal Roman vision of a brave military man, Velleius descri bes his quite unheroic death : Duci plus ad moriendum quam ad pugnandum animi fuit: quippe paterni auitique successor exempli se ipse transfixit. The general had more courage to die than to fight, for, following the example of his father and grandfather, he ran hi mself through with his sword. Vell. Pat. 2.119.3 Varus is depicted following in the footsteps of his famous military family members by choosing the noble act of suicide, but the deed is made ignoble when Velleius mentions his lack of courage. Varus is depicted giving up. This embar r assment is made worse s sent from Maroboduus to Augustus But Velleius writes that the After his long description of Varus and the battle, Velleius concludes with an apology fo Ex quo apparet Varum, sane grauem et bonae uo luntatis uirum, ma gis imperatoris defectum consilio quam uirtute desti tutum militum se magnificentis simumque perdi disse exercitum. From all this it is evident that Varus, who was, it must be confessed, a man of character and of good intentions, lost his life and his magnificent army more through lack of judgement in the commander than of valour in his soldiers. Vell. Pat. 2.120.5 writes about, but it demonstrates that Varus is often categorized as a bad general or a n unfortunate victim. Velleius depicts him as both

PAGE 111

111 Varus the Bad G eneral man of good he heavily insinuates that Varus was a accustomed to military service and instead of using his army he prefer r ed to hold court and fo cus on legal matters (2.117 .4 ). Ind eed Varus fashioned h imself as more of a judge than a general (2.118 .1 ). Moreover w hen it came time to fight, Varus did not play the role of the general but decided instead to die. Varus is also labeled as a bad general because of his ne gligence, a feature emphasiz ed by Velleius with three different synonyms : Velleius labels behavior as the greatest negligence ( summam socordiam 2.118.1 ); Arminius is said to have segnitia ducis 2.118.2 ); the slaughter was caused in part by the negligence of its general ( marcore ducis 2.119.2 ). 68 The fact that Varus was known for negligence is supported also by Seneca the Elder. A n opponent of neglegentia loss ( ista neglegentia pater tuus exercitum perdidit Controv 3 ) and uses it to belittle the young Varus. Indeed, Varus was notorious enough for the following generation to remember it. Velleius also mentions ment tw ice. I t is suggested that his judg ment was corrupted by fate ( consilia corrumpat 2.118. 4 ), and his lack of judg ment is given as the main cause of the slaughter ( imperatoris defectum consilio 2.120.5 ). is a common beginning of 68 Shipley (1924) translates the synonyms socordia segnitia and marcor

PAGE 112

112 disaster, was a sense of security (2.118. 2) fear and use it against him. Velleius mentio ns several times that his men were brave and talented. are first described ( exercitus omnium fortissimus, disciplina, manu experientiaque bellorum inter Romanos milites princeps 2.119.2 ). Velleius follows this praise of the troops immediately with marcore ducis providing a steep contrast between the excellence of the army and the fail ures of Varus. Velleius apologizes for th e troops and exonerates them from any responsibility for the disaster. T he soldiers were not given much of an opportunity to fight or escape from the ambush; under normal circumstances the Romans would have defeated their foes easily ( 2.119.2). In his conc lusion of the cause of the disaster, faults lost his life and his magnificent army more through lack of judge ment in the commander than of valour i n his soldiers magis imperatoris defectum consilio quam virtute destitutum militum se magnificentissimumque perdidisse exercitum 2.120.5). Although his troops were top notch Varus w as an inadequate leader He did not have the sense to use them and he wasted their talents. This pins the blame of the disaster squarely on Varus. specific examples. The praefect Lucius Eggius acted nobly (2.119.4) The lieutenant Lucius Aspr enas is praised for having saved his men from the slaughter and for securing the alleg iance of tribes in Lower Germania His two legions are praised in

PAGE 113

113 connection to him: they aid Asprenas with an industrious and manly effort ( gnava virilique opera 2.120.3 ). The camp praefect Lucius Caedicius also earns praise along with his men While besie ged at Aliso they used careful planning, foresight, and watchfulness along with fighting (all things that Varus lacked) to escape t heir situation (2.120.4) Frontinus praises this same Caedicius at Strate gem ata 4.7.8. When the besie ged Caedicius worries that the Germans will use nearby wood to burn down the Roman fortifications, he uses quick thinking to prevent this. A similar situat ion occurs at Strate gem ata 3.15.4. The besi e ged Romans trick their German prisoners into thinking that their food supply is plentiful so that when the prisoners are released, they convince the German forces that it is hopeless to force the Romans into subm ission through hunger. The s e pa troops got what they really needed: clever, strong leadersh ip that could save them from disast rous situations. Immediately after relating the story of Caedicius Velleius concludes that the disaster w r of his troops (2.120.5). And following this, a final story of courage is told about Caldus Caelius, a prisoner who ended his life by hitting himself over th e head with his chains (2.120.6) Velleius embe ds his statement of failure in accounts of the bravery and quick thinking of others Indeed as a bad general Varus easily makes others look good. Although Velleius never seems to miss an opp ortunity to praise Tiberius, at 2.120.1 2 he does not have to try hard. Tiberius swoops in with his armies, strengthens the garrisons, and (most unlike Varus) he does not misjudge his enemy ( non fiducia hostis metiens 2.120.1 ). Also u nlike Varus, he embraces battle i nstead of shunning it ( arma infert hosti quem arcuisse

PAGE 114

114 pater et patria contenti erant 2.120.2 ) and accomplishes much without losing any men ( incolumni omnium, quos transduxerant 2.120.2). Tiberius exhibits the positive akes milita ry campaigning in Germania look easy, thus making Varus look even more foolish. It must be conc eded that Velleius does portray a few men besides Varus negatively. Ceio nius is criticized for his sugg estion to surrender and his desire to die by to rture rather than in battle. But this comparative phrase ( auctor deditionis supplicio quam proelio mori maluit 2.119.4 ) seems to echo the comparative phrase about Varus just a few sentences earlier ( duci plus ad moriendum quam ad pugnandum animi fuit 2.1 Ceio reflect s and amplifies Velleius also criticizes Vala Numonius because, like Varus, he was not a good leader for his men in batt le and he did not have the bravery to fight until the bitter end. Lucius Asprenas is the third man to attract blame, although Velleius seems to suggest by the words Sunt tamen, qui...crederint ke Varus when he was governor in Syria, supposedly demonstrated greed and took from others when his official position afforded him the opportunity to do so. Thus these men and their shameful beha When these details fro m these pre T acitean authors are brought to the surface Varus appears to be a very bad general and seems to deserve to be the man be hind what many considered the most serious Roman defeat. But sprinkled throughout the works of these same early authors are suggestions that perhaps Varus is not as blameworthy as he is made out to be. Perhaps Varus is just an unfortunate victim.

PAGE 115

115 Varus the V ictim When our pre Tacitean aut hors try to make Varus look unfortunate rather than blameworthy, they portray him as a victim either of deceit, barbaric ferocity, or fate. Strabo, for example, makes the treachery of the Germans clear when he writes that the Germans ambushed Varus and tha t they were in clear violation of their treaty (7.1.4) Varus trusted the Germans because they had an agreement, but t he Germans chose perfidy instead When Vel leius introduces the Germans they are noted for supreme craft iness ( versutissimi n.b. the supe rlative form to an extent scarcely credible to one who has had no experience with them natumque mendacio genus 2.118.1 ). A fter Velleius introduces Arminius, he writes that the German as an opportunity for evil ( in occasionem sceleris ) and then provides some details about Arminius plotting: how he gathered men, persuaded them, and named a day for the treachery ( tempus insidiarum 2.118.3 ). When Velleius be gins to describe the disaster, the perfidy of the enemy ( perfidia hostis 2.119.1) is one of three reasons such an excellent army was able to be slaughtered. 69 Manilius, too, notes the deceit of the Germans. He uses the Varian disaster as an example of an occasion when the heavens portended that arms would be raised in treachery ( clandestinis surgentia fraudibus arma 1. 897 ). Manilius also writes that the Germans broke the ir oaths when they attacked Varu s ( foedere rupto 1 898). The Germans are portrayed as a treacherous group in these sta tements and deflect some blame off of Varus. When the Germans are made deceitful, Varus looks like the poor victim of deceit. 69 The other two reasons are the negligence of its general ( marcore ducis ), which has been covered above, and the unkindness of fortune ( iniquitate fortunae ), which will be covered below.

PAGE 116

116 Varus is also a victim of German barbarity and ferocity. Again, Velleius makes great ferocity one of the key features of the Germans ( in summa feritate versutissimi 2.118.1). Part of the German deceit was to al low Varus to think he was tam ing their barbarous nature ( feritasque sua...mitesceret 2.118.1 ) when he settled their lawsuits. But the Roma ns were exterminated ( ad internecionem trucidatus est 2.119.2 ) by ( hostilis laceraverat feritas 2.119.5). Even when the battle ended the Germans continue d their rage against the Roman captives ( in captivos saeviretur a Germanis 2.120.6). The word feritas is used three times in these passages to describe the Germans. Similarly when Manilius describes Germania he uses the adjective fera ( 1. hus portrayed as savage and bloodthirsty almost to an i nhuman extent, his loss against them seems more forgiv able. What makes Varus look most blameless, however, is the suggestion that fate or fortune had a large hand in his loss. Indeed, Velleius mentions the inequality of fortune as one of the three reasons why his army perished (2.119.1). First, fortune was involved when he writes that fortune granted them an indulgence concerning the timing of the disaster (2.117.1) After Varus plot, Velleius writes Sed praevalebant iam fata consiliis omnemque animi eius aciem praestrinxerant 2.118.4). Thi s sentence, and particularly the word praevalebant insinuate s that Varus no longer had control over himself and his own decisions. He wa s t aken over by fate, and so he could not be held responsible for his actions. Second, Velleius continues ly the case that heaven perverts the judgement of the man

PAGE 117

117 ita se res habet, ut plerumque cuius fortunam mutaturus est deus, consilia corrumpat 2.118.4). We have already seen that one of nfalls was his flawed judg ment. But here Velleius suggests that forces. Third, Velleius make s pass...that that which happens by cha nce seems to be deserved, and accident passes efficiatque...ut, quod accidit, etiam merito accidisse videatur et casus in culpam transeat 2.118.4). In this final statement Velleius seems to attempt to free Varus from any kind of bl ame with the suggestion that the disaster happened by chance and was not his fault. Or perhaps we can loo k at this statement another way; Velleius certainly plants throughout his account the idea that Varus was a bad general who deserved such a great disas ter, but he also hints that Varus may have been a victim Perhaps Velleius presents his readers with this thought provoking statement so he can continue to ride the fenc e and deflect the duty of judging Varus on to the reader Manilius also suggests that d ivine forces were invo fires in the sky foretold disaster for Varus ( Astron 1.896 905) When the battle raged on earth, we have not the saepe domi culpa est: nescimus credere caelo 1 905 ). 70 Thus Manil ius also stra d dles the fenc e on Varus; he is a victim of fate or divine forces but he should have been warned by those divine forces. There is room for blame as well. 70 Text and translations of Manilius are from Goold (1977).

PAGE 118

118 Whether these early authors label Varus as a failure or victim, one thing they all agree upon is t he seriousness of the disaster When Strabo writes that the German ), he is refer r ing to the German peoples who fought Controversiae shows that the Varian disaster was serious enough to be remembered by the next generation and to haunt the son of Varus. Vellei us hints at the seriousness of the disaster when he lists the great loss of life: Varus, three legions, three divisions of cavalry, and six cohorts ( 2.117.1 ) But he really enforces the weight of the disaster when he calls it a most terrible calamity, the heaviest that had befallen the Romans on foreign soil since the disaster of Crassus in atrocissimae calamitatis, qua nulla post Crassi in Parthis damnum in externis gentibus grauior Romanis fuit 2.119.1). Manilius describes th e heavenly portent s ass ociated with the disaster as if he were describing the end of the world. He writes that et ipsa tu lit bellum natura per ignes / opposuitque suas vires finemque minata est 1. 902 3). Pliny the Elder sees fit to list the disaster among the most serious maiestatis eius foeda suggillatio 7 .150). 71 Frontinus gives us a glimpse into the horrible aftermath of the slaughter and the dangerous situations the survivors had to deal with. Without a doubt these pre Tacitean authors strongly demonstrate that the Varian disaster was very serious to the Romans. 71 Suggillat io is a rare word but it is used three times by Pliny the Elder (31.100, 32.74, and here at 7.150).

PAGE 119

119 Varus in Parallel and Post Tacitean Authors Thus far we have examined p re Tacitean authors who may h ave influenced Tacitus directly or may have used the same sources as Tacitus. The entire literary tradition of Varus is not extant, but pre Tacitean authors can help give us an idea of what in formation might be missing Authors that are contemporaneous with and later than Tacitus can al so help us piece together the tradition on which Tacitus was building. It i s important to consider w hat these authors say about Var us since they too may have obtained information from the same sources used by Tacitus. Once again we will be focus ing on the texts of Florus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio all of whom lived and wrote at the same time or short ly after Tacitus. Like Drusus, it seems Varus was still worth talking about all the way through the end of the first century CE and into the second century, since these three authors see fit to afford him such space and detail in their works. Florus offers ten sections to the account of the Varian disaster, a sizable chunk especially compared to some of the pieces ex t ant from the pre Tacitean authors. Suetonius discusses the Varian disaster most extensively in his lives of Augustus and Tiberius, but he make s mention of it also in the life of Caligula. And Cassius Dio the latest of the three author s offers the longest account as well as the greatest amount of detai l concerning the battle. In fact, he includes many detail s not found elsewhere, either because he had exclusive access to some sources or because he alone judged this information worthy of space In any case, these three authors not only affirm but amplify what we know about Varus from the pre Tacitean tradition. These authors affirm nce, the ferocity and deceit of the Germans, and the perception of the role of fate in the disaster. They amplify the seriousness of the disaster, especially the way it affected Augustus personally. Finally they add to the list

PAGE 120

120 of difficulties the Romans e xperience during the battle; most importantly, they add to the ch aracter of Varus, who appears more cruel and seems to have a greater effect on the behavior of others. Tacitean authors. Florus at the very iciencies as a leader in Germania by contrasting him with Drusus, whom Florus claims the Germans respect ed (see Appendix B p p 208 9) ; Varus he could restrain the violence of barba rians by the rod of a lictor and the proclamation of a herald activity. 72 This is similar to the accusation made by Velleius that Varus acted more like a judge than a general (2.117) Also like Velleius, Florus emphasize nt character by mentioning his misplaced confidence and lack of fear and his arrogant careless reaction to Segestes : 73 cum interim tanta erat Varo pacis fiducia ut ne prodita quidem per Segestem unum principum coniuratione com moveretur. I taque inprovidum et nihil tale metuentem ex inproviso adorti, cum ille o securitas ad tri bunal citaret, undique invadunt; Meanwhile Varus was so confident of peace that he was quite unperturbed even when the conspiracy was betrayed to him by Segestes, one of the chiefs. And so when he was unprepared and had no fear of any such thing, at a moment when (such was his confidence) he was actually summoning them to appear before his tribunal, they rose and attacked him from all sides. Flor. 2.30.33 4 Immediately al of the battle. Through such juxtaposition Florus strongly implies cause and effect. Suetonius (see Appendix B p p 210 1) similarly assert s through the thoughts of Tiberius that 72 Flor. 2.30.31 : quasi violentiam barbarorum lictoris virgis et praeconis voce posset inhibere. Text and translations of Florus are from Forster (1929). 73 Cf. Vell. Pat. 2.118.2: qui nihil timeret et frequentissimum initium esse calamitatis securitatem ; Vell. Pat. 2.118.4: Negat itaque se credere speciemque in se benevolentiae ex merito aestimare profitetur

PAGE 121

121 gligence was the cause: Proximo anno repetita Germania cum animaduerteret Varianam cladem temeritate et neglegentia ducis accidisse, nihil non de consilii sententia egit The next year he returned to Germany, and realiz ing that the disaster to Varus was d ue to that general's rashness and lack of care he took no step without the approval of a council 74 The words used by Suetonius to characterize Varus are temeritas and negligentia Seneca the Elder also connects the word negligentia with Varus, whereas Velleius uses the words socordia segnitia and marcor Suetonius alone uses temeritas Dio likewise asserts negligence (see Appendix B p p 212 9) Varus did not keep ( 56.19.1 ) but rather had them scattered apart as he moved fro m the Rhine towards the Weser 75 Varus was blinded by trust, confidence, and arrogance. He felt he had established bonds of friendship with Armin ius and Segimerus who spent time and frequently feasted with him ( ), and so he wa s confident ( ) suspected nothing ( ), and r ebuked those who warn ed him to be on guard ( 56.19.3 ). It is i nteresting to note that in Dio, Varus is warned by multiple unspecified people, whereas in Velleius, Florus, and Tacitus the warning comes from S egestes 76 When Dio implies that several people were suspicious and tried to warn Varus it makes Varus appear more oblivious and negligent as a general and thus more culpable. 74 Suet. Tib 18.1. Text and translations Tiberius are from Rolfe (1913). 75 Text and translations of Cassius Dio 56 and 57 are from Cary (1924). 76 Vell. Pat. 2.118; Flor. 2.30.33; Tac. Ann 1.55, 1.58.

PAGE 122

122 L ike their pre Tacitean predecessors, Florus and Dio also portray the Ger mans as a fierce, deceitful foe Florus suggests the wild nature of the G erman s when he writes that they had long been regretting that their swords were rusted and their horses idle ( 2.30.32). In addition, the Germans are very barbaric because of their strong aversion to Roman order. Florus writes that they were adverse to the togas and th e harsh laws of the Romans, and he criticiz es Varus for thinking that he could tame the violentia barbarorum with his administration (2.30.31 2) His foolishness leaves him open to their deceit: when he summons them to his tribunal, they attack from all sides (2.30.34) Florus offers us a most gru e some account of German ferocity during the battle : some lose their eyes, others, their hands. Once again the Germans show anger towards Roman order: they are most cruel towards legal pleaders and even cut out the tongue of one man before sewing up his mouth (2.30.36 7) Not even the body of the consul is respected as it is dug up from the ground (2.30.38) Concerning the nature of the Germans, Dio writes that they were not forgetful of their ancestral (56.18.2) but unlike Florus, Dio portrays Germans who The barbarians were adapting themselves to Roman ways, were becoming accustomed to hold markets, and w ere 56.18.2 ). As long as it was gradual, they did not mind or even notice the change (56.18.3) The trouble begins when Varus tries to change them too quickly, orders the m about like slaves, and takes their money (56.18.3) Only t hen do resort to revolt. A hint of this same idea can be seen when Florus

PAGE 123

123 writes that the Germans respected the Romans under Drusus, but became discontent ed under Varus (2.30.30 1) T he Germa ns show carefully orchestrated deceit. T hey first draw Varus away from the Rhine while pretending to be frien dly and submissive ( Cass. Dio 56.18.5) S everal communities requested aid from the Romans so the legions would be scattered (56.19.1) Dio then goes to great length and detail to describe the way the plans of the Germans played out: a staged uprising lures Varus out into what he thinks is friendly territory, the Germans excuse themselves to meet up with their troops, they kill the scattered detachments of Romans, and then attack just as Varus reaches difficult terrain (56.19.3 5) deceit of the Romans. Much of the deceit in Dio derive s from the repeated notion that the Germans acted friendly towards the Romans. As the Romans enter the territory of the Cherusci, the inhabitants are friendly ( 56.18.5 ). Armi nius and Segimerus had formed friendly bonds with Varus by spending time and feasting with him, and Varus is led to believe he was crossing friendly territory ( 56.19.2; 56.19.4 ). It is therefore a great shock when the Germans reveal themselves as en emies at the very end of the paragraph ( 56.19.5 ) The Germans in pre Tacitean texts are ferocious and barbaric. Similarly, the German in their reaction against it. For Dio however, the Germans are willing participants of the Roman order unt il Varus pushes them too much (56.18.2 3) Then they become not wild attack ers as Florus describes but care brutal Germans may garner some sympathy for Varus, and like the pre Tacitean authors, may m ake him

PAGE 124

124 look like a victim. But Germans heap responsibility for the disaster on Varus. A ccording to Dio, Varus pushed the cooperative Germans into revolt. Indeed when compared to the pre Tacitean sources, Florus and Dio portray Varus with a darker character. The pre Tacitean a uthors did not accuse Varus of much more than negligence. Velleius once hints and laziness (2.117.2) and the ( 2.72 5 ) may be considered cruel, but otherwise extant pre Tacitean sources Florus and Dio, on the other hand, add some neg ative aspects to his character. Florus even compares ( magis quam...haud secus quam ) mores : he attaches licentiousness ( libidinem ) pride ( superbiam ) and cruelty ( saevitiam ) to Varus and offers them as reasons why the Germans went f rom being content under Drusus to discontent ed under Varus. 77 ausus ) to make proclamations over the Germans, particularly over the Catthi (2.30.31) ( saeviora armis iura 2.30.32 ). Thus th e Germans we re driven to rally under Arminius. Dio also suggests that the Germans were content until Varus came along. He t ries to change them too quickly; his way of issuing orders does not sit well with the he exacted money as he would from subject nations (56.18.2 3). The Germans soon view (56.18.4) trayed differently by these two authors. P erhaps the tradition surrounding Varus changed and intensified over time. 77 Flor. 2.30.30 1: moresque nostros magis quam arma sub imperatore Druso suspicie bant; postquam ille defunctus es t, Vari Quintili libidinem ac superbiam haud secus quam saevitiam odisse coeperunt under the rule of Drusus they respected our moral qualities rather than our arms. After his death they began to detest the licentiousn ess and pride not less than the cruelty

PAGE 125

125 Perhaps the story of Varus got more and more colorful as each generation of Romans told it. Or perhaps they follow earlier sources that are no longer extant. P erhaps there was a part of the pre Tacitean tradition that made Varus into a cruel greedy general and was still around when Tacitus was writing and beyond, but is lost to us now. In any case, Tacitus himself does not engage in the same c haracterization of Varus as Florus cruelty or greed. The Varus in the texts of Florus and Dio is not only darker, but he also has greater effect on those around him. We have seen already how he directly compels the Germans to revolt (Cass. Dio 56.18.3) He also has a significant impact on his own men T he hatred that Varus had instilled in the Germans from his severe law making cause s the Germans to rage more brutally against t he Roman administrator s ( Florus 2.30. 36 ) Dio reports that commit suicide with him (56.21.5) But this is not as surprising as what follows. The rest of the men i mmediately give up, some of them imitating Varus with suicide: When news of this had spre ad, none of the rest, even if he had any strength left, defended himself any longer. Some imitated their leader, and others, casting aside their arms, allowed anybody who pleased to slay them; for to flee was impossible, however much one might desire to do so. Cass. Dio 56.22.1 His decision to commit suicide influences others to give up as well.

PAGE 126

126 Suetonius elaborates the effect of Varus on Tiberius who realizes that the disaster was due in large part to Varu negligentia and temeritas therefore he modifies his own behavior wit h the hope that he will not face the same problems as Varus ( Tib 18.1) C ontrary to his normal tendency, Tiberius consulted several advisors conce rning his campaign in Germania and did not act without their approval. Ordinarily Tiberius was supposed to be quite independent, but unlike Varus who did not li sten to any warnings, Tiberius decides to seek the counsel of many. Also unlike the negligent Varus, Tiberius is more careful ( curam...exactiorem Tib. 18.1 ). or does influence Tiberius when he enters Germania during the next campaign season. Tiberius does not want to become like Varus. Dio reports a similar influence over Tiberius ( and also Germanicus ) The two in their fear of falling victims to a fresh disaster they did not advance very far beyond the 56. similar to that suffered by Varus. Once again, the memory of Varus affects the behavior of others. The person most deeply affected by Varus and his disaster, however, is Augustus, and the post Tacitean authors make this abundantly clear through multiple references to the seriousness of the disaster and the very personal impact it had on the emperor. The se riousness of the disaster is acknowledged by Florus when he compares the death of Varus to that of Paulus at the battle of Cannae (2.30.35) This comparison puts the Varian disaster on the same level as one of the most disasterous battle s in all

PAGE 127

127 of Roman h istory. The seriousness is also implied wh en Florus summarizes the result: the empire, which had n ot stopped on the shores of the Ocean, was checke d on the imperium, quod in litore Oceani non steterat, in ripa Rheni fluminis s taret Tacitus himself mentions the Varian alongside the Lollian disaster wh reign ( pacem sine dubio post haec, verum cruentam: Lollianas Varianasque clades without a doubt there was peace after this, in truth bloody peace: there were the Lollian and Varian disasters Ann 1.10 ). Simila rly, Suetonius writes that Augustus only suffered two severe and ignominious defeats g raues ignominias cladesque Aug. 23.1 the former was more humiliating than serious, but the latter was almost fatal sed Lollianam maioris infamiae quam detrimenti, Varianam paene exitiabilem Aug. 23.1 ). 78 Finally, according to Suetonius infamous for the Varian disaster even years later in the eyes of the emperor Caligula. At Caligula had the Varian disaster. Suetonius offer s the fullest description o f defeat and its effect on Augustus ( Aug 23.1 2) Like Velleius ( 2.117.1 ) Suetonius emphasizes the destruction of the entire army: three legions, the general, the lieutenants and the auxiliaries. The emergency procedures taken by Augustus upon hearing the news are 78 Text and translations Augustus are from Rolfe (1913).

PAGE 128

128 outlined: night watches are posted around the city, and the governors of the provinces are retained for a longer period to ensure the loyalty of the allies. Then, in accordance with historical precedent, he vows games to Jupiter Optimus Maximus. His personal reaction is reserved for last: adeo denique consternatum ferunt, ut per continuos me nses barba capilloque summisso caput interdum foribus illideret uociferans: 'Quintili Vare, legiones redde!' diemque cladis quotann is maestum habuerit ac lugubrem. In fact, they say that he was so greatly affected that for several months in succession he cut neither his beard nor his hair, and sometimes he would dash his head against a door, crying: "Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!" And he observed the day of the disaster each year as one of sorrow and mourning. Aug 23.2 Dio of fers a similar account of Augustus v iolently uncomposed and publicly mourning: Augustus, when he learned of the dis aster to Varus, rent his garments, as some report, and mourned greatly, not only because of the soldiers who had been lost, but also because of his fear for the German and Gallic provinces, and particularly because he expected that the enemy would march ag ainst Italy and against Rome itself. Cass. Dio 56.23 .1 Mourning is institutionalized by Tiberius who delays the celebration of his triumph because the city was in mourning over the Varian disaster ( triumphum ipse distulit maesta ciuitate clade Variana Tib 17.2 ) In spite of the delay of ceremony, the Varian disaster brought addition f Tiberius had not taken care of the trouble in Illyricum, the victorious Germans undoubtedly would have united with the Pannonians again st Rom e ( Tib 17.1). In Suetonius as in Velleius Varus makes Tiberius look good as a commander.

PAGE 129

129 In addition to mourning, the disaster causes changes to the atmosphere in the city of Rome. Augustus is afraid of an uprising, so he posts night watches. T he terrible news of the disaster prevents the celebration of a festival (Cass. Dio 56.18.1). Dio states that usual business had stopped and no festivals were celebrated (56.24.1) Augustus takes measures that affect many lives. H e struggles to f ind men willi ng to go to Germania with Tiberius and he is forced to punish some by confiscating their property, and others by execution (56.23.2 3) The many Germans and Gauls in the city, including those on the praetorian guard, he sends away for fear of rebellion (56 .23.4). Dio explains that once Augustus heard that the Germans were not advancing to he ceased to be alarmed and paused to consider the matter p icture: For a catastrophe so great and sudden as this, it seemed to him, could have been due to nothing else than the wrath of some divinity; moreover, by reason of the portents which occurred both before the defeat and afterwards, he was strongly inclined to susp ect some superhuman agency. Cass. Dio 56.24.2 Dio then proceeds to list eight different portent s associated with the disaster, o ne reminiscent of Manilius: the sky is ab many portents reiterate the message of Manilius. A divine or super human force was involved in the Varian disaster, but the disaster should have been anticipated from all the many signs provided beforehand. As in the pre Tacitean authors, this way of thinking makes

PAGE 130

130 Varus, and by extension Augustus, look li ke an unfortunate victim of fate. 79 Yet at the same time, this way of thinking leaves some room for blame. In these post Tacitean authors, then, Varus can be seen having a great effect on the Ger mans, his own men, Augustus, Tiberius and even the city of Ro me These authors ponder more deeply what the Varian disaster meant to the different parties involved. Perhaps with time comes greater per spective or at least distance The later authors had a greater context of Roman history within which to place Varus and his disaster. They can gage its seriousness alongside other events and make judgments based not only on a wider scope of time, but on a wider scope of sources. The literary tradition of Varus under Dio was certainly much more expansive than that which existed in the time of Velleius. by far the long est and most detailed narrative of Varus He covers every stage of the disaster: the events leading up to it, the actua l battle, the sieges after the battle, and the reaction and aftermath. He covers just about every topic seen in our pre Tacitean detail s not seen in our other authors For example, Dio writes extensively about the fighting itself from 56.20 22. He discusses terrain and the difficulties it caused the Romans (56.20.1). He mentions the baggage, women, children, and slaves that hi ndered them (56.20.2 5 ). He describes twice how bad weather made their efforts more difficult (56.20.3, 56.21.3). He then proceeds to write about the battle from day 79 Dio mentions the effect of unlucky fate on both Varus and Germanicus at 57.20.1 2. He notes that Tiberius was evidently doomed to exert some fatal influence throughout his life held the consulship with him, including Varus and Germanicus, died horribly. It seems Varus and Germanicus have this one thing in common.

