The Poet and the Second Prince: Ovid in the Age of Tiberius Author(s): Peter E.

Knox Source: Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, Vol. 49 (2004), pp. 1-20 Published by: University of Michigan Press for the American Academy in Rome Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4238815 Accessed: 14/08/2010 11:43
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aarome. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Academy in Rome and University of Michigan Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome.

http://www.jstor.org

THE POET AND THE SECOND PRINCE: OVID IN THE AGE OF TIBERIUS Peter E. Knox, University of Colorado

Ovid'spoetryhaslongbeen readwithinthe politicalandliterary contextsof the Augustan era,

for obviousand sound reasons.'This approach extendsalso to interpretation of the exile poetry, bothin critical assessments andin attempts to unravel the relationship of theArsAmatoria of Ovid'srelegation.2 to the circumstances this strandof scholarship thererunsan Throughout implicitassumption thatin A.D. 8 Augustus was muchthe samemanwho sharedthe company of Virgiland Horaceand that the conditionsfor poetrywere muchthe sameas theyhad been for In this regard TibullusandPropertius. scholars havebeen slow to absorbchangesin our literary of the transition to the new erathatformally of Tiberius understanding beganwith the accession in A.D. 14. The reignof Tiberius is not knownas an era of greatliterature: as F. R. D. Goodyear once put it, "Tiberius most directly influenced literature it."3Ancienthistorians by inhibiting of the periodtookno noteof whathappened to poetryatthistime,but the fateof historiography and in grimtermsin thepagesof Tacitus, the decades of Tiberius's ruleis chronicled oratory during Dio, andSuetonius. Suetonius a characteristically sensational of literary provides description repression underTiberius (Tib.61.3): Every crime became a capital of a fewcareless A poetwas one,eventhe utterance words. on thegrounds thathe hadwritten a tragedy in which in he presented charged Agamemnon a badlight; a historian wasalsocharged because it wasalleged thathe haddescribed Brutus andCassius as"the lastof theRomans." Both these authors were executed without delay and their works, though theyhadoncebeenpublicly read before andaccorded Augustus general praise, were destroyed. One poet aloneof the greatfiguresof the earlier era survived the deathof Augustus: Ovid,who spentthe firstthreeyearsof Tiberius's reignas he had spentthe last six yearsof Augustus's-on the shoresof the BlackSea,wherehe finallydied in exile. The circumstances of thatexile serve
Earlierversions of this paper were delivered to audiences at the Universita degli Studi di Genova, Universitadi Firenze, Universita degli Studi di Roma "Tor Vergata,"Universita degli Studi di Siena,Facultadi Letteree Filosofia(in Arezzo), Universita Ca Foscari di Venezia, and Kenyon College. A transcript appeared in Maecenas 1 (2001) 151-181. I am grateful to all who endured these performancesand in particularto the following for sound criticismsand sage counsel, not alwaysheeded: Franco Montanari,MarioLabate, Sergio Casali,AlessandroBarchiesi,Mario Geymonat,JuliaDyson, and Clifford Weber. I am also grateful to Elaine Fantham and an anonymousreaderfor MAAR, as well as to its editor, Anthony Corbeill. Barchiesi 1994, focusing on the Fasti, is the most challenging formulation to date of the case for a subversive reading of Ovid in the context of Augustus'sreign. The title of this paper deliberatelyalludesto this influentialbook, also available in English translationas The Poet and the Prince:Ovid and AugustanDiscourse(Berkeley 1997).
2 1

Williams 1994 has been particularly influential among literaryassessments,esp. 154-209. For surveysof work since then, see also Williams2002a and 2002b.
3Goodyear

1984, 603.

MAAR 49, 2004

PETER E. KNOX

as a backdrop for thisinvestigation of the interaction of Tiberius, "thesecondprince," with Ovid andthe worldof letters.Its intentis to pose the question of whatrolethe firstemperor's successor playedin the changing circumstances of literature the finalyearsof Augustus's rule. during Thelastten yearsof Augustus's in 14werea grimtime: of Tiberius reignbeforethe accession "booksbegan to be burnedand penaltiesimposed on their writersduringthe last decadeof "I Tiberius's Augustus's principate, whenTiberius was de facto andin the end de iureco-regent. role in the administration duringthis periodwas recognized by ancientcommentators, though they were hardpressedto documenthis influence.As Tacitusputs it, afterthe deathof Gaius, "'everything pointedto him:he was adopted,givena sharein imperium, andgrantedtribunician authority."' Ancientsourcesroutinelyassignresponsibility for policy decisionsduringthis period to Augustus, whichis hardlysurprising. Evenif in fact Tiberiusnow playeda greaterrole, it would hardlyhavebeen in the interestof the regimeto lend credibility to the suggestion that Augustus wasnot in completecontrol.Dio famously lamentedthatpolicydebatesthathad once been publicwere now conductedbehindclosed doors.6 It was suspected,not implausibly, that most policydecisionswere madeby the emperors(T6OV KpaTOuVTmV) in close consultation with theirco-regents(T6OVlTapca6VVaCLTEV6TVTWv). AfterA.D. 4 Tiberius mustbe includedin this latter category.7 The outward trappings of power-adoption, proconsular imperium, tribunicia potestas-give little indicationwhere Tiberiusmighthave exercisedinfluence.One obviousplace to look for signsof his influence is in the consularfasti of the years following his restoration. As Symecogently argued,manyof the individuals now raisedto high officeowed theirascension to Tiberius.8 C.
A.D.

Vibius Postumus (suff. A.D. 5) served with Tiberius in Pannonia, as did M. Aemilius Lepidus (cos. 6), L. Apronius (suff. A.D. 8), and A. Vibius Habitus (suff. A.D. 8).9 Most notably,Tiberius selo who earned an obituary cured the post for Lucilius Longus (suff. A.D. 7), "a political nonentity," notice from Tacitus only because he was the sole friend of senatorialrank to accompanyTiberius into exile on Rhodes. Provincial commands during this period also regularlywent to the friends and associates of Tiberius,"1 which suggests that, with Augustus'ssupport or acquiescence, he was moving to consolidate his position. Tiberius'sstandingis also reflectedin the imperialiconographyof the period. The archerected at Ticinum in A.D. 7-8 testifies to his new place as heir apparent.12 Tiberius'simage also begins to

4Goodyear

1984, 603. See Woodman 1977, 130-136 and Birch 1981 on the settlement of June 26, A.D. 4. Cf. Hurlet 1997, 141-162 on the position of Tiberius during the ten years following until the death of Augustus, although he focuses primarilyon Tiberius'smilitarycommands, without much notice of his influence on civil matters.

regime in the next decade: "Not A.D. 14 but A.D. 4, that was the decisive year,"an observationthat Syme often repeated: 1958, 367-371, 427; 1974, 483-484; 1978, 197-198. Some skeptics, e.g., Brunt 1961, have doubted whether Tiberius reallyhad a hand in more thanmilitaryaffairson the frontiers, but see now Crook 1996, 107-108 for sober confirmation.
8

5 Ann. 1.3.3: illuc cunctauergere: filius, collega imperil,consors tribuniciae potestatisassumitur.Dio 55.27.5 relates that Tiberiusreturnedfrequendyfromhis campaignsto the cityin order to tend to business, though he is vague as to the precise nature of that business: 1Tpry[IdTWv TLVOV EVEKa.
6

Syme 1939, 383, 434-435; cf. also Seager 1972, 46-47.

9 For details, with bibliography,cf. Levick 1976, 42-44.

10

Martin and Woodman 1989 on Tac.Ann. 4.15.1.

53.19.3: Td }ytyve6Oai.

1lEv TrXE[u KpW)

KaU 8L' aTrOpprjTWV

11Cf. Syme 1986, 99-103.

12 His statue was accorded a prominent place among members of the imperial family:ILS 107.

7Cf. Syme 1974, 484, with characteristiccertitude, on the

significanceof Tiberius's elevationfor the developmentof the

THEPOETAND THESECONDPRINCE

on coinagein A.D. 8-9, when,it mightbe supposed, his positionwas allthe moresecurein appear
the aftermathof the suppression of the revolts in Pannonia.13 This is also the time when, according to ancient accounts, Augustus began to show signs of old age and started to delegate some tasks If we are to look for instances where Tiberius'sinfluthat he had formerlyundertaken himself.14 ence may be detected, it is reasonable to begin with acts of policy that are more consistent with policy during his reign than in the earlieryears of Augustus's.For example, one of the first acts of Tiberius as emperor was to transferthe elections from the people to the Senate.15 But changes in the consularelections were first instituted in A.D. 5, the year afterTiberiuswas installed in power, a circumstancethat suggests that ten yearslater he only finalizedthe policy that he had set in motion earlier.16 A similartest may be applied in reviewingthe relationshipof writers to the regime during this period and the application of the law of maiestas.

1. Orators,Historians,and Rhetoricians Tacitus writes scornfully about the suppression of earlier historians in the reign of Domitian, but for him the first link in the chain of repression that stretched to Domitian was forged in the reign of Tiberius with the trial of the senatorial historian Cremutius Cordus in A.D. 25, famously recounted in the fourth book of his Annals. The charge was novel in a prosecution under the law of maiestas (4.34.1): "that he had published a history in which he had praised Marcus Brutus and called Gaius Cassius the 'last of the Romans'." But this is only the most celebrated such case under Tiberius. It merits special treatment by Tacitus because it involves history, his own calling, and it is a prime exhibit of his theme of the loss of libertas.17 But there are a number of other instances documented in our sources that show Tiberius taking action against an individual because of his writings. Another victim fell in the same year 25, Votienus Montanus, a highly regarded orator from Narbo in Gaul. He is frequentlymentioned in the Controuersiae of the Elder Seneca, who reports that he was known among some contemporariesas the "Ovid of orators."18 He fell foul of Tiberius through some spoken or written word and was brought to trial before the Senate. Tacitus reports the proceedings in some detail because they provoked an emotional outburst by the emperor (Tac. Ann. 4.42.1-3):19
13 For the earliest examples (A.D. 8-10) of Augustus's coinage featuring Tiberius, see RIC 1.235-241. Cf. Hannestad 1988, 92.

