User:Marymudd/sandbox

LIVIA DRUSILLA REHABILITATED

History has portrayed Livia Drusilla, the third and much beloved wife of Caesar Augustus, as a conniving, Borgia-like criminal.

Popular tradition maintains Livia killed or incapacitated the successors Augustus selected from his own bloodline, and possibly eliminated Augustus himself, to advance the political careers of her sons.

Augustus did not have a son of his own. His marriage to Livia was childless; and by his previous wife Scribonia he had only a single daughter. To her first husband, however, Livia had borne Tiberius Claudius Nero and Nero Claudius Drusus.

Livia was well recognized as a highly perceptive and incisive thinker. Augustus valued her perspectives and opinions about political matters. The bumbling and witlessness with which she allegedly managed the assassinations of Augustus’ chosen successors are utterly foreign to her character, and thereby reveal her murderous reputation as patently false.

MARCUS CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS After his defeat of Mark Antony and Cleopatra had left him sole ruler of Rome, Augustus began to indicate, as successor to his political position, his nephew Marcus Claudius Marcellus—the son of Augustus’ sister Octavia by her first husband. In 29 BCE, during the triumphal procession celebrating his victory over Antony and Cleopatra, Augustus had Marcellus seated upon the right—hence predominant—trace horse of his triumphal chariot. In 25 BCE the Greek propagandist poet Krinagoras celebrated Marcellus’ depositio barbae—the celebration of a youth’s shaving of his first growth of beard. That same year, Marcellus married his cousin, Augustus’ daughter Julia. A year thereafter, Marcellus was made a pontiff. He was inducted into the Senate, where he enjoyed the special honor of sitting among the ex-praetors. Marcellus was also allowed to stand for the magistracies 10 years before attaining the requisite age.

Livia’s elder son Tiberius was the same age as Marcellus; both were born in 42 BCE. At his stepfather’s triumph, Tiberius received the lesser distinction of riding the left trace horse. In 24 BCE he and his brother received only a single senatorial privilege: the right to hold office 5 years early. Livia’s sons duly held the various senatorial offices.

In 23 BCE, a plague ravaged Italy. Augustus nearly succumbed, but recovered. Marcellus was not so fortunate. Suspicion began to spread that Livia had Marcellus murdered because he occupied a position of greater importance in Augustus’ regime than either of her sons. There is absolutely no evidence Marcellus aspired to harm or destroy Livia’s sons, and that to protect them Livia attacked Marcellus.

If Livia presumed Marcellus’ death would prompt Augustus to adopt one or both of her sons and marry one of them to Julia, she certainly miscalculated. The emperor adopted neither stepson, and presented his widowed daughter to his childhood friend and present counselor Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa. Tiberius had married one of Agrippa’s daughters, Drusus a half-sister of Marcellus. Between 11 BCE and 4 CE, Livia failed to strengthen the political prominence of her sons, either by murdering or disabling Augustus and thereby forcing Tiberius’ father-in-law Agrippa into the imperial office, or by eliminating Agrippa and leaving Augustus without a designated successor. She also apparently ignored the certainty, that Augustus would give preference to any son Julia might bear. This was precisely what came about. Julia presented Agrippa with Gaius in 20 BCE, Lucius in 17 BCE, and Marcus in 11 BCE. Augustus adopted Gaius and Lucius, making clear he now intended these grandsons as his successors.