PAGE 131

131 one through day four. The Germans, being well acquainted with the thick forest, surround the unprepared Romans (56.20.4 5). After sufferin g heavy losses the Romans make camp, and the next day they experience more difficulty fighting in the forest (56.21.1 2). They even have trouble wielding their own weapons due to the bad weather conditions (56.21.3) The Germans, on the other hand, have an easier time fighting because they are more lightly armed and thus can better tolerate the storm (56.21.4). They also gain reinforcements as more Germans join the cause for the sake of loot ccount of the battle does a thorough job explaining all of the disadvantages of the Romans and all of the advantages of the Germans. Then there is the aftermath (56.22.2a and 2b 4) The Germans begin to occupy various forts and lay sieges, but Dio notes they did not understand the conduct of sieges 56.22. 2a) Strate gem ata seem easily to outwit their besiegers. Also like Frontinus (3.15.4) Dio describes besieged Romans who suffer from hunger (56.2 2.2b) But unlike in account, the Romans are unable to fool the Germans and eventually have to make a desperate sally out during a stormy night. Dio again offers details of every step of this story: the progress of the Romans up to the third German outpost, the discovery of their escape because of the women and children, their avoidance of total capture due to the focus of the Germans on plunder and the quick thinking of the Roman trumpeters, the aid brought in by Asprenas, and the ransoming o f prisoners after the event. This account by Dio is much fuller than anything offered by Frontinus, although the subject matter is similar.

PAGE 132

132 The reasons for such detail and length may be numerous. Perhaps Dio had access to sources that were no t available to earlier authors. Or perhaps these sources were indeed available to others, but those authors simply decided no t to include that his tory which embraces full description. be shorter and shows hesitation for digression. It is possible that such authors would not be interested in the sort of detail which Dio provides due to the very nature of their work. Furthe rmore Dio may simply be engaging in inventio when he offers such detailed accounts. Inventio was certainly not out of the question for ancient authors of history, and in fact it would be considered the substance of history 80 Thus some of the construc tion. One further passage deserves consideration. Orosius, a much later author living at the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth century CE, preserves the harsh tradition surrounding Varus and although his section on Varus is brief (6.21.26 7) he (see Appendix B p. 220) Varus is la beled for his haughtiness and greed ( superbia atque avaritia ), the legions are described as completely wiped out ( funditus deletus est ), and Augustus is depicted hitting his head 81 T post Tacitean tradition seems to last very consistently for hundreds of years. 80 For inventio in history, see Bosw orth (2003). 81 Suetonius just a few sections earlier at 6.21.25.

PAGE 133

133 Tacitus wo uld surely have used the tradition surrounding Varus to its full potential but for his own purposes He has little reason to assas s negligence Segest es often ( saepe ) attempted to warn Varus about rebellion; he eve n encouraged Varus to arrest himself and the other German leaders at a banquet. But (1.55) Later Segestes speaks again about his warning to Varus and his suggestion that he be arrested with Arminius and the o thers, but he says that he was put off by the negligence of the leader ( dilatus segnitia ducis 1.58 ). The word segnitia is used by Tacitus, as also by Velleius (2.118.2) Aside from these two passages, Varus is not emphatically portrayed as a bad general as he is by some of our other authors. Neither is Varus emphatically portrayed as a victim. Tacitus once suggests that Varus may have fallen victim to fate ( sed Varus fato et vi Armini cecidit O therwise fate is not emphasiz ed as a factor in the disaster, certainly not as it is by Manilius or Dio. Varus can, however, be viewed as a victim of fierce Germans Varus is killed by fate, but also by the violence of Arminius ( v i Armini 1.55 ). The horror of the Teutoburg f orest also portrays the Germans as brutal foes. Tacitus describes piles of u nburied bones that remain scattered everywh ere and skulls that are nailed to trees as evidence of a violent massacre He menti ons altars where tribu nes and centurio ns were slaughtered ( macta v erant 1.61). Survivors point out places where officers fell, where Varus was wounded, and where he committed suicide. Tacitus recount s

PAGE 134

134 the standards and eagles ( utque signis et aquilis per superbiam inluserit 1.61 ). There are hints of German brutality from the battle: the son of Segimerus is said to have insulted the corpse of Varus (2.71) We may compare Florus s disinterred body (2.30.38) According to Tacitus, he was wounded before committing suicide (1.61), perhaps suggesting that he at least put up some of a fight and that his suicide was not entirely cowardly as other a uthors seem to insinuate. The suicide itself is done infelici dextera by his unlucky hand. The adjective infelici carries a tone of wretchedness and ill fortune. This is another instance where the role of fate is implied. The word certainly injects sympathy into this suicide scene and portrays Varus as an unfortunate victim. of its impact on Augustus, the loss of the military standards and eagles, and the mourning of the soldiers at the Teutoburg f orest T he only war Augustus had on hi s hands was against the Germans and that was only to erase the shame of his loss of the army under Varus ( bell um ea tempestate nullum nisi adversus Germanos supererat, abolendae magis infamiae ob amissum cum Quintilio Varo exercitum quam cupidine proferendi imperii aut dignum ob praemium 1.3 ). Tacitus mentions the Varian disaster as one of only two disasters to m (1.10) These two passages alone describe the effect of Varus and his disaster on Augustus. Unlike Suetonius and Dio, Tacitus records no o ver dramatic reaction of the emperor. T acitus also communicates t he s eriousness of disaster thro ugh the loss of standards and loot to the Germans The capture and insult of the standards and eagles

PAGE 135

135 by Arminius punctuates the end of Annals 1.61. Thereafter the recoveries of these standards and eagles as well as other loot become steps in which Germani cus can erase the shame of the Varian disaster. At Annals 1.57 loot that had bee n lost in the defeat is recovered At Annals 1.60 the eagle of the 19 th legion is found. At Annals 2.25 the German leader Mallovendus gives Germanicus a tip about where another eagle is hidden. At Annals 2.41 the importance of such recoveries is shown in the consecration of an arch in Rome. The serious embar r assment suffered from the loss of these items becomes rectified when Germanicus retrieves them. Tacitus also describes m ourning as a response to the Varian disaster. When Germanicus and h is men en ter the Teutoburg f orest it is described as maestos locos visuque ac memoria deformis ( mournful places loathsome in sight and memory, 1.61). 82 The beginning of Annals 1.62 when Ger manicus and his troops bury the remains of the dead is heavy with mourning: Igitur Romanus qui aderat exercitus sextum pos t cladis annum trium legionum ossa, nullo noscente alienas reliquias an suorum humo tegeret, omnis ut coniunctos, ut consanguineos, au cta in hostem ira, maesti simul et infensi condebant. primum extruendo tumulo caespitem Caesar posuit, gratissimo munere in defunctos et praesentibus doloris socius. And so the Roman army which was there in the sixth year after the disaster buried the bo nes of the three legions as if all were relatives and kinsmen, although nobody knew whether he was burying the remains of strangers or of his own relatives. Their anger against the enemy was increased, and they were mournful and enraged at the same time. C aesar was the first to place earth on the funeral mound that was about to be raised in a thankful tribute to the dead and sharing in the grief of those present. Ann 1.62 The soldiers in this passage are maesti and Germanicus is praesentibus doloris socius They mourn for the dead through the act of burying the bones and they treat the 82 For maestus and the Varian disaster, see also Suet. Aug 23.2 and Tib 17.2.

PAGE 136

136 text react to the disaster also with anger ( aucta ... ira ,... infensi ). Varus in the Ann als then, displays some of the features seen in other authors. He is a character with a hint of negligence, victimized by fate while fighting a fierce foe, falling into a serious disaster and causing sadness for many Romans. But Tacitus is not as emphati c in his portrayal of Varus as some of the other authors who make their opinio ns of him very plain. Tacitus paints a s ubtle portrait of Varus and his involvement in the Annals Tacitus need not get carried away with characterizing him as a bad general or a victim or a stain on on Varus. His purpose is rather to establish a contrast to his own general of Germania, namely Germanicus. Tacitus is not interested in Varus for the sake of Varus. He is interes ted in Varus for the sake of Germanicus. 83 According to ed Germanicus a great triumph. Germanicus just as so many others, looks good in comparison with Varus. He makes the Germans pay the penalty and he lea ds their famous men and women in his triumph ( 25). This juxtaposition of Varus and Germanicus effective ly shows Germanicus as an anti Varus. They fight the same foe, but while Varus fails miserably, Germanicus wins the greatest glory possible. Th e many authors who contribute to the literary tradi tion of Varus portray him as a bad general characterized by poor judgment, lack of military skill, and negligence, or as an unfortunate victim of deceit, ferocity, and fate. Germanicus can in no way be 83 Devil quent de la d faite de Varus pendant les campagnes de Germanicus, il rehausse, en soulignant la valeur de rites du fils adoptif de Tib

PAGE 137

137 por trayed thu s while he is general in Germania Considering what we have left of the Varus tradition, Germanicus certainly is an anti Varus. Once Germanicus crosses the Rhine with his troops at Annals 1.49, his behavior is characterized by anything but poor j udgment, lack of military skill, or negligence. His first attack, against the Marsi, is carefully planned out. Instead of getting trapped in the dangerous German terrain like Varus, Germanicus establishes base on a barrier preexisting from Tiberius, then i nvestigates the forest passes. He deliberates between a usual short path and a longer untried path which would be unguarded by the enemy and decides on the second. Germanicus had sent out scouts who reported that the Marsi were drunk from a feast. He sends ahead Caecina with some cohorts and follows at a mod erate distance ( modico intervallo 1.50 ) with his legions. They surround and easily defeat the unsuspecting tribe. Germanicus carefully surveys and takes advantage of all factors in this mission: locatio n, timing, and the condition of the enemy. If anyone in the passage is like Varus, it is the Marsi. They are careless and have no fear of war. 84 Germanicus capitalizes on this. Although the Marsi may be an easy target, Germanicus moves in with a plan. H e di vides his men into four groups for the attack. The slaughter of the Marsi is so complete that no Romans are harmed, a statement which we have seen in context with Drusus but certainly not Varus. When surrounding tribes became aware of the Roman presence an d began to fill the nearby woods, Germanicus was ready. His knowledge of the enemy is indicated by quod gnarum duci incessitque itineri et proelio ( 1.51) Tacitus describes the careful order of the different parts of the Roman army as 84 Ann 1.50: ... nullo metu, non antepo siti s vigiliis: adeo cuncta incuria disiecta erant neque belli timor, ... with no fear, without night watches posted: indeed everything was disorganized with neglect and there

PAGE 138

138 they proceed through the woods. Under these circumstances Germanicus might have experienced a di saster like that of Varus. He proceeds with his troops through difficult forest filled with alert Germa n tribes. But just when Germanic us perceives his men to b e in trouble, he provides some solid leadership through encouraging words. The men are filled with courage and slaughter the enemy. 85 ability to take hold of the situation and lead his men. th the Germans are handled likewise. Nowhere can we find the traits of Varus: the poor judgment, lack of military skill, and negligence. Germanicus follows Arminius into the wilderness and sends out his cavalry to scout out the area. Arminius uses the Germ an forests and swamps to his advantage against the Roman forces, and just when he seems to be gaining an upper hand against the cavalry and some reinforcement cohorts, Germanicus arrives with his legions drawn up. This inspires fear in the Germans and conf idence in the Romans. 86 L ike Varus and the men at risk of getting trapped in dangerous German terrain. But o nce again what could have been a grave disaster is 85 Ann 1.51 cum Caesar advectus ad vi cesimanos voce magna hoc illud tempus obliterandae seditionis clamitabat: pergerent, properarent culpam in decus vertere. exarsere animis unoque impetu perruptum hostem redigunt in aperta caeduntque when Germanicus rode up to the twentieth legion he crie d out in a loud voice that this was the time to erase their sedition from memory: they should go forward, they should hurry to turn their guilt into honor. They fired up their spirits and in one charge they broke through the enemy, drove them out into the 86 Tac. Ann 1.63: tunc nova acie turbatus eques, missaeque subsidiariae cohortes et fugientium agmine impulsae auxerant consternationem; trudebanturque in paludem gnaram vincentibus, iniquam nesciis, ni Caesar productas legiones instruxisset: inde hostibus terror, fiducia militi; et manibus aequis abscessum and when they were pushed back by the stream of fleeing men they increase d the disorder; they were driven into a swamp known to those who were winning, but disadvantageous to those who were unfamiliar with it, if Caesar had not drawn up the legions he brought forth: thence there was terror for the enemy and confidence for the t

PAGE 139

139 abruptly rectified by the appearanc e of Germanicus and the courage he inspires in his men. Tacitus demonstrates further that Germanicus is not like Varus when he crosses the Weser to face Arminius in the plain of Idistavisus His judgment is keen, he shows care for military strategy, and he leads his men through his words and actions Germanicus discovers the intentions of Arminius and plans accordingly (2.12) To ascertain disguise. 87 H e is thus able to address them appr opriately to inflame their courage (2.14) their opponents most effectively. He concludes with an incentive: this battle will pave the way to an end of service. Once again G er : orationem ducis secutus militum ardor ( inspiration of the troops followed the speech of the leader 2.15 ). Annals stands in stark contrast to the mourning and sadness surroun ding Varus throughout his literary tradition. With this care taken to prepare his men, Germanicus is ready to face Arminius. The R omans form their battle line ( 2.16 ) and when the charge begins ( 2.17 ) Germanicus uses the appearance of eight eagles in the sky to rouse his troops. Unlike Varus in the texts of Manilius and Suetonius, Germanicus receives good omens in the Annals when he is about to fight Arminius. Not only are the eight eagles interpreted as positive ( Ann 2.17), but he has a favorable dream ( laetam...quietem Ann 2.14) in which he makes a sacrifice and receives a robe from his grandmother Augusta. This 87

PAGE 140

140 dream is considered propitious by Germanicus: auctus omine, addicentibus auspiciis Ann 2.14). 88 a brutal Arminius. H orror reminiscent of the Teutoburg f orest colors the scene as Arminius rides ac ross the battlefield with blood smeare d on his face. I men achieve success. 89 Many Germans are cut down either at the river or in the forest. Germanicus accomplishes against Arminius what Varus could not. Tacitus decisively state s magna ea victoria neque cruenta nobis fuit ( it was a great victory and there was no bloodshed for us, 2.18). It is, in effe ct a Varian disaster for the Germans (2.18). T he slaughter lasted from morning until night and the result was miles of land cove red in dead bodies, plunder, and chains. This time the Romans get to vaunt over the scene. They raise a trophy with the names of the defeated tribes. Germanicus has turned the tables. He is not like Varus at all. He i s the opposite of Varus. He makes his e nemy like Varus instead. 90 The remaining Germans try to make a last stand, but once again Germanicus is not negligent. Germanicus displays military knowledge, careful judgment, and strong leadership: 88 Pelling (1997) 207 8 observes that the dream at Ann 2.14 ( laetam quietem ) seems to link with Ann 1.65 ( dira quies resaged a dark crisis; this now presages the greatest success. The first was threatening; this one is taken by Germanicus to be enacting nd dream may imply his escape from it. Devillers (2003) 132 notes the valuable effects of these two dreams. 89 See Devillers (2003) 162 3 concerning how Tacitus may favor Germanicus here by citing the treachery of the auxiliaries as the reason Arminius and Inguiomerus escaped, although Tacitus does distance himself from this idea by citing it as rumor ( tradiderunt Ann 2.17). 90 Arminius is like Varus in description here as well. As Pag n (1997) 59 60 notes, Varus is described as sanguine oblitum at Ann 1 .65.2, and Arminius in this battle is oblitus...cruore ( Ann 2.17.5). She observes also that the word oblino occurs only once more in the entire Tacitean corpus ( Ann 2.69.3).

PAGE 141

141 Nihil ex his Caesari incognitum: consilia locos, prompta occulta noverat astusque hostium in perniciem ipsis vertebat. Seio Tuberoni legato tradit equitem campumque; peditum aciem ita instruxit ut pars aequo in silvam aditu incederet, pars obiectum aggerem eniter etur; quod arduum sibi, cetera legatis permisit. N one of these things were unknown to Caesar: he knew their plans, their locations, things disclosed and concealed, and he was turning the stratagems of the enemy into their destruction. To the legate Seius Tubero he entrusted the cavalry and the field ; he d rew up his infantry in such a way that part might proceed into the forest on a level approach, and part might mount the mound that had been raised; what was difficult he kept for himself, other things he entrusted to his officers. Ann 2.20 Germanicus knows his enemies and can use strategy against them. He knows how to arrange his men, how to delegate responsibilities, and what responsibilities to reserve for himself as general. In another act of inspiration, Germanicus makes a bold move as a leader by taking his helmet off and encoura ging his men to the slaughter ( 2.21 ) The result again is gore of the Teutoburg type: ceterae ad noctem cruore hostium satiatae sunt ( the rest were sated on the blood of the enemy until nightfall, 2.21). Conclusion Thus in the Annals Germanicus shows nothing of the poor judgment, lack of military skill, or negligence which the literary tradition suggests Varus had shown as commander in Germania Instead Germanicus demonstrates leadership over his m en t hrough his actions and words, k eeps a keen eye on his enemy, i s wary of German terrain, and maneuvers himself and uses strategy accordingly. The result is Varian disaster for the Germans, not the Romans. Germani cus thus succeeds at erasing the stain of Varus. revenge on the Germans as Strabo asserts.

PAGE 142

142 CHAPTER 4 GERMANICUS AND T IBERIUS German icus and Tiberius in the Annals Drusus and Varus are of course already dead when the narrative of the Annals begins, but they nonetheless have a large impact on the characterization of Germanicus. Tiberius, however, is alive and well in the first hexad of the Annals perfectly apt to influence Germanicus directly Tacitus writes emperor in the first hexad of the Annals This has much to do with the chronological framework he has chosen, but as we have seen Tacitus occasionally break s from a strict timeline and narrate s past events in the present. Tacitus sometimes refers back to Tiberius eer as a military man in Germania These glimmers earlier career are subtle and infrequent, but they still have an effect on the character of Tiberius, and by extension, the character of Germanicus as well. The bulk of the ny occur in books 1 and 2, most likely since the German activity of Germa nicus and Drusus narrated within these Tibe accomplishments in G ermania appear six separate times in the words of various characters : 1.12, 1.34, 1.50, 2.14, and twice in 2.26 The first r eference is found in the speech of Asinius Gallus before the Senate. In an effo rt to dispel him for an ea accomplishments ( Ann paign is not mentioned specifical ly but certainly is implied. Gallus tries to use the recollection of it to please the emperor and soft en his attitude.

PAGE 143

143 the words of Tiberius himself. When he attempts to recall Germanicus f rom his campaign, Tiberius recollects that he had been sent into Germany several times and achiev ed more from policy than from war. 1 He wishes to persuade Germanicus of this strategy and encourages him to do the same. He use s himself as an example for Germanicus to follow. Germanicus, however, is not convinced. He understands that Tiberius has recalled him out of jealousy ( per invidiam ) 2 Perhaps Tiberius believes that Germanicus has matched his own success too closely. Indeed, Germanicus seems quite eager to ma He speaks of ce before his own troops. Whe n he arrives in front of the mu tinous soldiers, he praises the victories of Tiberius and h is deeds accomplished in Germania with those same armies. 3 Germanicus hopes to encourage th e men back into obedience by appealing to thei r se nse of pride and accomplishment but also by picking at their sense of shame in his comparison between them and a dutiful victorious army. The effect Germanicus is trying to achieve only works if all the troops there are familiar with the glorious repu tation of Tiberius and his legions. 1 Ann 2.26: se novies a divo Augusto in Germaniam missum plura consilio quam vi perfecisse. sic Sugambros in deditionem acceptos, sic Suebos regemque Maroboduum pace obstrictum had been sent into Germania by divine Augustus and accomplished more by policy than by force. Thus the Sugambri were admitted into surrender 2 Ann 2.26: haud cunctatus est ultra Germanicus, quamquam fingi ea seque per invidiam parto iam decori abstrahi intellegeret hings 3 Ann 1.34: tunc a veneratione Augusti orsus f lexit ad victorias triumphosque Tiberii, praecipuis laudibus celebrans quae apud Germanias illis cum leg ionibus pulcherrima fecisset veneration of Augustus he turned to the victories and triumphs of Tiberius, celebrating with particular

PAGE 144

144 Germanicus aims for the same effect when he mentions Tiberius in front of his troops at Annals 1.42: primane et vicesima legiones, illa signis a Tiberio acceptis, tu tot proeliorum socia, tot praemiis aucta, egregiam du ci vestro gratiam refertis? hunc ego nuntium patri laeta omnia aliis e provinciis audienti feram? ipsius tirones, ipsius veteranos non missione, non pecunia satiatos...? First and twentieth legions, those whose standards have been received by Tiberius, you who have been companions of so many battles, honored by so many rewards, you give in return to your leader this great thanks? Am I to bring this news to my father when all he hears from other provinces are positive things? That his own recruits, his own v eterans are not satisfied with discharge, with money? Ann 1.42 He equates hi mself with Tiberius when he reminds the troops that they have served under both leaders, that they have been victorious under both leaders, and that they should feel shame in the eyes of bot h leaders for their mutiny Germanicus again refers to Tiberius to re instill obedience in his men an d return their hunger for victory. Similarly at Annals 2.14 h e encourages his men to forget their weariness and fight hard to win a victory for him as he treads the same ground as his father and uncle. 4 Germanicus likens him self to Tiberius by portraying himself following in his footsteps and aspiring to the same goa ls. through Germany as if he is re enacting his career. Uncle and nephew have much in common. They likely travel through the same space: they cross the same rivers, stop at the same military outposts, and encounter the same tribes. Tacitus offers some 4 Ann 2.14: si taedio viarum ac maris finem cupiant, hac acie parari: propiorem iam Albim quam Rhenum neque bellum ultra, modo se patris patruique vestigia prementem isdem in terris victorem sisterent they should desire an end to the tedium of the marches and the sea, they should make it happen with this battle: now the Elbe was closer than the Rhine and there was no war beyond, if only they support him as

PAGE 145

145 evidence of this at Annals 1.50. When Germanicus is near the Caesian f orest, he comes upon a barrier begun by Tiberius and he builds his camp in the same place. 5 Although Germanicus experiences the same type of succ ess that Tiberius had in Germania he is careful about how he acknowledges this publicly. W hen he is victori o us against Arminius and Inguiomerus, he raises a trophy marked with Tiber instead of his own. It is again suggested by Tacitus that Germanicus perhaps fears ( de se nihil addidit, metu invidiae ... Ann 2.22 ) So the armies under Germanicus are labeled as armies of Tiberius and the two commanders are a gain equated. There is one final passage in the Annals G ermania When Maroboduus is threatened by the Cherusci and other tribes, he speaks about how he measures up against Arminius. T o express his superiority, Maroboduus states that Arminius experienced victory against unprepared legions out of vaecordem Arminium et rerum nescium alienam gloriam in se trahere, quoniam tres vagas legiones et ducem f raudis ignarum perfidia deceperit, magna cum clade Germaniae et ignominia sua, cum coniunx, cum fiius eius servitium adhuc tolerent. at se duodecim legionibus petitum duce Tiberio inlibatam Germanorum gloriam servavisse, mox condicionibus aequis discessum. The frenzied and ignorant Arminius drew the glory of another onto himself, since he deceived three wandering legions and a leader unaware of trickery, with great disaster for Germania and to his own disgrace, since his wife and son still endured servitude But he was attacked by twelve legions when Tiberius was commander and had preserved the undiminished glory of the Germans and then marched away on equal terms. Ann 2.46 5 Ann 1.50: at Ro manus agmine propero silvam Caesiam limitemque a Tiberio coeptum scindit, castra in limite locat, frontem ac tergum vallo, latera concaedibus munitus column tore through the Caesian forest and the barrier begun by Tiber ius and placed his camp on the

PAGE 146

146 Marobodu us uses Varus to downgrade Arminius and Tiberius to glorify himself. Tiberiu s is meant to look like a tough opponent, one whom Maroboduus can be proud to have matched. The six passages mentioned above are the only references Tacitus makes in the Annals They are surprisingly f e w Perhaps more tell particular where we might expect to encounter more information about his campaigns. When Tiberius is introduced at Annals 1.3, Tacitus writes that Tiberius was honored by Augu stus and eventually came into his favor, but no mention of his military accomplishments in Germania is made. 6 At Annals 1.4, Tacitus does characterize Tiberius as distinguished in war ( spectatum bello ), but he much prefers to focus on alities: ...Tiberium Neronem mat urum annis, spectatum bello, sed vetere atque insita Claudiae familiae superbia, multaque indicia saevitiae, quamquam premantur, erumpere. hunc et prima ab infantia eductum in domo regnatrice; congestos iuveni consulatus, tr iumphos; ne iis quidem annis, quibus Rhodi specie secessus exul egerit, aliud quam iram et simulationem et secretas lubidines meditatum. Tiberius Nero was mature in years, tested in war, but he had the old and innate arrogance of the Claudian family, and m any signs of cruelty, although su p pressed, broke forth. He also from earliest childhood was brought up in the imperial house; consulships, triumphs were heaped onto the young man ; not even in those years which he spent in exile on Rhodes in the appearance of seclusion, did he practice anything other than rage and dissimulation and hidden desires. Ann 1.4 6 In contrast, Tacitus does mention at Ann

PAGE 147

147 Similarly, the obituary of Tiberius reports nothing of his German victories, e ven though several events from his younger years are listed. 7 The disasters and negative aspects write about Tiberius the gloomy emperor rather than Tiberius the succes sful military commander. 8 Although Germanicus may appear wholly unlike Tiberius the gloomy emperor, the other Tiberius whom I have tried to excavate from the text actually has much in common with Germanicus. I propose that while Germanicus may be quite dissimilar to Tiberius the emperor, he is strikingly similar to T iberius the commander of Germania the Tiberius who existed in the time preceding the starting point of the Annals but who se image still haunts the Annals Tiberius in Pre Tacitean Authors Many ancient authors wrote about Tiberius the Emperor. Not many, however, wro te about Tiberius the Commander of Germ ania. But Tiberius spent nine campaign seasons there after the deaths of Drusus and Varus 9 From both men Tiberius inherited a precariou s situation which could have greatly harmed the Roman state if not handled properly. Augustus called upon Tiberiu s to secure a territory filled with fierce threatening tribes after the unex pected deaths of the previous commanders caused sudden lack of Rom an control. According to the ex t ant pre Tacitean sources, Tiberius was up to the challenge. 7 Concerning imper avoided and vituperation is also sidestepped by concentrating on acta rather than mores Ann 6.51 is very conspicuous 8 Pomeroy (1991) 217 9. 9 According to Ann 2.26, Augustus sent Tiberius to Germania nine times.