55.34.2. Cf. the epitome of Xiph. 114.15-30, which at this point relates that Augustus Kla T6 yspai Kai T] TOV
I KcqVEV. t33i4tTO3 &GOEVEa

14 Dio

Brutus,Cassius,and especiallyCato for opponents of the regime, see MacMullen1966, 1-45. The earliestinstanceof the emperortakingexception to such praisefor the tyrannicides might be the case of C. Albucius Silus, as earlyas 16 B.C., but it is impossible to date the incident recounted by Suetonius (Gramm.30), and it may have occurred when Silus was an old man, pace Kaster 1992 on Suet. Gramm.30.5.
18 For Votienus, see PIR1 5.674; RE 9A.924 "VotienusMontanus" (H. Papenhoff); Meyer 1842, 556-560; Bornecque 1902,200-201; Schanz 1935,356. MamercusScauruscalled him the "Ovid of orators,"according to Sen. Contr. 9.1-6, 10.2-3.

Tac. Ann. 1.15.1: tum primum e campocomitia ad patres translatasunt: nam ad eam diem, etsi potissimaarbitrioprincipis, quaedamtamen studiis tribuumr febant.
16

15

Thus Brunt 1961; cf. Syme 1958, 389-390, 756-760.

17 From the abundant bibliographyon the prosecution, see Rogers 1935, 86-87; Syme 1958, 337-338; Bauman 1974, 99-104; Levick 1976, 193-194. On the symbolic value of

19

On the proceedings against Votienus, see Bauman 1974, 120-12 1; Rutledge 2001, 97.

PETER E. KNOX

ForwhileVotienus wasbeingtriedforabusing Montanus theemperor, a soldier calledAemilius who was one of the witnesses(testisAemilius,e militaribus uiris),20 eagerto provethe case, no detail.Despiteloudprotests, hadto heartheinsultsto which, perseveringly spared Tiberius in private, he wassubject. Greatly upset,he criedthathe mustclearhis reputation immediately, or at leastbeforethe caseended.He wasonlycalmed with difficulty entreaties by his friends' anda chorusof flattery. Votienus was convicted on the count of maiestas and departed into exile in the Balearic Islands, where he died four years later.21 Our sources offer a conflictingportraitof MamercusAemilius Scaurus,22 whose suicide in A.D. 34 is reported by Tacitus and Dio.23Tacitus records a high opinion of his oratory,calling him one of the leading public speakersof the age (Ann. 3.31.5: oratorumea aetate uberrimus).24 Although he was associated with Sejanus,he managed to escape the purges of A.D. 32 but subsequentlyfell foul of Macro. The indictment arose out of an assumed slight of the emperor in a tragedy,with verses that could be interpretedas criticalof Tiberius.Dio provides more detail than Tacituson this point. The play was an "Atreus,"the manner Euripidean, and the offending verse "advised one of the subjects of that monarch to endure the folly of the reigning prince."25 According to Dio, Tiberius reacted by promising to make of Scaurus an Ajax and compelling him to commit suicide.26The formal charge for the proceedings, however, was adulterywith Livilla. On this point Dio dilates: "The above, however,was not the accusationthat was actuallybrought againsthim, but instead, he was charged with having committed adulterywith Livilla;indeed many others also were punished on her account, some with good reason and some as the result of false accusations."27 Scaurus's published orations were burned (Sen. Contr. 10 praef 3), presumablytogether with the offending tragedy.The specious prosecution on chargesof adulterywas not an isolated case, Dio asserts,and perhaps not without significantprecedent. Examples of such abuse and oppression could easilybe multiplied,28 but the point may perhaps be conceded that in his years as emperor Tiberius showed himself sensitive in the extreme to any writing that could be interpreted as criticalof himself. The presumption that a referencein a work of literaturecontained some veiled political content, as in the case of Scaurus,or some social slight, as in the case of Votienus, might be enough to trigger reprisals. In his treatment of intellectuals Tiberius was not the man his adopted father Augustus had been, and there is evidence to suggest

It has been arguedfrom this detail that Votienus'sreal offense was some attempton his partto interferewith the army, but that seems unlikely.Aemilius may well be identified by an inscriptionas a tribunein the praetorianguard(Goodyear 1981 on Ann. 2.11.1), making it more likely that he was witness to Votienus'sconduct around the palace.
21 22

20

25

Va Till) TOV KpaTOl)TO~i3ovLtv 4pG. Td3 TOll) KpQTOVVTCOV cqiakia3 26

tfl Dio 58.24.4: TrapfTnvEL & TOlVctppXO[t6VtVTLP aVToV. .. Cf. Eur.Phoen.394: (tfpELV XpE6V.

In A.D. 29, according to Jerome, Chron.p. 173b H.

Tacitus'scomment that Scaurus anticipated the sentence and voluntarilycommitted suicide beforehand is not inconsistent with Dio's account.
27 Dio 58.24.5: o0v[[1l1V aXX KaL ETrL TOVTy KaTlYyOplln, 6S Tiv ALOuMXtav [IeI1OLXEVlKOs- ToXXol y&p 8 Koil dXXoL SL aC)Tfv, o0 jl)v ET' dlklOCi 01 Se EK GUKOGalVTLot, EKOXd(JOlTtav.

PIR2A 404; RE 1.583-584 "Aemiius" no. 139 (P. v. Rohden); Rutledge 2001, 186-188. Tac.Ann. 6.29.4-7; Dio 58.24.3-5.

23

24

Cf. Woodman and Martin 1996, ad loc. and Tac. Ann. 6.29.3: insignis nobilitateet orandiscausis.The elder Seneca had a different opinion of his skills (Contr. 10 praef 2-3); cf. Fairweather1981, 137-138.

Consider the fate of Xeno, described by Suet. Tib.56: Xenonemquendamexquisitius sermocinantem cuminterrogasset, quaenamilla tam molesta dialectosesset, et ille respondisset Doridem, relegauit Cinariam, existimans exprobratumsibi ueteremsecessum,quod Dorice Rhodii loquantur.

28

THEPOETAND THE SECOND PRINCE

becameemperor. thathe had exhibitedthistraitlong beforehe actually We turnnow to consider the lastyearsof Augustus's ruleandthe possibleantecedents Tiberius's of behavior.

2. TheYear 8 Augustus's tastesin literature arewell documented in ancient A composite sources. sketchfromall of theseaccounts uswitha portrait of tolerance andsupportive presents assummarized indulgence, by Suetonius (Aug.89.5): Augustus allpossible gave to theintellectuals of histime. encouragement Hepolitely andpanotonly attended tiently oftheir and historical readings poems butoftheir and works, speeches dialogues; tobeing yetheobjected made thetheme of any work unless theauthor were known asa serious andreputable andwarned thepraetors notto lethisname bevulgarized writer, by itsconstant inprize occurrence orations. Numerous accounts illustrate tolerance toward Augustus's evento the pointof endurintellectuals, of the typethatTiberius ingpersonal slights whenhe became punished TheelderSeneca emperor.29 describes the relationship of Augustus withCraton,30 a Greekrhetorician devoted to theAsianic syle of speaking who despised thatsuggested Athensandtheso-called anything Atticstylefavored by the He oftenengaged inverbal emperor. withtheprinceps sparring without suffering adverse consequences. Seneca alsoprovides several examples of Augustus's tolerance of jibesmadeattheexpense of Marcus thenhis designated Agrippa, heir,a degreeof tolerance thatelicitsmarvel (Contr. 2.4.12-13):"the I feel,deserves divine admiration sincesuchlicense Augustus, waspermitted in hisreign." ForSeneca, who probably wrotein the yearsimmediately the deathof Tiberius, following thereis an unstated contrast withthemostrecentregime. Suetonius records thathis onlylegislative response to thepublication of libelouspamphlets wasto outlawthe dissemination of suchworksundera pseudonym.31 wascertainly of taking Augustus actionagainst capable contumelious wordsor actions,32 butthefew recorded instances do not constitute a pattern, withthreeexceptions to whichwe willshortly turn. Andtheyoccurlatein his reign, whenthe possible influence of Tiberius mustbe considered. In contrast withthetraditional portrait of thetolerance of Augustus, Tiberius's zealin prosecutingindividuals who spokeill of the emperor hadto be restrained fromanearly age.WhenAugustus refusedto be provoked by accusations against a certain Aemiius Aelianus fromCordoba thathe had slandered theprinceps, Tiberius weighedin, as reported by Suetonius (Aug.51.2-3):
Augustus'stolerance of outspokenness was often invoked admiringly by later authors, e.g., Sen. Ben. 3.27: sub diuo Augustonondumhominibusuerbasuaperzculosa, iam molesta; Clem. 1.10.3;Suet.Aug. 51; Tac.Ann. 4.24; Macrob.Sat.2.4: soleo in Augusto magis mirariquos pertulit iocos quam quos protulit. Augustus'stolerance of the insults of Timagenes is treated almost as a parable at Sen. Dial. 5.23.4-8.
30

29

Sen. Contr. 10.5.21-22. Cf. Blass 1865, 163; Bornecque 1902, 164.

edant. Perhaps Suetonius has in mind the case of lunius Novatus (Aug. 51.1), who circulated a pamphlet under the name of AgrippaPostumus. This kind of toleranceis attested also in Augustus's later years; cf. MacMullen 1966, 5: "to these opening rounds fired in the battle over his reputation, at least one more Anti-Cato was added by none other than Augustus, in extreme old age-what ripples of Republicanism in the salons elicited this last pamphletwe do not know." On Augustus'sAnti-Cato, see Suet. Aug. 85.1. Suet. Aug. 51.1: Iunium Nouatumet CassiumPatauinume plebe hominesalterumpecunia,alterumleui exiliopuniresatis habuit, cum ille Agrippaeiuuenis nomine asperrimam de se epistulamin uulgusedidisset,hic conuiuiopleno proclamasset neque uotum sibi neque animum deesse confodiendieum.
32

