religion in tacitus' annals

249 Pages·2012·1.89 MB·English

by  Kelly Shannon

RELIGION IN TACITUS’ ANNALS:

HISTORICAL CONSTRUCTIONS OF MEMORY

Kelly E. Shannon

Corpus Christi College, Oxford

A thesis submitted

3 April 2012

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

in the Faculty of Classics, Subfaculty of Languages and Literature,
University of Oxford

1
ABSTRACT

‘Religion in Tacitus’s Annals: Historical Constructions of Memory’

I examine how religion is presented in the Annals of Tacitus, and how it resonates with
and adds complexity to the larger themes of the historian’s narrative. Memory is essential to
understanding the place of religion in the narrative, for Tacitus constructs a picture of a Rome
with ‘religious amnesia.’ The Annals are populated with characters, both emperors and their
subjects, who fail to maintain the traditional religious practices of their forebears by neglecting
prodigies and omens, committing impious murders, and even participating in the destruction of
Rome’s sacred buildings. Alongside this forgetfulness of traditional religious practice runs the
construction of a new memory – that of the deified Augustus – which leads to the veneration of
living emperors in terms appropriate to gods. This religious narrative resonates with and
illuminates Tacitean observations on the nature of power in imperial Rome. Furthermore,
tracing the prominence of religious memory in the text improves our understanding of how
Tacitus thinks about the past, and particularly how he thinks about the role of the historian in
shaping memory for his readers.
I consider various religious categories and their function in Tacitus’ writings, and how
his characters interact with them: calendars (do Tacitus’ Romans preserve or change the
traditional scheduling of festivals?), architecture (what determines the building of or alterations
to temples and other religious monuments?), liturgy (do they worship in the same ways their
ancestors did?), and images (how do they treat cult statues?). I analyze the patterns of behaviour,
both in terms of ritual practice and in how Tacitus’ characters think about and interpret the
supernatural, and consider how Rome’s religious past features in these patterns. The thesis is
structured according to the reigns of individual emperors. Four chapters chart Tiberius’
accession, Germanicus’ death, its aftermath, and Sejanus’ rise to power; one chapter examines
the religious antiquarian Claudius; and the final chapter analyzes Nero’s impieties and their
consequences.

