Gcse ancient History
|
|  Yüklə 2.8 Mb.
|
3.2 Agrippina’s character Agrippina was undoubtedly ambitious and ruthless and very clever – all of which she had learnt to be living through the reigns of Tiberius and Gaius. She had seen her brothers and mother (possibly even her father) murdered by Tiberius and his agents. She had been married off to the lazy Domitius Ahenobarbus at the early age of 13 to keep her out of the way. She was probably never sure that Tiberius would not decide to make it permanent. The start of her brother’s reign had suggested that she was safe. However, whatever the truth of the plot and her involvement with Aemilius Lepidus she was exiled to the same island as her mother and sisters by Gaius, and they had never left the islands alive. Then she had to live for nearly seven years under the shadow of the increasing power of Messalina, protecting her son from all sorts of threats (including snakes if the story is believed!). She used every weapon she had to stay alive and build up support. The sources are rarely sympathetic to her, but they do recognize she was no ordinary woman. From this point on, the state was changed completely, and everything was subject to the control of a woman; however, this was a woman who was not motivated like Messalina; she did not play with the affairs of Rome like some toy for her personal pleasure. Rome was now enslaved by an almost masculine dominance. In public Agrippina showed a serious, often arrogant face; in private, there was no sign of immorality, unless it helped her in her search for power; she had an enormous desire for money which was excused with the reason that money was a means to power. Tacitus Annals 12.7 There is very little information on how far she was involved in administration or financial policy of the Empire. This is because our sources are largely not interested in such subjects. However, it seems likely that an intelligent and well-educated woman such as Agrippina would be useful to Claudius and would certainly be able to offer advice and help. She had seen enough mis-management of affairs with Gaius to know what not to do. Claudius’ reign is generally thought to have been well managed and well organized. There were no financial crises and the provinces were well governed. It seems fair to assume that Agrippina had taken some credit for this state of affairs. Regardless of her skill in administration and policy, her aim was still to gain and keep power. She was certainly ruthless towards anything which got in her way. She intended Domitius, her son, to marry Octavia, Claudius’ daughter. However she was betrothed to L. Silanus. Tacitus (Annals 12.4) tells how she arranged, with the help of Vitellius, for him to be accused of incest with his sister, Junia Calvina. He was removed from the Senate and forced to give up his post as praetor. On the day of the marriage Silanus committed suicide, and Tacitus makes a point of the irony that the accusation of incest was found amusing when Claudius had just married his niece (Annals 12.8). Almost immediately after this the marriage is arranged between Domitius and Octavia. This was sensible in view of their ages, and was likely to lead to greater things. Pollio spoke to the proposal in almost the same words as Vitellius had used shortly before. So Octavia was engaged to be married, and Domitius, on top of his previous family relationship, became the emperor's prospective son-in-law, and an equal of Britannicus, through the efforts of his mother. She was helped by the cleverness of those who had accused Messalina, and who feared the vengeance of her son. Tacitus Annals 12.9 In addition: However, Agrippina, to be known for acts other than evil ones, got Annaeus Seneca recalled from exile; she also arranged that he had the praetorship. She thought this would please the general public, because of his fame as a writer; she also wanted him to be Domitius’ tutor and to use his advice in her efforts to win power. For Seneca was believed to be loyal to Agrippina because of her kindnesses to him, but equally he hated Claudius because he felt he had been unfairly treated by the emperor. Tacitus Annals 12.8
Images of Agrippina and Claudius on coins Claudius and Agrippina Minor. AD 50/54. Roman Aureus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Agrippina_Minor_with_Claudius.jpg http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/sear5/s1886.html: for examples of presentations of Agrippina and Claudius A.A.Barrett ill. 12: tetradrachma of Agrippina and Claudius 3.3 The Adoption of Domitius by Claudius: the succession to Claudius arranged In AD 50 (Tacitus Annals 12.25) Claudius adopted Domitius into his family. As Tacitus says this strengthened his claim to be the successor over Britannicus who was three years younger. He was now given the name Nero (Tacitus Annals 12.26) and Agrippina was given the title of Augusta. Britannicus is slowly sidelined. Agrippina is now working for the succession of Nero as emperor, and she is ruthless in her ambitions. She takes a number of actions to strengthen her power or improve her standing in Rome and the Empire:
Even so Agrippina did not dare to make a play for supreme power, if Lusius Geta and Rufius Crispinus were not removed from the command of the praetorian cohorts; she believed that they still remembered Messalina and were loyal to her children’s cause. Agrippina, therefore, constantly argued that the cohorts were split by the rivalry between the two, and that, if there was one commander, their discipline would be all the stricter,; so Burrus Afranius was given the command. He had a fine reputation as a soldier, but he was fully aware as to whom he owed his position. Tacitus Annals 12.42
The scheming of Agrippina, however, was pushing Claudius into acts of the most cruel kind. Artifices of the same Agrippina. She destroyed Statilius Taurus, who was famous for his wealth, because she wanted his gardens. She had Tarquinius Priscus bring a charge against him. …he accused him of extortion, but added charges dealing in magic and superstitious practices. Taurus, not wanting to put up with an undeserved dishonour from a lying accuser, committed suicide before the Senate brought in a verdict. Tarquitius was however expelled from the Senate, which the senators did, despite the efforts of Agrippina, because of their hatred of the accuser. Tacitus Annals 12.59 Agrippina, according to the sources, had manipulated Claudius to achieve her own ambitions; she had removed, one way or another, those she felt were either rivals or threats, or were people she simply disliked. She had gained wealth and property in whatever way she could. With Claudius apparently in agreement, she had removed his own son from the succession and replaced him with Nero. One of her most serious rivals was Domitia Lepida because: The bitterest struggle was over who should have the most influence with Nero - his aunt or his mother. Lepida was winning over his young mind by flattery and extravagant gifts; on the other hand, Agrippina, who could give her son an empire but could not tolerate him being emperor, was harsh and menacing. Tacitus Annals 12.64 Domitia is condemned to death, and Narcissus leaves Rome ill, leaving Agrippina a clear field for her final action to ensure her power and influence.