PAGE 148

148 Tiberius the Superhuman Commander of Germania Once again Velleius Paterculus offers the fullest acco Germania (see Appendix C pp. 221 7 ); however, h is encomium demands caution. The particularly tainted with bias. Velleius does not hide his affectio n for Tiberius. He clear ly expresses the joy he felt to serve such a man. For example Velleiu s begins his account of the German campaigns, was a spectator of his superhuman achievements ( caelestissimorum eius operum ) and further assisted in them to the extent of my mod est ability (2.104.3). And Velleius would have us believe that others were similarly enthusiastic about Tiberius. With overfl owing excitement he describe s veteran soldiers who rush to greet Tiberius as he travels through the lands: do not think that mo rtal man will be permitted to behold again a sight like that which I (2.104.3). His elation in unbridled : large a volume could be filled with the tale of our achievements in the following summer under the generalship of Tiberius C 10 enthusiasm stems in part from his personal involvement with Tiberius and his German campaigns. Velleius himself tells u s that he was present in Germania and serving under Tiberius at this time. One might argue, however, that this gives V elleius better insight or more accurate knowledge of affairs in Germania than authors who were 10 Vell. Pat. 2.106.1: Pro dii boni! Quanti uoluminis opera insequenti aestate sub duce Tiberio Caesare gessimus! This statement seems ironic because althou gh of all the pre Tacitean authors Velleius does Velleius had written a lengthier work he would have dedicated more space to these achievements. But Vell eius never undertook the larger work to which he so often alludes. Unfortunately no other pre Tacitean texts, at least none of the ones extant, offer the volume of information about which Velleius boasts either. Perhaps if Velleius had written an annalisti c history, he would have been able to provide history, and an abbreviated one at that, he is forced to move quickly from one event to the next. Thus Velleiu

PAGE 149

149 not present. Praise notwithstanding Velleius tell s us which individual tribes Tiberius encountered, which locations he visited, and what he was engaged in at di fferent times subjective comments. Although t he great success attributed to Tiberius is likely enhanced by such subje ctivity, nevertheless it is an importa account that cannot be ( caelestissimorum eius operum ) long been a Caesar before he was such in name 11 thereby elevating hi m far above normal men. He then lists the several tribes Tiberius subjugated. The Cherusci are on this list, and Velleius makes sure he points out that Arminius, the man who caused great disaster for the Romans later, belonged to this tribe. Tiberius is th us subtly praised for his ability to subdue th e tribe which produced such a f ie r ce leader, the tribe which Varus was unable to subdue. Then he goes further: he crosses the Weser and presses into the territory beyond (2.105 .1 ). Velleius writes that the acco mplishments of the next summer could fill a large volume, and he then pours fou r p erlustrata armis tota Germania est, uictae gentes paene nominibus incognit ae, receptae Cauchorum nationes: omnis eorum iuuentus infinita numero, immensa corporib us, situ locorum tutissima, tra ditis armis una cum ducibus suis saepta fulgenti armatoque milit um nostrorum agmine ante impera tor is procubuit tribunal. F racti Langobardi, gens etiam Germana feritate ferocior. All Germany was travers ed by our armies, races were conquered hitherto almost unknown, even by name; and the tribes of the Cauchi were again subjugated. All the flower of their youth, infinite in number though they 11 Vell. Pat. 2.104.3: ante meritis ac uirtutibus quam nomine Caesarem

PAGE 150

150 were, huge of stature and protected by the ground they held, sur rendered their arms, and, flanked by a gleaming line of our soldiers, fell with their generals upon their knees before the tribunal of the commander. The power of the Langobardi was broken, a race surpassi ng even the Germans in savagery. 2.106.1 2 Althoug h Velleius does not list individual tribes aside from the C auc h i and the Langobardi, he tota Germania and gentes paene nominibus incognitae The verb perlustrata also implies thorough subjug ation. The word s nationes and omnis also communicate widespread success. Indeed Tiberius subdues everyone, even the especially fierce Langobardi. stature, and topographically advantaged makes his success even more remarkable and praiseworthy. Like Drusus, Tiberius earns praise when the Germans are depicted as a challenging foe. entioned twice more by Velleius; briefly : after proving victorious over many tribes (he) a ffected a junction with Caesar and the army, bringing with it a great abun dance of supplies of all kinds ( plurimarum gentium uictoria parta cum abu ndantissima rerum omnium copia exercitui Caesarique se iunx it 2.106.3 ) In addition to another form of omnis ( omnium ) Velleius uses two superlative forms here to indicate thorough subjugation. The second example is longer : Victor omnium gentium locorumque quos adierat Caesar incolumi inuiolatoque et semel tant ummodo magna cum clade hostium fraude eorum temptato exercitu in hiberna legiones reduxit, eadem qua priore anno festinatione urbem petens. Nihil erat iam in Germania quod uinci posset, praeter gentem Ma rcomannorum... Victorious over all the nations and c ountries which he approached, his army safe and unimpaired having been attacked but once, and that too through deceit on the part of the enemy with great loss on their side Caesar led his legions back to winter quarter s, and sought the city with the same haste as

PAGE 151

151 in the previous year. Nothing remained to be conquered in Germany except the people of the Marco manni... 2.107.3 108.1 victor is prominently placed, and omnis appears again, this time modifying gentium and locorum peoples and places. Tiberius seems unstop p able, finding success at everything that he does. Velleius confirms this far reaching dominance when he writes nihil erat in Germania quod vinci posset Alth ough he has to concede one exception, it is still quite an accomplishment to subdue all German tribes but one. And as we will see, this one last foe is certainly a worthy one. quests in Germania the passage s above share comments on the achievements of Drusus and Tiberius against the R h aeti and Vindelici (2.95.1 2): the Romans come out unscathed ( maiore cum periculo quam damno Romani exercitus 2.95.2; incolumi inui olatoque 2.107.3 ) while the enemy suffers great defea t ( plurimo cum earum sanguine 2.95. 2; magna cum clade hostium 2.107.3) in spite of the fact that they were numerous ( numero frequentes 2.95.2; infinita numero 2.106.1) protected by the land ( gentes locis tutissimas 2.95.2; situ locorum tutissima 2.106.1), and fierce ( feritate truces 2.95.2; Germana feritate ferocior 2.106.2 ) The Romans enjoy thorough victory ( per domuerunt 2.95.2; per lustrata 2.106.1). The similarities in these passages perhaps illustrate that T death and that the torch can be passed smoothly from Drusus to Tiberius. As we have seen, Germanicus also becomes an acceptable replacement for Drusus. In addition to praising Tiberi praises T Tiberius accomplishes feats which no Roman

PAGE 152

152 had managed before. For example, Velleius says that at the end of the first campaign season Tiberius travels to the Lippe and becomes the first to pi tch a winter camp there (2.105.3 ). In the next season he conquers many tribes, some of which are barely known by name (2.106.1) and then marches his army far past the Rhine towards the Elbe (2.106.2) Velleius remarks specifical ly on the exceptional nature of this last .2 ). 12 Tiberius then explores with his fleet waters previously unknown (2.106. 3 ). The fact that Tiberius achieves new feats makes him look even great er like a daring Roman pioneer. Velleius also depicts Tiberius engaged in careful planning, strategy, and leadership. As a good leader, Tiberius takes the most da ngerous undertakings on himself and gives less dangerous tasks to Saturninus (2.105 .1 ). Later on, Velleius specifically mentions how Tiberiu the seasons h elps wonderful combination of careful planning and good fo rtune on the part of the general, and a close watch upon the seasons, the fleet which had skirted the windings of the sea coast sailed up the Elbe... (2.106 .3 ). At the end of his account of this stint in Germania Velleius shows that Tiberius is more conc erned about good leader ship than glory. When the Pannonian revolt breaks out, Tiberius pulls Tiberius a safe course to keep his army buried in the interior of the country and thus 3 ). Thus Tiberius 12 Syme (1971) 33 n. 23 and Wells (1972) 218 9 have objected to this statement by Velleius, stating that Drusus and L. Domitius Ahen obarbus had both reached the Elbe before (in 9 BC and 1 CE). Woodman (1977) 144 believes that this is not a deliberate falsification, but that the statement refers to the entire passage, not just a single clause. At first glance, however, the statement doe s give the impression that

PAGE 153

153 employs good leadership as well as solid planning and strategy to make the right decisions for the Roman people and state. It is also worth noting how the people surrounding Tiberius affect his image. Velleius speaks several times about the joy he felt while serving Tiberius, and he certainly regards Tiberius as far superior to a normal man, including himself (e.g., 2.104.3) Indeed the behavior of others elevate s Tiberius to a very high status The soldiers treat him like a celebrity when they eagerly strive to see him, call out to him, and touch his hand (2.104.4 105.1). Even the Germans admire him and treat him like a god. V elleius describes at length a scene in which a high ranking barbarian requests to see Caesar. The old man is in awe of Tiberius: he quietly looks at him for a long while before he begins t o speak ( diu tacitus contemplatus Caesarem 2.107.2 ), and his eyes r emain fixed on him as he departs ( sine fine respectans Caesarem ripae suorum adpulsus est 2.107.2 ). When he finally ad d resses Tiberius, he says of the young ( cum uestrum numen absentium colat 2.107.2 ), the n he himself calls Ti berius a god and expresses the greatest happiness at their meeting ( hodie uidi deos, nec feliciorem ullum uitae meae aut optaui aut sensi diem 2.107.2) Like the soldiers at 2.104 .4 he desires to touch hand, and then he departs. This story in particular raises Tiberius to god like status. Saturninus, the leader to whom Tiberius assigns his less dangerous tasks, is praised as a virtuous man of action capable of balancing duty and leisure (2.105.2). Saturninus is a great is even greater. Similarly Marob oduus man of noble family, strong in

PAGE 154

154 (2.108.2 ), a man with an understanding of power and military strategy. Velleius leads us to believe 5 ) All other tribes and lea ders had been defeated. Only the greatest remained. By praising his enemy, Velleius praises Tiberius. So Velleius paints Tiberius as a superhuman character by emphasizing his popularity with the troops, the completeness of his success in Germania, the no velty of his accomplishments, his good leadership skills, and his prominence in relation to those the Annals The scene at 2.104. 4 when the troops rush to greet Tiberius and grasp his hand seems similar to Annals 1.34 Although the Tiberius passage is full of pomp and excitement the troops look to their general as the young imperial hero in whom they can place their hope. The men turn all attention to Germanicus, crowd around him, and attempt to grab his hand. celebr ity with the troops, howe ver, is demonstrated at Annals 2.13 when he disguise s himself to learn the minds of his soldiers. The soldiers praise various aspects of his character and demonstrate supreme reverence by showing anger at the idea of defecting from him. Resounding victor y is something Tiberius, Drusus, and Germanicus all have in common. Germanicus thorough ly dominates his enemies at passages like Annals 1.50

PAGE 155

155 1, 2.18, 2.21, and 2.25 Thus characterized as successful milit ary commanders. The novelty of Tiberius deeds in the Annals Tiberius is portrayed as a vibrant young Roman pioneer as he travels farther into Germania and manages new feats at 2.105.3 and 2.106.1 3. Germanicus is also a dynamic character. He is not afraid to try new things: a t Annals 1.51 he takes the path less traveled in order to take the Marsi by surprise. H e also pushes the boundaries of the empire to their greatest extent: like Tiberius at 2.106. 2 Germanicus takes his troops to the dis tant Elbe at Annals 2.14. 13 At Annals 2.24 Germanicus sails so far in the northern waters that when his men become shipw r ecked they encounter strange new creatures. In the annalistic format as analyzed by G insburg, Germanicus inhabits the res externae ; throughout the narrative he is most often seen on the frontiers of the empire, not in Rome. 14 Indeed, when Germanicus dies his presence on the edges of Roman territory is marked by various monuments. 15 Just as Tiberius display text, so Germanicus reveal s these characteristics in the Annals Tiberius shows concern for the care of his men at 2.97.4, and at Annals 1.71 Germanicus demonstrates similar concern when he visits his injured troops. He greets the men individually offering hope and su pport which heightens their willingness to support him in turn. Tiberius is depicted 13 Pag n (1999) 312 4 discusses Germanicus as a character who pushes boundaries and asserts that Germanicus at the periphery of the empire opposes Tiberius at the center. Although Germanicus may Annals he has much in common with the dynamic Tiberius the commander of Germany as he is portrayed by pre Tacitean autho rs like Velleius. 14 I derive the concept of Germanicus as a res ex ternae character from Ginsburg (1981) Chapter 4. 15 Ann

PAGE 156

156 offering similar persona l care to his own ailing men Velleius writes kindness, saying that during both the Pan non ian and German wars Tiberius looked after he chief occupation of his mind (2.114.1). He offered his personal comforts to them to ease their recovery. To both com manders the well being of their soldiers is of the utmost importance. Finally when Tiberius sacrifices glory for command, just so Germanicus at Annals 2.26 saves the glory of Germ ania for Drusus st in order to straighten out affairs in the East. Both commanders perform selfless acts for the good of Rome. As Velleius elevates Tiberius far abov e the people who surround him, so t he same c an be said about Germanicus. Although Tacitus is not as obviously enthusia s tic abo ut Germanicus as Velleius is about Tiberius, Tacitus still gives Germanicus enough of a sheen that scholars for a long time labeled Germanicus the hero of the hexad. 16 He is p opular, young, and active. Not even Drusus the Younger comes close to the celebrity status of Germanicus. In particular Annals 2.13 shows the men praising fiercely for him. This is a way in which Tacitus can extol Germanicus without making himself vulnerable to accusations of subjectivity. Such passages, particularly those communicating the thoughts of the Roman people, are scattered throughout the Annals and attach t o German icus an admiration resembling the enthusiasm surrounding 16 See Walker (1952) 118 20; Syme (1958) 418; Daitz (1960) 37, 48.

PAGE 157

157 The Familial Piety of Tiberius Ovid, like Velleius, offers enthusiastic, yet short, praise about Tiberius in Germany (see Appendix C p. 229) When discussing the Temple o f Concord in the Fasti Ovid rank over Veii. 17 He calls Tiberius dux venerande (1.646), recognizes Germania mentions spoils brought back and dedicated to the goddess. Tiberius is certainly displa yed favorably as a benefactor of the Romans and a conqueror of the Germans, but detail is not to be found here. Th e Temple of Concord mentioned in Ovid Fasti was dedicated to Drusus by Tiber ius after his success in Germania Thus in a way Tiberius wins closure for his brother when he achieves success in the campaign which Drusus began. This very concept of closure for Drusus is brought up in the Consolatio ad Liviam 271 82 (see Appendix C p. 229) Although Tiberius is not sp ecifically named, one is tempted to infer that Tiberius is the commander in mind when t he author of this consolatio envisions the German people being utterly subdued and laden with chains (273 4) Since Tiberius was the commander i mmediately succeeding Dru sus in Germany, the responsibility for fulfilling such desires is his. If this consolatio was written just after the death of Drusus and just as Tiberius was about to set out on his new command, or perhaps just as Tiberius was returning victoriously, then we could count this passage among the few which contribute to the literary tradition of Tiberius the general of Germania. Unfortunately the date, and indeed the authorship, of the consolatio are unknow n, and so we cannot be sure of a reference to Tiberius. But if Tiberius is in fact meant, then just 17

PAGE 158

158 lead creates an opportunity for Tiberius to succeed. According to our sources however, Tiberius does not seem too greedy for success in Germania. It appears he would have prefer r ed that his brother live than that he take his place. We have already seen that t he brotherly love between Tiberius and Drusus was evident all throughout the pre Tacitean trad i tion Tiberius makes his first trip to Germania because of Drusus. As Valeriu s Maximus describes, Tiberius ru shes to his ( 17) Pliny the Elder attests to the urgency with which Tiberius traveled (7.84 see Appendi x C p. 228 ) continues to show his bond with him through the dedication of the Temple of Concord. H er of the Consolatio ad Liviam may have also crossed his mind. The Scarcity of the Pre Tacitean Tradition Unlike Velleius, Strabo does not contribute much to the literary tradition of Tiberius (see Appendix C p. 221) He makes two short references to Tiberius at 7.1.5 when he describes the H ercynian f orest and its nearby lake. He states that Tiberius once used an island in the lake as a base for naval o perations against the Vindelici ( 10). He upon the sources of the Ister ( 6). Aside from these two notes, Strabo has nothing more to say about Tiberius. To be fair, however, Strab o did not write at length a short cameo concerning the slaughter of Varus affords Strabo the opportunity to mention

PAGE 159

159 ommanders do not enjoy much attention is interested in information concerning the land and the peoples of Germa ny and not so much the Roman politics which touch upon them. On the other hand, Roman politics sometimes help elucidate the information which Strabo does wish to communicate; h e admits that more information would be known about certain tribes if Augustus h ad allowed his general s to pursue them ( 9) Thus perhaps the lack of press Tiberius recei ves for his accomplishments in Germany relates to Augustus advises Tiberius either through fear or jealousy to act with r estraint in regards to expanding the empire 18 In the case of Germany, Augustus may have given this advice through fear. Based on his reaction to the Pannonian revolt he seemed aware of the great threat the peopl es to the north of Italy posed to Rome ( Suet. Tib 16.1 ) and he was deeply affected by the Varian disaster ( Suet. Aug 23.2 ) approach to German affairs, especially after suffering the Lollian disaster and losing Drusus there, was always taken with caution. Thus as Strabo says, Augustus r estrains his generals in Germania and consequently the attention the accompl ishments of these generals recei ves in the contemporary literature is sparse. Or perhaps the restrai n t s Augustus puts on his gen erals dampened their accomplishments so much so that they 18 Ann 1.11; Tiberius seems to show a willingness to obey the words of Augustus for various reasons through out the Annals as demonstrated by Cowan (2009) 181 3. In this situation he perhaps forfeits

PAGE 160

160 simply were not worth writing about. Heaping praise on minor successes would just have been embar r assing. On the other hand, perhaps there were othe r pre Tacitean authors who narrat ed eavors in Germany, but for whatever reason their work simply is not extant. military exploits in his work Bellum Germanicum but that information is lost to us now. 19 Tib erius himself perhaps recounted his own military activi ties in his writings. Tiberius composed two or possibly even three pieces which could have influenced Tacitus: one perhaps apologetic work after the fall of Sejanus, 20 and the commentarii et acta Tib erii which may have been two works instead of one. 21 The latter certainly aid to have read it 22 How they may have Durry believes that they would have reinforced position against the emperor. 23 Yet perhaps Tacitus could nia in these works. The same i s true for the commentarii of Agrippina the Younger. Although this memoir also would pr esumably have had a pro imperial bias, it may have contained insider information about Tiberius, Germanicus, and Agrippina the Elder, as well as information 19 ar the author appeals to the historians of the period, but only in general terms, alluding to their character and credit, their Elder (1.69) and Agrippina the Younger (4.53). 20 Suet. Tib 61 21 Devillers (2003) 34 5. For the commentarii et acta Tiberii as two pieces instead of one, see Durry (1958) 221 22 Suet. Dom 20. 23 Durry (1958) 226 ; Devillers (2003) 35.

PAGE 161

161 about life inside the Julio Claudian house. 24 Especially since her memoirs are cited by Tacitus at A nnals 4.53, Agrippina the Younger cannot be discounted as a possible source. Her impressions of Tiberius, moreover, were not likely to have been positive, considering that her family suffered so much under his reign. 25 Because not all sources were likely to be positive towards Tiberius it seems possible not lost by accident. 26 Tiberius was known for being extremely sensitive about what people thought, said, and wrote especially about him. 27 His maiestas trials are a testament to that 28 Clutorius Priscus and Cremutius Cordus lost their lives because their work did not please the emperor. 29 Others surely were afraid to write because of this reason 30 There is indeed a strange gap in historical literature which survives from the beginning 24 Devillers (2003) 35 7. 25 Devillers (2003) 36 7. 26 Augustus had practiced book burning (Syme [ 1939 ] 486 7 ) and Cramer (1945) writes in detail about book burning under both Augustus and Tiberius. 27 Tiberius showed such sensitivity at a young age when men spoke against Augustus. Suet. Aug 51.3 report Aetati tuae, mi Tiberi, noli in hac re indulgere et nimium indignari quemquam esse, qui de me male loquatur; satis est enim, si hoc habemus ne quis nobis male facere possit dour of youth in this matter, or take it too much (t ext and translation from Rolfe [1913]). In the Annals new emperor are centered on negative reactions to their words, for example Ann 1.8 with Valerius Messala, Ann 1.12 with Asinius Gallus, and Ann 1.13 with Lucius Arruntius, Quintus Haterius, and Mamer cus Scaurus. 28 For more about freedom of speech under Augustus and Tiberius, see Cramer (1945), Rutledge (2001) maiestas trials, see Syme (1958) 420 34. 29 According to Tacitus, authors Clutorius Priscus ( Ann 3.49 51) and Cremutius Cordus ( Ann 4.34 5) lost their lives for works they wrote during the reign of Tiberius. 30 Tacitus himself writes at Ann 1.1: Tiberii Gaique et Claudii ac Neronis res florentibus ipsis ob metum falsae, postquam occiderant, recentib us odiis compositae sunt and Nero while they were in power were falsified on account of fear, after they died, they were composed Hist. 1.1.

PAGE 162

162 o f the first centur y CE 31 I s it a coincidence then, notoriously been labeled pro Tiberian ove r the years, survives? W riting hi story and annals was an admired pursuit in the eyes of the Romans, especially after Livy had written his famous A b urbe c ondita Was there really no one else interested in taking up such a noble task at this time? 32 What of the works of Aufidius Bassus and Servilius Nonianus ? According to Quintilian, Au fidius wrote a Bellum Germanicum that was worthy of high praise. 33 34 Devillers writes that it probably would have been difficult for Aufidius not to extol Tiberius in his work, and if there were kind words for Germanicus as well, they were likely hidden under a panegyric of Tiberius. 35 As for Servilius Nonianus, Quintilian p raises him along with Aufidius, and since he was a s enator under Tiberius, he possibly wrote with some insider information. 36 Yet 31 Syme (1950) 4; Thomas (2001) 27. 32 S everal authors whose works have now been lost may have contributed to the literary tradition surrounding Tiberius, including Iulius Marathus, C. Drusus, Julius Saturninus, Aquilius Niger, and Baebius Macer. Memoirs written by Maecenas may also have been av ailable (Bramble [1982] 492 3). Devillers (2003) 28 32 names a few others who were writing around the beginning of the first century CE, and Wilkes (1972) memoirs...can be compiled as sources for the history of the Julio Claudians. Two, M. Servilius Nonianus ( cos 35) and Cluvius Rufus ( cos. suff. 33 Quint. Inst 10.1.102 3. 34 Syme (1958) 274 of information is re flected in Dio. 35 Devillers (2003) 14. This idea of praise for Germanicus hidden under praise for Tiberius is addressed Histories Devillers (2003) 14 speculates that Tiberius would not have been a focus, but rather Germanicus, due to the period in which Aufidius was writing this later work. 36 Quint. Inst 10.1.102. Syme (1958) 275 6.

PAGE 163

163 Devillers warns unknown. It is not clear if he was a supporter of Tiberius and thus wro te f avorably about him 37 Surely there were other pre Tacitean authors who wrote or c onsidered writing about the reign of Tiberius b ut this was a dangerous undertaking even after Tiberius was dead. 38 The case of Cremutius Cordus helps illustrate the tone of th e literary environment during the early empire. 39 According to Tacitus, Cordus was attacked by cronies of Sejanus for his praise of Brutus and Cassius and therefore starved himself to death, but not before delivering an impassioned speech on literary freedo m of expression, which Tacitus recreates. 40 The speech implies that times have changed under Tiberius. Caesar and Augustus allowed authors to make political comments, but Cordus cannot be excused for his words even when they are not against Tiberius or his mother. 41 37 Devillers (2003) 16. 38 C laudians. could be written. 39 It is uncertain what 9 suggests that perhaps Tacitus took inspiration from Cordus when writing about Augustus at the beginning of the Annals Regardless of whether or not he wrote about the reign of Tiberius, he certainly wrote under the reign of Tiberius, and thus serves as a good example of what writers of the age had to endure. 40 Ann. 4.34 5 ; Whether or not Tacitus wrote from a copy of an actual speech delivered by Cordus is unknown. Devillers (2003) 28 9 acknowledges the possibility but also suggests that Tacitus may have identified with Cordus, may have known his descendants, and may have e mbellished the story. McHugh (2004) 391 show that good men can live under bad emperors if they use figured speech correctly. 41 Ann. 4.34: sed ipse divus Iulius, i pse divus Augustus et tulere ista et reliquere, haud facile dixerim, moderatione magis an sapientia and let them lie, whether with their self restraint or their wisdom I cannot easily s claim that his words were not against Tiberius or his mother, see McHugh (2004) 399.

PAGE 164

164 Writing about Tiberius under the later Julio Claudian emperors surely would have been danger ous, too. Even men who wrote as late as the reign of Domitian might have felt unsafe in such an endeavor, since Domitian supposedly admired Tiberius. 42 We k now that Tacitus himself felt restrained in his writing under this emperor, and that his words only flowed freely after Domitian was gone. 43 Wilkes explains that writing during the early imperial era Republic to Empire was considerable and was still very apparent to Cassius Dio writing 44 Dio writes that once the Empire began: the events occurring after this time can not be recorded in the same manner as those of previous times...most things that happened began to be kept secret and concealed, and even though some things are per chan ce made public, they are distrusted just because they can not be verified; for it is suspected that everything is said and done with reference to the wishes of the men in power at the time and their associates. Dio 53.19.2 3 The first century CE was a diff icult time for writers as they struggled to learn how to write history in the new imperial environment, under emperors and their successors. 45 42 According to Suet. Dom 20 Domitian was supposedly fond of reading the memoirs of Tiberius, and Walker (1952) 210 even suggests that Domitian ma y have modeled certain aspects of his reign after Tiberius. 43 Agr 2, 3; Tacitus praises the reigns of Nerva and Trajan as a rare time when one can think what one wants and say what one thinks ( rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae senti as dicere licet Hist 1.1). 44 Wilkes (1972) 186. 45 As an example, Pliny the Elder tells us at HN pref. 20 that he withheld his histories from the public until after his death so he could not be accused of ambition while still living.

PAGE 165

165 Since was so early in this learning process, the body of historical literature which s urvives from his period is relatively small. In addition to acknowledging lost information on Tiberius, we must wonder how much information was available to authors to begin with. Even when Tiberius went to Rhodes, no one seems to know why exactly he left. Speculatio n is all we have. 46 In truth Tiberius was a mysterious figure from early on. Even the ancient authors seemed to have had trouble deciphering the story of his life. 47 Details concerning his German campaigns may have been obscured as well, thus making it diff icult for ancient historians to write with any length on the subject. Tiberius in Parallel and Post Tacitean Authors As is the case with pre Tacitean authors, the parallel and post Tacitean authors write more about Tiberius the e mperor than the young Tibe rius or Tiberius as the commander of Germania Some information is offered by Suetonius, Dio, Eutropius, and Orosius, however. As we will see, these authors mention the military success Tiberius experienced early on, but they seem to place a curious amount of e mphasis on the rela tionships T iberius had with other imperial figures. Tiberius 9.1 2 along with his campaigns against the R h aeti and Vindelici and the Pannonians (see Appendix C pp. 230 2) accomplishment. He states that he relocated fo rty thousand German war prisoners ( Tib connection to Germania is not mentioned again until Tiberius 16.1 when 46 Ann 1.4; Suet. Ti b 10. 47

PAGE 166

1 66 Sue tonius simply writes that Tiberius was put in charge of subduing the Germans, but th at the Illyrian revolt required his attention instead. victory over the Illyrians back to Germania, however, when he writes: cui gloriae amplior adhuc ex oportunitate cumulus accessit. nam sub id fere tempus Quintilius Varus cum tribus legionibus in Germania periit, nemine dubitante quin uictores Ger mani iuncturi se Pannoniis fuerint, nisi debellatum prius Illyricum esset. Circumstances g ave this exploit a larger and crowning glory; for it was at just about that time that Quintilius Varus perished with three legions in Germany, and no one doubted that the victorious Germans would have united with the Pannonians, had not Illyricum been subd ued first. Tib 17.1 Suetonius makes it sound as though Tiberius prevented a very serious and potentially d eva stating war with the Germans by being victorious in Illyricum. Suetonius also describes up after disaster. He takes extra counse l and personally sees t o it that orders are followed. F or example, Tiberius makes sure that no extra baggage crosses the Rhine to weigh down the train ( Tib 18.1) 48 Suetonius then note s while on campaign: he would eat while sitting on the ground, would often sleep without a tent, and insisted on giving orders in writing. He also encouraged good communication, requesting that his men consult with him immedia te l y if ever they were in doubt about something ( Tib 18.2). As a leader, Tiberius was a strict disciplinarian and once punished a commander ( Tib 19.1) Finally, Suetonius remarks that Tiberius did not trust much in chance or fortune, but he did observe a mi litary superstition handed down from his ancestors. Aside from this anecdote, Suetonius describes Tiberius as an austere, cautious general. 48 Tiberius shows military foresight by making sure he does not suffe r from the bulk of equipment. Dio

PAGE 167

167 When Tiberius returns fro m Germania, he celebrates his vi ctory with others. He is accompanied in his triumph by his generals, he bows to Augustus before the Capitol, feasts with the people, and includes his brother in the dedication of the Temple of Concord and the Temple of Castor and Pollux ( Tib 20.1). Tiberius do es not dominate the limelight alone but shares it wit h several others. His familial devotion and generosity in particular are emphasized Dio, however, does not depict Tiberius sharing the limelight with others (see Appendix C pp. 233 8) The young Tiberius oftentimes seems to be overshadowed by other fami ly members. For example, when Tiberius first travels to Germania, he goes in order to take care of his brother (55.2) The focus of the passage is on Drusus. Even though Tiberius is credited with transporting the body and delivering a eulogy, and his succe ss over the Dalmatians and Pannonians is mentioned, these are not the central messages of the passage. Even when he celebrates his success, the feasts are held also in the names of Livia, Julia, and Drusus When Dio directly describes the campaigns in Ger mania he either minimize s the accomplishments, or he downplay all Dio writes is when there was some disturbance in the province of Germany, he took the field ( 55.8 ). No details are given. W hen Dio has fini shed relating the events of the year 7 BCE, nothing worthy of mention happened in Germany 55.9). Dio tells us tha t Tiberius campaigned in Germania, crossed th e Weser and reached the Elbe but nothing noteworthy was accomplished at this time 55.28 ). He mentions that

PAGE 168

168 Tiberius be g an his second campaign in Germania at 55.29, but the rest of the passage is about trouble s in Dalmatia and Pannonia. At th e beginning of 55.30 Tiberius leaves Germania to deal with these disturbances. No further information is given. Thus Dio writes of sporadic times, with little or no detail. When Dio does expand on affairs in Germany, Tiberius is more of a secondary character in the narrative, while Augustus takes a prominent position. Augustus campaigned against the Germans, but stayed in Rome while Tiberius cross ed the Rhine (55 .6) Tiberius is just a subordinate, a mere agent dispatched by the emperor Indeed, Augustus is th e subject throughout most of this passage. Augustus refuses to make a truce, Augustus arrests the envoys of the Sugambri, Augustus grants money to the soldier s. When Tiberius appears toward the end of this passage, he is the object while Augustus is the subject. Augustus gives him titles, Augustus places him as commander in place of Drusus, Augustus has him post a proclamation concerning his new office, and Augustus grants him a triumph. Augustus certainly takes first place in this passage, while Tiberius takes a distant, uncommanding seco nd. Augustus as the subject takes action and makes decisions. In actuality the reader knows that Augustus is in Rome and Tiberius is the one really implementing orders in Germania, but Dio has not written his passage from that point of view Although there are no hostilities evident between Tiberius and Augustus in this passage, the emperor certainly overshadows the young general. Tensions exist between the two later Tiberius is said to be engaged in military affairs, but he frequently visits Rome, chiefly because he fears that Augustus will shift favor to someone else while he is away (55.27) Indeed, Tiberius always had tough competition ; the sons of

PAGE 169

169 Drusus celebrate their father by dedicating gladiatorial games to him and the people show their approval (55.27) In what Dio seems to depict as retaliation through his name and his own, only he uses the form of his name which asserts his adoption by Augustus. Dio seems to sh ow Tiberius striving to keep up with Germanicus and his brother who are already gaining favor in Rome. emperor at 55.31. He suspects that Tiberius is drawing out his military comm and so he can maintain some power for as long as possible. He therefore sends out Germanicus, although he was still young and only a quaestor. This surely magnified well. Tiberius and Livia dedicate a sacred precinct, and both stage banquets (55.8) Tiberius has to e is almost always mentioned in connection with someone else, either sharing attention, competing for attention, or in the case of Augustus, acting as a complete subordinate. A similar tone ca n be detected in the later text of Eutropius, who writes that R ome flourished under Augustus and then list s the places added to the empire and the peoples conquered (see Appendix C p. 239) Concerning Germany he writes: Vicit autem multis proeliis Dacos. Germanorum ingentes copias cecidit, ipsos quoque trans Albim flu vium summovit, qui in Barbarico longe ultra Rhenum est. Hoc tamen bellum per Drusum, privignum suum, administravit, sicut per Tiberium, privignum alterum, Pannonicum, quo bello XL captivorum milia ex Germania transtulit et supra ripam Rheni in Gallia conlo cavit. He also conquered the Dacians in battle; put to the sword numerous forces of the Germans; and drove them beyond the river Elbe, which is in the

PAGE 170

170 country of the barbarians far beyond the Rhine. This war however he carried on by the agency of his step son Drusus, as he had conducted the Pannonian war by that of his other step son Tiberius, in which he transplanted forty thousand prisoners from Germany, and settled them in Gaul on the bank of the Rhine. 7.9 49 Augustus is the subject of cecidit and summovit and so Augustus is seemingly depicted as the mastermind responsible for the success in Germania. Drusus and Tiberius are then mentioned almost as afterthoughts, and indeed their names appear as objects of per Augustus is still the subject, this time of the verb administravit All the credit belongs to Augustus in this passage. Eutropius must have had access to Dio, Suetonius, Tacitus, and perhaps even th e pre Tacitean authors. He perpe tuate s a tradition about the emperors which by his time had been growing for a few hundred years. A citation in Orosius stands as evidence of this (see Appendix C p. 240) He, like Eutropius, mentions that Tiberius led f o rty thousand people out of Germania (6.21.22 5) In this same passage he cites Suetonius as a s ource. When he uses the phrase cruentissima caede deleuit Orosius seemingly perpetuates the tradition in which Tiberius is cruel. Yet Orosius has his own motives for this: the objecti ve of his work is to highlight the hardships of the past 50 All the same, Orosius shows that s not lighten as the tradition moves on; if anything, his character seems to get darker with time. Conclusion The tradition, then, portrays Tiberius as a successful general in Germania, but no authors offer much detail except Velleius, who had first military career. A large piece of the tradition is certainly missing, most notably Pliny the 49 Text and translations of Eutropius are from Watson (1876). 50 Laistner (1940) 251.