Suet. Aug. 55: etiam sparsosde se in curiafamosos libellos nec expauit et magna cura redarguitac ne requisitisquidem auctoribusid modo censuit, cognoscendum posthacde iis qui libellosaut carmina ad infamiamcuiuspiam sub alieno nomine

31

PETER E. KNOX

against When Tiberiusmentionedthe matterin a letter,with more violentexpostulations you mustnot givewayto emotionin this Aelianus, Augustus wroteback:"MydearTiberius, if no one can matter, or takeit too muchto heartif anyonespeaksill of me;let us be satisfied do ill to us." And yet, the first treason proceedings instituted against an individual because of his writing ocFrom curred in the reign of Augustus. The case involved the historicalworks of Titus Labienus.33 Labienus was the same family as a prominent supporter of Pompey in the Civil Warwith Caesar,34 known as an outstandingorator,but his sharptongue earned him also a reputationand a nickname. As the elder Seneca (Sen. Contr. 10 praef. 5) remarks,playing on rabies "madness,""his freedom of speech (libertas)was so great that it passed the bounds of freedom, and because he savaged all social ranks and everyone alike, he was called 'Rabienus'."How was Labienus'sextreme libertas Given his family connections, one suspects the expression of republicansentiments, manifested?"5 and indeed, Seneca reports one sententia from a declamation in which he calls Marcus Cato "the most brilliantvictim of the storm of the civil war."Cato, he avers, "could have lived by the favor of Caesar-if he had been willing to live by anyone'sfavor."36 Augustus once famouslyalluded to Livy as an adherentof Pompey,but in the reign of Tiberius,praiseof Caesar'sopponents was treasonous. Labienus'shistories almost did not survive him. According to Seneca, they were the first literary works ordered burned by the state. "It was," as Seneca notes, "an unheard of novelty (res noua et inusitata) that punishment should be exacted from literature."37 This disgrace led Labienus to take his own life-probably to preempt execution or exile-and to make a last defiant gesture, by The book-burning failed in its objective: having himself walled up in the tombs of his ancestors.38 thirty years later the emperor Gaius Caligula, in a show of magnanimity,ordered that Labienus's work, which had survived in secret, be restored to the public. This attempt at suppression had failed and would have been futile in any case. As one contemporaryobserver,Cassius Severus,no friend of Labienus, noted at the time of this book-burning, "I ought to be burnt alive now-for I have those books by heart."39 who claimed to have memorized the seditious histories of Labienus, is the Cassius Severus,40 second of the three intellectuals to suffer punishment in the last decade of Augustus's rule. Of humble extraction (Tac.Ann. 4.21.3: sordidaeoriginis),Cassius Severus rose to become one of the leading oratorsof his day.Quintilianrankshim with MessallaCorvinusand Asinius Poflio as among
PIR2L 19; RE 12:1.270-271 "Labienus"no. 8 (W. Kroll); Meyer 1842, 528-531; Schanz 1935, 344-345; Syme 1939, 486; Raaflauband Samons 1990, 439-441; Fantham 1996, 124-125.
34 On Labienus's familyconnectionsto Pompey and the loyal33

tempestasabstulit, potuit beneficio Caesarisuiuere, si ullius uoluisset, and cf. 10 praef 5, where he refers to Labienus's persistence in Pompeianosspiritus.
37 Sen. Contr. 10 praef 5. On the proceedings, see Hennig

1973.
38

ties of his relation, perhaps his father,the former marshalof Caesar,cf. Syme 1938.
35 In his declamations,apparently, Labienus did not hesitate

Sen. Contr. 10 praef 7.

to take unpopularpositions. In declaimingon the imaginary case of a man who crippled childrenwho had been exposed, forcing them to be beggars and demanding a fee from them, Labienus took the side of the accused and turned it into an opportunity to attack the unpunished vices of the upper classes; cf. Sen. Contr. 10.4.17-18.
36

39 Sen. Contr. 10 praef 8: CassiSeueri,hominisLabienoinuisissimi, belle dictaresferebaturillo temporequo libriLabieni ex senatus consulto urebantur:nunc me, inquit, uiuum uri oportet,qui illos edidici.

40PIR2C 522; RE 3.1744-1749 "Cassius" no. 89 (J.Brzoska);

Meyer 1842, 545-551; Bornecque 1902, 157-158; Schanz 1935, 345-347; Fantham 1996, 126-127.

Suet. Contr.10.3.5:M. Cato,quo uironihil speciosiusciuilis

THEPOETAND THESECOND PRINCE

a livelyappreciation andtheelderSeneca the outstanding speakers of theAugustan period,4" provides in thepreface Thisreport for to bookthreeof his Controuersiae.42 is of thehighest by Seneca interest, a decisive shiftin the direction of Roman Cassius wasjudged, atleastby some,to represent oratory.43 In the Dialogus of Tacitus a speaker of the modern characterizes Cassius as the firstrepresentative of this style,andhis testimonial is Marcus is fulsome. style.The speaker Aper,himselfan adherent andthatnew conditions he asserts, sawthatthe timeshad changed demanded a different Cassius, Morethanone sourcealso comments on his wit and acerbity.45 approach.44 Cassius disdained the practice of declamation as a formof exercise, preferring the roughandtumbleof the courts, where hiswasnotthemanner in highplaces. calculated to makefriends Hisoutspokenness wouldeventually bringhimintoconflict withthe regime. Ourreporter is Seneca, relating in hisSuasoriae howvarious orators dealtwithadvice to Ciceroon whether he shouldbeg Antony forhislife (Suas. 6.11): Varius likethis(sicdiuisit): "Ishould Geminus divided advise you,if youhadto choose now death and todierather between than And heincluded begging pardon, allthepoints made beg." bytheother himtoflee. declaimers, adding, however, athird: heexhorted Brutus, Cassius, and Sextus hadfled.Andhe added anepigram Pompey particularly admired byCassius Severus: "Why doweloseheart? Therepublic toohasitstriumvirs." In the reignof Tiberius, praiseof Brutus andCassius wasreported by Tacitus asthe lead charge in the billof indictment against Cremutius Cordus, although otherallegations werethrown in, including abuseof the Senateandthe Roman peopleandlackof respectfor Tiberius andAugustus. Of theproximate causeof Cassius's prosecution we haveno directevidence,46 butit seemsclear thathe walkeda veryfineline in his relations withthe imperial family. He hadprosecuted a close friendof Augustus, puttingthe emperor in the awkward positionof havingto figureout a wayto helphisfriend without appearing to circumvent thelaws.47 Plutarch records another sardonic remark
Quint. Inst. 10.1.117: multa si cum iudicio legatur dabit imitatione digna Cassius Seuerus, qui si ceteris uirtutibus colorem et grauitatem orationis adiecisset, ponendus inter praecipuosforet. nam et ingeniiplurimumest in eo et acerbitas miraet urbanitastet sermot, sedcplus stomachoquamconsilio dedit:praetereaut amarisales, ita frequenteramaritudoipsa ridiculaest. Cf. Inst. 12.10.11. Contr.3 praef. 2: oratio eius erat ualens, culta, uigentibus plena sententiis. nemo minuspassusest aliquidin actionesua otiosi esse: nulla pars erat, quae non sua uirtute staret, nihil in quo auditorsine damnoaliud ageret;omnia intenta,aliquid petentia. nemo magis in sua potestate habuit audientiumaffectus. uerumest, quodde illo dixit Gallio noster:'cumdiceret, rerumpotiebatur;adeo omnes imperatafaciebant: cum ille uoluerat, irascebantur, <flebant, miserebantur>.nemo non illo dicente timebat,ne desineret.
43 42 41

speciemorationisesse mutandam.Even a conservativecritic like Vipstanus Messalla, who speaks later in the Dialogus (26.4-5), concedes the importance of Cassius, even as he rejectshis style of speaking as too boisterous and caustic. An instance: once he visited the school of a celebrated declaimer,Cestius, who had the nerve to rate himself above Cicero, whom Cassius much admired. This is how Cassius himself recounts the incident, according to Sen. Contr. 3 praef 16:meminime intrare scholameius cumrecitaturus esset in Milonem; Cestiusex consuetudinesua miratusdicebat:'si Thraexessem, Fusius essem;sipantomimus essem,Bathyllus essem; si equus, Melissio.' non continui bilem et exclamaui: 'si cloacaesses, maximaesses.' risus omnium ingens;scholastici intueri me, quis essem qui tam crassasceruiceshaberem. Other samples of Cassius'ssardonicwit: Sen. Contr.2.4.11, 4 praef 11, 9.3.14, 10 praef 8, 10.5.20, Suas. 6.11; Quint. Inst. 6.3.78. For discussion, see Rogers 1935, 79-80; Bauman 1967, 259-260; 1974, 27-31; Syme 1986, 409-412; Raaflauband Samons 1990, 441.
47 Suet.Aug.56.3:cumAsprenas Noniusartius ei iunctuscausam
46 45

See Winterbottom 1964, 90-92 and Heldmann 1982, 163-198 on the role played by Cassius Severus in changing the direction of Roman oratory.Cassiuswas not a delatorper se, although Quintilian notes quaedamaccusandiuoluptas (Inst.11.1.57).
44 Tac.Dial. 19.1-2: uidit namque,ut paulo ante dicebam, cum

condicionetemporumet diuersitate auriumformam quoqueac

ueneficiiaccusanteCassioSeuero diceret,consuluitsenatum, quidofficiisuiputaret; cunctari enimse, ne sisuperesset,eripere