3.4 The death of Claudius The sources tell us clearly that Agrippina murdered Claudius. Although there is some confusion about who poisoned him and when in the sources, they do not doubt that he was murdered and that Agrippina planned it. Both Tacitus and Suetonius tell basically the same story. Tacitus gives more detail about Agrippina’s planning and helpers. He also gives us some insights into her thoughts and feeling. He tells us that she was worried about the type of poison to use incase it was too quick or too slow. Then he describes her terror when the poison does not work at once, and how she reacts quickly and decisively. Suetonius gives us the events but tells us very little about Agrippina’s role other than to suggest she administered the poison herself. They do both agree on the mushroom as the food which contained the poison. Claudius was the first member of his family to be murdered; he may not have been the one to arrange it, but he certainly knew about it. He did not hide the fact because later he used to praise mushrooms [the poison was administered to Claudius in a dish of mushroom], as "the food of the gods," in the words of the Greek proverb. Suetonius Nero 33 Here Suetonius implies that Nero was in on the plot – something neither Tacitus nor Suetonius himself suggest in their accounts. This is typical of the inconsistency in Suetonius’ biographies – he does sometimes change his version depending on which character he is writing about. There is always the possibility that Claudius died a natural death. By October 13th AD 54 Claudius was 64 years old. He was known for his excessive eating and drinking, especially the latter. He was not physically strong; he suffered from some disability. The sources suggest that he was probably under stress from the task of being emperor and the pressures being put on him by Agrippina. They may well have argued about Nero and Britannicus, as the sources suggest he was coming round to the idea of replacing Nero with his own son. However, not just Tacitus and Suetonius, but Josephus, Dio Cassius and Pliny the Elder all tell the same story. This implies a general acceptance of the poisoning version and that Agrippina was to blame.
3.5 The Accession of Nero and Agrippina’s role: the struggle for power Whatever the truth about Claudius’ death, the accession of Nero was clearly the work of Agrippina. She kept the information about Claudius’ death secret until she was sure of the situation. She kept Britannicus out of the public eye and away from the Praetorian Guard. She pretended that Claudius was still alive as long as she could in order to arrange a smooth hand over of power. (Suetonius Claudius 45 and Tacitus Annals 12. 68) Then Nero was presented to the soldiers and despite some mutterings about Britannicus, there was no real opposition from the Guard or the Senate. Nero promises gifts to the soldiers and everything went as smoothly as possible, thanks to Agrippina. Nero made this clear at once in a number of ways.