PAGE 171

171 ifficult to know precisely what information about Tiberius actually circulated. However, much of the tradition do es not seem to let Tiberius stand alone, but inste ad he is mention ed alongside Drusus or Augustus. Tiberius really only gets his own spotlight us shares space with Germanicus in the Annals it is not surprising. T hroughout the tradition, t he character of Tiberius commonly had the attention deflected away from him and placed onto another. The difference, perhap s, is this: in the earlier texts Tiberius does not seem to mind sharing attention. He embraces his relationship with his brother and ev en encourages assoc iation of himself and Drusus by dedicating the Temple of Co ncord in both their names. N o where can we f ind animosity between Tiberius and Augustus. In with competitio suspicions grow between Tiberius and Augustus. So somewhere betwee n the pre Tacitean tradition and the parallel/post Tacitean tradition the portrayal of Tiberius changed, and w e can s ee it happening in Annals Although Tiberius gains favor at Annals 1.3, Augustus only settled on him after many others were dead Even so, Augustus requires Tiber ius to adopt Germanicus, who already had been assigned to Germania in spite of the fact that Tiberius had his own adult son. With this slap in the face one might sympathize with Tiberius, but in Annals 1.4 Tacitus attests that Tiberius was born with arrogance and also had a cruel streak. The character we see in the Annals is mostly Tiberius the emperor, not T iberius the commander of Germania Tacitus traces for us the transition of Tiberius fr om a private citizen to emperor, w hen he leaves behind his military persona and inhabits the

PAGE 172

172 res internae of the Annals 51 He does not go out on campaign, but rather stays sedentary in Italy, particularly in Rome. Germanicus takes his place, as attested by Dio (55.31) as the vi brant general in Germania. Thus Germanicus becomes what Tiberius would have been had he remained as commander in the north. Indeed, as we have Ann 2.14 ). P erhaps this is why Tiberius is oftentimes so critical of what Germanicus does while in Germania ( e.g Ann 1.62 ). Tiberius has person al experience with the province and surely thinks about what he did or would have done in certain situations. He reminds Germanicus at Annals 2.26 of his experience and advises him accordingly. Germanicus responds by attributing jealousy to Tiberius. Thus even Germanicus recognizes that Tiberius harbo rs animosity and that this animosity stems from military success in Germania Once T iberius removes Germanicus from Germania and the not last once he is transferred to the East ( Ann 2.5) Tiberius does not demonstrate such jealousy when he shares military r es p onsibilities with his brothe r in the pre Tacitean tradition, b ut in the Annals his jealousy and hostility are ope nly noted on more than one occa sion ( i.e. 1.7, 1.63, 2.5, 2. 22, 2. 26) In Suetonius and Dio he is likewise a hostile, suspicious character. The Annals marks the turning p oint in the Tiberius tradition, much like it shows the turning Although the contrast between Tiberius the emperor and Germanicus is sharp Tiberius the commander of Germania, particular ly the one fr om the pre Tacitean 51 I derive the concept of Tiberius as a res internae character from Ginsburg (1981) Chapter 4.

PAGE 173

173 tradition has much in common with Germanicus. Tiberius the commander of Germania is glorified for his military achievement in the pre Tacitean tradition, much like Germanicus Once we look past Tiberius the emperor and are attentive to traces of Tiberius the commander of Germania, we can understand more not only about Tiberius but also about Germanicus. O nce again Tiberius sits by while someone else succeeds in his province and earns the affection of the people. As for Germanicus, he is what Tiberius would have become had he continued his command in Germania instead of becoming emperor. Perhaps if Tiberius had not met with so much hardship in his younger years, he could have been the vibrant and admired commander which Germanicus becomes in the Annals Instead the tradition shows him cons tantly playing second fiddle Germanicus lets us see what Tiberius might have been if he had been allowed to flourish on his own in Germani a. What is more, perhaps Tiberius the emperor lets us see what Ge rmanicus might have been if he had lived longer and gained imperium

PAGE 174

174 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION Tacitus is very conscious of the Roman past. Although the narrative of the Annals formally begins in 14 CE, characters and events from previous time are repeatedly brought into the text and conn ected with characters like Germanicus. 1 Thus the Annals is not solely concer ned with the Julio Claudian era but it in fact embraces a wider spa n of Roman history and addresses how the Julio Claudian era fits into a grander scheme. Similarly, Germani cus is not just an individual; he belongs to a long line of famous Roman commanders who campaigned in Germania. He is part of a special group and part of a tradition. His character in the Annals when viewed with this tradition in mind, thus has a timeless quality. He can speak to other generations and add to the puzzling conversation of what it means to be human. So how does Germanicus fit into the l ine of famous Roman commanders of Germania? Germanicus is what Drusus was, h e is the opposite of what Varus was, and h e is what Tiberius would have been. While becoming a successful general like his father, Germanicus avo ids disaster of the Varian type and ultimately carries out the work that had been destined for Tiberius When we carefully excavate these characters from the Annals these relationships become clear. Intertextualities from pre Tacitean sources further emphasize these relationships, and post Tacitean sources confirm them. Although some sources of the literary traditions surrounding Drusus, Varus, and Tiberius may be missing, the extant sources reinforce the messages in the Annals 1 For elements of the past in the Annals see Syme (1958) 364 77. For Germanicus as a character tied to the past, see Pelling (1993) 77 8.

PAGE 175

175 us, Varus, and Tiberius alter the traditional scholarly interpretation of Germanicus? Although it does not elevate text anyway, Germanicus does manage live up to the example s et by his father Drusus. We have seen through our comparison of sources that Drusus certainly set the bar high for future commanders, but as we have seen especially in the words and thoughts of the people of Rome, Germanicus met expectations and filled his s shoes rather nicely. Thus when he is viewed alongside the shadows of Drusus that lurk in the Annals Germanicus looks like quite the competent military man. When the Annals is put into the context of the larger portrait of Drusus from the pre an d post Tacitean tradition, Germanic us inherits the popularity and r epublican qualities of h is father, as well as the tragedy Varus makes Germanicu s look more than just competent; he makes him look absolutely praiseworthy. In the Annals Germanicus not only succeeds in areas where Varus failed, like avoiding treachery and facing Arminius, b ut he goes above and beyond Germanicus effectively repairs all the damage Varus had done by burying the dead, recovering lost spoils and standards, and reasserting Roman control to extents of Germania reached previously by Drusus. Germanicus is certainly the opposite of Varus, existing in the minds of the Romans as a leader whom they wish to honor rather than forget. Germanicus and Tiberius perhaps share the most complex r elationship. In the past scholars have argued that Germanicus and Tiberius are opposites, and Germanicus

PAGE 176

176 has been label ed the 2 Perhaps this is true of Germanicus and the e mperor Tiberius, that is, the old, sedentary, gloomy Tiberius. The y ounger Tiberius, however, the commander Tiberius who took the field in Germania and won military success and popularity among the troops, may in fact have had much in common with the vibrant Germanicus. Perhaps Tacitus suggests the similarities between a m ilitary minded Tiberius and Germanicus when he portrays Tiberius giving stategic advic e to Germanicus at places like Annals 2.26 or show ing decisions and actions at places like Annals 1.52 and 1.62. In these scenes it appears as though Tiberius knows what he would h ave done as the commander in the se situation s Annals so we must turn similar to Germanicus: popular, esteemed, talented, and caring of his men. A few other sources agree, yet since the literary tradi tion surroun ding Tiberius is so incomplete, questions will remain T he literary traditions gleaned from both pre and post Tacitean sources can help us better understand the characters of Drusus, Varus, and Tiberius and thus can help us better understand their effect on Germanicus. Knowledge of the traditions can also help us identify intertextualities and understand the place of the Annals within the tradition of Roman historiography portrayal of him fits right in with t he rest of the tradition. A s the other sources do Tacitus 2 Walker (1952) 118; Daitz (1960) 48; Ross (1973) 214, 220, 227; Rutland (1987) 154 also acknowledge the idea of Germanicus as a foil, although Ross sees it as problematic. See Pelling (1993) 78 81 for a re evaluation.

PAGE 177

177 people and the troops, kind, handsome, and charismatic. Tacitus certainly paints Drusus as a model Roman, one who was revered long after his death. Thus Tacitus sustains the literary tradition of Drusus. He does not add much to it, but it is interesting such specific sit es as ( Annals 1.56), altar ( Annals 2.7), and fosse ( Annals 2.8) When it comes to Varus, Tacitus a ctually portrays him less harshly than others. In other sources, Varus is shown in a negative light. Some authors even attack his character, cal ling him greedy, careless, and lazy. Although Tacitus does acknowledge purpose. Tacitus uses Varus just enough to provide a scapegoa t which will contrast with German icus and to bring past historical fact into the textual present. After all, the tradition seems to suggest that Tacitus would be amiss if he did not mention Varus. If authors like Manilius can find a place for Varus in their wo rk, certainly Tacitus can Ta citus takes what would seem to be a requirement and turns it into an advantage: characters. As for Tiberius, Tacitus does not paint him a very flattering portrait. Tiberi campaigns in Germania are certainly not a topic of concern. Tacitus minimizes his military success from his younger years and focuses instead on the gloomy emperor. his commander Tacitus offers a harsh portray exact place in the literary trad ition of Tiberius since so much of that t radition is lost

PAGE 178

178 Thus Tacitus follows the literary tradition of Drusus fairly closely, but he seems to deviate from the existing traditions when it comes to Varus and Tiberius. He treats Varus less harshly than many other sources and Tiberius perhaps more harshly than other sources. His portrayals of these characters certainly affect the portrayal of Germanicus in that they ultimately make him look successful, talented, charismatic, and popular. characterization? Poetics raises three particular questions. First, Aristotle explain s at 2.1 5 that an author represents his characters as better than in real life, or as worse, or as they are. It is impossible to know what Drusus, Varus, Tiberius, and Germanicus were truly like in real life, but we can attempt to reconstruct facsimil es o f them by examining the extant records concerning their lives. In doing so, we can speculate that Tacitus seems to portray Drusus as the wonderful person that he likely was in real life (according to the information we have left about him), but he seems to portray Varus as better and Tiberius as worse. D o these characterizations help Tacitus idealize, discredi t, or fairly portray Germanicus? Drusus and Varus elevate our esteem for Germanicus, so that he look s like a n ideal Roman leader. Tiberius, however, h a s a double effect on Germanicus; as gloomy emperor, he casts Germanicus in a positive light, such that Germanicus 3 However, to the young Tiberius, commander of Germania, Germanicus is quite similar. Like Drus us, the young commander Tiberius displays virtue and promise which are reflected in 3 For Germanicus as an opposite or fo il of Tiberius, see Walker (1952) 118; Daitz (1960) 48; Ross (1973) 214, 227; Rutland (1987) 154. For Germanicus as a hero, see Walker (1952) 118 20; Daitz (1960) 37. Ross (1973) 215 he is such a good foil for Tiberius.

PAGE 179

179 Germanicus. On the other hand, the reader of the Annals knows that this young Tiberius eventually grows old to become the gloomy e mpero r Tiberius. Would Germanicus have do ne the same someday rule Rome? Perhaps this way of thinking places Germanicus in a bad light and foreshadows doom in the character of Germanicus. One must remember that he is a Julio Claudian. His family holds a certain reputation, and even Ta citus asserts that at Annals 1. 4 when he refers to Tiberius having the chronic and innate arrogance of the ( vetere atque insita Claudiae familiae superbia ) just before he saevitia 4 So perhaps Tacitus does not always use Tiberius to make Germanicus into the gleaming white horse of the Annals after all. 5 And so does Germanicus appear better than he was in real life, or worse, or as he real ly was? Again it is impossible to know what Germanicus was truly like in real life, but we can attempt to reconstruct a facsimile of him from the extant records and then 6 The work of Stiles has already take n up this task. After examining various sources from the reign of Tiberius, Stiles concludes that the contemporary literary tradition surrounding Germanicus was quite positive. 7 Tacitus, then, seems to follow suit with what was already in place among 4 Ann 1.4: pars multo maxima inminentis dominos variis rumoribus differebant :...Tiberium Neronem maturum annis, spectatum bello, set vetere atque insita Claudiae familiae superbia, multaque indicia saevitiae, quamquam premantur, erumpere various gossip:...Tiberius Nero was mature in years, distinguished in war, but he had the chronic and innate arrogance of the Claudian family, and many signs of cruelty, altho 5 grows greyer, and opposites begin to merge and 6 For an examination of the literary tradition of Germanicus, see Stiles (2010). 7 Stiles (2010) 167 70.

PAGE 180

180 earli er authors by portraying Germanicus in a fairly favorable light. Whether Germanicus really was so praiseworthy in re al life cannot be known for certain but it is quite possible that the literature has taken a good man and raised him up to greatness. At P oetics 9 .1 3 Aristotle explains t hat historians write about things that have actually happened while poets write about things that may possibly or probably happen It would be difficult to argue, however, that Tacitus, or any historian for that matter, actually uphold s these boundaries. As Dio recognizes at 53.19. 1 6 it is often challenging for a historian to find out what actually happened in the past, so even if an author wanted to stick strictly to the facts, he would find the task difficult, if not impossible. Thus many authors like Dio, Suetonius, and even Tacitus will frequently present the reader with various versions of a story and allow the reader to make their own decision. So metimes an author may even offer his opinion on the matter. Some i nve ntio is quite acceptable in ancient historical texts, and so the line between history and poetry is not as clear as Aristotle might have us believe. 8 Devillers reminds us that 9 Tacitus has certai n messages to relay and purposes to fulfill as he writes, and in order to achieve certain effects, he may sometimes act both as a poet and as a historian by writing about the proba ble and the possible along with the factual. Furthermore, writing about the probable or possible future of characters like Germanicus is perhaps tempting to Tacitus since he is looking back from the future. 8 For inventio see Damon (2007) 444 6; Laird (2009) 202 4. For inventio in Tacitus, see Woodma n (1988) 176 9. For inventio in history, see Bosworth (2003). 9 Devillers (2003) 160 1.

PAGE 181

181 We have seen that the characterizations of D rusus, Varus, and Tiberius allow the reader to imagine what Germanicus might have become had he lived his life differently or had he not died so young. Perhaps Germanicus could have become greater than his father, finally conquering Germania for the Romans. On the other hand, perhaps he could have become worse than Varus, falling into a trap in northern Germania and losing more Roman lives and honor Or perhaps he could have become like Tiberius, outliving his military glory, la sting to inherit the principate and grow ing into a monster of an emperor. Would he have had a bright fut ure ahead of him, or a dark one? The shadows of Drusus, Var us, and Tiberius cast over perception not only of who Germanicus is but who he could become. The possibilities materialize P appreciation for Germanicus is heightened: although he does not get the chance to become greater than his father, he does manage to avoid the fate s of Varus and Tiberius. fate instead is to die young much like h is father, but far away in the East rather than in the province from which he took his name and his military glory. 10 This fate naturally makes Germanicus into a tragic character, and so Aris discussion of tragedy and the tragic character, particular ly at Poetics 6.1 4 tempts us to ask how Tacitus may use past characters to paint Germanicus as tragic. Aristotle 10

PAGE 182

182 11 importantly, it evokes pity. 12 Do these characters from the past amplify Germanicus as a man of action who evokes pity? certainly renders him more tragic, since Drusus is a very tragic character h imself according to the extant literary tradition: he dies young, unexpectedly, and while sti ll at the height of his success; h e is mourned greatly by his brother, moth er, wife, and the Roman people. onto Ge rmanicus to make him appear tragic as well. For example, at Annals 2.41 when the people see Germanicus in his tragic death is foreshadowed and at Annals 3.5 and wonder why Germanicus does not receive similar rites. Such a comparison of Germanicus to Drusus renders Germanicus more tragic than his father because although he similarly dies a tragic d eath, he is not simi larly honored. Pity is the emotion tied to these mighty men who were brought down in their primes. Varus may not but he does demonstrate how Germanicus grows and develops in the Annals At Rhetoric 2.12 14 Aristotle discusses the differences among the young man, the old man, and the man in prime of life. At the beginning of the Annals Germanicus is a young man attempti ng to reach his prime. 11 Arist Poet 6.2: Text and translations of the Poetics are from Fyfe (1932). 12 Arist Poet 6.2: ... It ( tragedy ) represents men in action and does not use narrative and through pity and fear it effects relief to these and similar emotions

PAGE 183

183 scho lar s like Ross and Rutland often point out Germanic rashness, or lack of experience, focusing especially on the mutiny episode of Annals 1.33 49 13 But once Germanicus begins his campaigns in Germania in the shadow of Varus, he changes At the star t of the campaigns Germanicus runs the risk of becoming the new Varus, a foolhardy leader who falls victim to the fierce Germans. As he moves forward, however, his continual successes decrease his chances of meeting a Varian fate. He gains experience, lose s his naivety, and eventually ceases to be a candidate for Varian seemed only to presage gloom for the German campaigns, but once Germanicus accumulates a list of emphasizes growth into a seasoned general who has come into his prime. My argument for t his change in the character of Germanicus demands that his portrayal be reevaluated In the past, Germanicus was labeled as hero, failure, and many levels in between. Based on my conclusions, w here does characterization of Germanicus fall on the scale of success and failure ? Germanicus does not utterly sink to the bottom or rise completely to the top. R ather he wavers between the two extremes over the course of the Annals and perhaps in the end he is raised a bit aloft on t he successful side. Drusus pull s Germanicus upward on the scale towards success but even Drusus was not perfect, and so his character can only do so muc h to elevate his son. Association with Varus first causes Germa nicus to sink a bit 13 Ross (1973) 211 (1973) 220 also mentions the slaughter at A nn 6 likewise notes the humiliation Ann 1.35 and says of his lack of involvement in the bloodshed of Ann

PAGE 184

184 towards failure but once it becomes clear that Germanicus is not like Varus, Varus actually makes Germanicus appear successful, and so Germa nicus manages to remain above even If Germanicus is viewed as comparable to Tiberius when he was the commander of Germania, then Tiberius pulls Germanicus upwards towards success but he is not able to raise him as high as Drusus. Howe the young Tiberius open him up to the possibility of becoming like the old Tiberius, then he may suffer towards failure. Overall, Germanicus teeters between success and failure There are positives and negatives, and the end result is not easy to tally up, as scholarly debate has demonstrated. 14 Germanicus is not a success or a failure, but a combination of the two. Moreover he is not constantly the same combination of the two, but throughout the Annals he displays waverin g degrees of success and failure. When he dies the scale on which he wavers freezes with unequivocal results According to Aristotl e t he mean is the goal of a good man, but it is difficult to attain 15 When Germanicus is viewed in the Annals with Drusus, Varus, and Tiberius in mind, he ultimately Drusus, but he certainly does not sink like Varus. Neither hero or a failure, Germanicus is a very real, very human character who experiences ups and downs an d perhaps this is why we keep reading his story and pondering his nature. 14 a) as either 15 Arist. Eth. Nic. 2.6.10 7.

PAGE 185

185 APPENDIX A THE LITERARY TRADITI ON OF DRUSUS Periochae 138 Raeti a Tib. Nerone et Druso, Caesaris privignis, domiti. Agrippa, Caesaris gener, mortuus. A Druso census actus est. The Raeti were overcome by Tiberius Nero and Drusus, the stepsons of in law, died. Drusus conducted the cen sus. 1 139 Civitates Germaniae cis Rhenum et trans Rhenum positae oppugnantur a Druso, et tumultus, qui ob censum exortus in Gallia erat, componitur; ara dei Caesaris ad confluentem Araris et Rhodani dedicata, sacerdote creato C. Iulio Vercondaridubno Aeduo The states of Germany situated on the near and farther sides of the Rhine were attacked by Drusus, and the uprising that arose in Gaul over the census was settled. An altar of the divine Caesar was dedicated at the confluence of the Arar and the Rhone, G aius Julius Vercondaridubnus, an Aeduan, being appointed the priest. 140 Thraces domiti a L. Pisone, item Cherusci, Tencteri, Chauci aliaeque Germanorum trans Rhenum gentes subactae a Druso referuntur... The Thracians were subdued by Lucius Piso; an accoun t is also given of the subjugation by Drusus of the Cherusci, Tencteri, Chauci, and other German tribes across the Rhine... 141 Bellum adversus transrhenanas gentes a Druso gestum refertur... An account is given of the war conducted by Drusus against the t ribes across the Rhine... 142 Bellum adversus Germanorum trans Rhenum civitates gestum a Druso refertur. Ipse ex fractura, equo super crus eius conlapso, XXX die, quam id 1 Text and translations of the Periochae are from Schlesinger (1959).

PAGE 186

186 acciderat, mortuus. Corpus a Nerone fratre, qui nuntio valetudinis evocatus raptim ad cucurrerat, Romam pervectum et in tumulo C. Iulii reconditum. Laudatus est a Caesare Augusto vitrico, et supremis eius plures honores dati. Clades Quinctilii Vari. An account is given of the war waged by Drusus against the German states acros s the Rhine. D rusus himself died of a broken leg, sustained when his horse fell on it, on the thirtieth day after the accident. His body was conveyed to Rome by his brother Nero, who had arrived posthaste on news of his illness; burial was in the tomb of Gaius Julius. T he eulogy was pronounced by Caesar Augustus, his stepfather, and many distinctions were conferred on him at his funeral. Disaster to Quintilius Varus Strabo 13 After the people who live along the river come the other tribes that live between the Rhenus and the River Albis, which latter flows approximately parallel to the former, towards the ocean, and traverses no less territory than the former. Between the two are other navigable ri vers also (among them the Amasias, on which Drusus won a naval victory over the Bructeri), which likewise flow from the south towards the north and the ocean; 2 6 And it was between the Salas and the Rhenus that Drusus Germanicus, while he was successfully carrying on t he war, came to his end. He had subjugated, not only most of the tribes, but also the islands along the coast, among which is Burchanis, which he took by siege 2 Text and translations of Strabo are from Jones (1924).

PAGE 187

187 Velleius Paterculus 2.95.1 2 Reversum inde Neronem Caesar haud mediocris belli mole experiri st atuit, adiutore operis dato fratre ipsius Druso Claudio, quem intra Caesaris penates enixa e rat Livia. Quippe uterque e diver sis partibus Raetos Vindelicosque adgressi, multis urbium et castellorum oppugnationibus nec non derec ta quoque acie feliciter func ti gentes locis tutissimas, aditu difficillimas, numero frequentes, feritate truces maiore cum peric ulo quam damno Romani exercitus plurimo cum earum sanguine perdomuerunt. magnitude In this work he gave him as a collaborator his own brother Drusus Claudius, to whom Livia gave birth when already in the house of Caesar. The two brothers attacked the Raeti and Vindelici from different directions, and after storming many towns and stron gholds, as well as engaging successfully in pitched battles, with more danger than real loss to the Roman army, though with much bloodshed on the part of the enemy, they thoroughly subdued these races, protected as they were by the nature of the country, d ifficulty of access, strong in numbers, and fiercely warlike 3 2.97.2 3 Cura deinde atque onus Germanici belli delegata Druso Claudio, fratri Neronis, adulescenti tot tantarumque virtutum, quot et quantas natura mortalis recipit vel industria perficit. Cui us ingenium utrum bellicis magis operibus an civilibus suffecerit artibus, in incerto est: morum certe dulcedo ac suavitas et adversus amicos aequa ac par sui aestimatio inimitabilis fuisse dicitur; nam pulchritudo corporis proxima fraternae fuit. Sed illu m magna ex parte domitorem Germaniae, plurimo eius gentis variis in locis profuso sanguine, fatorum iniquitas consulem agentem annum tricesimum rapuit. The burden of responsibility for this war was then entrusted to Drusus Claudius, the brother of Nero, a young man endowed with as many great It would be hard to say whether his talents were the better adapted to a military career or the duties of civil life; at any rate, the charm and the sweetness of his character are said to have been inimitable, and also his modest attitude of equality towards his friends. As for his personal beauty, it was second only to that of his brother. But, after accomplishing to a great extent the subjec tion of Germany, in which much blood of that people was shed on various battle fields, an unkind fate carried him off during his consulship, in his thirtieth year. 3 Text and translations of Velleius are from Shipley (1924).

PAGE 188

188 Horace Carm 4.4.1 28 Qualem ministrum fulminis alitem, cui rex deorum regnum in auis uagas permisit expertus fidelem Iuppiter in Ganymede flauo, olim iuuentas et patrius uigor nido laborum protulit inscium uernique iam nimbis remotis insolitos docuere nisus uenti pauentem, mox in ouilia demisit ho stem uiuidu s impetus, nunc in reluctantis dracones egit amor dapis atque pugnae; qualemue laetis caprea pascuis intenta fuluae matris ab ubere iam lact e depulsum leonem dente nouo peritura uidit, uidere Raeti be lla sub Alp ibus Drusum gerentem Vindelici -quibus mos unde deductus per omne tempus Ama zonia securi dextras obarmet, quaerere distuli, nec scire fas est omnia -sed diu lateque uictrices cateruae consiliis iuuenis reuictae s ensere, qui d mens rite, quid indoles nutrita faustis sub penetralibus posset, quid Augusti paternus in pueros animus Nerones. Like the winged servant of the thunderbolt, to whom the king of gods gave royal sway over the roving birds, having found him faithful in the case of fair haired Ganymede at first youth and native strength drove him forth from the nest ignorant of toil, and the spring winds, now that the storm showers are gone, have taught him unaccustomed efforts despite his fear; ne xt eager impulse despatched him as a foe against the sheep pens; now love of feasting and fight has driven him against struggling snakes; or like a lion newly weaned from the rich milk of his tawny mother which a (female) goat intent on rich pastures has s een, about to perish by its untried tooth; even so did the Vindelici see Drusus waging war beneath the Raetian Alps whence came the custom which through all time arms their right hands with the Amazonian axe I have postponed finding out, nor is it right to know all things but their hordes victorious for a long time far and wide were counsels, and felt what a mind and character duly nurtured under favouring auspices could achieve, felt what the fatherly spirit of Augustus tow ards the young Neros could achieve. 4 Carm 4.14. 1 13 quae cura patrum quaeu e Quiritium plenis honorum muneribus tuas, What care of Fathers, or what care of citizens shall with full service of 4 Text and translations of Horace are from Lyne (1995).