PETER E. KNOX

Cassius Severus Tiberius.8 aimedat a senator who flattered Whenthe blowfell,the chargeagainst men andwomen.Tacitus was unspecified slanderdirectedat prominent reportsthe prosecution to of treason andassigns as a precedent for the resumption trialsunderTiberius the responsibility libelwasAugustus, "The first whoemployed thislawto investigate written Augustus (Ann.1.72.2-3): of Cassius in defaming eminentmen provoked by the licentiousness Severus, whichhe employed did not have It is worthconsidering the possibility thatTacitus andwomenin frivolous writings." for this turnof eventsto Augustus.49 Elsewhere accessto the full storyin assigning responsibility aboutthe eventsof Augustus's lastyears,andin anycase,if Tiberius he showshimselfill informed it wouldhaveleftlittleimprint on therecord. Cassius wasconvicted exerted influence on Augustus, it was thatCassius and relegated to the islandof Crete.But his casedid not end there.Whatever he did not stop.In the year24, Tacitus the caseof did to attract the angerof the emperor, relates, now emperor Cassius Severus againcamebeforethe SenateandTiberius, (Ann.4.21.3): A vicious TheSenate thecaseof theexiled manof humble nextconsidered Cassius Severus. butan effective he hadearned fromthe Senate, origin speaker, byhis unrestrained aggresto Crete. he a sworn verdict of banishment thesame siveness, There, bycontinuing practices, somany newontopofold,that hewasdeprived brought upon himself enmities, ofhisproperty, prohibited from fireandwater, andgrew oldontherock of Seriphus. himin 24, we may On the islandof Seriphus Cassius diednineyearslater. Tiberius's actionagainst of or a routinecontinuation suspect,was not merelyan act of pietastowardthe deifiedAugustus his predecessor's policy.It reflected the angerof an offendedmonarch, whoseunrulysubjecthad not learned his lessonthe firsttime. At this point, a questionsuperveneson the date of Cassius's originalprosecution.Other antefor the earpoints of chronology hinge on this, for the trialof Cassiusprovidesa terminus lier case of Labienus.Manyscholarshave settledon A.D. 12.50In that year,we learnfromDio, even though the agingAugustusbegan to delegatemanyduties to his youngerrelatives,51 he continuednonetheless to superintend the moralclimateof the empireandordereda roundup of authorsof libelouswritings.52 Thereis an obviousattraction in synchronizing the trialof Cassius for defamation of membersof the nobilitywith this actionto suppressdefamatory pamphlets, but nothingcompelsus to acceptit. Especially sinceit fliesin the face of the directtestimony of Saint in A.D. 32, the twenty-fifth the deathof Cassius Jerome,who registers yearof his exile,as he
tells us.53If Jerome is right, the original prosecution fell in the year 8. As Syme notes,54 Jerome is
legibus sin deesset, destituere acpraedamnare amicum 51 For example, when he wrote a letter commending Gerreum, et consentientibus existimaretur; seditin subselliis manicus to the Senate, it was read out not by Augustus uniuersis peraliquot horas, uerum tacitus et ne laudatione quidem iudi- himself, who could no longer project his voice sufficiently, cialidata.On thisaffair, cf. Froment 1879,126-128. but by Germanicus (Dio 56.26.2).
48

"Such frankness will be the deathof this man,"Cassius quipped(Plut.Mor.60D: ttvTfl TOUTOV l TrcappfloLa TOV

TOVTO 8L6KEL, ETrETpE&E, Kal

Dio 56.27.1: o0 IEVTOL KOL TatXxc flTTOI aXXaKaILTOL! L1TrEvOLSl[tlapXLav

ia06v
OTl ILPCa OTTO

Tl

Trapa

aITrpaL

-TroKTEVEL). avOpuirrov

(4)

4pEL TLVCOV

UtVyypdl4lOLTO, (fTfltLV

GVTWV EITOlUaTO,

Kal EKELVd TE,

Koestermann 1955,80-81 pleadsin mitigation thatthis action wastaken byAugustus noton hisownaccount buton behalf of slandered members of thearistocracy andtherefore differs fromTiberius's reactions.
49 50

TO [L1V (V Tf roXEL EVpE9EvTa Tp0S T7V dyopaP6pv v TO 8 Tc TpO; T6V EKacTaXOOL OpXOVTWV,KaTE4IXEAE, Kal TOV aUTO EKOXWJETLVag. GIVveEVTWV 53 Jerome, Chron.p.

176 H.

E.g.,PIR2C 522;Koestermann 1955,80;Goodyear 1981 on Tac.Ann. 1.72.3; . Crook1996,110-111

54

Syme 1986, 411.

PRINCE THEPOETAND THE SECOND

If we acceptthat lightly.55 witness,but his evidenceshouldnot be discarded not anunimpeachable andsuicideof Labienus will thenhaveoccurred follow.Theprosecution date,otherconsequences in the year8, a yearof of literature is documented before.The suppression in thatyearor shortly in the historyof Roman poetry. someconsequence

andPoetry 3. Tiberius as it reignis as depressing to the yearsof Tiberius's A surveyof the poetrythatcanbe attributed urgently of readers is brief:no greatnamesin the roll call,littleto suggestthatlatergenerations role,if any,in poets.56 Whatwasthe emperor's to the Tiberian reserved a portionof theirlibraries influence the poetsof thisperiod thisstateof affairs? Towhatextentdid his owntastein literature in our in literary is amplydocumented interest scholarship or deterthemfromtheirart?Tiberius's formedthe basisof as for anyothermemberof the Romanelite,rhetoric sources.57 For Tiberius, in the Latinsideof the discipline wasnoneotherthanMessalla Corvinus, his education. His master the of This and noted of Augustus opened doorto close associate patron poets.58 apprenticeship Messalla cultivated not onlyin oratory. As a publicspeaker, not taken, apparently many possibilities, is represented tack.In the ancientsourcesTiberius but his pupiltook a different the plainstyle,59 His vocabulary has been characterized obscureandwordy.60 by ancientobservers as notoriously noted The effectwas suchthatsome contemporaries as archaizing.61 and moderncommentators whichweresomewhat affectedandpedantic, betweenhis prepared orations, a distinctdifference andhis extempore speeches.62 by his exIt is possiblethat this tendencytowardthe obscureand pedanticwas reinforced in Rhodes.It was there,in 20 B.C., thathe stoppedon his return from perienceof Greekrhetoric journey he had on the throne.On the outward whereit washis missionto placeTigranes Armenia, reflected his own. In an of literary been attended presumably men,whoseinterests by a company

" Cf., in support of 8, Cramer1945, 173 n. 70, 177; Bauman

career,see PIR1V 90; Syme 1986, 200-226.

59 On Messallaas a public speaker,see Schanz 1935, 23-24;

1974, 29-31; Syme 1978, 213-214; Kienast 1982, 121; Gil 1985, 139-140.
56

Suet. Aug. 86.2: nec Tiberloparcit et exoletas interdum et reconditas uoces aucupanti. Dio 57.17.1-2 recounts an 57 It is not surprisingto learn from Velleius (2.94.2) that Tiepisode in which Tiberius anguished over his apparently beriuswas optimisstudiismaximoqueingenioinstructissimus, unintended coinage of a new word in an edict of A.D.17; cf. and his literaryinterests are also attested by Suetonius (Tib. Miller 1968. 70.1-3): artes liberales... studiosissimecoluit; cf. Fantham 62 1996, 140-141. Suet. Tib.70.1: sed adfectatione et morositate nimiaobscurabat stilum, ut aliquantoex temporequam a curapraestantior 58 Suet. Tib. 70.1: in oratione Latina secutus est Coruinum haberetur. Messallamquemsenem adulescensobseruarat. On Messalla's

Citroni 1993, 390-391: "Ci6 che piu immediatamente impressiona nel panorama offerto dalla letteraturaromana del periodo postaugusteo e la mancanza, dopo Ovidio e Livio, e fino all'eta di Seneca, di grandi personalita di scrittori, quasi l'eccezionalefiorituradel periodo augusteo avesse esaurito per qualche tempo la capacita produttiva della cultura letteraria." Citroni 1993, 383-391 is an excellent discussion of the changed circumstancesof literaturein the last years of Augustus and the importance of the year 8 as a turning point.

Malcovati1976, 529-531; Heldmann 1982, 157-161. Levick 1976, 17 notes the contrast between the styles of Messalla and Tiberius. Tacitusso characterizes his speeches on a number of occasions, e.g., Ann. 1.11.2, 1.33.4, 3.51.2, 13.3.2; cf. Goodyear 1981 on 2.38.1, Lindsay 1995 on Suet. Tib.70.1. ByJuvenal's time (10.71: uerbosaet grandisepistula)wordiness was the hallmarkof Tiberius'sstyle.
61 60

