In the opening sentence P. states ‘Modern scholars mostly treat the Principate established by Augustus as benign’. I will leave readers of the book to make of that what they will. P. disagrees, aiming to establish that the reality was a res publica challenged by political opposition – including M. Scribonius Drusus Libo, a distant relative of Augustus. He was placed on trial for treason and this study examines both sides struggling for control of Rome – Tiberius against the supporters of Augustus' grandsons; the Principate against those wanting to restore the Republic.
The book is a revised version of a Ph.D. thesis, but takes into account new scholarship published since its completion. P. divides the study into twelve chapters: the first two deal with Libo, and are followed by an extensive account of events leading up to Tiberius' accession and beyond.
The opening chapter contains a reminder that the sources are sketchy at best, which would disrupt lesser projects; ‘Evidence of what happened to M. Scribonius Drusus Libo is frustratingly superficial’ (p. 5). Previous scholarship is divided into those who think Drusus Libo was an important conspirator and those who do not (p. 8 n. 18). It is interesting that the two sides split roughly chronologically into pre and post WWII. P., in the former grouping, sets out to demonstrate that there was more to the conspiracy, charges, trial and suicide of Libo than has previously been believed, namely ‘the nature of the charge; Drusus Libo's inability to find an advocate; the continuation of the investigation after death; placing Drusus Libo into custody rather than encouraging voluntary exile; the implementation of damnatio memoriae; marking 13th September a holiday; and the invocation of Concord’ (p. 9). P. boldly states that these elements represent ‘a profound rupture in Rome's socio-political fabric’, going on to examine the trial and its sorry aftermath. He suggests that because of the lack of hard evidence ‘Senators could only infer intent from Junius’ evidence' (p. 26) and that ‘the true nature of the charge which was intent to cause revolution was interpreted under the lex maiestas’ (pp. 26–7). P. painstakingly sets out his case in ‘The Treatment of an Enemy’, providing a logical and coherent version of what might have occurred in handling the conspiracy.
In Chapter 3 the adoption of Agrippa Postumus is explored, including his tricky character. It seems risky to employ Augustus' handling of Claudius' career as a potential model for the adoption and offices of Agrippa Postumus – this requires a separate discussion (pp. 51–2). There is a plausible reconstruction of events occurring with Gaius and M. Lollius in the East and the matter of a HS 400,000 payment. Chapter 4, ‘Growing Pains’, charts the official rise and subsequent marginalisation of Agrippa Postumus. This requires a steady hand to guide the reader through the complex Julio-Claudian family relations. P. succeeds, with only minor inconsistencies in the naming of the protagonists.
Chapter 5 focuses on a testing predicament in Rome in a.d. 5, ‘antecedents of a crisis that would burden the years immediately following’ (p. 76): the rise in grain prices, followed by famine and disease; and the army's financial demands. P. maintains that the floods, famine, fires and emergency decrees of Augustus' reign led to anxiety in Rome and the ringleaders of protest circulating defamatory pamphlets. He argues that Agrippa Postumus was Tiberius' rival in a.d. 6/7, but when the former was forced out it showed Augustus now favoured Livia's descendants over Agrippa's.
In ‘Augustus’ Final Arrangements', P. investigates the management of Agrippa Postumus: the confinement in Surrentum; no money; and his placing under guard at home. Agrippa Postumus became a political embarrassment and P. concludes that a ‘military guard indicates a political dimension, but our evidence cites only family quarrels’ (p. 105). However, in this case, are they not the same thing?
The next chapter deals with the exiles of the younger Julia, D. Junius Silanus and Ovid. P. asserts that the representation of Julia as a conspirator is wrong – her ‘crime’ was really a lack of chastity, not conspiracy. Ovid was exiled for an error and not an illegal act, because he probably witnessed something he should not have, something that ‘affected Augustus directly’ (p. 128).
In ‘Novus Principatus: an Imperial Co-operative’, P. points to low-level conspiracies being uncovered in Rome, and the circulation of defamatory pamphlets during a period of Augustus' failing health in a.d. 11, but he takes issue with Augustus ‘entrusting’ the Senate to Tiberius whilst Germanicus was ‘entrusted’ to its care. There is opaqueness in using the example of Germanicus' sons who were commended to the Senate (Nero Caesar in a.d. 20 and Drusus Caesar in a.d. 23) after the death of their father, as they were placed under the care of Drusus and only after his death were they under the Senate's care.
‘The Hesitation of Tiberius’ rejects claims of dissimulatio and moderatio surrounding Tiberius' reluctance to be princeps. P. ascribes this hesitancy to a worry about the present dangers from conspiracies (Clemens and Drusus Libo) and army revolts.
Chapter 10 examines the death of Agrippa Postumus, and the following chapter explores ‘Germanicus: Successor to Tiberius or Augustus?’ P. analyses the mutinies in Germany and assuredly handles the main questions that arise, but here some of the criticism of previous scholarship is too literal.
The final chapter, ‘Alternative Government’, is an apt slogan; it covers the arraignment of Libo in a detailed section on the discovery of the plot and his prosecution (in a.d 16). Seager describes the threat that Libo posed, ‘for descendants of the old nobility were peculiarly vulnerable to charges of conspiracy against the new order – especially when related, like Libo, to the imperial house’ (Tiberius [2005], p. 74). Tiberius took two years from discovery to prosecution so one can ponder anew on the lack of anxiety and who was really in control of the situation.
The extensive provision of sources is very welcome but the use of ellipses, Suet. Tib. 25.1–3 for example, can change the quotation. The concluding chapter draws together the preceding ones well, but for all Libo's standing ‘We can only speculate on Drusus Libo's part in the conspiracy’ (p. 212). P. argues pace Levick that it is unlikely that Libo would be nominated princeps because Tiberius and Drusus presented formidable obstacles in Rome (and the even more formidable Germanicus commanded the legions in Germany). It seems that reconstituting the Republic, no matter how attractive to the conspirators, did not come to pass because, unlikely as it may seem, Tiberius made the right moves.
The book's closing sentence, ‘A better understanding of the historical works of the first century ad is essential’ (p. 217), implies there is more to be done than is presented here, and it highlights one of the weaknesses of the analyses in that there are no pointers or contextualising regarding the sources themselves. There are useful appendices, bibliography and three stemmata charting Libo's connections. One gripe is the use of Tiberius Claudius Drusus for Claudius in one stemma, which is just confusing. The index of sources is a comprehensive, excellent resource.
P. claims to have produced a new model for understanding Tiberius' principate, ‘one which stands in contrast to those hitherto produced’ (p. 215); however, one should not treat this book as the last word on the subject. Rather it should be read alongside Seager (Tiberius [2005]), Levick (Tiberius the Politician [1999]) and the relevant chapters in my The Julio-Claudian Succession (2012) to allow readers to draw their own conclusions. Overall, as a study of how Tiberius suppressed opposition this is a worthwhile addition to the scholarship on the early first century.