2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements 7
References and Abbreviations 8
Introduction 9
1 What do the gods think? Prodigies and prophecies 9
1.1 Prodigies 9
1.2 Prophecies 12
2 Why do things happen? Fate and fortune 15
2.1 Fatum 15
2.2 Fortuna 18
3 What do humans get wrong? Cult practice, memory,
and decline 21
3.1 Cultic memory and traditional practices 21
3.2 Priestly authority 23
3.3 Imperial cult 24
4 Structure of the argument 27
Chapter 1: Tiberius the Autocrat 29
1.1 Introduction: A test case in imperial authority 29
1.2 Funeral, apotheosis, and recusatio 32
1.2.1 The dubious deification 32
1.2.2 Senatorial responses 34
1.3 The use and abuse of Divus Augustus in maiestas trials 35
1.3.1 The disease’s first stages 35
1.3.2 The disease intensifies 39
1.4 The emergence of religious flattery 40
1.5 When informers and flattery collide: The trial of Libo
Drusus 43
1.5.1 Accusations of magic: A new disease 43
1.5.2 Tiberius’ role 44
1.5.3 Flattery from the Senate: Another disease 45
1.6 Controlling the triumph 46
1.6.1 The triumph’s religious dimension 46
1.6.2 Germanicus and Tiberius 47
1.6.3 Infausti amores 50
3
1.6.4 Relations with the conquered 51
1.7 Conclusions 53
Chapter 2: Germanicus as Religious Interpreter 55
2.1 Introduction 55
2.2 Germanicus’ religious rhetoric in the German mutiny 55
2.3 Teutoburg and Varus: Tiberius and Germanicus in conflict 61
2.4 Gods on our side? Further conflict with Tiberius 68
2.4.1 More rhetoric, dreams, and signs 68
2.4.2 Fortuna, spoils, and conflict with Tiberius 71
2.5 Germanicus abroad 74
2.5.1 Actium, Troy, Colophon: Variability of fortune 74
2.5.2 Ignorance of arcana in Egypt 78
2.6 Germanicus’ death sequence 81
2.6.1 Understanding the workings of fate 81
2.6.2 Responses to the deceased 1: Piso 83
2.6.3 Responses to the deceased 2: Rome 86
2.7 Conclusions 88
Chapter 3: Vengeance and Religious Amnesia in Annals 3 91
3.1 Introduction 91
3.2 Germanicus’ funeral and Piso’s trial 91
3.2.1 Mortal or immortal? 91
3.2.2 Tiberius as god 94
3.2.3 Problematic vengeance 96
3.2.4 Fortuna and the succession 98
3.3 Policing traditions: The flamen Dialis and the
asylum embassies 99
3.3.1 Drusus and Maluginensis: The flamen Dialis and
the godlike Tiberius 99
3.3.2 Temple asylum and the Senate’s role 104
3.4 Augusta, Fetiales, and the Senate 111
3.5 Conclusions 113
Chapter 4: Tiberius, Sejanus, and the Wrath of the Gods 115
4.1 Introduction 115
4.2 Fortuna and the wrath of the gods: Sejanus’ rise 115
4
4.3 Amnesia and Memory: Old and new temples, and the
flamen Dialis 118
4.3.1 Asylum again 118
4.3.2 Emperor worship in Asia 119
4.3.3 Confarreatio 120
4.4 Flattery and its results 122
4.5 Memory-making and Tiberian rejection: The Spanish
temple 124
4.6 The rhetoric of divinity continues 130
4.6.1 Adopting or rejecting Tiberius’ rhetoric 130
4.6.2 The Asian temple revisited: More Greek
competition 132
4.7 Destructive departure: Tiberius retires to Capri 133
4.8 Traditional sacrifice redefined: Titius Sabinus’ trial 135
4.9 Responses to Livia: Religious or secular? 139
4.9.1 Livia’s funeral 139
4.9.2 Tiberius’ torment 141
4.10 Responses to Sejanus: What is faustus? 143
4.11 Tiberius the Traditionalist? 146
4.11.1 Sibylline books 146
4.11.2 Tiberius the astrologer 148
4.12 The phoenix: Impressions and interpretations 150
4.13 Conclusions 152
Interlude: Caligula 154
Chapter 5: Claudius the Antiquarian 158
5.1 Introduction 158
5.2 Dreams and grain: Two problems of Claudius’ principate 158
5.3 Claudius’ antiquarian censorship 160
5.3.1 Introduction 160
5.3.2 Ludi Saeculares: Nero and Britannicus 160
5.3.3 Revival of the haruspices 163
5.4 Claudius, Messalina, and the misuse of ritual 166
5.4.1 Claudius’ sacrifices and Messalina’s wedding 166
5.4.2 Playing Bacchus 168
5.4.3 Narcissus and the Vestals 169
5
5.5 Rise of Agrippina: Flattery, prayer, and expiation 170
5.6 ‘Plus ça change...’: Agrippina’s charges and Claudius’
antiquarianism 173
5.7 The growth of Agrippina’s power 176
5.8 Prodigies from kindly gods? 179
5.9 Gods less kindly: Agrippina’s condemnations and more
prodigies 182
5.9.1 More trials on occult charges 182
5.9.2 Cos and Xenophon the doctor 184
5.9.3 A second prodigy list 184
5.10 Curses, Prayers, and the Transfer of Power 187
5.11 Conclusions 190
Chapter 6: Nero’s Religious Behaviour: A Narrative in Prodigies 192
6.1 Introduction 192
6.2 Britannicus: Nero’s first transgression 192
6.3 The murder of Agrippina 195
6.3.1 Agrippina as transgressor 195
6.3.2 Nero the matricide 198
6.3.3 Flattery and prodigies in response to impiety 202
6.4 When will Nero be punished? The problems of prodigies 203
6.5 Octavia’s death and growing adulatio 206
6.6 Misgivings of people and princeps 210
6.7 Temples, Religion, and the Fire in Rome 212
6.7.1 Livian religious memory 212
6.7.2 Reactions: Failing religious memory 214
6.8 Impiety and Misinterpretation in the Pisonian Conspiracy 217
6.9 Inlusit dehinc Neroni fortuna: The beginning of the end 220
6.10 Religion and the delatores 223
6.11 Conclusions 226