The notion of Livia murdering Marcellus is described only by the third century writer Dio Cassius; and he questions it as spurious. That it is not mentioned by the first-century muckraker Tacitus or the second-century gossipmonger Suetonius, suggests it was not contemporaneous with Livia but emerged retrospectively. GAIUS AND LUCIUS CAESAR From the moments of their births, Augustus aggressively promoted the two elder sons of Julia and Agrippa as his intended heirs to his political position: to Roman citizens, to provincials, and to foreign potentates. Augustus closely supervised his grandsons’ upbringing and education, especially after Agrippa’s death in 12 BCE. The boys frequented their grandfather’s townhouse and country homes. Suetonius describes how they dined and traveled with him. Augustus presented games in their honor. In 6 BCE, Gaius was elected to the executive position of consul—the highest office of the Roman constitution. When Gaius assumed the toga of manhood on his fifteenth birthday the year following, the senate gave him the right to attend its meetings, and conferred him the title princeps iuventutis—principal of youths. Augustus now allowed Gaius to accept election to the consulship but not hold the office until he reached the age of 20. When Lucius reached the age of fifteen three years later, the same honors were bestowed upon him.

For certain the sons of Livia enjoyed privileged careers as integral functionaries of Augustus regime. In addition to holding regular and special civilian magistracies, the brothers exercised extraordinary military commands. Their success in stabilizing the empire’s northern frontier earned both the hereditary honorary sobriquet Germanicus. Nevertheless the positions of Augustus’ stepsons within his political system were clearly and unequivocally subordinate to those of his grandsons.

The death of Agrippa in 12 BCE precipitated a series of events, which removed both of Livia’s sons from their privileged but subordinate status.

•	11 BCE: Augustus compelled Tiberius to divorce his beloved Vipsania, by whom he had a son, and espouse the widowed Julia. When Tiberius assumed command of military operations in the Balkans, Julia accompanied him to his headquarters at Aquileia and there bore him a son who died. •	9 BCE: On September 14, Nero Claudius Drusus was killed in a fall from his horse. His death left Livia with only one son prominent in Roman public affairs. It also dissolved a marital connection between the kindred of Augustus and Livia, since the decedent had been wed to Augustus’ niece. •	7 BCE: On January 1, Tiberius celebrated a triumph for his military successes, and for the second time assumed the executive position of consul—the highest office of the Roman constitution. •	6 BCE: On January 1 Augustus had the senate confer upon Tiberius, for a term of five years, one of the special powers of the emperor—the tribunicia potestas. This action defined Tiberius as regent to Gaius and Lucius. In October, Tiberius abruptly quit Rome for the island of Rhodes. Since did not resign any of his 	powers and left behind his wife and son, his withdrawal was ostensibly temporary. Nevertheless 	he refused to budge for years. •	2 BCE: In summer, Julia was implicated in a plot against her father, the details of which are sketchy. Julia was divorced from Tiberius, convicted of adultery which Augustus had made a capital offense, and sentenced to banishment from Rome. Now Tiberius expressed intent to return to Rome, declaring he had withdrawn so not to appear 	a political rival to Gaius and Lucius. Surely this excuse had validity, for Augustus ordered Tiberius 	to remain on Rhodes indefinitely and forget the family he had so eagerly abandoned. •	1 BCE. Tiberius’ regency was not renewed. Livia prevailed upon Augustus to designate Tiberius imperial legate to Rhodes, to disguise with an official appointment the fact his restriction to the island was forced. The ruse failed. Tiberius was scorned throughout the empire. Statues of him were toppled in Gaul, where he had once served a governor. His former retainer, the vassal king of Cappadocia, broke the rules of patronage by refusing to visit him. Although no court of law had formally sentenced Tiberius to banishment, people everywhere referred to him as exsul—the exile. Suspicion about Tiberius arose regarding messages—perhaps military orders—he allegedly sent to an unspecified number of persons. The communiqués were purportedly ambiguous and intended to incite subversive activities. Some centurions who were obligated to Tiberius for their appointments, were suspected of having delivered the incriminating instructions while returning to active duty from furlough. Augustus notified Tiberius about these suggestions of sedition and misuse of military authority. Tiberius responded by arranging to have a witness present at all his actions and utterances. Tiberius’ keen interest in astrology prompted conjectures about his motives. A man who knew the future could manipulate his own destiny and those of others. The Romans consequently looked with suspicion, upon those who practiced occult arts for non-religious purposes. Dio Cassius claims Tiberius divined the fates of Gaius and Lucius as well as his own. This author also asserts Tiberius’ expectations of becoming emperor prompted him to cultivate an enduring friendship with the noted astrologer Thrasyllus. Augustus sent Gaius on a mission to reassert Roman influence over Armenia and the desert empire of Parthia. In a meeting on the Greek island of Chios, Tiberius tried and failed to promote reassurance he did not aspire to overthrow Gaius or Lucius. •	1 CE: During his Eastern junket, Gaius learned his chief of staff had been deliberately misrepresenting Tiberius as a danger to the prince and his brother. Now with Gaius’ permission, Augustus allowed Tiberius to return to Rome on the strict condition he refrain utterly from participation in political affairs. Lucius died at on August 20, 2 CE at Marseilles, where he had paused while en route to military service in Spain. The nature of the fatal ailment is unknown: sources describe it only as a fever. In the year following, Gaius was stabbed by an Armenian nationalist. While recuperating in Syria, he formally relinquished all his titles and powers to become a private citizen at the end of 3 CE. Augustus tried to dissuade him, finally accepted the resignation, but prevailed upon Gaius to return to Italy. During this journey Gaius died at Limyra in Asia Minor, on February 21, 4 CE.