PAGE 189

189 Auguste, virtutes in aevum per titulos memoresque fastus aeternet, o, qua sol habitabilis illustrat oras, maxime principum? q uem legis experter Latinae Vindelici didicere nuper, quid Marte posses. milite nam tuo Drusus Genaunos, implacidum genus, Breunosque u eloces et arces Alpibus impositas tremedis deiecit acer plus u ice simplici; honours immortalize through time your feats of virtue by inscript ions and commemorative records, oh greatest of statesmen, wherever the sun shines on habitable shores? you whose p ower in war the Vindelici, free of Latin law, have recently learnt to know. For with your troops keen Drusus with more than simple requital hurled down the Genauni, an implacable people, and the swift Breuni, and their citadels set upon the awesome Alps; Valerius Maximus 17 T antum amorem princeps parensque noster insitum animo fratris Dr usi habuit, ut cum Ticini, quo v ictor hos tium ad conplectendos parentes venerat, gravi illum et periculosa v alitudine in Germania fluctuare cognosset, protinus inde metu attonitus erumperet. I ter q uoque quam rapidum et praeceps v elut uno spiritu corripuerit eo patet, quod Alpes Rhenumque transgressus die ac nocte mut ato subinde equo CC milia passuum per modo dev ictam barbariam Namantabag io duce solo comite conten tus ev asit. Our e mperor and father, Tiberius, had a very strong natural love in his heart for his brother, Drusus. After defeating our enemies, Tiberius had come to Ticinum to embrace his parents, when he learned that the health of Drusus, who was in Germ any, was in a serious and dangerous condition, and that he might not live. He was panic stricken and rushed away immediately. He obviously made the journey in wild haste, almost in a single breath, since he crossed the Alps and the Rhine riding day and nig ht, changing his horse repeatedly, and then was happy to carry out a journey of two hundred miles through a barbarous region that had only recently been pacified, with Namantabagius as his sole guide and companion. 5 5 The text of Valerius Maximus is from Smith (1985). The translation is from Walk er (2004).

PAGE 190

190 Seneca the Younger Polyb 15.5 Ti. Caes ar patruus meus Drusum Germanicum patrem meum, minorem natu quam ipse erat fratrem, intima Germaniae recludentem et gentes ferocissimas Romano subicientem imperio in complexu et in osculis suis amisit. Modum tamen lugendi non sibi tantum sed etiam aliis fe cit ac totum exercitum non solum maestum sed etiam attonitum corpus Drusi sui sibi vindicantem ad morem Romani luctus redegit iudicavitque non militandi tantum disciplinam esse servandam sed etiam dolendi. Non potuisset ille lacrimas alienas compescere, ni si prius pressisset suas. Tiberius Caesar, my uncle, lost his younger brother Drusus Germanicus, my father, just when he was opening up the remote parts of Germany, and was bringing the fiercest tribes under the power of Rome, and, holding him in his arms he gave him a last kiss. Yet, not only for himself but for others, he set a limit upon mourning, and when the whole army was not only disconsolate but even distraught, and claimed the body of the loved Drusus for itself, he forced it to return to the Rom an fashion of mourning, and ruled that discipline must be maintained, not only in fighting, but also in grieving. But he would not have been able to check the tears of others if he had not first repressed his own 6 Marc. 3.1 2 Liuia amiserat filium Drusum, magnum futurum pri ncipem, iam magnum ducem; intrav erat penitus Germaniam et ibi signa Romana fixerat ubi uix ullos esse Romanos notum erat. In expeditione de cesserat ipsis illum hostibus aegrum cum v eneratione et pace mutua prosequentibus nec optare quod expediebat audentibus. Accedebat ad hanc mortem, quam ille pro re publica obierat, ingens ciuium prouinciarumque et totius Italiae desiderium, per quam effusis in officium lugubre municipiis coloniisque usque in urbem ductum erat funus triumpho simillimum Non licuerat matri ultima filii oscula gratumque extremi sermonem oris haurire. L ongo itinere reliquias Drusi sui prosecuta, tot per omnem Italiam ardentibus rogis, quasi totiens illum amitteret, inritata, ut primum tamen intulit tumulo, simul et illum e t dolorem suum posuit, nec plus doluit quam aut honestum erat Caesare aut aequo m Tiberio saluo. Non desiit denique Drusi sui celebrare nomen, ubique illum sibi pri v atim publiceque repraesentare, libentissime de illo loq ui, de illo audire: cum memoria illius vixit; quam nemo potest retinere et frequentare qui illam tristem sibi reddidit. And Livia lost her son Drusus, who would have made a great emperor, and had already shown himself a great leader. For he had penetrated far into 6 Text and translations of Seneca are from Basore (1932).

PAGE 191

191 Germany, and had plan ted the Roman standards in a region where it was scarcely known that any Romans existed. He had died on the campaign, and his very foes had reverently honoured his sick bed by maintaining peace along with us; nor did they dare to desire what their interest s demanded. And to these circumstances of his death, which he had met in the service of his country, there was added the unbounded sorrow of his fellow citizens, of the provinces, and of all Italy, through the length of which crowds poured forth from the t owns and colonies, and, escorting the funeral train all the way to the city, made it seem more like a triumph. His mother words of his dying lips. On the long journey through whi ch she accompanied the remains of her dear Drusus, her heart was harrowed by the countless pyres th at flamed throughout all Italy for on each she seemed to be losing her son afresh yet as soon as she had placed him in the tomb, along with her son she laid away her sorrow, and grieved no more than was respectful to Caesar or fair to Tiberius, seeing that they were alive. And lastly, she never ceased from proclaiming the name of her dear Drusus. She had him pictured everywhere, in private and in public p laces, and it was her greatest pleasure to talk about him and to listen to the talk of others she lived with his memory. But no one can cherish and cling to a memory that he has rendered an affliction to himself. Marc. 6.4.1 6.5.3 Non dubito quin Iuliae Augustae, quam familiariter coluisti, magis tibi placeat exemplum: illa te ad suum consilium uocat. Illa in primo ferv ore, cum maxime in pa tientes ferocesque sunt miseri, accessum Areo, philosopho v iri sui, praebuit et multum eam rem pro fuisse sibi confess a est, plus quam populum Romanum, quem nolebat tristem tristitia sua facere, plus quam Augustum, qui subducto altero adminiculo titubabat nec luctu suorum inclinandus erat, plus quam Tiberium filium, cuius pietas efficiebat ut in illo acerbo et defleto gen tibus funere nihil sibi nisi numerum deesse sentiret. Hic, ut opinor, aditus illi fuit, hoc principium apud feminam opinionis suae custodem diligentissimam: 'usque in hunc diem, Iulia, quantum quidem ego sciam adsiduus v iri tu i comes, cui non tantum quae in publicum emittuntur nota, sed omnes sunt secret iores animorum vestrorum motus dedisti operam ne quid esset quod in te quisquam reprenderet; nec id in maioribus modo observ asti, sed in minimis, ne quid faceres cui famam, liberrimam principum iudicem, uelles ignoscere. Nec quicquam pulchrius exi stimo quam in summo fastigio col locatos multarum rerum u eniam dare, nullius petere; serv andus itaque tibi in hac quoque re tuus mos est, ne quid committas quod minus a literve factum v elis. Deinde oro atque obsec ro ne te difficilem am icis et intractabilem praestes. Non est enim quod ignores omnes hos nescire quemadmodum se gerant, loquantur aliquid coram te de Druso an nihil, ne aut oblivio clarissimi iuv enis illi faciat iniuriam aut mentio tibi. Cum secessimus et in unum conv enimus, facta eius dictaque quanto meruit suspectu celebramus; coram te altum nobis de illo

PAGE 192

192 sile ntium est. Cares itaque maxima v oluptate, filii tui laudibus, quas non dubito quin uel inpendio uitae, si potestas detur, in aev um omne sis proro gatura. Quare patere, immo arcer se sermones quibus ille narretur, et apertas aures praebe ad nomen memoriamque filii tui; I doubt not that the example of Julia Augusta, whom you regarded as an intimate friend, will seem more to your taste than the other; she summons you to follow her. She, during the first passion of grief, when its victims are most unsubmissive and most violent, made herself accessible to the philosopher Areus, the friend of her husband, and later confessed that she had gained much help f rom that source more than from the Roman people, whom she was unwilling to sadden with this sadness of hers; more than from Augustus, who was staggering under the loss of one of his main supports, and was in no condition to be further bowed down by the g rief of his dear ones; more than from her son Tiberius, whose devotion at that untimely funeral that made the nations weep kept her from feeling that she had suffered any loss except in the number of her sons. It was thus, I fancy, that Areus approached he r, it was thus he commenced to address a woman least so far as I am aware and, as the constant companion of your husband, I have known not only everything that was given forth to t he public, but all the more secret thoughts of your minds you have taken pains that no one should find anything at all in you to criticize; and not only in the larger matters, but in the smallest trifles, you have been on your guard not t o do anything th at you could wis h public opinion, that most frank judge of princes, to excuse. And nothing, I think, is more admirable than the rule that those who have been placed in high position should bestow pardon for many things, should seek pardon for none. And so in this matter also you must still hold to your practice of doing nothing that you could wish undone, or done otherwise. Furthermore, I beg and beseech you, do not make yourself unapproachable and difficult to your friends. For surely you must be aware tha t none of them know how to conduct themselves whether they should speak of Drusus in your presence or not wishing neither to wrong so distinguished a youth by forgetting him, or to hurt you by mentioning him. When we have withdrawn from your company an d are gathered together, we extol his deeds and words with all the veneration he deserved; in your presence there is deep silence about him. And so you are missing a very great pleasure in not hearing the praises of your son, which I doubt not, you would b e glad, if you should be given the opportunity, to prolong to all time even at the cost of your life. Wherefore submit to conversation about your son, nay, encourage it, and let your ears be open

PAGE 193

193 Consolatio ad Liviam 13 20 Occidit exemplum iuvenis venerabile morum: Maximus ille armis, maximus ille toga. Ille modo eripuit latebrosas hostibus Alpes Et titulum belli dux duce fratre tulit: Ille genus Suevos acre indomitosque Sicambr os Contudit inque fugam barbara terga dedit, Ignotumque tibi meruit, Romane, triumphum, Protulit in terras imperiumque novas. A youth is dead, whose life was a pattern that all might reverence; great in arms was he, and great in peace. He wrested of late from the foe their Alpine hiding places, and won renown, sharing with his brother the captaincy of the war; he crushed the fierce tribe of Suevi and the untamed Sicambri, and turned their barbarous backs to flight, and won for thee, O Roman, a triumph befo re unknown, and extended thy sway to new lands. 7 85 94 Vidimus attonitum fraterna morte Neronem Pallida promissa flere per ora coma, Dissimilemque sui, vultu profitente dolorem: Ei mihi, quam toto luctus in ore fuit! Tu t amen extremo moritur um tempore f ratrem Vidisti, lacrimas vidit et ille tuas, Affigique suis moriens tua pectora sensit Et tenuit vultu lumina fixa tuo, Lumin a caerulea iam iamque natantia m orte, Lumina fratern as iam subitura m anus. We beheld Nero d azed by his faced with disheveled hair, unlike himself in his grief proclaiming countenance; alas, how that grief was shown in every line! Yet thou hour, and he saw thy tears, and dyin g he felt thy breast pressed close to his, and kept his eyes fixed upon thy face, his eyes, all but merged in darksome death, his eyes, soon to be closed by his Florus 2.30 .23 8 Missus in eam provinciam Drusus primos domui t Vsipetes, inde Tencteros per currit et Catthos. Nam Marcomannorum spoliis et insignibus quendam editum tumulum in tropaei modum excoluit. Inde validissimas nationes Cheruscos Suebosque et Sicambros pariter adgressus est, qui viginti centurionibus in crucem actis hoc velu t sacramento sumpserant bellum, adeo certa victoriae spe, ut praedam in antecessum pactione diviserint. Cherusci equos, Suebi aurum et a rgentum, Sicambri captivos elege rant; 7 Text and translations of the Consolatio ad Liviam are from Mozley (1929).

PAGE 194

194 sed omnia retrorsum. Victor namque Drusus equos, pecora, torques eorum ipsoqu e pra edam divisit et vendidit. Et p raeterea in tutelam provin ciae praesidia atque custodias u bique disposuit per Mosam flumen, per Albin, per Visurgin In Rheni quidem ripa quinquaginta amplius castella direxit. Borm am et Gesoriacum pontibus iunxit classibusque firmavit. Invisum atque inaccessum in id tempus Hercynium saltum patefecit. Ea denique in Germania pax erat, ut mutati homines, alia terra, caelum ipsum mitius molliusque solito videretur. Denique non per adulationem, sed ex meritis, defuncto ibi fortissi mo iuvene, ipse, quod numquam alias, senatus cognomen ex provincia dedit. Drusus was sent into the province and conquered the Usipetes first, and then overran the territory of the Tencturi and Catthi. He erected, by way of a trophy, a high mound adorned w ith the spoils and decorations of the Marcomanni. Next he attacked simultaneously those power ful tribes, the Cherusci, Suebi and Sicambri, who had begun hostilities after crucifying twenty of our centurians, an act which served as an oath binding them toge ther, and with such confidence of victory that they made an agreement in anticipation for dividing the spoils. The Cherusci had chosen the horses, the Suebi the gold and silver, the Sicambri the captives. Everything, however, turned out contrariwise; for D rusus, after defeating them, divided up their horses, their herds, their necklets and their own persons as spoil and sold them. Furthermore, to secure the province he posted garrisons and guard posts all along the Meuse, Elbe and Wesser. Along the banks of the Rhine he disposed more than fifty forts. He built bridges at Borma and Gesoriacum, and left fleets to protect them. He opened a way through the Hercynian forest, which had never before been visited or traversed. In a word, there was such peace in Germ any that the inhabitants seemed changed, the face of the country transformed, and the very climate milder and softer than it used to be. Lastly, when the gallant young general had died there, the senate itself, not from flattery but as an acknowledgement o f his merit, did him the unparalleled honour of bestowing upon him a surname derived from the name of a province. 8 Suetonius Cl aud. 1 .2 5 Is Drusus in quaesturae praeturaeque honore dux Raetici, deinde Germanici belli Oceanum septemtrionalem primus Romanorum ducum navigavit transque Rhenum fossas navi et immensi operis effecit, quae nunc adhuc Drusi nae vocantur. Hostem etiam frequ enter caesum ac penitus in intimas solitudines actum non prius destitit insequi, quam species barbarae mulieris humana amp lior victorem tendere ultra sermone Latino 8 Text and translations of Florus are from Forster (1929).

PAGE 195

195 prohibuisset. Quas ob res ovandi ius et triumphalia ornamenta percepit; ac post praeturam confestim inito consulatu atque expeditione repetita sup remum diem morbo obiit in aestiv is castris, quae ex eo Scelerata su nt appellata. Corpus eius per municipiorum coloniarumque primores suscipientibus obviis scribarum decuriis ad urbem devectum sepultumque est in campo Martio. Ceterum exercitus honorarium ei tumulum excitavit, circa quem deinceps stato die quotannis miles d ecurreret Galliarumque civitates publice supplicarent. Praeterea senatus inter alia complura marmoreum arcum cum tropaeis via Appia decrevit et Germanici cognomen ipsi posterisque eius. Fuisse autem creditur non minus gloriosi quam civilis animi; nam ex ho ste super victorias opima quoque spolia captasse summoque saepius discrimine duces Germanorum tota acie insectatus; nec dissimulasse umquam pristinum se rei p. statum, q uandoque posset, restituturum. U nde existimo nonnullos tradere ausos, suspectum eum Aug usto revocatumque ex provincia et quia cunctaretur, interceptum veneno. Quod equidem magis ne praetermitterem rettuli, quam quia verum aut veri simile putem, cum Augustus tanto opere et vivum dilexerit, ut coheredem semper filiis instituerit, sicut quondam in senatu professus est, et defunctum ita pro contione laudaverit, ut deos precatus sit, similes ei Caesares suos facerent sibique tam honestum quandoque exitum darent quam illi dedissent. Nec contentus elogium tumulo eius versibus a se compositis insculp sisse, etiam vitae memoriam prosa oratione composuit. This Drusus, while holding the offices of quaestor and praetor, was in charge of the war in Raetia and later of that in Germany. He was the first of Roman generals to sail the northern Ocean, and beyon d the Rhine with prodigious labour he constructed the huge canals which to this very day are called by his na me. Even after he had defeated the enemy in many battles and driven them far into the wilds of the interior, he did not cease his pursuit until the apparition of a barbarian woman of greater than human size, speaking in the Latin tongue, forbade him to push his victory further. For these exploits he received the honour of an ovation with the triumphal regalia; and immediately after his praetorship he became consul and resumed his campaign, but died in his summer camp, which for that reason was given the name of "Accursed." The body was carried by the leading men of the free towns and colonies to Rome, where it was met and received by the decuries of s cribes, and buried in the campus Martius. But the army reared a monument in his honour, about which the soldiers should make a ceremonial run each year thereafter on a stated day, which the cities of Gaul were to observe with prayers and sacrifices. The se nate, in addition to many other honours, voted him a marble arch adorned with trophies on the Appian Way, and the surname Germanicus for himself and his descendants. It is the general belief that he was as eager for glory as he was democratic by nature; fo r in addition to victories over the enemy he greatly desired to win the "noble trophies," often pursuing the leaders of the Germans all over the field at great personal risk; and he made no secret of his intention of restoring the old time form of governme nt, whenever he

PAGE 196

196 should have the power. It is because of this, I think, that some have made bold to write that he was an object of suspicion to Augustus; that the emperor recalled him from his province, and when he did not obey at once, took him off by pois on. This I have mentioned, rather not to pass it by, than that I think it true or even probable; for as a matter of fact Augustus loved him so dearly while he lived that he always named him joint heir along with his sons, as he once declared in the senate; and when he was dead, he eulogized him warmly before the people, praying the gods to make his Caesars like Drusus, and to grant him, when his time came, as glorious a death as they had given that hero. And not content with carving a laudatory inscription on his tomb in verses of his own composition, Augustus also wrote a memoir of his life in prose 9 Cassius Dio 54.22.1, 3 4 Drusus and Tiberius in the meantime were engaged in the following exploits. The Rhaetians, who dwel l between Noricum and Gaul, near the Tridentine Alps which adjoin Italy, were overrunning a large part of the neighboring territory of Gaul and carrying off plunder even from Italy; and they were harassing such of the Romans or their allies as travelled th rough their country...For these reasons, then, Augustus first sent against them Drusus, who speedily routed a detachment of them which came to meet him near the Tridentine mountains, and in consequence received the rank of praetor. Later, when the Rhaetian s had been repulsed from Italy, but were still harassing Gaul, Augustus sent out Tiberius also. Both leaders then invaded Rhaetia at many points at the same time, either in person or through their lieutenants, and Tiberius even crossed the lake with ships. 10 9 Claudius are from Rolfe (1914). 10 Text and translations of Cassius Dio are from Cary (1917).

PAGE 197

197 54.32.2 33.2 He also waited for the Germans to cross the Rhine, and then repulsed them. Next he crossed over to the country of the Usipetes, passing along the very island of the Batavians, and from there marched along the river to the Sugambrian territory, where he devastated much country. He sailed down the Rhine to the ocean, won over the F risians, and crossing the lake, invaded the country of the Chauci, where he ran into danger, as his ships were left high and dry by the ebb of the ocean. He was saved on this occasion by the Frisians, who had joined his expedition with their infantry, and withdrew, since it was now winter. Upon arriving in Rome he was appointed praetor urbanus, in the consulship of Quintus Aelius and Paulus Fabius, although he already had the rank of praetor. At the beginning of spring he sent out again for the war, crossed the Rhine, and subjugated the Usipetes. He bridged the Lupia, invaded the country of the Sugambri, and advanced through it into the country of the Cherusci, as far as the Visurgis. He was able to do this because the Sugambri, in anger at the Chatti, the o nly tribe among their neighbours that had refused to join their alliance, had made a campaign against them with all their population; and seizing this opportunity, he traversed their country unnoticed. He would have crossed the Visurgis also, had he not ru n short of provisions, and had not the winter set in and, besides, a swarm of bees been seen in his camp. 55.1.3 55.2.2

PAGE 198

198 The Albis rises in the Vandalic Mountains, and empties, a mighty river, into the northern ocean. Drusus undertook to cross this river, but failing in the attempt, set up trophies and withdrew. For a woman of superhuman size is not fated that thou shalt look upon all these land s. But depart; for the end that such a voice should have come to any man from the Diety, yet I cannot discredit the tale; for Drusus immediately departed, and as he was retur ning in haste, died on the way of some disease before reaching the Rhine. And I find confirmation of the story in these incidents: wolves were prowling about the camp and howling just before his death; two youths were seen riding through the midst of the c amp; a sound as of women lamenting was heard; and there were shooting stars in the sky. So much for these events. he was not far off), had sent Tiberius to him in haste. Tiberius fo und him still breathing, and on his death carried the bo dy to Rome, causing the centurio ns and military tribunes to carry it over the first stage of the journey, as far as the winter quarters of the army, and after that the foremost men of each city. W hen the body had been laid in state in the Forum, two funeral orations were delivered: Tiberius pronounced a eulogy there in the Forum, and Augustus pronounced one in the Circus Flaminius.

PAGE 199

199 55.2.3 Drusus, together with his sons, received the title of Germanicus, and he was given the further honours of statues, an arch, and a cenotaph on the bank of the Rhine itself. Orosius 6.21.12 7 Post hoc Claudius Drusus, priuignus Caesaris, Galliam Raetiamque sortitus maximas fortissimasque gentes Germaniae armis subegit. nam tunc, ueluti ad constitutum pacis diem festinarent, ita omnes ad experientiam belli decisionemue foederis undatim gentes commoue bantur aut suscepturae condiciones pacis, si uincerentur, aut usurae quieta libertate, si uincerent. Norici Illyrii Pannonii Dalmatae Moesi Thraces et Daci Sarmatae plurimique et maximi Germaniae populi per diuersos duces uel superati uel repressi uel etia m obiectu maximorum fluminum, Rheni Danuuiique, seclusi sunt. Drusus in Germania primum Usipetes, deinde Tencteros et Chattos perdomuit. Marcomannos paene ad internecionem cecidit. postea fortissimas nationes et quibus natura uires, consuetudo experientiam uirium dabat, Cheruscos Suebos et Sygambros pariter uno bello sed etiam suis aspero superauit. quorum ex eo considerari uirtus ac feritas potest, quod mulieres quoque eorum, siquando praeuentu Romanorum inter plaustra sua concludebantur, deficientibus tel is uel qualibet re, qua uelut telo uti furor possit, paruos filios conlisos humi in hostium ora iaciebant, in singulis filiorum necibus bis parricidae. After this, Claudius Drusus, the stepson of Caesar, was allotted Gaul and Raetia, and with his troops subdued the bravest tribes of Germany For at that time, as if they were hastening to a day established for peace, all the tribes like waves were moved to try war or an agreement of peace, either to accept the conditions of peace if they were conquer ed, or to enjoy tranqui l peace if they conquered The Norici, Illyrii, Pannonii, Dalmatae, Moesi, Thraces, and the Daci Sarmatae, the largest and strongest peoples of Germany, were either overcome or checked by different generals or even shut off by the larg est of rivers, the Rhine and the Danube. Drusus in Germany first conquered the Usipetes a nd then the Tencteri and Chatti. He slaughtered t he Marcomanni almost to a man. Afterwards, he overcame the bravest nation s to whom nature gave str ength and practic e exp erience in the use of this strength namely, the Cherusci, Suebi, and Sugambri, all in one battle, but also a severe one for his men The bravery and ferocity of

PAGE 200

200 these men can be judged from the fact that if ever their women were enclosed in the midst of their carts by an advance of the Romans and if their weapons or an ything that their fury might use as a weapon failed them, dash ing their little children on the ground they would throw them in to the faces of the e nemy, in the individual slaughters of the ir children committing murder twice 11 11 The text of Orosius is from Zangemeister (1889). The translation is from Deferrari (1964).

PAGE 201

201 APPENDIX B T HE LITERARY TRADITIO N OF VARUS Strabo 7.1.4. 13 25 , , In dealing with these peoples distrust has been a great advantage, whereas those who have been trusted have done the greatest harm, as, for instance, the Cherusci and their subjects, in whose country three Roman legions, with their general Quintilius Varus, were destroyed by a mbush in violation of the treaty. But they all paid the penalty, and afforded the younger Germanicus a most brilliant triumph that triumph in which their most famous men and women were led captive, I mean Segimuntus, son of Segestes and chieftain of the Cherusci, and his si ster Thusnelda, the wife of Arme nius the man who at the time of the violation of the treaty against Quintilius Varus was commander in chief of the Cheruscan army and even to this day is keeping up the war year ol d son Thumelicus. 1 Seneca the Elder Controv 1.3.10 Declamaverat apud illum hanc ipsam controversiam Varus Quintilius, tu nc Germanici gener ut praetexta tus. Cum descri psisset circumstantium quod tam cito oculis poena subduceretur, dixit: exaudierunt dii immortales publica vota et preces: incestam ne cito supplicium transcurreret revocaverunt. Ces tius multa contumeliose dixit in istam sententiam: Sic, inquit, quomodo quadrigas revocaverunt? N am et ante posuisti simil itudinem, quia e t haec de carcere exierat. Cum multa dixisset, novissime adiecit rem quam omnes ista neglegentia pater tuus ex Filium obiurgabat, patri male dixit. 1 Text and translations of Strabo are from Jones (1924).

PAGE 202

202 Quinctilius Varus then son in law of Germanicus and only a very young man, had declaimed this very controversia before Cestius. After describing the i n dignation of those standing around because the penalty was so swiftly ds heard the prayers and entreaties of the people. They called the unchaste woman chariot and four? You used t hat image before, as well, by saying that she s ness that your father lost his er. 2 Velleius Paterculus 2.117 20 Tantum quod ultimam imposuerat Pannonico ac Delmatico bello Caesar manum, cum intra quinque consummati tanti operis dies funestae ex Germania epistulae nuntium attulere caesi Vari trucidatarumque le gionum trium totidemque alarum et sex cohortium uelut in hoc saltem tantummodo indulgente nobis fortuna, ne occupato duce tanta clades inferretur. Sed et causa et persona moram exigit. Varus Quintilius in lustri magis quam nobili ortus familia, uir ingenio mitis, moribus quietus, ut corpore ita animo immobilior, otio magis castrorum quam bellicae adsuetus militiae, pecuniae uero quam non contemptor, Syria, cui praefuerat, declarauit, quam pauper diuitem ingressus diues pauperem reliquit; i s, cum exercitui qui erat in Germania p raeesset, concepit esse homines, qui nihil praeter uocem mem braque haberent hominum, quique gladiis domari non poterant, posse iure mulceri. Quo pro posito mediam ingressus Germaniam uelut inter uiros pa cis gaudentes dulcedine iurisdictionibus agendoque pro tribunali ordine trahebat aestiua. At illi, quod nisi expertus uix credat, in summa feritate uersutissimi natumque mendacio genus, simulantes fictas litium series et nunc pro uo cantes alter alterum in iur g ia, nunc agentes gratias quod ea Romana iustitia finiret feritasque sua nouitate incognitae disciplinae mitesceret et solita armis discerni iure terminarentur, in summam socordiam perduxere Quintilium usque eo ut se praetorem ur banum in foro ius dicere, non in mediis Germaniae finibus exercitui praeess e creder et. Tum iuuenis genere nobilis, manu fortis, sensu celer, ultra barbarum promptus ingenio, nomine Arminius, Sigimeri principis gen tis eius filius, ardorem animi v ultu oculisque praeferens, adsiduus militiae nostrae prioris comes, iur e etiam ciuitat is Romanae dec us equestris consecutus gradus, segnitia ducis in occasionem 2 Text and translations of Seneca the Elder are from Winterbottom (1974).

