|
Saturday, July 31, 2010 - 1:01 PM
The beginning of the emperor's letter seemed very striking. It
opened thus: "May all the gods and goddesses destroy
me more miserably
than I feel myself to be daily perishing, if I know at
know at this moment
what to write to you, Senators, how to write it, or
what, in short, not
to write." So completely had his crimes and infamies
recoiled, as a penalty,
on himself. With profound meaning was it often
affirmed by the greatest
teacher of philosophy that, could the minds of tyrants
be laid bare, there
would be seen gashes and wounds; for, as the body is
lacerated by scourging,
so is the spirit by brutality, by lust and by evil
thoughts. Assuredly
Tiberius was not saved by his elevation or his
solitude from having to
confess the anguish of his heart and his
self-inflicted
punishment.
Authority was then given to the Senate to
decide the case of Caecilianus,
one of its members, the chief witness against Cotta,
and it was agreed
that the same penalty should be inflicted as on
Aruseius and Sanquinius,
the accusers of Lucius Arruntius. Nothing ever
happened to Cotta more to
his distinction. Of noble birth, but beggared by
extravagance and infamous
for his excesses, he was now by dignity of his
revenge, raised to a level
with the stainless virtues of Arruntius.
Quintus Servaeus and Minucius Thermus were
next arraigned. Servaeus
was an ex-praetor, and had formerly been a companion
of Germanicus; Minucius
was of equestrian rank, and both had enjoyed, though
discreetly, the friendship
of Sejanus. Hence they were the more pitied. Tiberius,
on the contrary,
denounced them as foremost in crime, and bade Caius
Cestius, the elder,
tell the Senate what he had communicated to the
emperor by letter. Cestius
undertook the prosecution. And this was the most
dreadful feature of the
age, that leading members of the Senate, some openly,
some secretly employed
themselves in the very lowest work of the informer.
One could not distinguish
between aliens and kinsfolk, between friends and
strangers, or say what
was quite recent, or what half-forgotten from lapse of
time. People were
incriminated for some casual remark in the forum or at
the dinner-table,
for every one was impatient to be the first to mark
his victim, some to
screen themselves, most from being, as it were,
infected with the contagion
of the malady.
Minucius and Servaeus, on being condemned,
went over to the prosecution,
and then Julius Africanus with Seius Quadratus were
dragged into the same
ruin. Africanus was from the Santones, one of the
states of Gaul; the origin
of Quadratus I have not ascertained. Many authors, I
am well aware, have
passed over the perils and punishments of a host of
persons, sickened by
the multiplicity of them, or fearing that what they
had themselves found
wearisome and saddening would be equally fatiguing to
their readers. For
myself, I have lighted on many facts worth knowing,
though other writers
have not recorded them.
A Roman knight, Marcus Terentius, at the
crisis when all others
had hypocritically repudiated the friendship of
Sejanus, dared, when impeached
on that ground, to cling to it by the following avowal
to the Senate: "In
my position it is perhaps less to my advantage to
acknowledge than to deny
the charge. Still, whatever is to be the issue of the
matter, I shall admit
that I was the friend of Sejanus, that I anxiously
sought to be such, and
was delighted when I was successful. I had seen him
his father's colleague
in the command of the praetorian cohorts, and
subsequently combining the
duties of civil and military life. His kinsfolk and
connections were loaded
with honours; intimacy with Sejanus was in every case a
powerful recommendation
to the emperor's friendship. Those, on the contrary,
whom he hated, had
to struggle with danger and humiliation. I take no
individual as an instance.
All of us who had no part in his last design, I mean
to defend at the peril
of myself alone. It was really not Sejanus of
Vulsinii, it was a member
of the Claudian and Julian houses, in which he had
taken a position by
his marriage-alliance, it was your son-in-law, Caesar,
your partner in
the consulship, the man who administered your
political functions, whom
we courted. It is not for us to criticise one whom you
may raise above
all others, or your motives for so doing. Heaven has
intrusted you with
the supreme decision of affairs, and for us is left
the glory of obedience.
And, again, we see what takes place before our eyes,
who it is on whom
you bestow riches and honours, who are the most
powerful to help or to
injure. That Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire was such, no one will deny. To
explore the prince's
secret thoughts, or any of his hidden plans, is a
forbidden, a dangerous
thing, nor does it follow that one could reach them.
|