The deaths of Lucius and Gaius forced Augustus’ hand. Marcus Agrippa Postumus, the late princes’ younger brother, was mentally and emotionally deranged: hence Augustus had not prepared him for a public career. In training for this vocation, and showing great promise, was Livia’s grandson Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus, the son of Tiberius’ late brother. Through his mother Antonia he was Augustus’ grand-nephew and hence a blood relative. Nevertheless Livia convinced her husband to adopt Tiberius as his son and successor and in turn have Tiberius adopt Germanicus. She insisted Germanicus at the age of 17 was still too young and untried to be a viable successor. The succession of Livia’s bloodline over multiple generations was secured.

The Accusations against Livia Livia’s detractors expect us to believe she waited until Lucius was 18 years of age and Gaius 22 before striking them down. What advantage did she expect to gain from this delay? Suppose some unforeseen occurrence obstructed her ability to perpetrate the murders before the time she had chosen to carry them out arrived? As the princes grew older and their renown increased, the more notable their deaths stood to be.

Infant mortality was rampant in ancient Rome. Perhaps one child in 10 survived to adolescence. Consequently a dynastic murder stood less chance of detection if perpetrated on child than on adult. Did the shrewd, intrepid Livia fail to perceive this fact? She had direct, personal interaction with Gaius and Lucius throughout their childhood and youth. Why not strike them in this period of their lives? Then they were close at hand, easily deceived, and too naive to realize they were in danger. If Livia meant to annihilate her sons’ rivals all along, why did she allow them to be born in the first place? Why not arrange to have some unscrupulous doctor or midwife strangle the newborns, or cut their umbilical cords too close? Why not have Julia injured, so she persistently miscarried or failed to conceive at all? For that matter, why not simply eliminate Julia herself? Then she would no longer be available to contract marriage alliances potentially detrimental to the advancement of Tiberius and Drusus.

Did Livia hope to evade suspicion by striking her targets while they were absent from Italy? She could only have done so through long chains of agents, any one of whom might incriminate her by confession or a botched attack on an intended victim. Why did she not obviate this potential for discovery by perpetrating the murders herself, while the princes were in Rome and in immediate contact with her?

That Tiberius remained regent until 1 BCE evokes the detracting notion Livia felt no real urgency to remove Gaius and Lucius prior to this deadline. Tiberius could become emperor no matter where he was, so long as he held the regency. Presumably, then, its expiration caught Livia off guard, if she had to take several years thereafter to arrange the princes’ assassinations. Did Livia not know, or at least suspect, Augustus would neglect to renew Tiberius’ powers? Why did she not devise the murders before the regency ended? Augustus was still the target of conspirators. His advancing years were taking their toll on his persistently weak health. Livia might lose her husband at any time. If he died before she intervened, Tiberius’ chances would be lost forever.