10

PETER E. KNOX

and Cinnahad accompanied earlier Catullus Memmius to Bithynia. But the members generation did not achieve of Tiberius's company quitethatlevelof distinction. Theyincludeda certain Julius
Florus, of whom we know only that he held a post as a scribe and that he wrote some satires;Titius, for whom Horace predicts fame as an author of Pindaric odes but of whom we never hear again; and the otherwise unknown Celsus.63 From Horace's vivid portrait of this cohort, there is little to suggest that Tiberius had alreadyformed his somewhat idiosyncratictaste in poetry known from later sources. Perhaps something began to develop on the returnjourney.On his way back to Rome from Armenia,Tiberiusstopped for the firsttime at Rhodes (Suet. Tib.11.1). There he studied with Theodorus of Gadara, who may also have tutored him as a boy in Rome.64 We know from other sources that Tiberius admiredTheodorus, the rivalof Apollodorus of Pergamum,Augustus'sown In the disputes between adherents of these two rhetoricians,Tiberius took the side of teacher.65 Theodorus.66 From this point may date the formationof Tiberius'smaturestyle, under the influence of Theodorus, as it diverged from the Atticism of Messalla.A taste for the obscure is also reflected in his choice of favorite poets.67Suetonius reports that he composed "Greekverses in the manner of his favorites,Euphorion, Rhianus,and Parthenius,whose busts he placed in the public libraries among those of the classics-thus prompting several scholars to publish rival commentaries on these poets and dedicate them to him."68 Although these poets had enjoyed a vogue in the 40s and 30s B.C., there is little to suggest that their popularity endured into the first century A.D. Tiberius's tastes may have seemed even a bit old-fashioned to contemporaries. Tiberius cultivated the company of men of letters throughout his life and, like many members of his class and most notably like his stepfather,the emperor Augustus, dabbled a bit in poetry himself. Tiberiuscomposed verse in both Latin and Greek, but the only title attestedis a lyric poem in Latin on the death of his nephew Lucius Caesar,which Suetonius calls a conquestiode morteL. Caesaris.69Laterin life, Tacitusinformsus, when Tiberiuswent into seclusion on the island of Capri, he took with him only one senator,who was also a legal scholar,and one illustriousequestrian,with the rest of the company composed of men of letters.70 But unlike Augustus, it cannot be said that Tiberius had a flair for identifying the greatest talents. It might be argued that as a literarypatron Tiberiuswas simply less fortunate than Augustus. We know little of the works that were dedicated
Horace provides the names in Epist. 1.3. For Florus, cf. PIR21 316, RE 10.589 "Julius" no. 237 (A. Stein);for Titius, cf. PIR' T 195; for Albinovanus Celsus, also the addressee of Epist. 1.8, cf. PIR2A 478, RE 1.1314 "Albinovanus"no. 4 (P. v. Rohden). 64Quint. Inst. 3.1.17 dates Tiberius'sstudieswith Theodorus to the period of retirement(cumin eam insulamsecessisset), but this cannot be right:cf. Lindsay 1995 on Suet. Tib.57.1. According to Suetonius, Tiberius had been a pupil of Theodorus as a boy, presumablyin Rome.
65 63

year 1984, 606. Suet. Tib. 70.2: fecit et Graecapoemata imitatus Euphorionem et Rhianum et Parthenium,quibuspoetis admodum delectatus scripta omnium et imagines publicis bibliothecis inter ueteres et praecipuos auctores dedicauit: et ob hoc pleriqueeruditorumcertatimad eum multa de his ediderunt. No trace of these commentariessurvives,but we know of a commentaryby Apollonides on the Silloi of Timon of Phlius (Diog. Laert. 9.109). Suet. Tib.70.1 composuitet carmenlyricumcuiusest titulus "conquestiode morte L. Caesaris."On Tiberius's other attested writings, including an autobiography,see Cichorius 1922, 388-390. Tac.Ann. 4.58.1: profectioarto comitatu fuit: unus senator consulatufunctus, CocceiusNerua, cui legum peritia; eques Romanus ex inlustribus praeterSeianum CurtiusAtticus; ceteri liberalibusstudiispraediti,ferme Graeci,quorumsermonibus leuaretur.
70 69 68

On Theodorus,see RE5A.1847-1859 "Theodoros"no. 39 (W Stegemann),Kennedy 1972, 340-342. The elder Seneca refers to Tiberius as ipse Theodoreus(Suas.3.7).

66

Some aspects of these disagreements can be recovered from Quintilian and the so-called Anonymous Seguerianus (Rhet. Gr. 1.427).
67

Cf. Bowersock 1965,133-134; Williams 1978, 139;Good-

THEPOETAND THESECOND PRINCE

11

and Valerius to him as emperor, otherthanthe poemsby Maniius and Germanicus, Maximus's On the positiveside of the ledger,the best thatcan ninebooksof Memorable DeedsandSayings.7" Tiberius andpromoted a rather be saidis thatourevidencesuggests attracted that,whileemperor, In suchcompany, concerns. colorlessclassof writingon themesdetachedfromcontemporary we not to mightask,whatwould havebeen his opinionof the worksof Virgil,Horace,Propertius, wasunmoved mentionOvid?At the veryleast,thereis someevidenceto suggestthatTiberius by greatliterature Wemaythenturnto the moreinteresting and,in turn,did not inspireany. question of whetherTiberius was merelyunluckyin the writersof his age or whetherby personality and policyhe deterred the greater lights. Suetonius assures us thatTiberius "even whenconfronted withinsultsandmalevolent rumors and scandalous directed at himself and his poems familyremained steadfastly patientand often repeated thatin a free statethe tongueshouldbe free as well as the mind."72 But this straightforwardappraisal of Tiberius's toleranceof dissentis contradicted in the biography elsewhere and the recordof first-century throughout Roman historiography.73 In theyear 21 the affair of Clutorius Priscus74 boththeextreme illustrated sensitivities of Tiberius to literary activity andthe degreeto whichhis attitudes influenced the behavior of thosewho surrounded him.Priscus had achieved somecelebrity witha poemthathe composed on the deathof in 19,forwhichhe wasrewarded Germanicus witha cashgiftby Tiberius. Twoyears laterapparently he hadhopedto cashin againon thissuccess. Whenthe emperor's son Drususfellill,Priscus made readya newcomposition in the expectation of evengreater rewards. Unfortunately, Priscus hadthe badjudgment to rehearse hispieceto anaudience of noblewomen in thehouseof Publius Petronius. Thisperformance waspremature, forDrususdidnot die andPriscus's indiscretion wasreported to the Senate.He was soon tried,apparently withoutthe emperor's knowledge or involvement. The overenthusiastic Senate adopted the motionof the consul-elect andvotedthe deathpenalty. Tacitus reports the speechof Marcus Lepidus(consulin A.D. 6), who alonespokein opposition to the sentence.75 This appeal for moderation did not avail and Priscus was executed, eliciting a mild rebuke

fromthe absentemperor, evenwhilehe commended the pietyof thosewho actedquickly to avenge thisslightagainst his person.Forthe future the Senate resolved thatits verdicts wereto be deferred for ten daysbeforetheirenactment, to givethe emperor an opportunity to set themasideif he so chose.Butthiscaseis particularly illuminating because it showsthe Senateattempting to anticipate Tiberius's response to Priscus's crime,a crimeinvolving a carmen andan error.76 The recordcontains in whichTiberius several otherentries reacts to poetrythathe considered
Tac. Ann. 3.50: uita Clutorii in integro est, qui neque seruatusin periculumreipublicaenequeinterfectus in exemplum ibit. studia illi, ut plena uaecordiae,ita inania et fluxa sunt; 72 nec quicquamgraueac serium ex eo metuas,qui suorumipse Suet. Tib. 28: aduersusconuicia malosque rumoreset famosa de se ac suis carmina firmus ac patiens subinde iactabat flagitiorumproditornon uirorumanimis, sed muliercularum in ciuitate libera linguam mentemque liberas esse debere. adrepit.cedattamenurbeet bonisamissisaquaet igniarceatur, On Tiberius's moderatioat the beginning of his reign, see quodperindecenseoac si lege maiestatisteneretur. Ovid refers Goodyear 1972 on Tac. Ann. 1.8.4; Levick 1976, 195; and to his own offense in terms that foreshadowthis referenceto cf. Dio 57.9.2, 57.19. 1. Clutorius'suaecordia: cf. Ovid, Trist.2.15: tanta meo comes est insania morbo, Pont. 2.3.46 et mea non minimum culpa 73 Cf., e.g., Suet. Tib. 66; Dio 57.23.1-3. furoris habet. See Woodman and Martin 1996, ad loc. for the question of whether Clutorius's case came under the 74 Cf. Tac. Ann. 3.49-51; Dio 57.20.3-4; RE 4.1.118-119 law of maiestas. "Clutorius"no. 1 (A. Stein); PIR2 C 1199, Demougin 1992, 209 (no. 237). He is perhaps one of the poets mentioned at 76 As Shotter 1969 argues,the Senate'sreactionwas entirely consistentwith the legal climateestablishedby Tiberius,and Ovid, Pont. 4.16.10: Priscusuterque. On Tiberius's literary patronage, see Levick 1976, 230; Williams 1978, 298-299.
71 75

12

PETER E. KNOX

offensive. In A.D. 23, Dio reports,Tiberiusbrought Aelius Saturninusbefore the Senate for libelous verses, with conviction followed swiftlyby execution.77 JuliusMontanus is mentioned by Ovid as a writer of both elegiacs and hexameters.78 Montanus, egregiuspoeta in the elder Seneca'sestimation (Contr.7.1.27), was known to the youngerSeneca as an associateof Tiberius,who had also fallen out of favor,79 though with what consequences we can only surmise. Sextus Vistilius committed suicide in 32 after Tiberius took offense at poetry that he considered insulting to Gaius Caligula.80 Also in the year32 a formerpraetor,Sextius Paconianus,onetime associateof the now discredited Sejanus, fell victim to Tiberius,whose resentmentwas further stirredby the revelationthat Paconianus had been involved in the plot againsthis nephew Gaius. Paconianusonly escaped the death sentence by But it appearsthat he did not escape imprisonment,nor did his informationwin turninginformer.8" a lasting reprievefrom Tiberius.Paconianus,it should be noted, also wrote verse.82 Three yearslater, Tacitusreports, Tiberius still seethed over the scandal of Sejanusand harbored resentmentagainst those who had been associated with him.83 A number of senators were executed in that year, and Paconianus contrived a way to attractthe attention of the emperor again. Although still confined to prison, he wrote poetry that was counted as treasonous and was strangledin his cell.84 Not every poet who offended the emperor was necessarilydoomed, but it required special circumstancesor special influence to win acquittalonce an accusation had been brought.85

4. An AugustanPoet and the SecondPrince The year 8 was marked by other scandals of greaterinterest to modern scholars than the affairsof Labienus and Cassius Severus. In this year, too, Augustus banished his granddaughterJulia to a lonely island where she would eventually end her days. The offense with which she was charged was adultery.Some modern scholars argue that the charge of adulterywas merely a pretext with
they would have had good reason to believe that he would be satisfiedwith the outcome.
7

Cf. Dio 57.22.5. Rogers 1935, 72-73 considers Dio's account suspect. If Saturninuswas of servileorigin, a prosecution before the Senate would be surprising:cf. Levick 1976, 192-193, 287 n. 92.