PAGE 203

203 sceleris usus est, haud imprudenter speculatus neminem celerius opprimi quam qui nihil timeret, et fre quentissimum initiu m esse calamitatis securitatem. Pr imo igitur paucos, mox pl uri s in societatem consilii recepti ; opprimi posse Romanos et dicit et persuadet, decretis facta iungit, tempus insidiarum constituit. Id Varo per uirum eius gentis fidelem clarique nomi nis, Segesten, indicatur. Postulabat eti am vinciri socios. Sed praeval ebant iam fata cons iliis omnemque animi eius aciem praestrin xerant: q uippe ita se res habet, ut plerumque cui us fortunam mutaturus est deus, consilia corrumpat effi ciatque, quod miserrimum est, ut, quod accidit, etiam merito accidisse uideatur et casus in culpam transe at. Negat itaque se credere speciem que in se beneuolentiae ex merito aestimare profitetur. Nec diutius post primum indicem secundo relictus locus. Ordinem atrocissimae calamitatis, qua nulla post Crassi in Parthis damnum in externis gentibus grauior Romanis fuit, iustis uoluminibus ut alii, ita nos conabimur exponere: nunc summa deflenda est. Exercitus omnium fortissimus, disciplina, manu experientiaque bellorum inter Romanos milites princeps, marcore ducis, perfidia hostis, iniquitate fortuna e circumuentus, cum ne pugnandi quidem egrediendi ve occasio nisi inique nec in quantum uoluerant, data esset immunis, castigatis etiam quibusdam graui poena, quia Romanis et armis et animis usi fuissent, inclusus siluis, paludibus, insidiis ab eo hoste ad internecionem trucidatus est quem ita semper more pecudum trucidauerat, ut uitam aut mor tem eius nunc ira nunc uenia temperaret. Duci plus ad moriendum quam ad pugnandum animi fuit: quippe paterni auitique successor exempli se ipse transfixit. At e praef ectis castrorum duobus quam clarum exemplum L. Eggius, tam turpe Ceionius prodidit, qui, cum longe maximam partem absumpsisset acies, auctor deditionis supplicio quam proelio mori maluit. At Vala Numonius, legatus Vari, cetera quietus ac probus, diri auctor exempli, spoliatum equite peditem relinquens fuga cum ali s Rhenum petere in gressus est. Quod factum eius fortuna ulta est; non enim desertis superfuit, sed desertor occidit. Vari corpus semiustum hostilis lacerauerat feritas; caput eius abscisum latumque ad Maroboduum et ab eo missum ad Caesarem gentilicii tamen tumuli sepul tura honoratum est. His auditis reuolat ad patrem Caesar; per petuus patronus Romani imperii adsuetam sibi causam suscipit. Mittitur ad Germaniam, Gallias confirmat, disponit exercitus, praesidia munit et se magnitudine sua, non fiducia hostis metiens qui Cimbricam Teuton icamque militiam Italiae minaba tur, ultro Rhe num cu m exercitu transgreditur. Arma infert hosti quem arcuisse pater et patria contenti erant; penetrat interius, aperit limites, uastat agros, urit domos, fundit obuios maximaque cum gloria, inco lumi omnium quos transduxerat numero in hiberna reuertitu r. Reddatur uerum L. Asprenati testimonium, qui legatus sub auunculo suo Varo militans gnaua uiri lique opera duarum legionum quibus praeerat, exercitum immunem tanta calamitate seruauit ma tureque a d inferiora hiberna descendendo uacillan tium etiam cis Rhe num sitarum gentium animos confirmauit. Sunt

PAGE 204

204 tamen qui ut uiuos ab eo uindi catos, ita iugulatorum sub Varo occupata crediderint patrimonia hereditatemque occisi exer citus, in quan tum uoluerit, ab eo aditam. L. etiam Caedicii praefecti castrorum eorumque qui una circumdati Alisone immensis Germanorum copiis obsidebantur, laudanda uirtus est qui omnibus diffi cultatibus su peratis quas inopia rerum intolerabili s, uis hostium faciebat inexsuperabili s, nec temerario consilio nec segni prouidentia us i specula tique opportunitatem ferro sibi ad suos peperere reditum. Ex quo apparet Varum, sane grauem et bonae uo luntatis uirum, ma gis imperatoris defectum consilio quam uirtute desti tutum militum se magnificentis simumque perdi disse exercitum. Cum in captiuos saeuir etur a Ger manis, praeclari facinoris auctor fuit Caldus Caelius, ad ulescens uetustate familiae suae dignissimus, qui com plexus catenarum quibus uinctus erat seriem, ita illas in lisit capiti suo, ut protinus pariter sanguinis cerebrique effluuio expiraret Scarcely had Caesar put the finishing touch upon the Pannonian and Dalmatian war, when, within five days of the completion of this task, dispatches from Germany brought the baleful news of the death of Varus, and of the slaughter of three legions, of as many divisions of cavalry, and of six cohorts as though fortune were granting us this indulgence at least, that such a disaster should not be brought upon us when our commander was occupied by other wars. The cause of this defeat and the personality of the general require of me a brief digression. Varus Quintilius, descended from a famous rather than a high born family, was a man of mild character and of a quiet disposition, somewhat slow in mind as he was in body, and more accustomed to the leisure of t he camp than to actual service in war. That he was no despiser of money is demonstrated by his governorship of Syria: he entered the rich province a poor man, but left it a rich man and the province poor. When placed in charge of the army in Germany, he en tertained the notion that the Germans were a people who were men only in limbs and voice, and that they, who could not be subdued by the sword, could be soothed by the law. With this purpose in mind he entered the heart of Germany as though he were going a mong a people enjoying the blessings of peace, and sitting on his tribunal he wasted the time of a summer campaign in holding court and observing the proper details of legal procedure. But the Germans, who with their great ferocity combine great craft, to an extent scarcely credible to one who has had no experience with them, and are a race to lying born, by trumping up a series of fictitious lawsuits, now provoking one another to disputes, and now expressing their gratitude that Roman justice was settling these disputes, that their own barbarous nature was being softened down by this new and hitherto unknown method, and that quarrels which were usually settled by arms were now being ended by law, brought Quintilius to such a complete degree of negligence, t hat he came to look upon himself as a city praetor administering justice in the forum, and not a general in command of a n army in the heart of Germany. Thereupon appeared a young man of noble birth, brave in action and alert in mind, possessing an intellig ence quite

PAGE 205

205 beyond the ordinary barbarian; he was, namely, Arminius, the son of Sigimer, a prince of that nation, and he showed in his countenance and in his eyes the fire of the mind within. He had been associated with us constantly on private campaigns, a nd had even attained the dignity of equestrian rank. This young man made use of the negligence of the general as an opportunity for treachery, sagaciously seeing that no one could be more quickly overpowered than the man who feared nothing, and that the mo st common beginning of di saster was a sense of security. At first, then, he admitted but a few, later a large number, to a share in his design; he told them, and convinced them too, that the Romans could be crushed, added execution to resolve, and named a day for carrying out the plot. This was disclosed to Varus through Segestes, a loyal man of that race and of illustrious name, who also demanded that the conspirators be put in chains. But fate now dominated the plans of Varus and had blindfolded the eyes of his mind. Indeed, it is usually the case that heaven perverts the judgement of the man whose fortune it means to reverse, and brings it to pass and this is the wretched part of it that that which happens by chance seems to be deserved, and accident passes over into culpability. And so Quintilius refused to believe the story, and insisted upon judging the apparent friendship of the Germans toward him by the standard of his merit. And, after this first warning, there was no time left for a second. The details of this terrible calamity, the heaviest that had befallen the Romans on foreign soil since the disaster of Crassus in Parthia, I shall endeavour to set forth, as others have done, in my larger work. Here I can merely lament the disaster as a whole. An army unexcelled in bravery, the first of Roman armies in discipline, in energy, and in experience in the field, through the negligence of its general, the perfidy of the enemy, and the unkindness of fortune was surrounded, nor was as much opportunity a s they had wished given to the soldiers either of fighting or of extricating themselves, except against heavy odds; nay, some were even heavily chastised for using the arms and showing the spirit of Romans. Hemmed in by forests and marshes and ambuscades, it was exterminated almost to a man by the ve ry enemy whom it had always slaughtered like cattle, whose life or death had depended solely upon the wrath or the pity of the Romans. The general had more courage to die than to fight, for, following the exampl e of his father and grandfather, he ran himself through with his sword. Of the two prefects of the camp, Lucius Eggius furnished a precedent as noble as that of Ceionius was base, who, after the greater part of the army had perished, proposed its surrender preferring to die by torture at the hands of the enemy than in battle. Vala Numonius, lieutenant of Varus, who, in the rest of his life, had been an inoffensive and an honourable man, also set a fearful example in that he left the infantry unprotected by the cavalry and in flight tried to reach the Rhine with his squadrons of horse. But fortune avenged his act, for he did not survive those whom he had abandoned, but die d in the act of deserting them. The body of Varus, partially burned, was mangled by the enemy in their barbarity; his head was cut off and taken to

PAGE 206

206 Maroboduus and was sent by him to Caesar; but in spite of the disaster it was honoured by burial in the tomb of his family. On hearing of this disaster, Caesar flew to his father's side. The cons tant protector of the Roman empire again took up his accustomed part. Dispatched to Germany, he reassured the provinces of Gaul, distributed his armies, strengthened the garrison towns, and then, measuring himself by the standard of his own greatness, and not by the presumption of an enemy who threatened Italy with a war like that of the Cimbri and Teutones, he took the offensive and crossed the Rhine with his army. He thus m ade aggressive war upon the enemy when his father and his country would have been c ontent to let him hold them in check, he penetrated into the heart of the country, opened up military roads, devastated fields, burned houses, routed those who came against him, and, without loss to the troops with which he had crossed, he returned, covere d with glory, to winter quarters. Due tribute should be paid to Lucius Asprenas, who was serving as lieutenant under Varus his uncle, and who, backed by the brave and energetic support of the two legions under his command, saved his army from this great di saster, and by a quick descent to the quarters of the army in Lower Germany strengthened the allegiance of the races even on the hither side of the Rhine who were beginning to waver. There are those, however, who believed that, though he had saved the live s of the living, he had appropriated to his own use the property of the dead who were slain with Varus, and that inheritances of the slaughtered army w ere claimed by him at pleasure. The valour of Lucius Caedicius, prefect of the camp, also deserves praise and of those who, pent up with him at Aliso, were besieged by an immense force of Germans. For, overcoming all their difficulties which want rendered unendurable and the forces of the enemy almost insurmountable, following a design that was carefully con sidered, and using a vigilance that was ever on the alert, they watched their chance, and with the sword won t heir way back to their friends. From all this it is evident that Varus, who was, it must be confessed, a man of character and of good intentions, lost his life and his magnificent army more through lack of judgement in the comm ander than of valour in his soldiers. When the Germans were venting their rage upon their captives, an heroic act was performed by Caldus Caelius, a young man worthy in every way of his long line of ancestors, who, seizing a section of the chain with which he was bound, brought it down with such force upon his own head as to cause his instant death, both his brains and his blood gushing from the wound. 3 3 Text and translations of Velleius are from Shipley (1924).

PAGE 207

207 Manilius Astron. 1. 896 905 quin et bella canunt ignes subitosque tumultus et clandestinis surgentia fraudibus arma, externas modo per gentes ut, foedere rupto cum fera ductorem rapuit Germania Varum infecitque trium legionum sanguine campos, ar serunt toto passim minitantia mundo lumina, et ipsa tulit bellum natura per ignes opposuitque suas vires finemque minata est. ne mirere gravis rerumque hominumque ruinas, saepe domi culpa e st: nescimus credere caelo. Wars, too, the fires portend, and sudden insurrection, and arms uplifted in stealthy treachery; so of late in foreign parts, when, its oaths forsworn, barbarous Germany made away with our commander Varus and stained the fields with three legions did menacing lights burn in every quarter of the skies; nature herself waged war with fire marshalling her forces a gainst us and threatening our de struction. f or 4 Pliny the Elder HN 7 .150 ...iuxta haec Variana clades et maiestatis eius foeda suggillatio,... ...next the disaster of Varus and the foul slur upon his dignity; ... 5 Frontinus Str 3.15.4 Reliqui ex Variana clade, cum obsiderentur, quia defici frumento videbantur, horrea tota nocte circumduxerunt captivos, dein de praecisis manibus dimiserunt; hi circumsedentibus suis persuaserunt, ne spem maturae expugnationis reponerent in fame Romanorum, quibus ingens alimentorum copia superesset. 4 Text and translations of Manilius are from Goold (1977). 5 Text and translations of Pliny the Elder are from Rackham (19 42).

PAGE 208

208 When the survivors of the Varian disaster were under siege and seemed to be running short of food, they spent an entire night in leading prisoners round their store houses; then, having cut off their hands, they turned them loose. These men persuaded the besieging force to cherish no hope of an early reduction of the Romans by starvation, since they had an abundan ce of food supplies. 6 Str 4.7.8 Caedici us primipilaris, qui in G ermania post Varianam cladem ob sessis nostris pro duce fuit, veritus, ne barbari ligna quae congesta erant vallo admoverent et castra eius incenderent, simulata lignorum inopia, missis undiqu e qui ea furarentur effecit, ut Germani universos truncos amolirentur. Caedicius, a centurion of the first rank, who acted as leader in Germany, when, after the Varian disaster, our men were beleagured, was afraid that the barbarians would bring up to the fortifications the wood which they had gathered, and would set fire to his camp. He therefore pretended to be in need of fuel, and sent out men in every direction to steal it. In this way he caused the Germans to remove the whole supply of felled trees. Florus 2.30.29 39 S ed difficilius est provincias ob tinere quam facere; viri bus parantur, iure retinentur. I gitur breve id gaudium. Q uippe Germani victi magis quam domiti erant, moresque nostros magis quam arma sub imperatore Druso suspiciebant; postquam il le defunctus est, Vari Quintili libidinem ac superbiam haud secus quam saevitiam odisse coeperunt. A usus ille agere conventum, et in Cattho s edixerat, quasi violentiam barbar orum licto ris virgis et p raeconis voce posset inhibere. A t illi, qui iam pridem ro bigi ne obsitos enses inertesque mae rerent equos, ut primum togas et saeviora armis iura viderunt, duce Armenio arma corripiunt; cum interim tanta erat Varo pacis fiducia, ut ne prodita quidem per Segestem unum principum coniuratione com moveretur. I taque in providum et nihil tale metuentem ex inproviso adorti, cum ille o securitas ad tri bunal citaret, undique invadunt; castra rapiuntur, tres legiones opprimuntur. Varus perditas res eodem quo Cannensem diem Paulus et fato est et animo secutus. N ihil illa caede per paludes perque silvas cruentius, nihil insultatione barbar or um intolerabil ius, praecipue tamen in causarum patro nos. A liis oc ulos, aliis manus amputabant, uni os ob sutum, recisa prius lingua, quam in manu lare desisti I psius quoque consulis corpus, quod militum pi etas humi abdiderat, effossum. S igna et 6 Text and translations of Frontinus are from Bennett (1925).

PAGE 209

209 aquilas duas adhuc barbari possident, tertiam signifer, prius quam in manus hostium veniret, evolsit mersamque intra baltei sui latebras gerens in cruenta palude sic latuit. H ac cla de factum, ut imperium, quod in litore Oceani non stete rat, in ripa Rheni fluminis staret. But it is more difficult to retain than to create provinces; they are won by force, they are secured by justice. Therefore our joy was sho rt lived; for the Germans had been defeated rather than subdued, and under the rule of Drusus the y respected our moral qualities rather than our arms. After his death they began to detest the licentiousness and pride not less than the cruelty of Quintilius Varus. He had the temerity to hold an assembly and ha d issued an edict against the C att h i, just as though he could restrain the violence of barbarians by the rod of a lictor and the proclamation of a herald. But the Germans who had long been regretting th at their swords were rusted and their horses idle, as soon as they saw the toga and experienced laws more cruel than arms, snatched up their weapons under the leadership of Armenius. Meanwhile Varus was so confident of peace that he was quite unperturbed e ven when the conspiracy was betrayed to him by Segestes, one of the chiefs. And so when he was unprepared and had no fear of any such thing, at a moment when (such was his confidence) he was actually summoning them to appear before his tribunal, they rose and attacked him from all sides. His camp was seized, and three legions were overwhelmed. Varus met disaster by the same fate and with the same courage as Paulus on the fatal day of Cannae. Never was there slaughter more cruel than took place there in the marshes and woods, never were more intolerable insults inflicted by barbarians, especially those directed against the legal pleaders. They put out the eyes of some of them and cut off the hands of others; they sewed up the mouth of one of them after first cutting out his tongue, which one of the barbarians held in his hand, the consul himself, which the dutiful affection of the soldiers had buried, was disinterred. As for the standar ds and eagles, the barbari ans possess two to this day; the third eagle was wrenched from its pole, before it could fall into the hands of the enemy, by the standard bearer, who, carrying it concealed in the folds round his belt, secreted himself in the blo od stained marsh. The result of this disaster was that the empire, which had n ot stopped on the shores of the Ocean, was che cked on the banks of the Rhine. 7 7 Text and translations of Florus are from Forster (1929).

PAGE 210

210 Suetonius Aug 23.1 2 Grav es ignominias cladesque duas omnino nec alibi quam in Germania accepit, Lollianam et Varianam, sed Lollianam maioris infamiae quam detrimenti, Vari anam paene exitiabilem tribus legionibus cum duce legatisque et auxiliis omnibus caesis. hac nuntiata excubias per urbem i ndixit, ne quis tumultus ex s iste ret, et praesidibus provinc iarum propagav it imperium, ut a peritis et assuetis socii continerentur. Vov it et magnos ludos Ioui Optimo Maximo, si res p. i n me liorem statum v ertis set: quod factum Cimbrico Marsi coque bello erat. A deo denique consternatum ferunt, ut per continuos menses barba capilloque summisso ca put interdum foribus diemque cladis quotannis maestum habuerit ac lugubrem. He suffered but two severe and ignominious defeats, those of Lollius and Varus, both of which w ere in Germany. Of these the former was more humiliating than serious, but the latter was almost fatal, since three legions were cut to pieces with their general, his lieutenants, and all the auxiliaries. When the news of this came, he ordered that watch b e kept by night throughout the city, to prevent any outbreak, and he prolonged the terms of the governors of the provinces, that the allies might be held to their allegiance by experienced men with whom they were acquainted. He also vowed great games to Ju piter Optimus Maximus, in case the condition of the commonwealth should improve, a thing which had been done in the Cimbric and Marsic wars. In fact, they say that he was so greatly affected that for several months in succession he cut neither his beard no r his hair, and sometimes he would dash his head against a door, crying: "Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!" And he observed the day of the disaster each year as one of sorrow and mourning. 8 Tib 16.2.3 18.1.6 A c persev erantiae grande pretium tuli t, toto Illyrico, quod inter Italiam regnumque Noricum e t Thraciam et Macedoniam inter que Danuv ium flumen et sinum maris Hadriatici patet, perdomito et in dicione m redacto. C ui gloriae amplior adhuc ex op p ortunitate cumulu s accessit. N am sub id fere tempus Quintilius Varus cum tribus legionibus in Germania periit, nemine dubitante quin v ictores Ger mani iuncturi se Pannoniis f uerint, nisi debellatum prius Illyricum ess et. Q uas ob res triumphus ei de cretus est multique et m agni honores. C ensuerunt etiam q uida m ut Pannonicus, alii ut Inv ictus, no nnulli ut Pius cognominaretur. S ed de cognomine intercessit Augustus, eo con tentum repromittens, quod se de functo suscepturus e sset. T riumphum ipse distulit maesta civ itate clade Variana; nihilo minus urbem 8 Augustus are from Rolfe (1913).

PAGE 211

211 praetex tatus et laurea coronatus intrav it positumque in Saeptis tribunal senatu astante conscendit ac me dius inter duos consules cum Augusto simul sedit; unde populo consaluta to circum templa deductus est. Proximo anno repeti ta Germania cum animadv erteret Varianam clad em temeritate et neglegentia ducis acci disse, nihil non de consilii sententia egit; semper alias sui arbitrii conten tusque se uno, tunc praeter con suetudinem cum compluribus de ratione belli communi cavit. C uram quoque solito exactiorem praestitit. He reap ed an ample reward for his perseverance, for he completely subdued and reduced to submission the whole of Illyricum, which is bounded by Italy and the kingdom of Noricum, by Thrace and Macedonia, by the D anube, and by the Adriatic sea. Circumstances gave t his exploit a larger and crowning glory; for it was at just about that time that Quintilius Varus perished with three legions in Germany, and no one doubted that the victorious Germans would have united with the Pannonians, had not Illyricum been subdued f irst. Consequently a triumph was voted him and many high honours. Some also recommended that he be given the surname of Pannonicus, others of Invictus, others of Pius. Augustus however vetoed the surname, reiterating the promise that Tiberius would be sati sfied with one which he would receive at his father's death. Tiberius himself put off the triumph, because the country was in mourning for the disaster to Varus; but he entered the city clad in the purple bordered toga and crowned with laurel, and mounting a tribunal which had been set up in the Saepta, while the senate stood alongside, he took his seat beside Augustus between the two consuls. Having greeted the people from this position, he was e scorted to the various temples. The next year he returned to Germany, and realising that the disaster to Varus was due to that general's rashness and lack of care, he took no step without the approval of a council; while he had always before been a man of independent judgment and self reliance, then contrary to his habit he consulted with many advisers about the conduct of the campaign. He also observed more scrupulous care than usual. 9 Calig 31.1 Q uer i etiam palam de condicione tem porum suorum soleba t, quod nullis calamitatibus pu blicis insignirentur; Augusti prin cipatum clade Variana, Tiberi ruina spectaculorum apud Fiden as memorabilem factum, suo obliv ionem imminere prosperitate rerum; atque identidem exercituum caedes, famem, pestilentiam, incendia, hiatum aliquem terrae optabat. 9 Tiberius are from Rolf e (1913).

PAGE 212

212 He even used openly to deplore the state of his times, because they had been marked by no public disasters, saying that the rule of Augustus had been made famous by the Varus massacre, and that of Tiberius by the collapse of the amphitheatre at Fidenae, while his own was threatened wit h oblivion because of its prosperity; and every now and then he wished for the destruction of his armies, for famine, pestilence, fires, or a great earthquake. 10 Cassius Dio 56 .1 8 25 , , , 10 Caligula are from Rolfe (1913).

PAGE 213

213 , , , , , , , , , ( ) ( )

PAGE 214

214 ( ), , ... , ( ), , , , , , ,

PAGE 215

215 , , ... Scarcely had these decrees been passed when terrible news t hat arrived from the province of Germany prevented them from holding the festival I shall now relate the events which had taken place in Germany during this period The Romans were holding portions of it not entire regions but merely such districts as happened to have been subdued so that no r ecord has been made of the fact and soldiers of theirs were wintering there and cities were being founded. The barbarians were adapting themselves to Roman ways, were becoming accustomed to hold mar kets, and were meeting in peaceful assemblages. They had not, however, forgotten their

PAGE 216

216 ancestral habits, their native manners, their old life of independence, or the power derived from arms. Hence, so long as they were unlearning the se customs gradually an d by the way, as one may say, under careful watching they were not disturbed by the change in their manner of life, and were becoming different without knowing it. But when Quintilius Varus became governor of the province of Germany, and in the discharge of his official duties was administering the affairs of these peoples also, he strove to change them more rapidly. Besides issuing orders to them as if they were actually slaves of the Romans, he exacted money as he would from subject nations. To this they were in no mood to submit, for the leaders longed for their former ascendancy and the masses preferred their accustomed condition to foreign domination. Now they did not openly revolt, since they saw that there were many Roman troops near the Rhine and ma ny within their own borders; instead, they received Varus, pretending that they would do all he demanded of them, and thus they drew him far away from the Rhine into the land of the Cherusci, toward the Visurgis, and there by behaving in a most peaceful an d friendly manner led him to believe that they would live submissively without the presence of soldiers. Consequently he did not keep his legions together, as was proper in a hostile country, but distributed many of the soldiers to helpless communities, wh ich asked for them for the alleged purpose of guarding various points, arresting robbers, or escorting provision trains. Among those deepest in the conspiracy and leaders of the plot and of the war were Armenius and Segimerus, who were his constan t compan ions and often shared his mess. He accordingly became confident, and expecting no harm, not only refused to believe all those who suspected what was going on and advised him to be on his gua rd, but actually rebuked them for being needlessly excited and slandering his friends. Then there came an uprising, first on the part of those who lived at a distance from him, deliberately so arranged, in order that Varus should march against them and so be more easily overpowered while proce eding through what w as supposed to be friendly country, instead of putting himself on his guard as he would do in case all became hostile to him at once. And so it came to pass. They escorted him as he set out, and then begged to be excused from further attendance, in order, as they claimed, to assemble their allied forces, after which they would quietly come to his aid. Then they took charge of their troops, which were already in waiting somewhere, and after the men in each community had put to death the detachments of soldie rs for which they had previously asked, they came upon Varus in the midst of forests by this time almost impenetrable. And there, at the very moment of revealing themselves as enemies instead of subjects, they wrought great and dire havoc. The mountains ha d an uneven surface broken by ravines, and the trees grew close together and very high. Hence the Romans, even before the enemy assailed them, were having a hard time of it felling trees, building roads, and br idging places that required it. They had with them many waggons and many beasts of burden as in time of peace; moreover, not a few women and children and a large retinue

PAGE 217

217 o f servants were following them one more reason for their a dvancing in scattered groups. Meanwhile a violent rain and wind came up that separated them still further, while the ground, that had become slippery around the roots and logs, made walking very treacherous for them, and the tops of the trees kept breaking off and fallin g down, causing much confusion. While the Romans w ere in such difficulties, the barbarians suddenly surrounded them on all sides at once, coming through the densest thickets, as they were acquainted with the paths. At first they hurled their volleys from a distance; then, as no one defended himself and ma ny were wounded, t hey approached closer to them. For the Romans were not proceeding in any regular order, but were mixed in helter skelter with the waggons and the unarmed, and so, being unable to form readily anywhere in a body, and being fewer at every p oint than their assailants, they suffered greatly and could offer no resistance at all. Accordingly they encamped on the spot, after securing a suitable place, so far as that was possible on a wooded mountain; and afterwards they either burned or abandoned most of their waggons and everything else that was not absolutely necessary to them. The next day they advanced in a little better order, and even reached open country, though they did not get off without loss. Upon setting out from there they pl unged into the woods again, where they defended themselves against their assailants, but suffered their heaviest losses while doing so. For since they had to form their lines in a narrow space, in order that the cavalry and infantry together might run down the enemy, they collided frequently with one another and with the trees. They were still advancing when the fourth day dawned, and again a heavy downpour and violent wind assailed them, preventing them from going forward and even from standing securely, a nd moreover depriving them of the use of their weapons. For they could not handle their bows or their javelins with any success, nor, for that matter, their shields, which were tho roughly soaked. Their opponents, on the other hand, being for the most part lightly equipped, and able to approach and retire freely, suffered less from the storm. Furthermore, the enemy's forces had greatly increased, as many of those who had at first wavered now joined them, largely in the hope of plunder, and thus they could mo re easily encircle and strike down the Romans, whose ranks were now thinned, many having perished in the earlier fighting. Varus, therefore, and all the more p rominent officers, fearing that they should either be captured alive or be killed by their bitter est foes (for they had already been wounded), made bold to do a thing that was terrible yet unavoidable: they took their own lives. When news of this had spread, none of the rest, ev en if he had any strength left, defended himself any longer. Some imitated their leader, and others, casting aside their arms, allowed anybody who pleased to slay them; for to flee was impossible, however m uch one might desire to do so. Every man, therefore, and every horse was cut down without f ear of resistance, and the... And the barbarians occupied all the strongholds save one, their delay at which prevented them from either crossing the Rhine or invading Gaul. Yet they found themselves

PAGE 218

218 unable to reduce this fort, because they did not understand the conduct of sieges, and beca use the Romans employed numerous archers, who repeatedly repulsed them and destroyed large numbers of them. Later they learned that the Romans had posted a guard at the Rhine, and that Tiberius was approaching with an imposing army. Therefore most of the b arbarians retired from the fort, and even the detachment still left there withdrew to a considerable distance, so as not to be injured by sudden sallies on the part of the garrison, and then kept watch of the roads, hoping to capture the garrison through t he failure of their provisions. The Romans inside, so long as they had plenty of food, remained where they were, awaiting relief; but when no one came to their assistance and they were also hard pressed by hunger, they waited merely for a stormy night and then stole forth. Now the soldiers were but few, the unarmed many. They succeeded in getting past the foe's first and second outposts, but when they reached the third, they were discovered, for the women and children, by reason of their fatigue and fear as well as on account of the darkness and cold, kept callin g to the warriors to come back. And they would all have perished or been captured, had the barbarians not been occupied in seizing the plunder. This afforded an opportunity for the most hardy to get some distance away, and the trumpeters with them by sounding the signal for a double quick march caused the enemy to think that they had been sent by Aspre nas. Th erefore the foe ceased his pursuit, and Asprenas, upon learning what was taking place, actuall y did render them assistance. Some of the prisoners were afterwards ransomed by their relatives and returned from captivity; for this was permitted on condition that the men ransomed should remain outside of Italy. This, however, occurred later. Augustus, when he learned of the disaster to Varus, rent his garments, as some report, and mourned greatly, not only because of the soldiers who had been lost, but also because of his fear for the German and Gallic provinces, and particularly because he expected tha t the enemy would march against Italy and against Rome itself. For there were no citizens of military age left worth mentioning, and the allied forces that were of any value had suffered severely. Nevertheless, he made preparations as best he could in view of the circumstances; and when no men of military age showed a willingness to be enrolled, he made them draw lots, depriving of his property and disfranchising every fifth man of those still under thirty five and every tenth man among those who had passed that age. Finally, as a great many paid no heed to him even then, he put some to death. He chose by lot as many as he could of those who had already completed their term of service and of the freedmen, and after enrolling them sent them in haste with Tib eriu s into the province of Germany. And as there were in Rome a large number of Gauls and Germans, some of them serving in the pretorian guard and others sojourning there for various reasons, he feared they might begin a rebellion; hence he s ent away such as were in his body guard to certain islands and ordered those who were unarmed to leave the city. This was the way he handled matters at that time; and none of the usual business was carried

PAGE 219

219 on nor were the festivals celebrated. Later, when he heard that some of the soldiers had been saved, that the Germanies were garrisoned, and that the enemy did not venture to come even to the Rhine, he ceased to be alarmed and paused to consider the mat ter. For a catastrophe so great and sudden as this, it seemed to h im, could have been due to nothing else than the wrath of some divinity; moreover, by reason of the portents which occurred both before the defeat and afterwards, he was strongly inclined to s uspect some superhuman agency. For the temple of Mars in the fie ld of the same name was struck by lightning, and many locusts flew into the very city and were devoured by swallows; the peaks of the Alps seemed to collapse upon one another and to send up three columns of fire; the s ky in many places seemed ablaze and nu merous comets appeared at one and the same time; spears seemed to dart from the north and to fall in the direction of the Roman camps; bees formed their combs about the altars in the camps; a statue of Victory that was in the province of Germany and faced the enemy's territ ory turned about to face Italy; and in one instance there was a futile battle and conflict of the soldiers over the eagles in the camps, the soldiers believing that the barbarians had fallen upon them. For these reason s, then, and also be cause... Tiberius did not see fit to cross the Rhine, but kept quiet, watching to see that the barbarians did not cross. And they, knowing him to be there, did not venture to cross in their turn. Germanicus was becoming endeared to the populace for many rea sons, but particularly because he acted as advocate for various persons, and this quite as much before Augustus himself as before the other judges. Accordingly, on one occasion when he was going to lend assistance in this way to a quaestor who was charged with murder, his accuser became alarmed lest he should in consequence of this lose his suit before the judges who regularly heard such cases, and wished to have it tried before Augustus. But his efforts were all in vain, for he did not win the suit. ...hol ding it after his consulship. But the next year, in addition to the events already described, the temple of Concord was dedicated by Tiberius, and both his name and that of Drusus, his dead brother, were inscribed upon it. In the consulship of Marcus Aemil ius and Statilius Taurus, Tiberius and Germanicus, the latter acting as proconsul, invaded Germany and overran portions of it. They did not win any battle, however, since no one came to close quarters with them, nor did they reduce any tribe; for in their fear of falling victims to a fresh disaster they did not advance very far beyond the Rhine, but after remaining in that region until late autumn and celebrating the birthday of Augustus, on which they held a horse race under the direction of the centurions they returned. 11 11 Text and translations of Cassius Dio 56 and 57 are from Cary (1924).