Conclusions 229
Bibliography 233
6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A generous grant from the Clarendon Fund made my enrolment at Oxford possible and
enabled me to focus on my DPhil for three years. Funding for the final year was provided by the
Memoria Romana Project based at Ruhr-Universität Bochum. I thank Prof. Karl Galinsky and
all the attendees at the 2011 workshop for stimulating discussion of the aspects of
Gedächtnisgeschichte that provide some of the theoretical underpinnings for this thesis.
I am also immensely grateful to the many scholars who have given of their time and
insight to help improve my work. The Department of Classics at the University of Virginia has
generously allowed me the use of its library during trips home to Charlottesville, and I have also
benefitted from discussing my work there, particularly with Jon Mikalson and John Miller. In
Oxford, Miriam Griffin, Chris Pelling, Luke Pitcher, and Tim Rood all provided helpful
comments during my Transfer and Confirmation of Status interviews. Tony Woodman and
Chris Pelling have not only provided formative teaching in ancient historiography (particularly
Tacitus), but have also generously offered their thoughts on portions of the thesis, and it has
been much improved by their erudition and care. During my time at Corpus Christi College,
Stephen Harrison has generously provided advice and support, particularly the use of office
space. But I owe the greatest debt of gratitude to my supervisor, Rhiannon Ash. Her careful
readings and helpful comments have contributed immensely to my thoughts on Tacitus. In
addition, her warmth, humour, and kindness helped to ease the strain of bringing a thesis into the
world. I cannot imagine a more supportive supervisor with whom to work.
I am also grateful to many friends and family who have supported me while writing this
thesis. Sarah Harden, Brittany McLaughlin, Bettina Reitz, and Lauren Schwartzman have been
the best of friends and colleagues as we wrote our doctorates together, and I could not have done
this without them. Stephen Sweet has not only improved the introduction with his
characteristically penetrating insight, but also graciously supported me during the trials and
tribulations that attend the completion of a thesis. My parents deserve special thanks for their
loving support throughout my life, and especially while I have been far away in Oxford
completing my doctorate.
7
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS

References with no author or work specified (e.g. ‘11.11.1’) are to Tacitus’ Annals, and
the Histories are referred to with ‘H.’ with no author specified. Occasionally I have included
author/work citations for clarity (e.g. ‘Tac. A. 3.18.4’). References to the minor works of Tacitus
and to all other ancient authors are as in LSJ, OLD, and Lewis and Short. Other abbreviations
are as follows:
BNP Brill’s New Pauly
CAH Cambridge Ancient History
CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum
EJ V. Ehrenberg and A.H.M. Jones, Documents Illustrating the Reigns of
Augustus and Tiberius (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955).
IGR Inscriptiones Graecae ad Res Romanas Pertinentes
ILS Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae
Lewis and Short C.T. Lewis and C. Short, A Latin Dictionary.
LSJ H.G. Liddel and R. Scott, A Greek English Lexicon (revised H.S. Jones).
OLD Oxford Latin Dictionary
Poilloux J. Pouilloux, Recherches sur l’histoire et les cultes de Thasos (Paris: E. de
Boccard, 1954).
RE Real-Encyclopädie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft
SCPP Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre
SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum
Sherk R.K. Sherk, The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian: Translated
Documents of Greece and Rome, vol. 6 (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1988).
Tab. Heb. Tabula Hebana
Tab. Siar. Tabula Siarensis
ThesCRA Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum
TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae

The text of the Annals is that of H. Heubner (Stuttgart: Teubner, corrected edition 1994) except
where specified. Most quotations from modern French, German, and Italian scholars have been
translated into English.
8
INTRODUCTION
Praeter multiplices rerum humanarum casus caelo terraque prodigia et fulminum monitus et
futurorum praesagia, laeta tristia, ambigua manifesta; nec enim umquam atrocioribus populi
Romani cladibus magisve iustis indiciis adprobatum est non esse curae deis securitatem nostram,
esse ultionem (Tacitus, Histories 1.3.2).