81 Tac.Ann. 6.3.4: isdem litteris Caesar SextiumPaconianum praetoriumperculit magno patrum gaudio, audacemmaleficum, omniumsecretarimantemdelectumque ab Seiano,cuius ope dolus C. Caesaripararetur.quod postquampatefactum, prorupere concepta pridem odia, et summum supplicium ni professusindiciumforet. decernebatur,
82

78

Pont. 4.16.11-12: quiqueuel imparibusnumeris,Montane, uel aequis / sufficiset gemino carminenomen babes. Cf. RE 10.681-682 "Julius"no. 364 (E. Diehl); PIR2I 434; Bardon 1956, 59-60; Dahlmann 1975, 138-139; Courtney 1993, 330. Ep. 122.11: tolerabilis poeta et amicitia Tiberi notus et frigore. The elder Seneca may also have remarked on his relationship with Tiberius: there is a lacuna in the text where Montanus is described as qui comes fuit <Tiberii> (in Hakanson's edition, adopting Kiessling's supplement). Other supplements have been proposed, e.g., Sander's Ouidii, but the gap, of course, may have been larger than a single word.
79 80

He is surely to be identified with the poet from whom Diomedes quotes four hexameters; for the fragments, see Dahlmann 1975, 144-148; Courtney 1993, 343-344.
83

Tac.Ann. 6.38.

84 Tac. Ann. 6.39.1: nec dispares TrebelleniRufi et Sextii Paconiani exitus: nam Trebellenus sua manu cecidit, Paconianus in carcereob carmina illic in principemfactitata est. strangulatus

Tac.Ann. 6.9.

85 Tac. Ann. 4.31.1 reports that the grim news of the year 24 was lightened somewhat by the happy outcome of the affair of C. Cominius, a Roman knight who was convicted of composing a poem slandering the emperor,probrosum carmen.On this occasion Tiberius yielded to the entreaties of his brother,a senatorwho unaccountablyfound a way to soften his mood.

THEPOETAND THE SECOND PRINCE

13

whichAugustus covered up a moreserious offense.Suetonius mentions Julia's L. Aemilius husband, Paullus, in a list of thosewho conspired against Augustus,86 andwhileothersources informus that Paullus waspunished fortreason, the yearof his condemnation is disputed. Mostrecently scholars havebeen inclinedto set it in the sameyearasJulia's demise.87 On eitherinterpretation of Julia's crime-adulteryor political intrigue-the temptation hasprovedirresistible to connect thatscandal withthe othersignaleventof the yearfromourpointof view,the exileof Ovid,the greatest living poet of the day,andthe removal of hisArsAmatoria fromthe publiclibraries in Rome.88 Butthat maybe onlya distortion of historical perspective. When we considerthe fates of Labienusand Cassius,the year8 beginsto look pivotalfor intellectuals, andthereis considerable circumstantial evidence to pointto theinfluence of Tiberius in their demise.89 No ancientauthority providesus with an explanation for the punishment of Ovid. His own poetry,composedin exile at Tomi,is our only directtestimony aboutthe charges him by the emperor. broughtagainst The secondbook of his Tristia consistsof a singleelegyadin his own defense.Therehe famously dressedto Augustus refersto his dualoffense,carmen et "apoemanda mistake" error, (Trist. 2.207-210).The poemis certainly theArsAmatoria, as Ovid makesclearin numerous in thiscollection references andits successor, the fourbooksof Epistulae ex Ponto.90 The moremysterious of the charge,andtherefore component the moreirresistible to is the blunder, the error. Into this vacuumof information scholars, of scholars have generations witha myriad of fanciful in a conspiracy charged withAgrippa hypotheses:91 Postumus complicity in the plot by L. Aemilius involvement against Augustus, the empress Paullus, aidingandabetting Liviain her poisoningschemes,adultery withJulia,adultery with Livia,adultery with Augustus, and othersevenmoreoutlandish. havesuggested Manyscholars thatOvidis being disingenuous in alluding to an error, andhis onlyrealcrimewasliterary. Thatmaybe closerto the truth; but the canbe refined. argument Ovidrepeatedly insiststhathe hadnot committed in a courtof law,ashe anycrimeactionable spellsout in somedetailin a remarkable in the annals poemaddressed, of Latinliterature, uniquely to a foreignking,Cotysof Thrace(Pont.2.9.71-76): necquicquam, quod legeuetor committere, feci, esttamen hisgrauior noxafatenda mihi.
neueroges,quaesit:stultam conscripsimus Artem: innocuas nobishaecuetatessemanus. ecquidpraeterea peccarim, quaerere noli, ut lateatsolaculpasubArtemea. I havedone nothingthatI am forbidden by law.Yet I mustconfessa faultmoregravethan this. Do not askwhatit is: I havecomposeda foolish'Art'.Thisis whatprevents my hands
86

Suet. Aug. 19.1.

87 Syme 1978,209: "Husband and wife are linked by a common fate. The date is clear,the year 8, but not the nature and extent of their guilt." Cf. Birch 1981, 453. 88 The most recent and persuasive articulation of this hypothesis is to be found in Goold 1983. See also White 2002, 16-25. 89

rivalryand domestic scandal caused acute embarrassment to Augustus. Another is the influence of Tiberius."Others, e.g., Fantham 1985, 244-245, cling to the myth of Tiberius's republican tendencies and imagine that he opposed the repressionin Augustus'slast years.
90

E.g., Pont. 2.9.73 stultam conscripsimusArtem. Other references are collected by Owen 1924, 10-12.

Cf.Goodyear 1972,97 n. 1:"Why repression beganwhen

91Thibault 1964 cataloguesthe theoriesof 114 scholarssince 1437 about the nature of Ovid's "real"offense.

it did is not certain. One possible reason is that dynastic

14

PETER E. KNOX

sin?Don't inquire,so thatmy offensemay anyfurther frombeingclean.Have I committed hidebeneath myArsalone. No crime, at least in the eyes of the law as Ovid knew it. Elsewhere he characterizesthe offense as an act of simplicitas(Trist.1.5.42) or stultitia (Trist.3.6.35). He calls himself an innocent bystander and compareshimself to Actaeon, who accidentallycaught sight of Diana at the bath (Trist.2.105).92 Everyone in Rome seemingly knew of Ovid's transgression(Trist.4.10.99), and yet Ovid says that it is too difficult to talk about it (Pont. 1.6.21) because the subject touches Augustus personally (Trist.2.209) and causes him pain (Trist.2.123: laesi Caesarisira).9 Ovid's testimony is not always consistent, but it forms a necessary startingpoint for any hypothesis. Ovid himself clearlyprefers to focus attention on the Ars Amatoria,the other half of the indictment, even while affirmingthe significance of his error: "indeed, I cannot defend my offense entirely,but part of it consists in error" (Trist.3.5.51-52: non equidemtotampossum defendereculpam,/ sed partemnostri criminis errorhabet). The many acts of oppression by Tiberius againstwriters during his reign suggest a context in which Ovid's disaster might figure without imagining some intrigue worthy of a Roman tabloid. Would the emperor's granddaughterhave needed, or wanted, the involvement of a 51-year-old poet to prosecute an illicit affairwith a Roman noble? Would she or her husband have involved this same poet in a plot to overthrow the state? What could Ovid have done to assist such a plot? A more plausible context for the indictment of Ovid's poem and his blunder is suggested by the stubborn outspokenness of Titus Labienus and Cornelius Severus. Perhaps a tactless remark or gesture that provoked the ruler to intemperate action. But which ruler? Ovid makes it clear that the judgment was delivered by Augustus, but subsequent events suggest the possibility that it was the growing influence of his adopted son and heir Tiberius that led to these acts of repression in Augustus'slater years. No other Augustanpoet hews so closely to the officialline in mattersof the succession as Ovid. In the Ars, Ovid advises young men to take advantageof the opportunities afforded by a military triumphto meet women and uses the occasion to insert an encomium on Gaius Caesar'sexpedition to the East. Ovid's exhortation to Gaius clearlyreflectshis "official"position as the future emperor

(Ars1.191-194):94
mouebis patris, puer,arma auspiciis annisque et uincesannisauspiciisque patris. talerudimentum tantosubnominedebes, nunciuuenum deindefuturesenum. princeps,
92 It would be a mistaketo take this statementtoo literally, as Williams1994,174 warns:"Abasic misconception,however, is to assume that because Ovid writes curaliquid uidi (103), he literally means that the accidental witnessing of some compromising scene was the cause of his downfall." Ovid illustrateshis own fate by comparing it to Actaeon's, which he representsin the Metamorphoses as an arbitraryexercise of power by Diana. In the two other passages where Ovid laments having seen something (Trist.3.5.49, 3.6.27), he is also alluding to the Metamorphoses.

minuo in referencesto the crime, and laedo is more sparsely attested in this context; cf. TLL8.1:156.70 s.v. maiestas(H. Dietzfelbinger). Cf. also Trist. 1.5.84 (laesi ira dei), 3.6.23 (numinis laesi ira), 4.10.98 (laesiprincipisira). 1993, 198-199 aptly comparesILS 137.4-7, a contemporarydedication to Gaius and Lucius by a centurion: nam quom te, Caesar,temp[us] exposcet deum / caeloque repetessed[em, qua] mundumreges,/ sint hei tua quei sorte te[rrae]huic imperent/ regantque nosfelicibu[s] voteis sueis. Cf. Galasso 1995, 17 on the possibilitythat Ovid was perhaps too faithfulan interpreterof Augustanideology.Millar 1993 paints a compellingportraitof Ovid'sexile poetryas the work of a rejectedloyalist.
94 White