PAGE 220

220 57.20. 1 2 When Tiberius held the consulship with Drusus, men immediately began to prophesy destruction for Drusus from this ver y circumstance. For not one of the men who had ever been consul with Tiberius f ailed to meet a violent death; but in the first p lace there was Quintilius Varus, and next Gnaeus Piso, and then Germanicus himself, all of whom died violent and miserable deaths. Tiberius was evidently doomed to exert some such fatal influence throughout his life; at all events, not only Drusus, his col league at this time, but also Sejanus, who later shared the office with him, came to destruction. Orosius 6.21.26 7 Sub eodem uero tempore Quintilius Varus cum tribus legionibus a Germanis rebellantibus, mira superbia atque auaritia in subiectos agens, fun ditus deletus est. quam reipublicae cladem Caesar Augustus adeo grauiter tulit, ut saepe per uim doloris caput parieti conlidens clamaret Quintili Vare, redde legiones. Indeed, at this same time, Quintilius Varus, who treated conquered peoples with asto unding haughtiness and avarice, together with three legions, was completely destroyed by the Germans who had rebelled. Caesar Augustus took this loss to the state so hard that, by the force of his grief, he again and again dashed his head against a wall an 12 12 The text of Orosius is from Zangemeister (1889). The translation is from Deferrari (1964).

PAGE 221

221 APPENDIX C THE LITERARY TRADITI ON OF TIBERIUS Strabo 9 These tribes have become known through their wars with the Romans, in which they would either yield and then later revolt again, or else quit their settlements; and they would have been better known if Augustus had allowed h is generals to cross the Albis in pursuit of those who emigrated thither. But as a matter of fact he supposed that he could conduct the war in hand more successfully if he should hold off from those outside the Albis, who were living in peace, and should n ot incite them to make common cause with the others in their enmity against him 1 10 There is also an island in it which Tiberius used as a base of operations in his nava l battle with the Vindelici. 6 sources of the Ister. Velleius Paterculus 2.97.4 Moles deinde eius belli translata in Neronem est: quod is sua et uirtute 1 Text and translations of Strabo are from Jones (1924).

PAGE 222

222 et fortuna adminis trauit peragratusque uictor omnis parti s Germaniae sine ullo detrimento commissi exercitus, quod praecipue huic duci semper curae fuit, sic perdomui t eam ut in for mam paene stipen diariae redigeret prouinciae. Tum alter triumphus cum altero consulatu ei oblatus est. The burden of responsibility for this war was then transferred to Nero. He carried it on with his customary valour and good fortune, and after traversin g every part of Germany in a victorious campaign, without any loss of the army entrusted to him for he made this one of his chief concerns he so subdued the country as to reduce it almost to the status of a tributary province. He then received a second triumph, and a second consulship. 2 2.104.3 110.3 Hoc tempus me, functum an te tribunatu, castro rum Ti. Caesaris militem fecit; quippe protinus ab adoptione missus cum eo praefectus equitum in Germaniam, successor officii patris mei, caelestissi morum eius o perum per annos continuos novem prae fectus aut legatus spectator, t um pro captu medio critatis meae adiutor fui. Neque illi spectaculo quo fructus sum simile condicio mortalis recipere uidetur mihi, cum per c eleberrimam Italiae partem trac tumque omnem Ga l liae prouinciarum ueterem impe ratorem et ante meritis ac uirtutibus quam nomine Caesarem reuisentes sibi quisque quam illi gratula rentur plenius. At uero militum conspectu eius elicitae gaudio lacrimae alacritasque et salutationis noua quaedam exultatio et contingendi manum cupiditas non conti nentium protinus quin adiice rent, idemus te, imperator? Saluum rece go tecum, imperator, in Armenia, ego in Raetia fui, ego a te in Vindelicis, ego in Pannonia, ego in German neque uerbis ex primi et fo rtasse uix mereri fidem potest. Intrata protinus Germania, subacti Canninefat e s, Attuarii, Bructeri, recepti Cherusci (gentes eius Ar min ius mox nostra clade nobilis) transitus Visurgis, penetrata ulteriora, cum omnem partem aspe rrimi et periculosis simi belli Caesar uindicaret sibi, iis quae minori s erant discriminis, Sentium Sa turninum, qu i ia m legatus patris eius in Germania fuerat, praefecisset, uirum multiplicem uirtutibus, gnauum, agilem, prouidum militariumque officiorum pat ientem ac peritum pariter, sed eundem, ubi negotia fecissent locum otio, liberaliter lauteque eo abutentem, ita tamen ut eum splendidum atque hilarem potius quam luxuriosum aut desidem diceres. D e cuius uiri claro ingenio celebrique consulatu praediximus. Anni eius aesti ua usque in mensem Decembrem producta in manis emolumentum fecere uictoriae. Pieta s sua Caesarem paene obstructis hieme Alpibus in u r bem traxit, at tutela imperii eum ueris initio reduxit in Germaniam, in cuius mediis finibus ad c aput Lupiae fluminis hiberna di grediens p rinceps locauerat. Pro dii boni, q uanti uoluminis opera 2 Text and translations of Velleius are from Shipley (1924).

PAGE 223

223 insequenti aestate sub duce Tiberio Caesare gessimus! Perlustrata armis tota Germania est, uictae gentes paene nominibus incognit ae, receptae Cauchorum nationes: omnis eo rum iuuentus infinita numero, immensa corporib us, situ locorum tutissima, tra ditis armis una cum ducibus suis saepta fulgenti armatoque milit um nostrorum agmine ante impera tor is procubuit tribunal. Fracti Langobardi, gens etiam Germana feritate ferocior; d enique, quod numquam antea spe conceptum, nedum opere temp tatum erat, ad quadringentesimum miliarium a Rheno usque ad flumen Albim, qui Semnonum Her mundurorumque fines praeterfluit, Romanus cum signis perductus exercitus. Et ea dem mira felicitate et cura d ucis, temporum quoque obseruantia, classis, quae Oceani circumnauigauerat sinus, ab inaudito atque incognito ante mari flumine Albi subuec ta, plurimarum gentium uictoria parta cum ab undantissima rerum omnium copia exercitui Caesarique se iunxit. Non temper o mihi quin tantae rerum magnitudini hoc, qua lecumque est, inseram. Cum cite riorem ripam praedicti fluminis castris occupassemus et ulterior armata hostium vir tute fulgeret, sub omnem motum conatumque nostrarum nauium pro tinu s refugientium, unus e barbaris aetate senior, corpore excellens, dignitate, quantum ostendebat cultus, eminens, cauatum, ut illis mos est, ex materia conscendit alueum solusque id nauigii genus tempe rans ad medium processit fluminis et petiit, liceret sibi sine periculo in eam, quam ar mis tenebamus, e gredi ripam ac uidere Caesarem. Data petenti facultas. Tum adpulso lintre et diu tacitus contemplatus Caesarem n ostra quidem, inquit, furit iuuentus, quae cum uestrum numen absentium colat, praesentium potius arma metu it quam sequitur fidem. Sed ego beneficio et permissu tuo, Caesar, quos ante audiebam, hodie uidi deos, nec feliciorem ullum uitae meae a ut optaui aut sensi diem Impe tratoque ut manum contingeret, reuersus in nauicu lam, sine fine respectans Caesarem ripa e suorum adpulsus est. Victor omnium gentium locorumque quos adierat Caesar incolumi inuiolatoque et semel tantummodo magna cum clade hostium fraude eorum temptato exercitu in hiberna legiones reduxit, eadem qua priore anno festinatione urbem petens. Nihil erat iam in Ger mania quod uinci posset, praeter gentem Ma rcomannorum, quae Ma roboduo duce excita sedibus suis atque in interiora refugiens incinct os Hercynia silua campos inco lebat. Nulla festinatio huius uiri mentionem transgredi debet. Maroboduus, genere nobilis, corp ore praeualens, ani mo ferox, natione magis quam ra tione barbarus, non tumultuarium neque fortuitum neque mobilem et ex uoluntate parentium constan tem inter suos occupauit principatum, sed certum imperium uimque regiam complexus animo statuit auo cata procul a Romanis gente sua eo progredi ubi cum propter potentiora arma refugisset, sua faceret potentissima. Occupatis igitur quos praedixi mus locis finitimos omni s aut bello domuit aut con dicionibus iuris sui fecit. Corpus s uum custodientium imperium per pet uis exercitiis paene ad Romanae disciplinae formam redactum, breui in eminens et nostro quoque imperio timendum perduxit fastigium gerebatque se ita aduersus Romanos ut neque bello nos lacesseret et, et si lacesseretur, superesse sibi uim ac

PAGE 224

224 uoluntatem re sistendi ostenderet Legati quos mittebat ad Caesares, interdum ut supplicem commendabant, interdum ut pro pari loquebantur. Gentibus hominibusque a nobis d esciscentibus erat apud eum per fugium, in totumque ex male dissimulato agebat aemulum; exe rcitumque quem septuaginta milium pedi tum, quattuor equitum fecerat, adsiduis aduersus finitimos bellis e xercendo maiori quam, quod habe bat, operi praeparabat: e ratque etiam eo timendus quod cum Germaniam ad laeuam et in fronte, Pannoniam ad dextram, a tergo sedi um suarum haberet Noricos, tamquam in omnes semper uenturus ab omnibus timebatur. Nec securam incrementi sui patiebatur esse Italiam, quippe cum a summis Alpium iugis quae finem Italiae terminant initium eius finium haud multo plus ducentis mi libus passuum abesset. Hunc uirum et hanc regionem proximo anno diuersis e partibus Ti. Caesar adgredi statuit. Sentio Saturnino mandatum ut per Cattos excisis continentibus Her cyniae siluis legiones Boiohae mum ( id regioni quam incolebat Maroboduus, no me n est) duceret ipse a Carnunto, qui locus Norici regni proximus ab hac parte erat, exercitum qui in Illyrico merebat ducere in Marcoman nos orsus est. Rumpit interdum interdum moratur proposita hominum fortuna. Praeparauerat iam hiberna Caesar ad Danubi um admotoque e xercitu non plus quam quinque dierum iter a primis hostium aberat legionesque quas Saturninum admouere placuerat, paene aequali diuisa e interuallo ab hoste intra pau cos dies in praedicto loco cum Caesare se iuncturae erant, cum uniuersa Pann onia, insolens longae pacis bonis, adulta uiribus, Delmatia omnibusque tractus eius gentibus in societatem adductis con silii, arma corripuit. Tum necessaria gloriosis praeposita neque t utum uisum abdito in interiora exercitu uacuam tam uicino hosti relinqu ere Italia m. Gentium natio numque quae rebellauerant omnis numerus amplius octingentis milibus ex plebat; ducenta fere peditum collige ban tur armis habilia, equitum novem It was at this time that I became a soldier in the camp of Tiberius Caesar, after ha ving previously filled the duties of the tribunate. For, immediately after the adoption of Tiberius, I was sent with him to Germ any as prefect of the cavalry, s ucceeding my father in that position, and for nine continuous years as prefect of cavalry or as commander of a legion I was a spectator of his superhuman achievements, and further assisted in them to the extent of my modest ability. I do not think that mortal man will be permitted to behold again a sight like that which I enjoyed, when, throughout th e most populous parts of Italy and the full extent of the provinces of Gaul, the people as they beheld once more their old commander, who by virtue of his services had long been a Caesar before he was such in name, congratulated themselves in even heartier ter ms than they congratulated him. Indeed, words cannot express the feelings of the soldiers at their meeting, and perhaps my account will scarcely be believed the tears which sprang to their eyes in their joy at the sight of him, their eagerness, their strange transports in saluting him, their longing to touch his hand, and their inabi lity to restrain Is it rea Have we received you safely back a I served And I

PAGE 225

225 in I received my dec I mine in He at once entered Germany. The Canninefates, the Attuarii, and Bructeri were subdued, the Cherusci (Arminius, a member of this race, was soon to beco me famous for the disaster inflicted upon us) were again subjugated, the Weser crossed, and the regions beyond it penetrated. Caesar claimed for himself every part of the war that was difficult or dangerous, placing Sentius Saturninus, who had already serv ed as legate under his father in Germany, in charge of expeditions of a less dangerous character: a man many sided in his virtue s, a man of energy of action, and of foresight, alike able to endure the duties of a soldier as he was well trained in them, but who, likewise, when his labours left room for leisure, made a liberal and elegant use of it, but with this reservation, that one would call him sumptuous and jovial rather than extravagant or indolent. About the distinguished ability of this illustrious m an and his famous consulship I have already spoken The prolonging of the campaign of that year into the month of December increased the benefits derived from the great victory. Caesar was drawn to the city by his filial affection, though the Alps were alm ost blocked by winter's snows; but the defence of the empire brought him at the beginning of spring back to Germany, where he had on his departure pitched his winter camp at the source of the river Lippe, in the very heart of the country, the first Roman t o winter there. Ye Heavens, how large a volume could be filled with the tale of our achievements in the following summer under the generalship of Tiberius Caesar! All Germany was traversed by our armies, races were conquered hitherto almost unknown, even b y name; and the tribes of the Cauchi were again subjugated. All the flower of their youth, infinite in number though they were, huge of stature and protected by the ground they held, surrendered their arms, and, flanked by a gleaming line of our soldiers, fell with their generals upon their knees before the tribunal of the commander. The power of the Langobardi was broken, a race surpassing even the Germans in savagery; and finally and this is something which had never before been entertained even as a ho pe, much less actually attempted a Roman a rmy with its standards was led four hundred miles beyond the Rhine as far as the river Elbe, which flows past the territories of t he Semnones and the Hermunduri. And with the same wonderful combination of careful planning and good fortune on the part of the general, and a close watch upon the seasons, the fleet which had skirted the windings of the sea coast sailed up the Elbe from a sea hitherto unheard of and unknown, and after p roving victorious over many tribes effected a junction with Caesar and the army, bringing with it a great abundance of supplies of all kinds. Even in the midst of these great events I cannot refrain from inserting this little incident. We were encamped on the nearer bank of the aforesaid river, while on the farther bank glittered the arms of the enemies' troops, who showed an inclination to flee at every movement and manoeuvre of our vessels, when one of the barbarians, advanced in years, tall of stature, o f high rank, to judge by his dress, embarked in a canoe,

PAGE 226

226 made as is usual with them of a hollowed log, and guiding this strange craft he advanced al one to the middle of the stream and asked permission to land without harm to himself on the bank occupied by our troops, and to see Caesar. Permission was granted. Then he beached his canoe, and, after gazing upon Caesar for a long time in silence, exclaimed: "Our young men are insane, for though they worship you as divine when absent, when you are present they fear your armies instead of trusting to your protection. But I, by your kind permission, Caesar, have to day seen the gods of whom I merely used to hear; and in my life have never hoped for or experienced a happier day." After asking for and receiving perm ission to touch Caesar's hand, he again entered his canoe, and continued to gaze back upon him until he landed upon his own bank. Victorious over all the nations and countries which he approached, his army safe and unimpaired, having been attacked but once and that too through deceit on the part of the enemy and with great loss on their side, Caesar led his legions back to winter quarter s, and sought the city with the same haste as in the previous year. Nothing remained to be conquered in Germany except th e people of the Marcomanni, which, leaving its settlements at the summons of its leader Maroboduus, had retired into the interior and now dwelt in the plains surr ounded by the Hercynian forest. No considerations of haste should lead us to pass over this ma n Maroboduus without mention. A man of noble family, strong in body and courageous in mind, a barbarian by birth but not in intelligence, he achieved among his countrymen no mere chief's position gained as the result of internal disorders or chance or liab le to change and dependent upon the caprice of his subjects, but, conceiving in his mind the idea of a definite empire and royal powers, he resolved to remove his own race far away from the Romans and to migrate to a place where, inasmuch as he had fled be fore the strength of more powerful arms, he might make his own all powerful. Accordingly, after occupying the region we have mentioned, he proceeded to reduce all the neighbouring races by war, or to bring them under his sovereignty by treaty. The body of guards protecting the kingdom of Maroboduus, which by constant drill had been brought almost to the Roman standard of discipline, soon placed him in a position of power that was dreaded even by our empire. His policy toward Rome was to avoid provoking us b y war, but at the same time to let us understand that, if he were provoked by us he had in reserve th e power and the will to resist. The envoys whom he sent to the Caesars sometimes commended him to them as a suppliant and sometimes spoke as though they re presented an equal. Races and individuals who revolted from us found in him a refuge, and in all respects, with but little concealment, he played the part of a rival. His army, which he had brought up to the number of seventy thousand foot and four thousan d horse, he was steadily preparing, by exercising it in constant wars against his neighbours, for some greater task than that which he had in hand. He was also to be feared on this account, that, having Germany at the left and in front of his settlements, Pannonia on the right, and Noricum in the rear of them, he was dreaded by all as one who might at

PAGE 227

227 any moment descend upon all. Nor did he permit Italy to be free from concern as regards his growing power, since the summits of the Alps which mark h er bounda ry were not more than two hundred miles distant from his boundary line. Such was the man and such the region that Tiberius Caesar resolved to attack from opposite directions in the course of the coming year. Sentius Saturninus had instructions to lead his legions through the country of the Catti into Boiohaemum, for that is the name of the region occupied by Maroboduus, cutting a passage through the Hercynian forest which bounded the region, while from Carnuntum, the nearest point of the kingdom of Noricum in this direction, he himself undertook to lead against the Marcomanni the army which was serving in Illyricum. Fortune sometimes breaks off completely, sometimes merely delays, the execution of men's plans. Caesar had already arranged his winter quarters on the Danube, and had brought up his army to within five days' march of t he advanced posts of the enemy; and the legions which he had ordered Saturninus to bring up, separated from the enemy by an almost equal distance, were on the point of effecting a ju nction with Caesar at a predetermined rendezvous within a few days, when all Pannonia, grown arrogant through the blessings of a long peace and now at the maturity of her power, suddenly took up arms, bringing Dalmatia and all the races of that region into her alliance. Thereupon glory was sacrificed to necessity; and it did not seem to Tiberius a safe course to keep his army buried in the interior of the country and thus leave Italy unprotected from an enemy so near at hand. The full number of the races an d tribes which had rebelled reached a total of more than eight hundred thousand. About two hundred thousand infantry trained to arms, and nine thousan d cavalry were being assembled. 2.115. 5 Nihil in hoc tanto bello, nihil in Germania aut uidere maius aut m irari magis potui quam quod imperatori num quam adeo ulla opportuna uisa est uictoriae occasio quam damno amissi pensaret militis semperque uisum est gloriosum, quod esset tutissimum, et ante conscientiae quam famae consultum, nec umquam consilia ducis iu dicio exercitus, sed exercitus proui dentia ducis rectus est. Nothing in the course of this great war, nothing in the campaigns in Germany, came under my observation that was greater, or that aroused my admiration more, than these traits of its general; no chance of winning a victory ever seemed to him timely, which he would have to purchase by the sacrifice of his soldiers; the safest course was always regarded by him as the best; he consulted his conscience first and then his reputation, and, finally, the plans of the commander were never governed by the opinion of the army, but rather the army by the wisdom of its leader.

PAGE 228

228 Pliny the Elder 7.84 nunc quidem in circo quosdam CLX passuum tolerare non ignoramus nuperque Fonteio et Vipstano cos s annos VIII genitum a meridie ad vesperam LXXV passuum cucurrisse. cuius rei admiratio ita demum solida per venie t, si quis cogitet nocte a c die longissimum iter vehic ulis Tib. Neronem emensum festi nante m ad Drusum fratrem aegrotum in Germaniam; ea fuerunt CC passuum. At the present day indeed we are aware that some men can last out 128 miles in the circus, and that recently in the consulship of Fonteius and Vipstanus a boy of 8 ran 68 miles between noon and evening. The marvel lous nature of this feat will only get across to us in full measure if we reflect that Tiberius Nero completed by carriage the longest twenty four who was ill: this measured 182 miles 3 7.149 ...contumeliosus priv igni Neronis secessus ... ...the insolent withdrawal of his stepson Nero ... Valerius Maximus 17 T antum amorem princeps parensque noster insitum animo fratris Dr usi habuit, ut cum Ticini, quo v ictor hos tium ad conplectendos parentes venerat, gravi illum et periculosa v alitudine in Germania fluctuare cognosset, protinus inde metu attonitus erumperet. I ter q uoque quam rapidum et praeceps v elut uno spiritu corripuerit eo patet, quod Alpes Rhenumque transgressus die ac nocte mut ato subinde equo CC milia passuum per modo dev ictam barbariam Namantabag io duce solo comite contentus ev asit. Our e mperor and father, Tiberius, had a very strong natural love in his heart for his brother, Drusus. After defeating our enemies, Tiberius had come to Ticinum to embrac e his parents, when he learned that the health of Drusus, who was in Germany, was in a serious and dangerous condition, and that he might not live. He was panic stricken and rushed away immediately. He obviously made the journey in wild haste, almost in a single breath, since he crossed the Alps and the Rhine riding day and night, changing his horse 3 Text and translations of Pliny the Elder are from Rackham (1942).

PAGE 229

229 repeatedly, and then was happy to carry out a journey of two hundred miles through a barbarous region that had only recently been pacified, with Namantabagius a s his sole guide and companion. 4 Ovid Fast 1.637 50 Candida, te niveo posuit lux proxima templo, qua f ert sublimes alta Moneta gradus: nunc bene prospicie s Latiam Concordia turbam, ut te sacratae constituere manus. Furius antiquam populi superator Etrusci voverat et voti solverat ille fidem. causa, quod a patribus sumptis secesserat armis volgus, et ipsa suas Roma timebat opes. causa recens melior: passos Germania crines porrigit auspiciis, dux venerande, tuis; inde triumphat ae libasti munera gentis templaque fecisti, quam colis ipse, deae. hanc tua constituit genetrix et rebus et ara, sola toro magni digna reperta Iovis. The next day, fair Concord, installed in you in snow white temple temple steeply rise. Now, as you rightly keep an eye on the Roman multitude, hallowed hands have established you. Camillus, who conquered the Etruscan town of Veii, had vowed the original temple and fulfilled his vow. The occasion was a popular revolt against the ruling class when Rome lived in fear of her own manpower. The lates t occasion is better. Tiberius, general we revere, Germany, in mourning, surrenders to your command. and built a temple to the go ddess you adore. This your mother Livia seconded by her actions and an altar, the only spouse worthy of our J ove like Augustus. 5 Consolatio ad Liviam 271 82 At tibi ius veniae superest, Germania, nullum: 4 The text of Valerius Maximus is from Smith (1985). The translation is from Walk er (2004). 5 The text of Ovid is from Frazer (1931); the translation is from Nagel (1995).

PAGE 230

230 Postmodo tu poenas, barbare, morte dabis. Aspici am regum liventia colla catenis Duraque per saevas vincula nexa manus Et tandem trepidos vultus inque illa ferocum Invitis lacrimas decidere ora genis. Spiritus ille minax et Drusi morte superbus Carnifici in maesto carcere dandus erit. Consistam len tisque oculis laetusque videbo Strata per obscenas corpora nuda vias. Hunc Aurora diem spectacula tanta ferentem Quam primum croceis roscida portet equis! But for thee, Germania, no right of pardon r emains; thou shalt atone hereafter, barbarian, by t hy death. I shall see the necks of kings livid with c hains, and ruthless fetters entwining cruel hands, a nd faces cowed at last, and the tears falling down u nwilling, haughty cheeks. That threatening spirit, e o the e xecutioner in the gloomy cell. I will stop, and l eisurely with glad eyes gaze on naked bodies strewn o n the unsightly roads. The day that brings so g reat a spectacle let dewy Aurora speed it hither o n her saffron car! 6 Suetonius Tib 7.3 Drusum fratrem in Germania amisit, cuius corpus pedibus toto itine re praegrediens Romam usque perv exit. He lost his brother Drusus in Germany and conveyed his body to Rome, going before it on foot all the way. 7 Tib 9.1 2 E xin Rae ticum Vindelicumque bellum, inde Pannonicum, inde Germanicum gessit. Raetico atque Vindelico gentis Al pinas, Pannonico Breucos et Dal matas subegit, German ico quadraginta milia dediticio rum traiecit in Galliam iuxtaque ripam Rheni sedibus adsignatis conloca vit. Quas ob res et ov ans et curru urbem ingressus est, prius ut quidam putant, trium ph alibus ornamentis honoratus, nov o nec antea cuiquam tributo genere honoris. 6 Text and translations of the Consolatio ad Liviam are from Mozley (1929). 7 Tiberius are from Rolfe (1913).

PAGE 231

231 Next he carried on war with the Raeti and Vindelici, then in Pan nonia, and finally in German y. In the first of these wars he subdued the Alpine tribes, in the second the Breuci and Dalmatians, and in the third he brought forty thousand prisoners of war over into Gaul and assigned them homes near the bank of the Rhine. Because of these exploits he entered the city both in an ovation and riding in a chariot, having previously, as some think, been honoured with the triumphal regalia, a new kind of distinction never before conferred upon anyone. Tib 16 20 D ata rur sus potestas tribunicia in quin quennium, delegatus pa candae Germaniae status, Partho rum legati mandatis Augusto Romae redditis eum quo que adire in prov incia iussi. S ed nuntiata Illyrici de fectione transiit ad cur am nov i belli, quod grav issimum omnium externorum bellorum post Punica, per quin decim legiones paremque auxiliorum copiam triennio gessit in magnis omn ium rerum difficultatibus summa que frugum inopia. Et quanquam saepius rev ocaretur, tamen perseveravit, metuens ne vicinus et praev alens hostis instaret ul tra cedentibus. Ac persev erantiae grande pretium tulit, toto Illyrico, quod inter Italiam regnumque Noricum et Thrac iam et Macedoniam interque Danuv ium flumen et sinum maris Hadriatici patet, per domito et in dicionem redacto. C ui gloriae amplior adhuc ex o p portunitate cumulus accessit. N am sub id fere tempus Quintilius Varus cum tribus legionibus in Germania periit, nem ine dubitante quin v ictores Ger mani iuncturi se Pannoniis fuerint, nisi debellatum prius Illyricum ess et. Q uas ob res triumphus ei de cretus est multique et magni honores. C ensuerunt etiam q uidam ut Pannonicus, alii ut Inv ictus, no nnulli ut Pius cognominaretur. S ed de cognomine intercessit Augustus, eo con tentum repromittens, quod se de functo suscepturus esset. T riumphum ipse distulit maesta ci uitate clade Variana; nihilo minus urbem praetex tatus et laurea coronatus intrav it positumque in Saeptis tribunal senatu astante conscendit ac me dius inter duos consules cum Augusto simul sedit; unde populo consalut ato circum templa deductus est. Proximo a nno repet ita Germania cum animadv erteret Varianam cladem temer itate et neglegentia ducis acci disse, nihil non de consilii sententia egit; semper alias sui arbitrii conten tusque se uno, tunc praeter con suetudinem cum compluribus de ratione bell i communi cavi t. C uram quoque solito exactiorem praestitit. T raiecturus Rhenum commeatum omnem ad certam formulam adstrictu m non ante transmisit, quam con sistens apud ripam explorasset v ehiculorum onera, ne qua deportarentur nisi concessa aut necessaria. Trans Rhenum ve ro eum v itae ordinem tenuit, ut sedens in caespite nudo cibum c aperet, saepe sine tentorio per noctaret, praecepta sequentis diei omnia, et si quid subiti muneris iniungendum esset, per libellos daret; addita monitione ut, de quo quisque dubitaret, se nec a lio interprete quacum que uel noctis hora uteretur. D isciplinam acerrime exegit animadv ersionum et igno miniarum generibus ex antiquitate repetitis atque etiam legato legionis, quod paucos milit es cum liberto suo trans ripam v enatum misisset, ignominia notat o.

PAGE 232

232 Proelia, quamv is minimum fortunae casibusque per mitteret, aliquanto co nstantius inibat, quotiens lucu brante se subito ac nullo propellente decideret lumen et ex s tingueretur, confidens, ut aiebat, ostento sibi a maioribus suis in omni ducatu expertissimo S ed re prospere gesta non multum afuit quin a Bructero quodam occideretur, cui inter proximos uersanti et trepidatione detecto tormentis expressa con fessio est cogitati facinoris. A Germania in urbem post biennium regressus triumphum, quem distulerat, egit prosequen tibus etiam legatis, qu ibus triumphalia ornamenta impe trarat. A c prius quam in Capitolium flecteret, descendit e curru seque praes identi patri ad genua summisit. Batonem Pannoniu m ducem ingentibus donatum prae miis Rav ennam transtulit, gratiam referens, quod se quondam cum exercitu iniquitate loci circumclusum passus esset evadere. P randium dehinc populo mille mensis et congiarium trecenos nummos viritim dedit. Dedicav it et Concordiae aedem, item Pollucis et Castoris suo fratrisque nomine de ma nubiis. He was given the tribunician power for a second term of three yea rs, the duty of subjugating Germany was assigned him, and the envoys of the Parthians, after presenting their instructions to Augustus in Rome, were bidden to appear also before h im in his province. But when the revolt of Illyricum was reported, he was transferred to the charge of a new war, the most serious of all foreign wars since those with Carthage, which he carried on for three years with fifteen legions and a corresponding f orce of auxiliaries, amid great difficulties of every kind and the utmost scarcity of supplies. But though he was often recalled, he none the less kept on, for fear that the enemy, who were close at hand and very strong, might assume the offensive if the R omans gave ground. He reaped an ample reward for his perseverance, for he completely subdued and reduced to submission the whole of Illyricum, which is bounded by Italy and the kingdom of Noricum, by Thrace and Macedonia, by the Danube, and by the Adriatic sea. Circumstances gave this exploit a larger and crowning glory; for it was at just about that time that Quintilius Varus perished with three legions in Germany, and no one doubted that the victorious Germans would h ave united with the Pannonians, had no t Illyricum been subdued first. Consequently a triumph was vot ed him and many high honours. Some also recommended that he be given the surname of Pannonicus, others of Invictus, others of Pius. Augustus however vetoed the surname, reiterating the promise t hat Tiberius would be satisfied with the one which he would receive at his father's death. Tiberius himself put off the triumph, because the country was in mourning for the disaster to Varus; but he entered the city clad in the purple bordered toga and cro wned with laurel, and mounting a tribunal which had been set up in the Saepta, while the senate stood alongside, he took his seat beside Augustus between the two consuls. Having greeted the people from this position, he was escorted to the various temples. The next year he returned to Germany, and realising that the disaster to Varus was due to that general's rashness and lack of care, he took no step without the approval of a council; while he had always

PAGE 233

233 before been a man of independent judgment and self r eliance, then contrary to his habit he consulted with many advisers about the conduct of the campaign. He also observed more scrupulous care than usual. When on the point of crossing the Rhine, he reduced all the baggage to a prescribed limit, and would no t start without standing on the bank and inspecting the loads of the wagons, to make sure that nothing was taken except what was allowed or necessary. Once on the other side, he adopted the following manner of life: he took his meals sitting on the bare tu rf, often passed the night without a tent, and gave all his orders for the following day, as well as notice of any sudden emergency, in writing; adding the injunction that if anyone was in doubt about any matter, he was to consult him personally at any hou r whatsoever, even of the night. He required the strictest discipline, reviving bygone methods of punishment and ignominy, and even degrading the commander of a legion for sending a few soldiers across the river to accompany one of his freedmen on a huntin g expedition. Although he left very little to fortune and chance, he entered battles with cons iderably greater confidence whenever it happened that, as he was working at night, his lamp suddenly and without human agency died down and went out; trusting, as used to say, to an omen in which he had great confidence, since both he and his ancestors had found it trustwo rthy in all of their campaigns. Yet in the very hour of victory he narrowly escaped assassination by one of the Bructeri, who got access to him a mong his attendants, but was detected through his nervousness; whereupon a confession of his intended crime was wrung from him by torture. After two years he returned to the city from Germany and celebrated the triumph which he had postponed, accompanied a lso by his generals, for whom he had obtained the triumphal regalia. And before turning to enter the Capitol, he dismounted from his chariot and fell at the knees of his father, who was presiding over the ceremonies. He sent Bato, the leader of the Pannoni ans, to Ravenna, after presenting him with rich gifts; thus showing his gratitude to him for allowing him to escape when he was trapped with his army in a dangerous place. Then he gave a banquet to the people at a thousand tables, and a largess of three hu ndred sesterces to every man. With the proceeds of his spoils he restored and dedicated the temple of Concord, as well as that of Pollux and Castor, in his own name and that of his brother. Cassius Dio 55.2.1 5

PAGE 234

234 , Augustus, upon learning of Drusus' illness before it was far advanced (for he was not far off), had sent Tiberius to him in haste. Tiberius found him still breathing, and on his death carried the body to Rome, causing the centurions and military tribunes t o carry it over the first stage of the journey, as far as t he winter quarters of the army, and after that the foremost men of each city. When the body had been laid in state in the Forum, two funeral orations were delivered: Tiberius pronounced another eulogy there in the Forum, and Augustus pronounced one in the Circus Flaminius. The emperor, of course, had been away on a campaign, and it was not lawful for him to omit the customary rites in honour of his exploits at the time of his entrance inside the pomerium. The body was borne to the Campus Martius by the knights, both those who belonged strictly to the equestrian order and those who were of senatorial family; then it was given to the flames and the ashes were deposited in the sepulchre of Augustus. Drusus, together with his sons, received the title of Germanicus, and he was given the further honours of statues, an arch, and a cenotaph o n the bank of the Rhine itself. Tiberius, while Drusus was yet alive, had overcome the Dalmatians and Pannonians, wh o had once more begun a rebellion, and he had celebrated the equestrian triumph, and had feasted the people, some on the Capitol and the rest in many other places. At the same time Livia, also, with Julia, h ad given a dinner to the women. And the same fest ivities were being prepared for Drusus; 8 55.6.1 5 8 Text and translat ions of Cassius Dio are from Cary (1917).

PAGE 235

235 , , , After this, now that his second period of ten years had expired, Augustus once m ore accepted the supreme power, th ough with a show of reluctance, in spite of his oft ex pressed desire to lay it down; and he made a campaign against the Germans. He himself remained behind in Roman territory, while Tiberius crossed the Rhine. Accordingly all the barbarians except the Sugambri, through fear of them, made overtures of peace; b ut they gain ed nothing either at this time, for Augustus refused to conclude a truce with them without the Sugambri, or, indeed, later. To be sure, the Sugambri also sent envoys, but so far were they from accomplishing anything that all of these envoys, who were both many and distinguished, perished into the bargain. For Augustus arrested them and placed them in various cities; and they, being greatly distressed at this, took their own lives. The Sugambri were thereupon quiet for a time, but later they am ply requited the Romans for their calamity. Besides doing this, Augustus granted money to the soldiers, not as to victors, though he himself had taken the title of imperator and had also conferred it upon Tiberius, but because then for the first time they had Gaius taking par t with them in their exercises. So he advanced Tiberius to the position of commander in place of Drusus, and besides distinguishing him with the title of imperator, appointed him consul once more, and in accordance with the ancient prac tice caused him to post up a proclamation before entering upon the office. He also accorded him the distinction of a triumph 55.8.1 3

PAGE 236

236 Tiberius on the first day of the year in which he was consul with Gnaeus Piso convened the senate in the Curia Octaviae becau se it was outside the pomerium. After assigning to himself the duty of repairing the temple of Concord in order that he might ins cribe upon it his own name and that of Drusus, he celebrated his triumph, and in company with his mother dedicated the precinct called the precinct of Livia He gave a banquet to the senate on the Capitol, and she gave one on her own account to the women s omewhere or other. A little later, when there was some disturbance in the province of Germany, he took the field. The festival held in honour of the return of Augustus was directed by Gaius, in place of Tiberius, with the assistance of Piso. 55.9.1 These were all events of that year, for nothing worthy of mention happened in Germany. 55.27.3 5 This lasted until the scarcity of grain was at an end and gladiatorial games in honour of Drusus were given by Germanicus Caesar and Tiberius Claudius Nero, his sons. For this mark of honour to the memory of Dru sus comforted the people, and also the dedication by Tiberius of the temple of Castor and Pollux upon which he inscribed not only his own name, calling himself Claudianus instead of Claudius, because of his adoption into the family of Augu stus, but also that of Drusus. Tiberius, it should be explained, continued to carry on the wars, and at the same time visited the city repeatedly whenever the opportunity offered; this was partly, to be sure, on account of various business, but chiefly because he was afraid that Augustus might take advantage of his absence to show preference to somebody else.

PAGE 237

237 55.28.5 31.1

PAGE 238

238 While these events were occurring expeditions agai nst the Germans also were being co nducted by various leaders especially Tiberius He advanced first to the river Visurgis and later as far as the Albis but nothing noteworthy was accomplished at this time although not only Augustus but also Tiberius was called imperator because of the campaign and Gaius Sentius the governor of Germany received triumphal honours inasmuch as the Germans through their fear of the Romans made a truce not merely once but twice The reason that peace was granted them a second time in spite of their having broken their truce so soon was that the Dalmatians and Pannonians were in a state of great disturbance and required sharp attention The Dalmatians chafing under the levies of tribute had hitherto kept quiet though unwillingly But when Tiberius made his second campaign against the Germans and Valerius Messallinus the governor of Dalmatia and Pannonia at the time was sent out with him taking most of his army along the Dalmatians too were ordered to send a contingent; and on coming together for this purpose and beholding the strength of their warriors, they no longer delayed, but, under the vehement urging of one Bato, a Desidiatian, at first a few revolted and defeated the Romans who came against them, a nd then the rest also rebelled in consequence of this success. Next the Breucians, a Pannonian tribe, put another Bato at their head and marched against Sirmium and the Ro mans in that town. They did not capture the place, however, for Caecina Severus, the governor of the neighbouring province of Moesia, marched rapidly against them, when he heard of their uprising, and joining battle with them near the river Dravus, vanquished them; but hoping in some way to renew the struggle soon, since many of the Romans also had fallen, they turned their attention to summoning their allies and were getting together as many as they could. Meanwhile the Dalmatian Bato marched upon Salonae, where he was badly wounded by a stone missile and so accomplished nothing himself; b ut he sent out some others, who wrought havoc along the whole sea coast as far as Apollonia, and at that point, in spite of having been first defeated, won a battle in turn against the Romans who engaged them. Now when Tiberius learned of this, fearing tha t they might invade Italy, he

PAGE 239

239 returned from Germany, sending Messallinus ahead and following himself with most of his army. But Bato learned of their approach, and although not yet well, went to meet Messallinus; and though he proved stronger than Messalli nus in open conflict, he was afterward defeated by an ambuscade. Thereupon he went to Bato, the Breucian, and making common cause with him in the war, occupied a mountain named Alma. Here they were defeated by Rhoemetalces, the Thracian, who had been sent ahead against them by Severus, but resis ted Severus himself vigorously. Later, when Severus withdrew to Moesia, because the Dacians and Sarmatians were ravaging it, and Tiberius and Messallinus were tarrying in Siscia, the Dalmatians overran the territory of their allies and caused many more to revolt. And although Tiberius approached them, they would engage in no pitched battle with him, but kept moving from one place to another, causing great devastation; for, owing to their knowledge of the country and t he lightness of their equipment, they could easily proceed wherever they pleased. And when winter set in they did much greater damage, for the y even invaded Macedonia again. As for these forces, now, Rhoemetalces and his brother Rhascyporis checked them by a battle; and as for the others, they did not come to the defence of their country when it was later ravaged (in the consulship of Caecilius Metellus and Licinius Silanus), but took refuge in the mountain fortresses, from which they made raiding expeditio ns whenever the chance offered. When Augustus learned of these things, he began to be suspicious of Tiberius, who, as he thought, might speedily have overcome the Dalmatians, but was delaying purposely, in order that he might be under arms as long as possi ble, with the war as his excuse. He therefore sent out Germanicus, although he was only a quaestor, and gave him an army composed not only of free born citizens but also of freedmen, including those whom he had freed from slavery by taking them from their masters and mistresses on payment of their value and the cost of their maintenance for six months. Eutropius 7.9 Nullo tempore ante eum magis res Romana floruit. Nam exceptis civilibus bellis, in quibus invictus fuit, Romano adiecit imperio Aegyptum, Canta briam, Dalmatiam saepe ante victam, sed penitus tunc subactam, Pannoniam, Aquitaniam, Illyricum, Raetiam, Vindelicos et Salassos in Alpibus, omnes Ponti maritimas civitates, in his nobilissimas Bosphorum et Panticapaeum. Vicit autem multis proeliis Dacos. Germanorum ingentes copias cecidit, ipsos quoque trans Albim fluvium summovit, qui in Barbarico longe ultra Rhenum est. Hoc tamen bellum per Drusum, privignum suum, administravit, sicut per Tiberium, privignum alterum, Pannonicum, quo bello XL captivorum m ilia ex Germania transtulit et supra ripam Rheni in Gallia conlocavit. Armeniam a Parthis recepit. Obsides, quod nulli antea, Persae

PAGE 240

240 ei dederunt. Reddiderunt etiam signa Romana, quae Crasso victo ademerant. At no period was the Roman state more flourishing; for, to say nothing of the civil wars, in which he was unconquered, he added to the Roman empire Egypt, Cantabria, Dalmatia, often before conquered but only then entirely subdued, Pannonia, Aquitania, Illyricum, Rhaetia, the Vindelici and Sala ssi on the Alps, and all the maritime cities of Pontus, among which the two most noble were Bosporus and Panticapaeon. He also conquered the Dacians in battle; put to the sword numerous forces of the Germans; and drove them beyond the river Elbe, which is in the country of the barbarians far beyond the Rhine. This war however he carried on by the agency of his step son Drusus, as he had conducted the Pannonian war by that of his other step son Tiberius, in which he transplanted forty thousand prisoners from Germany, and settled them in Gaul on the bank of the Rhine. He recovered Armenia from the Parthians; the Persians gave him hostages, which they had given to no one before; and also restored the Roman standards, which they had taken from Crassus when he wa s defeated. 9 Orosius 6.21.22 5 Quibus etiam diebus multa per se multaque per duces et legatos bella gessit. nam inter ceteros et Piso aduersum Vindelicos missus est; quibus subactis uictor ad Caesarem Lugdunum uenit. Pannonios nouo motu intumescentes Tiber ius priuignus Caesaris cruentissima caede deleuit. idemque continuo Germanos bello arripuit, e quibus quadraginta milia captiuorum uictor abduxit. quod reuera bellum maximum et formidulosissimum quindecim legionibus per triennium gestum est, nec fere ullum maius bellum, sicut Suetonius adtestatur, post Punicum fuit. In those days also Caesar fought many wars by himself and many through his generals and legates Among others Piso was sent against the Vindelici, and w hen t he se had been subdued, he went to Caesar at Lugdunum. Tiberius, the stepson of Caesar, with a very cruel slaughter de stroyed the Pannonians who had risen in a new revolt. The same Tiberius immediately laid hold of the Germans in war, of whom as vict or he carried off forty thousand captive s. This very great and formidable war indeed, was carried on by fifteen legions for three years, and since the Punic struggle, there had been almost no great er war, as Suetonius testifies. 10 9 The text of Eutropius is from R hl (1985). The translation of Eutropius is from Watson (1876). 10 The text of Orosius is from Zangemeister (1889). The translation is from Deferrari (1964).

PAGE 241

241 LIST OF REFERENCES Texts and Translations Basore, John W. 1932. S eneca: Moral Essays Cambridge. Bennett, C.E. 1925. Frontinus: The Stratagems and the Aqueducts of Rome Cambridge, MA. Cary, Earnest. 1917 1924 Cambridge. Deferrari, Roy Joseph. 1964. Paulus Orosius: The Seven Books of History Against the Pagans. Washington, D.C. Fisher, C.D. 1906. Cornelii Taciti Annalium ab Excessu Divi Augusti Libri Oxford. Forster, Edward Seymour. 1929. Lucius Annaeus Florus: Epitome of Roman History Cambridge. F razer, Sir James George. 1931. Ovid: Fasti Cambridge. Freese, J.H. 1926. Cambridge. Fyfe, W. Hamilton. 1932. On Style Cambridge. Goold, G.P. 1977. Manilius: Astronomica Cambridge. Jones, Horace Leonard. 1924. The Geography of Strabo Cambridge. Lyne, R.O.A.M. 1995. Horace: Behind the Public Poetry New Haven. Mozley, J.H. 1929. Ovid: The Art of Love, and Other Poems Cambridge. Nagel, Betty Rose. 1995. Bloomington IN Rackham, H. 1926. Aristotle: The Nichomachean Ethics Cambridge. 1942. Natural History Cambridge. Rolfe, J.C. 1913, 1914. Suetonius in Two Volumes Cambridge. Schlesinger, Alfred C. 1959. Livy. Cambrid ge. Shipley, Frederick W. 1924. Velleius Paterculus Cambridge. Smith, Charles Sidney. 1895. Fifty Selections from Valerius Maximus Boston.

PAGE 242

242 Walker, Henry John. 2004. Valerius Maximus: Memorable Deeds and Sayings Indianapolis. Watson, John Selby. 1876. Justin, Cornelius Nepos, and Eutropius London. Winterbottom, M. 1974. The Elder Seneca: Declamations Cambridge. Zangemeister, C. 1889. Pauli Orosii Historiarum Adversum Paganos. Libri VII Leipzig. Secondary Sources Ash, Rhiannon. In Pliny the Elder: Themes and Contexts edited by Roy K. Gibson and Ruth Morello, pp. 1 19. Leiden. JRS 64: 21 6. CQ 17: 332 8. TAPA 91: 339 52. Bilde, Per. 1988. Flavius Josephus b etween Jerusalem and Rome: his L ife, his Works, and their I mportance Sheffield. Tra nsit A dmiratio : Memoria, I nvidia and the H Velleius Paterculus: Making History edited by Eleanor Cowan, pp. 93 120. Swansea Plus a CA 22: 167 98. The Cambridge History of Classical Literature Vol. 2: Latin Literature edited by E.J. Kenny, pp. 491 4 Cambridge. Brewer, Richard J., ed. 2000. Roman Fortresses and their Legions London. Conte, Gian B iagio 1986 The Rhetoric of Imitation: Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgil and Other Latin P oets Edited and with a forward by C. Segal. Ithaca. 1994. Latin Literature: A History Baltimore Courtney, Edward. 2003. The Fragmentary Latin Poets Oxford. Cowan, Eleanor. 2009 CA 28: 179 210. JHI 6: 157 96.

PAGE 243

243 Flavius Josephus: Interpretation and History edited by Jack Pastor, Pnina Stern, and Menahem Mor, pp. 65 86. Leiden: Brill. Daitz, Stephen G. 1960 A JP 81: 30 52. A Companion to Roman Rhetoric edited by William Dominik and Jon Hall, pp. 439 50. Malden, MA. Devillers, O livier 2003 historique Louvai n. Dueck, Daniela. 2000. Strabo of Amasia: A Greek Man of Letters in Augustan Rome London. Durry, In edited by Kurt Latte, pp. 215 35. Genve. Eck, Werner. 2007. The Age of Augustus Malden, MA. Elefante, M. 1997. Velle ius Paterculus, ad M. Vinicium Consulem Libri D uo Hildesheim, Z rich, and New York Ferguson, J. F. 1913 C W 7: 2 5. Ferrill, Arther. 1991. Caligula : Emperor of Rome London. Fraenkel, Eduard. 1957. Horace. Oxford. Fulkerson, L aurel 2006 ( Annals 1.31 Ramus 35: 169 92. Furneaux, Henry. 1896, 1907. The Annals of Tacitus 2 vols. 2 nd ed. Oxford. Gibson, Bruce. 2006. Statius : Silvae 5 Oxford. Ginsburg, Judith. 1981. Tradition and Theme in the Annals of Tacitus. New York 1993 In maiores certamina : Past and Present in the Annals Tacitus and the Tacitean Tradition edited by T.J. Luce and A.J. Woodman, pp. 86 103. Princeton. Josephus and the Hist ory of the Greco Roman Period: Essays in M emory of Morton Smith edited by Fausto Parente and Joseph Sievers, pp. 329 38. Leiden Goodyear, F.R. D. 1972, 1981. The Annals of Tacitus Vols. 1 2 Cambridge. Green, Steven J. 2004. Ovid, Fasti 1 Leiden.

PAGE 244

244 Arduum ad astra : The Poetics and Politics of Horoscopic F ailure in Astronomica Forgotten Stars: Rediscove Astronomica, edited by Steven J. Green and Katharina Volk, pp. 120 40. Oxford. Green, Steven J. and Katharina Volk. 2011 Astronomica. Oxford. Griffin, Miriam T. Leaders and Masses in the Roman World edited by I. Malkin and Z.W. Rubinsohn, pp. 33 57. Leiden Flavius Josephus: Interpretation and History edite d by Jack Pastor, Pnina Stern, and Menahem Mor, pp. 149 62. Leiden. Harrison, Stephen. 2007. The Cambridge Companion to Horace. Cambridge. Healy, John F. 1999. Pliny the Elder in Science and Technology Oxford. Hinds, S tephen 1998 Allusion and Intertext : Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman P oetry Cambridge. Hollis, Adrian S. 2007. Fragments of Roman Poetry c.60 BC AD 20 Oxford. Johnson, Timothy S. 2004. A Symposion of Praise: Horace Returns to Lyric in Odes IV Madison. Odes California Studies in Classical Antiquity 2: 171 81. Keitel, E lizabeth 1984 Annals AJP 105: 306 25. Koesterma nn, Erich. 1956 Germanicus 14 Historia 4: 429 79. Laird, Andrew. 2009 The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Historians edited by Andrew Feldherr, pp. 197 213. Cambridge. Laistner, M.L.W. 1940. CP 35: 241 58. Levene, D.S. 2010 Livy on the Hannibalic War Oxford. Levick, Barbara. 1990. Claudius London. leius Paterculus as Senator: A Dream with F Velleius Paterculus: Making History edited by Eleanor Cowan, pp. 1 16. Swansea: Classical Press of Wales.

PAGE 245

245 Lobur, John Alexander. 2011. R E Velleius Paterculus: Making History edited by Eleanor Cowan, pp. 203 18. Swansea CP 84: 16 31. 200 Oxford Readings in Classical Studies: Livy edited by Jane D. Chaplin and Ch ristina S. Kraus, pp 17 48. Oxford. Mader, Gottfried. 2000. Josephus and the Politics of Historiography: Apologetic and Impression Management in the Bellum Judaicum Leiden. Manolaraki, E leni and Antony Augoustakis 2012 the Tragic n A Companion to Tacitus edited by Victoria E. Pagn, pp. 386 402 Malden, MA. Marincola, John. 1997. Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography Cambridge. Martin, Ronald 1981 Tacitus Berkeley. Free Speech in Antiquity edited by Ineke Sluiter and Ralph M. Rosen, pp. 391 408. Leiden. Mellor, R onald 1993. Tacitus New York. Mendell, Clarence W. 1957. Tacitus: The Man and his Work New Haven. Miller, N. P. 1964 AJP 85: 279 96. Murdoch, Adrian. 2006. Stroud, England. Flavius Josephus: Interpretation and History edited by Jack Pastor, Pnina Stern, and Menahem Mor, pp. 259 78. Leiden. The Cambridge History of Classical Literature Vol. 2: Latin Literature edited by E.J. Kenny, p p. 458 66. Cambridge 2000. Irony and Misreading in the Annals of Tacitus Cambridge. Pagn, Victoria E. 1997. Tacitus Plus: The Poetics of Disguise Diss. University of Chicago. 1999 Annales 1.61 CP 94 : 302 20.

PAGE 246

246 Histories 4. n Velleius Paterculus. Making History ed ited by Eleanor Cowan, pp. 141 5 6. Swansea. Pelling, C. 1993 I n Tacitus and the Tacitean Tradition edited by T.J. Luce and A.J. Woodman, pp. 59 85. Princeton. G&R 44: 197 213. 2011. Velleius Paterculus: Making History edited by Eleanor Cowan, p p. 157 76. Swansea CQ 31: 102 5. Petersen, Hans. 1961. TAPA 92: 440 52. Pigo J akub 2008 Portrayal of Germanicus in Annals 1.31 The Children of Herodotus: Greek and Roman Historiography and Related Genres edited by J. Pigo pp. 287 303. Cambridge. Pomeroy, Arthur J. 1991. The Appropriate Comment Frankfurt. Potter, David S 1987. ZPE 69: 269 76. 2012 n A Companion to Tacitus edited by Victoria Emma Pagn, pp. 125 40 Malden, MA. in CP 67: 119 21. Velleius Paterculus: Making History edited by Eleanor Cowan, pp. 73 92. Swansea Richardson, Lawrence. 1992. A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome Baltimore Rives, J.B. 1999. Tacitus: Germania Oxford. A Companion to Tacitus edited by Victoria Emma Pag n, pp. 45 61. Malden, MA. Romm, James S. 1992 The Edges of the Earth in Ancient Thought: Geography, Exploration, and Fiction Princeton. Ross, D. O. 1973 YCl S 23: 209 27.

PAGE 247

247 R hl, Franz. 1985. Eutropi Brevarium Ad Urbe Condita Stuttgart. Rutland, Linda W. 1987 Rheinishes Museum 130: 153 64. Rutledge, Steven. 2001. Imperial Inquisitions: Prosecutors and Informants from Tiberius to Domitian New York Sailor, D y lan 2008. Writing and Empire in Tacitus Cambridge. Free Germania (HN. 16.1 AJP 108: 108 28. Francesca. 2006 Tragedy, Rhetoric, and the H istoriography of Tacitus' Annales Ann Arbor. Schmitzer, U. 2000. Velleius Paterculus und das Interesse an der Geschichte im Zeitalter des Tiberius Heidelberg. Schoonhoven, Henk. 1992. The Pseudo Ovidian Ad Liviam de Morte Drusi Groningen. Schrijvers, P Consolatio ad Liviam Mnemosyne 41: 381 84. Representations of Empire: Rome and the Mediterranean World edited by Alan K. Bowman, Hannah M. Cotton, Martin Goodman, and Simon Price, pp. 65 82. Oxford. Seager, Robin. 2005. Tiberius Malden, MA. Shotter, D.C. A. 1968 Historia 17: 194 214. 1992. Tiberius Caesar London. Shumate, Nancy. 2 006. Nation, Empire, Decline: Studies in Rhetorical Continuity from the Romans to the Modern Era. London. A Companion to Tacitus edited by Victoria Emma Pag n, pp. 476 503. Malden, MA. Praenomen Phoenix 42: 173 5. Sinclair, P atrick 1995. Tacitus the Sententious Historian: A Sociology of Rhetoric in Annales 1 6 University Park, P A. Historia 21: 287 307.

PAGE 248

248 hniques in the Organization of h is TAPA 110: 287 301. Stiles, Andrew. 2010 Claudian Dynasty Thesis. University of Sydney HS P h 74: 257 97. Sussman, Lewis A. 1978. The Elder Seneca Leiden. Sydenham, Colin. 2005. Horace: The Odes. London. Syme, R onald 1939. The Roman Revolution Oxford. 1950. A Roman Post M ortem: An Inquest on the Fall of the Roman Republic Sydney. 1958 Tacitus. 2 vols. Oxford. HS Ph 64: 27 87. 1971. Danubian Papers Bucharest. 1982 J RS 72: 68 82. 198 6. The Augustan Aristocracy Oxford. Syme, Ronald, and E. Badian, ed 1979. Roman Papers Vol. 2. Oxford. Syme, Ronald, and Anthony R. Birley, ed 1991. Roman Papers Vol. 7. Oxford. Thomas, Richard F. 2001. Virgil and the Augustan Reception Cambridge. Timpe, D ieter 1968 Der Triumph des Germanicus Bonn. Tozer, H.F. 1893. Selections from Strabo Oxford. Laus Principis in the Strategemata HSPh 103: 423 49. Tylawsky, E lizabeth. 2002 Annales Historia 51: 254 58. Volk, Katharina. 2009. Manilius and his Intellectual Background Oxford. 2011. Forgotten Stars: Astronomica, edited by Steven J. Green and Katharina Volk, pp. 1 12. Oxford.

PAGE 249

249 Walker, B. 1952 The Annals of Tacitus: A Study in the Writing of H istory Manchest er. Walker, Henry John. 2004. Valerius Maximus: Memorable Deeds and Sayings Indianapolis. Wallace JRS 76: 66 87. Walsh, P.G. 1961. Livy: His Historical Aims and Methods Cambridge. Wardle, D. 1997 Annals CQ 47: 609 13. Wells, C.M. 1972. The German Policy of Augustus: An Examination of the Archaeological Evidence. Oxford. Wells, Peter S. 2003. The Battle that Stopped Rome New York. Wh ite, Peter. 1993. Promised Verse : Poets in the Society of Augustan Rome Cambridge. Wilkes, J ohn 1972 Claudian H CW 65: 177 92 197 203 Williams, K. F. 2009 Latomus 68: 117 30. Woodman, A. J. CQ 25: 272 306. 1977. Velleius Paterculus. The Tiberian Narrative (2.94 131) Cambridge. 1988. Rhetoric in Classical Historiograph y : Four Studies London. 1998. Tacitus Reviewed Oxford. Annals 1.16 Arethusa 39: 303 29. Woodman, A.J. and R.H. Martin, eds. 1996. The Annals of Tacitus Book 3 Cambridge. Zanker, Paul. 1988. The Power of Images in the Age of Augu stus Ann Arbor

PAGE 250

250 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Megan M. Daly was born in Illinois in 1984. She received her Bachelor of Arts in 2006, her Master of Arts in 2008, and her Doctor of Philosophy in 2 013, all in Classical S tudies from the University of Florida.