The Romans had many ways to tell when their gods were upset, but deciding what had
upset them was usually not straightforward. Understanding their minds was an enterprise shot
through with difficulties and subject to personal interpretation. This impression emerges
overwhelmingly when considering how the Romans interact with their gods in Tacitus’ Annals.
The importance of such religious material in Tacitus’ writings has not always been
acknowledged, but, as this thesis will show, when we do take it seriously, there is much at stake
for how we interpret his narrative.
My analysis will focus on three major areas. First, I shall examine how, when, and where
(both geographically within the Roman empire and narratologically within Tacitus’ account) the
gods indicate their pleasure or displeasure, or what will happen in the future. Secondly, I will
consider to what extent we can understand why Tacitus considers the events of the Annals to
happen. Are they the result of human action, or determined by the gods? Alternatively, are they
related to the more amorphous supernatural categories of fate and fortune? If it is possible to
predict the future, this raises the underlying problem of the role of human agency in determining
the course of events. Finally, I will consider how cult practice evolves over the course of the
Annals, and what effect this has on events and their outcomes. This is related to my first
question, since, as I will argue, Tacitus indicates the gods’ displeasure is aroused when Romans
fail to maintain their relationship with the gods in traditional ways, through a prescribed series
of rites and rituals. Before beginning my analysis, I must further explain and define each of
these three areas of interest.

1 WHAT DO THE GODS THINK? PRODIGIES AND PROPHECIES1
1.1 PRODIGIES
Tacitus’ role as quindecemvir (11.11.1) probably made him particularly interested in
supernatural phenomena, but he was certainly not the first Roman historian to include prodigies
in his works. The Roman historiographical tradition had emphasized portentous occurrences

1 On the distinctions between different types of Roman divination, see Levene 1993, 3, and cf. Cic. Div. 1.3-4 and
34, with Wardle 2006 ad loc.
9
ever since the annales maximi, where the pontifices listed important events of the year,
especially prodigies, recognised by the Senate.2 They are particularly prominent in Livy, who
frequently reports prodigies at the end of a narrative year, not at the point when they actually
occurred; this placement can strip the prodigies of any clear causal force and reduce them to a
merely ‘official’ status.3 Prodigies are fundamentally negative, representing a general feeling of
foreboding rather than predicting a specific event. That, too, means that ‘they did not as a rule
have any content’ in relation to the actions of his narrative.4 Livy then begins his account of the
next annalistic year by describing the expiation of the prodigies, a necessary action for the
year’s new consuls for guaranteeing success in their campaigning.5 It is impossible to decide
definitively whether Livy is sceptical or credulous of his supernatural material. As Levene
points out in relation to Livy 43.13.1-2, which has traditionally been used as evidence by
scholars wishing to prove Livy’s scepticism or belief, the question of whether prodigies are true
predictors of the future is left open: ‘Livy certainly thinks prodigy lists are important – but only
gives reasons in terms of Roman tradition.’6
Tacitus’ attitude to prodigies appears to be similarly ambiguous in a programmatic
passage at H. 1.3.2 (quoted above). By mentioning prodigies in a list of the kinds of military and
political events he will treat, he implies that prodigies will be essential to his history. As often in
Tacitus, the language leaves the exact meaning of the sentence unclear. The abstract noun ultio
is modified by nostra, equivalent to a genitive, but ultio can take an objective genitive of the
person avenged (‘the vengeance taken on us,’ presumably by the gods), or a subjective genitive
of the agent of vengeance (‘the vengeance taken by us’).7 It is unclear whether Tacitus means
that prodigies truly express divine anger, or that they merely mark divine interest in human
affairs without indicating that the gods intend to become involved in events. The idea of
prodigies as divine vengeance for humans’ breaking of the pax deorum8 is left open as one

2 Rawson 1971; Ginsburg 1981, 4. Historians apparently stopped using the annales maximi directly as a source by
the time of Cicero. They may even have disappeared, but remained influential (Frier 1979, 274; Drews 1988).
3 Luce 1977, 83–4; Ginsburg 1981, 33–4.
4 Levene 1993, 4; cf. Liebeschuetz 1979, 8–9.
5 Ginsburg 1981, 29.
6 Levene 1993, 23. Frier 1979, 274 considers this a historiographical rather than a religious point. Levene 1993, 26
detects a ‘clash between belief and scepticism’ in Livy generally, something typical of discussions of religion
throughout Roman literature (cf. Levene 2006a, 421).
7 OLD b. Damon 2003, 97 assumes only the former meaning: ‘nostram is active with securitatem, passive with
ultionem.’ Davies 2004, 158 sees ambiguity in the infinitive esse: does this sentiment apply specifically to the
events of 69, or should it be viewed as a gnomic statement? Yet the words nec enim umquam indicate fairly clearly
that the year 69 is the best example of a general truth expressed in non esse curae deis securitatem nostram, esse
ultionem.
8 MacBain 1982, 7.
10