93 The epithet laesi might allude to prosecution under the law of maiestas,but the association should not be pushed. Contemporary references to the law preferred forms of

THEPOETAND THESECONDPRINCE

15

of yourfather,boy, and with the You will makewarwith the authority and the experience Bearing so greata namesuchshould experience andauthority of yourfather youwill conquer. be yourearliest exploit,a princenow of youth,but in the futureof old men.

but also on the timing The reception of theselineswill havedependednot only on the audience in A.D.2, or evenin 8, but havetakenoffenseon a reading of theirdelivery. Augustus couldhardly Tiberius?95 partyline. In thatyear,on October23, The year12 findsOvid stillpromoting the Augustan whichis commemorated celebrated hisPannonian by Ovidin theopening poemof Tiberius triumph, to Germanicus's of Tiberius Ovidpasses accomex Ponto.96 Frompraise hissecondbookof Epistulae for him (2.1.57-64):97 in the campaign of a futuretriumph plishments (2.1.49-52)andprediction
in arces te quoqueuictorem scandere Tarpeias

uidebit equis, laeta coronatis Roma honores maturosque pater natispectabit dedit ipsesuis. gaudia percipiens, quae haec a me,iuuenum belloque togaque iamnunc dicta tibiuaticinante nota. maxime, referam hunc carminibus fortasse triumphum, quoque uita nostris si modo malis. sufficiet
the Tarpeian citadel withgarlanded WithdelightRomeshallsee youtoo ascending steeds,and willfeelthe joythathe hasgivento his own.Even yourfather, as he viewshis son'slatehonors,

from of ouryouth inwarandpeace, mark these words of prophesy me.Perhaps now, greatest I shall if onlymylifeproves to mymisfortunes. equal relate thattriumph alsoin song, Ovid introducesthis predictionon solid precedent.Tibullus,for example,concludesan elegy of a triumph for Messalinus, the son of his patronMessalla.98 On whatwas (2.5)with a prophesy for Germanicus based?Germanicus camebackto RomefromGermany this confident prediction in 12 to assumethe consular in 13 wouldsurelyhavebeen to the Rhinefrontier fasces;his return well beforethe event.99 a triumph, Ovidwason safedynastic ground,and projected By predicting his flattery of Germanicus wouldsurelyhavereadwell in Romewhenthe firstthreebooksof the ex Pontoappeared.100 interpreter of the Epistulae Here,as in theArs,Ovidshowshimselfa faithful succession. No one in the regime the reignof Augustus, Augustan couldhavetakenoffenseduring except,thatis, his actualsuccessor.10'
On the precarious relationship between Tiberius and Gaius, see Syme 1939, 427-430; Levick 1976, 44-46; Bowersock 1984. In this atmosphereof distrust,Tiberius'sdirge on Lucius might even have been an attempt to curry favor with Augustus and Gaius, not unlike that of the unfortunate Clutorius Priscus.
9

100The publication of Pont. 1-3 belongs in the year 13; see Syme 1978, 40-46; Galasso 1995, 13-17.
101 The relationship between Tiberius and Germanicus is still being reassessed in the aftermathof the publication of the TabulaSiarensis and the Senatus consultum de Pisone patre;cf. Woodman and Martin 1996, 67-79 and Gonzalez 1999 among a rich and growing bibliography.The question is important in evaluatingthe Fasti and Ovid's revisions of it in exile, but the subject is beyond the scope of this paper, which focuses on events up to A.D. 8. For recent discussion, see the essays in Herbert-Brown2002, a volume dedicated by the editor to Tiberius Caesar (p. x), "the most important readerOvid ever had."

96

On the date of composition, see Syme 1978, 40-42.

97 For the careerof Germanicus,see PIR21 221; RE 10.435464 "Iulius"no. 138 (W. Kroll);Hurlet 1997, 163-208. 98

Cf. Galasso 1995, 92.

99 Cf. Syme 1978, 63-64.

16

PETER E. KNOX

Immediately afterthe blowfell, Ovidbeganaddressing or appeals to Augustus, eitherdirectly to Augustus's deathdidhe turnto intermediaries. Butneitherat thattimenorsubsequent through Tiberius.102 Instead, whenAugustus hadpassedfromthe scene,he lookedto Germanicus, the son he rededicated his poemon of DrususwhomTiberius hadbeen obligedto adopt.To Germanicus the Romancalendar, the Fasti,whichhe beganto reviseduringhis lastyearsin exile.The second in which ex Pontoopenswith a poem celebrating the triumph of Tiberius, book of the Epistulae is givenprideof place.One explanation in this Germanicus for why Ovid mightignoreTiberius waycouldbe thathe had reasonto expectno help fromhim.103 How to accountfor the repressive of the year8 andhow mightTiberius activity be connected Ovidwas exiledat the end of the yearandbeganhis journey to it?104 to Tomiin December(Trist. 1.11.5).Tiberius had returned to Rome,as was his habit;105 although the exacttimingcannotbe fixed,it is highlylikelythathe wastherewhenOvid'shearing In thatyear, took place.106 too, Mesin oratory; died at a respectable old age.Messalla hadnot onlytutoredTiberius sallaCorvinus he withAugustus was a patronof poetsandOvidwasconnected to his circle.Although his influence wanedas the years wenton, it mightwellhavebeenenoughto shelter Ovidfromaction,especially as long as he kept his nose clean.But he didn't,and Tiberius impelledAugustusto act against at aboutthe sametimeas the booksof Labienus the poet of the ArsAmatoria werebeingburned and CassiusSeverus was shippedoff to Crete.Whatwas it thatTiberius objectedto in the Ars? Not the naughty Nor the fact thatit couldbe readas an exhortation parts,in all likelihood.107 to fromexile of Julia's Afterall,in 20 he allowedthe return thathe adultery. lover,Silanus, asserting had neverreallybeen exiled in the firstplace.Tacituscould not havefailedto note the ironyif Ovidhad diedin exile for playinga partin the sameaffair.108 whichwas of no Ovid'smisfortune, in thiscontext.It is unfortunate heldno interest forTacitus accountin the historical record, thata
See Helzle 2003, 249-350 on the sparseness of references to Tiberius by name in Ovid's poetry. In this context, however, some account should probably be taken of the metricalintractabilityof the name in hexameters and elegy, except in the vocative.
103 The suggestion that Tiberius, not Augustus, was the moving force in Ovid's relegationhas, of course, been made before, most notably by Owen 1924, 31-34, who assumes an overtly political offense; cf. Thibault 1964, 83-85. More recent discussion along these lines can be found in Green 1982, who argues for Ovid's involvement in a "Juliancoup against Augustus (and, a fortiori, Tiberius)." 104 Raaflaub and Samons 1990, 445-446 point out that even on the most negative accounting of the last years of Augustus, the toll of victims-"Severus, two plebeians, and Ovid"-hardly matches the vehemence of Syme's rhetoric about an era of censorshipand repression.Againstthis background, they arguepersuasively"thatthe exile of Ovid was a singularevent, and one of little importto ancientobserversof the period;it gained significancein modern times as evidence of Augustus' attempt to control Roman authors." 105
102

Rome IIETOTOV EVC) KIVPTO; XoVX1TrKLOS KSal XEL[LUVa

Fcio; XaIVL0o! ulTaTEvGav (56.1.1), but this must mean "afterthe onset of winter,"not "afterthe winter,"for at that time Tiberiuswas alreadytravelingback to the front for the final, decisive campaignin Illyricum.The usage is paralleled by expressions such as [lEO'qpfpav "afterdaybreak"(Plat. Phaedr.251e, Hdt. 2.150.4).
107 Nor is it likely that they would have bothered Augustus, who himself dabbled in off-color verse, a specimen of which is preserved in Mart. 11.20; see the fragments and testimonia assembled by Malcovati 1969, 1-5. What did Tiberius think of Ovid's poetry? Cf. Syme 1986, 402: "The clue leads towards the literarytastes of his successor.An exact student of Romanritualand religiousproprieties,Ti. Caesarmaynot have condoned a superficialand frivolous performancelike the Fasti. But the Metamorphosescarried recondite erudition about legendary history,while the Ars Amatoria,bold, clever, and subversive,might prove congenial to a sceptical intelligence, a sardonic sense of humour."

Dio 55.27.5: Ta

TE

-y&p T6V TroXtUOv ICta &6LKEL,KtI

ES

T1V Tr6XLV, r6mTE EGE4OlTa. TrtPdYXOL, O1UVEXW5 106

108Tac. Ann. 3.24. Tacitus's"omission"is often noted, e.g., by Syme 1958, 336. Perhaps an explanation might have been included in the projected work on Augustus and the events of that time: sed aliorum exitus, simul cetera illius aetatis memorabo,si, effectis quae intendi, plures ad curas uitamproduxero.

Dio is our source for the fact that Tiberius returned to

THE POET AND THE SECOND PRINCE

17

large section-four folia-is missing from the manuscriptof Dio's history in the portion that treats the year 8.109We may surmise that if Tiberius objected to the Ars, it might well have been because into it Ovid had inserted a panegyricof young Gaius Caesar,whom Augustus had preferredin the And what of the blunder? It could have been something as trivial as a recitasuccession to him.110 tion at an inopportune time.11'One thinks of Clutorius Priscus, another poet done in by a poem, a dirge on Tiberius'sson, and an error,his performanceof the offensive work to a group of noblewomen. With Tiberius it did not take much.'12Literaryhistorians of this period would do well to consider Ovid's position as a poet still sounding the themes that resonatedwith Augustus in a time that belonged to Tiberius.

109 As Syme 1978, 207 observes, "the scandal of Julia could not have been hushed up and totallyforgotten.The historians whom Cassius Dio followed were still writing within forty yearsof the event. If nothing else, the oral traditionwas still alive."But cf. Syme 1986, 214: "Whetherthe Greek historian would have known or cared about the relegation of a Latin poet is another matter."