Even so, publicly every honour was piled on Agrippina. When a tribune, whose customary job it was, asked for the password, he was given “The Best of Mothers”. The Senate also decreed her two lictors, and the office of priestess to Claudius; at the same meeting they decreed a public funeral and deification for Claudius. Tacitus Annals 13.2 He let his mother manage everything, public and private. On the first day of his reign, he even gave to the tribune on guard-duty the password "The Best of Mothers," and afterwards he often rode with her through the streets in her litter. Suetonius Nero 9
However, Agrippina did not appear to think that she was now to take a back seat to her son. Rather she appeared to think that she was now the co-ruler of the empire. The reign had barely got underway when a crime was committed which Tacitus claims was her doing (Annals 13.1) – that was the murder of Junius Silanus, proconsul of Asia. The motive is said to be fear that he might avenge the death of his brother Lucius Silanus. Tacitus also adds that he had a claim to the throne as good as Nero’s. Agrippina appears to be working to ensure Nero is safe as emperor. A freedman was used to do the deed. Narcissus followed soon after, against Nero’s wishes according to Tacitus. There would have been more murders, if Burrus and Seneca had not opposed them. These men were the emperor’s advisors while he was young. They were in agreement (a rare thing for those in power) and, in different ways, they were both effective with Nero. These two men guided the emperor's youth with a unity of purpose seldom found where authority is shared, and though their accomplishments were wholly different, they had equal influence. Burrus had a soldier's interests and serious character; Seneca tutored Nero in public speaking and had a friendly disposition and decency. They helped each other so that they could more easily direct the young emperor towards acceptable pleasures, if he rejected decency and goodness. For both of them there was the struggle against Agrippina; she was burning with all the desire of her criminally-gained power. Tacitus Annals 13.2 It seems there was something of a power struggle going on within the palace for control of Nero. She had arranged that meetings were held in the palace so that she could listen in from behind a curtain. Tacitus tells us she opposed an attempt by Nero to change a law of Claudius. Her desire to share power is shown also by an incident early in the reign. When envoys from Armenia were having an audience with Nero, she was getting ready to walk up onto the raised area and sit next to him. She would have done so, if Seneca, while everyone stood there amazed, had not told Nero to go down and greet his mother as she came up. This display of a son’s concern prevented the scandal. Tacitus Annals 13.5 3.6 Seneca and Burrus: Nero’s watchers Agrippina had seen to the appointment of Lucius Annaeus Seneca as Nero’s tutor soon after her marriage to Claudius. He had been exiled by Claudius early in his reign but she arranged his recall. It has already been suggested that she and he were lovers. He was a major literary figure and philosopher, writing tragedies and Moral Letters, as well as satire in the form of a parody of the deification of Claudius. He wrote one treatise, on Clemency, specifically to Nero urging the virtue of mercy as one of the key qualities of an emperor. It is assumed that he wrote Nero’s speeches. Tacitus (Annals 12.58) tells of two occasions when Nero delivered speeches, once for Ilium and once for Bononia at the age of 16 (also recorded in Suetonius Nero 7). One of Seneca’s duties was to train him in the writing and delivering of speeches in public (rhetoric). His speech at the funeral of Claudius was written by Seneca according to Tacitus (Annals 13.3) although Nero was probably not incapable since he had some ambitions as a writer. Suetonius (Nero 52) gives us some evidence of this and of Seneca’s influence. Until at least AD 59 and probably AD 62 he remained Nero’s principal advisor, although his influence lessened. Along with Burrus, he helped Nero to step clear of his mother’s influence. he controlled her early efforts to remove rivals and threats and he prevented the scandal of the Armenian envoys. In addition he introduced to Nero the freedwoman Acte as a means of lessening Nero’s interest in his mother (Tacitus Annals 13.12-13). Seneca retired in AD 62 shortly after the death of Burrus, although he was still advising Nero as late as AD 64. In AD 65 he was caught up in the plot of Piso. Whether he was involved in this plot to overthrow Nero is not known for certain. According to Tacitus, Nero took the opportunity to get rid of Seneca at this time, and so he was forced to commit suicide. (Tacitus Annals 15. 60-66). Sextus Afranius Burrus Praetorian prefect. His appointment had been arranged by Agrippina (Tacitus Annals 12.42) in AD 51. He showed his worth to Agrippina in AD 54 when he ensured that the guard was loyal to Nero on his accession. He was clearly important to Nero’s security and to the stable nature of his government in the early years. Seneca too tried to lessen Nero’s mother’s influence and power. In AD 55 he came under suspicion of plotting with Agrippina to overthrow Nero, although Tacitus makes it clear that the whole accusation was probably false, made up by Silana who had fallen out with Agrippina over a man called Titus Sextus Africanus. (Tacitus Annals 13.19). Tacitus says that there was one story that Seneca saved Burrus, but that other authors say that Burrus was not suspected. However, Burrus was given the job of interrogating Agrippina.who defended herself well enough to get her accusers punished. (Tacitus Annals 13.21) Tacitus and Suetonius both suggest that Nero poisoned him in AD 62. Neither of them appear to have been party to the plan to kill Agrippina. Suetonius does not mention them at all in connection with the plan nor when she is killed. They only appear in Tacitus’ version once the plan has failed and Nero is terrified about what Agrippina would do. He asked what defence he had against this, if Burrus and Seneca did not have any suggestion. He had summoned both of them at once, although it is uncertain whether they knew about it beforehand. Both were silent for along time to avoid dissuading him without success, or they believed that matters had reached the point that Nero was bound to die if Agrippina were not dealt with first. Seneca was quick enough to respond first and looked back at Burrus, as though asking if the soldiers ought to be ordered to murder her. Burrus replied that the praetorians were attached to the household of the Caesars, and, in memory of Germanicus, would not dare do anything so terrible against his daughter. Tacitus Annals 14.7 In this account they do nothing, leaving Nero to solve the problem himself! Seneca does write a speech in defence of his action for which Tacitus condemns him in these words: ‘So people did not criticise Nero, who had passed all criticism by this savage crime, but Seneca because he wrote such a confession in this speech.’ (Annals 14.11) Nero became emperor within two months of his seventeenth birthday with little experience of government and the use of power. It is not surprising that he relied heavily on two experienced and intelligent men, and allowed them to weaken his mother’s control of him. As a seventeen year old he might well prefer to enjoy the pleasures of his role than the burdens. He might also want to get away from the controlling influence of his mother as he became older. Seneca and Burrus were only too willing to encourage him in this.
|