If Augustus did not attribute foul play to Livia, after one of her sons was dead and the other in a state of terrible uncertainty, he would hardly have done so while both stepsons were at the heights of their careers. Livia could have eliminated Gaius and Lucius without fear of incrimination, many years before 4 CE. She had more to lose than gain from delay.

Tacitus vaguely asserts Gaius and Lucius may or may not have been victims of Livia’s treachery. This reference indicates the suspicions against Livia arose as early as the first century. Dio Cassius maintains many Romans presumed Livia was responsible for the deaths of both princes, merely because that of Lucius happened to occur concurrently with Tiberius’ return to Rome from Rhodes.

AUGUSTUS AND AGRIPPA POSTUMUS Augustus’ youngest grandson bore the sobriquet Postumus because he was born after the death of his natural father Agrippa. Mental and emotional instability became apparent at an early age, and precluded Augustus from preparing Agrippa Postumus for a career in statecraft. Augustus adopted Postumus concurrently with Tiberius in 4 CE. Then owing to Postumus increasingly violent temperament, Augustus in 7 CE rescinded the adoption and remanded Postumus to exile, first at Sorrento and subsequently on the pinnacle island of Pianosa near Elba. A story circulated that shortly before his death, Augustus visited Postumus on Pianosa. The emperor’s sole companion was Paullus Fabius Maximus, the husband of Augustus’ first cousin Marcia. Grandfather and grandson were reconciled; and Augustus decided to reinstate Postumus’ adoption and indicate him for the succession in lieu of Tiberius. The journey was kept secret from Livia until Marcia disclosed it. Livia thereupon murdered her husband before he could implement his intended change. Directly after Augustus’ death the centurion on Pianosa received orders to eliminate Postumus.

Quite likely the voyage to Pianosa never took place. Negotiating 200 miles of rough water between Ostia and Pianosa would have presented a formidable challenge for the septuagenarian Augustus, whose health was seriously compromised in the summer of 14 CE. The only evidence for Maximus’ absence from Rome at this time, is the absence of his name from the Acts of the Arval Brethren for May of 14 CE. Suppose for the sake of argument that Augustus did reach Pianosa, and found Postumus healed of his aberrations and in sound mental health. Hardly would the sick and aging emperor have entrusted the system of government he had founded and nurtured, to an utterly inexperienced young man who had never been trained in statecraft, had been living in strict isolation for seven years, and carried a history of mental illness.

The story has numerous versions, none of which verify conclusively that Livia eliminated her husband. Tacitus and Plutarch maintain Augustus was reconciled to Postumus, but express Livia’s reaction in vagaries. Dio cites as gossip the allegation Livia smeared figs on a tree with poison, and then directed Augustus to pick and eat them while selecting uncontaminated fruit for herself. Similarly an epitomist of the fourth century writer Sextus Aurelius Victor attributes this assertion to hearsay.

Tacitus avers Tiberius issued the order for Postumus’ execution out of cowardice, and Livia approved the action out of stepmotherly animosity. Dio wavers that the order may have come from Tiberius, from Livia, or even from Augustus himself. Indeed the trio could very well have been concerned a political party hostile to Tiberius’ succession might rally about Postumus as a figurehead. This very development occurred two years later, when a false Agrippa appeared.

AGRIPPA AND JULIA No ancient writer attributes the death of Agrippa and criminal prosecution of Julia to Livia. That Livia engineered the undoing of either is purely modern conceit.

SOURCES Anonymous, Epitome de Caesaribus Dio Cassius Cocceianus, Romaïka Plutarch, Peri adolexias Gaius Suetonius Tranquilus, De vita Caesarum Publius(?) Cornelius Tacitus, Annales.