"' Perhaps Levick 1976, 336, followed by Birch 1981, 453 n. 35, who speculates about the performance of an "epithalamium" for Julia and Silanus, is on the right track. Cf. Gil 1985, 140-141, who supposes a personal affront or a carmenprobrosum.
112 Cf. Wallace-Hadrill1987,227: "Ovid'sdownfall was his failure to win over Tiberius, not Augustus";Knox 2002.

l1o See Bowersock 1984 on Tiberius during his years in Rhodes and his difficult relationswith Gaius in the East.

18

PETER E. KNOX

Bibliography
ABBREVIATIONS ILS PIR RE RIC InscriptionesLatinaeSelectae,ed. H. Dessau (1892-1916). Prosopographia ImperiiRomani SaeculiI, II, III, 1st ed. E. Klebs and H. Dessau (1897-1898); 2nd ed. E. Groag, A. Stein, et al. (1933-). ed. A. Pauly, G. Wissowa, and W. Kroll der classischenAltertumswissenschaft, Real-Encyclopddie (1893-). Roman ImperialCoinage, Vol.I, ed. C. H. V. Sutherlandand R. A. G. Carson (1984).

WORKS CITED
Barchiesi,A., Il poeta e ilprincipe. Ovidio e il discorsoaugusteo (Rome and Bari 1994). Bardon, H., La litte'rature latine inconnue,vol. 2 (Paris 1956). Bauman,R., The 'crimenmaiestatis'in the Roman Republicand AugustanPrincipate(Johannesburg1967). , Impietasin Principem.A Study of Treasonagainst the Roman Emperorwith SpecialReferenceto the First CenturyA.D. (Munich 1974). Birch, R. A., "The Settlement of 26 June A.D. 4 and Its Aftermath,"ClassicalQuarterly31 (1981) 443-456. Blass, E, Die griechischeBeredsamkeitin dem Zeitraumvon Alexanderbis auf Augustus (Berlin 1865). d'apresSenequele pere (Lille 1902). Bornecque, H., Les delamations et les d&lamateurs Bowersock, G. W., Augustusand the Greek World(Oxford 1965). ,"Augustus and the East: The Problem of the Succession," in CaesarAugustus:Seven Aspects, ed. F. Millar and E. Segal (Oxford 1984) 169-188. Brunt, P. A., "The lex ValeriaCornelia,"Journalof Roman Studies51(1961) 71-83. Cichorius, C., RomischeStudien (Leipzig 1922). Citroni, M., "Produzioneletterariae forme del potere. Gli scrittorilatini nel I secolo dell' impero," in Storia vol. 3: La culturae l'impero,ed. A. Momigliano and A. Schiavone di Roma, vol. 2: L'impero mediterraneo; (Turin1993) 383-490. Latin Poets (Oxford 1993). Courtney,E., The Fragmentary Cramer,E H., "Bookburningand Censorship in Ancient Rome: A Chapter from the History of Freedom of Speech,"Journalof the History of Ideas 6 (1945) 157-196. Crook,J. "PoliticalHistory,30 B.C. to A.D. 14,"in The CambridgeAncient History,2nd ed., vol 10: TheAugustan Empire,43 B.C.-A.D. 69, ed. A. K. Bowman, E. Champlin, and A. Lintott (Cambridge1996) 70-112. Dahlmann, H., CorneliusSeverus(Mainz 1975). des chevalierromainsjulio-claudiens (Rome 1992). Demougin, S., Prosopographie Fairweather, J., Seneca the Elder (Cambridge 1981). Fantham, E., "Ovid, Germanicus and the Composition of the Fasti,"Papersof the LiverpoolLatin Seminar5 (1985) 243-281. ,Roman LiteraryCulture:From Ciceroto Apuleius (Baltimoreand London 1996). Froment, T., "CassiusSeverus: un orateur republicaine sous Auguste," Annales de la Faculte des Lettres de Bordeaux1 (1879) 121-138. Galasso, L., P Ovidii Nasonis Epistularumex Ponto LiberII (Florence 1995). Gil, L., Censuraen el mundo antiguo, 2nd ed. (Madrid 1985). AmericanJournalof Philology 120 (1999) Siarensis," Gonzalez, J., "Tacitus,Germanicus,Piso, and the Tabula 123-142. Goodyear, E R. D., The Annals of Tacitus,Books 1-6, vol. 1:Annals 1.1-54 (Cambridge1972). ,The Annals of Tacitus,Books 1-6, vol. 2: Annals 1.55-81 and Annals 2 (Cambridge1981). derromischen "Tiberiusand Gaius:Their Influenceand Views on Literature," AufstiegundNiedergang Welt 11.32.1 (1984) 603-610.

THEPOETAND THE SECOND PRINCE

19

Studies 8 (1983)94-107. Goold,G. P., "TheCauseof Ovid'sExile,"IllinoisClassical

Green, P., "Carmenet Error:rrpo64xiiL and aLTLa in the Matter of Ovid's Exile," ClassicalAntiquity 1 (1982)

202-220. ArtandImperial Hannestad, N., Roman Policy(Aarhus 1988). undVerfall derRedekunst fiber Heldmann, K.,AntikeTheorien Entwicklung (Munich 1982). ex Ponto,BuchI-II:Kommentar Helzle,M., OvidsEpistulae (Heidelberg 2003). Chiron 3 (1973)245-254. und derersteMajestatsprozess Hennig,D., "T.Labienus defamosis libellis," at ItsBimillennium Fasti: Historical Herbert-Brown, G., ed., Ovid's Readings (Oxford 2002). de l'EIcole et Tihere du Prince sousAuguste de Hurlet,F, Les Collegues (Rome1997).Collection Franqaise Rome227. et rhetoribus" "De on the Textof Suetonius Kaster, R.,Studies grammaticis (Atlanta 1992). World in theRoman G. A., TheArtof Rhetoric Kennedy, (Princeton 1972). undMonarch Kienast, D., Augustus: Prinzeps (Darmstadt 1982). in Herbert-Brown to Augustus," the GreatMother Knox,P.E., "Representing 2002, 155-174. unterTiberius," Historia 4 (1955)72-106. Koestermann, E., "DieMajestatsprozesse thePolitician Levick,B., Tiberius (London1976). Tiberius Lindsay, H., Suetonius: (Bristol 1995). in the Empire andAlienation MacMullen, R., Enemiesof the RomanOrder: Treason, Unrest, (Cambridge, Mass.1966). Caesaris 5th ed. (Turin Malcovati, E., Imperatoris AugustiOperum Fragmenta, 1969). Romanorum Fragmenta, 4th ed. (Turin 1976). , Oratorum R. H., andA. J. Woodman, Tacitus: BookIV (Cambridge Martin, Annals, 1989). Romanorum Meyer, H., Oratorum Fragmenta (Zurich 1842). "Journal RomeSeenfromTomoi, Studies Millar, F, "Ovidandthe Domus Augusta: of Roman 83 (1993)1-17. N. P., "Tiberius American 89 (1968)1-19. Miller, Speaks," Journal of Philology Liber Owen,S. G., P OvidiNasonisTristium Secundus (Oxford1924). to Augustus," in Between K.A., andL.J. Samons, Republic andEmpire: Raaflaub, "Opposition Interpretations ed. K. A. Raaflaub andM. Toher(Berkeley andHis Principate, of Augustus 1990)417-454. R. S., Criminal Trials andCriminal underTiberius Rogers, Legislation (Middletown, Conn.1935). S. H., Imperial Prosecutors andInformants Rutledge, Inquisitions: from Tiberius to Domitian(Londonand New York2001). andLosAngeles1972). Seager, R., Tiberius (Berkeley derromischen Literatur. Zweiter Teil: Die romische Literatur in derZeitderMonarchie Schanz, M., Geschichte bisaufHadrian, 4th ed. revised by C. Hosius(Munich 1935). D. C. A., "TheTrial of Clutorius Greece andRome16 (1969)14-18. Shotter, Priscus," "Journal of Labienus, 28 (193 Syme, R.,"The Allegiance ofRoman Studies 8) 113-125(= E. Badian, ed.,Roman
Papers [Oxford 1979] 1:62-75).

,The Roman Revolution (Oxford1939). 2 vols. (Oxford1958). ,Tacitus, ,"Historyor Biography: The Caseof Tiberius Caesar," Historia 23 (1974)481-496 (= A. Birley, ed.,
Roman Papers [Oxford 1984] 3:937-952).

in Ovid(Oxford1978). History ,The Augustan Aristocracy (Oxford1986). Thibault, J. C., TheMystery of Ovid's Exile(Berkeley 1964). "in HomoViator: forAugustus, Wallace-Hadrill, A., "Time Classical EssaysforJ. Bramble, ed. Michael Whitby, P. Hardie,andMary Whitby(Bristol 1987)221-236. White,P.,Promised Verse (Cambridge, Mass.1993). , "Ovidandthe Augustan in Brill's Milieu," Companion to Ovid,ed. B. W.Boyd(Leiden 2002) 1-25.
Williams, G. D., Banished Voices:Readingsin Ovid'sExile Poetry (Cambridge 1994).

20

PETERE.KNOX

Williams, G. D., "Ovid'sExilic Poetry:Worlds Apart,"in Brill'sCompanionto Ovid, ed. B. W Boyd (Leiden 2002a) 337-381. Companionto Ovid, ed. ,"Ovid's Exile Poetry: Tristia,Epistulaeex Ponto and Ibis," in The Cambridge P. Hardie (Cambridge2002b) 233-245. Williams, G., Changeand Decline:Roman Literaturein the EarlyEmpire(Berkeley 1978). Winterbottom, M., "Quintilianand the VirBonus,"Journalof Roman Studies54 (1964) 90-97. Woodman, A. J., VelleiusPaterculus:The TiberianNarrative(2.94-131) (Cambridge1977). Book 3 (Cambridge1996). Woodman, A. J., and R. H. Martin, TheAnnals of Tacitus: