Cornelia Africana - What a woman! by Elisabeth Storrs

My previous posts about Roman women have centered on victims (Lucretia and Virginia) and villains (Tarpeia and Tullia Minor) whose virtues and vices served as exemplars both good and bad. Today I write about another celebrated woman who was seen as the architype of a Roman Matron. Her name is Cornelia Africana. 

Unlike the other women who were legendary figures, Cornelia’s existence is verifiable through the writing of the Greek historian, Plutarch, who refers to Cornelia in his histories about her two famous sons, the Gracchi Brothers.

Born around 190 BCE, Cornelia Minor was the daughter of Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the famed Roman general and hero of the Second Punic War, and Aemilia Paulla. Her name, ‘Africana’, derives from the cognomen ‘Africanus’ granted to her father after his conquest of the Carthaginians in North Africa. Like Lucretia, Cornelia is seen as an embodiment of civic virtue but she is a far more complex character given her interest in literature and ‘behind the scenes’ influence on politics.

Cornelia and her jewels by Angelica Kauffman, 1785

Cornelia grew up in luxury within an aristocratic household where her father encouraged appreciation of Greek culture and art. She was also schooled in Stoicism, a philosophy which espouses facing the vicissitudes of life with equal fortitude.

At seventeen she was married to the middle-aged Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus in what appears to have been a happy marriage. There is an apocryphal story her husband discovered two snakes in his bed chamber, a male and a female. He consulted a seer who told him that he must kill one and let the other go. If he killed the male, he himself would die, and if he killed the female, Cornelia would perish. Such was his love for his young wife, Tiberius opted to kill the male snake, and he passed away not long afterward.

During their marriage, Cornelia bore twelve children of whom only three survived to adulthood –a daughter, Sempronia (later married to her notorious cousin Scipio Aemilianus to maintain the Scipio dynasty), and two sons, Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus (born nine years apart). She proudly claimed her children as ‘her jewels’.

When her husband died, Cornelia refused the hand of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes of Egypt and chose not to remarry, thereby fulfilling the role of the dutiful ‘univera’ ie a ‘one man woman’ loyal to her husband in life and death. Yet such a choice may well have been a shrewd way to ensure her own independence as well as control over her children’s lives. She already held an esteemed reputation due to her bloodline, and therefore could make choices for herself, a rarity in the ancient world. She thereafter devoted herself to her children’s education. Emulating her famous father’s Graecophilia, she hired the Greek philosopher, Blossius of Cumae, and the rhetorician, Diophanes of Mitylene, as tutors.

The Gracchi Brothers would go on to leave significant marks on Roman history as reformists who proposed the Roman State and wealthy landowners give land to poorer citizens. As a result, Tiberius and Gaius died, a decade apart, in bloody fashion. And this is where the story of Cornelia becomes particularly interesting. Fragments of letters reputedly written to her son, Gaius, were included in the manuscripts of Cornelius Nepos, one of the earliest known Latin biographers. In these fragments, Cornelia is seen as harshly admonishing Gaius for his rebellious actions which had caused unrest in Rome. For he advocated extending citizenship to Latin speaking allies and giving greater freedoms to the plebeians thereby undermining the power of aristocracy.

“No enemy has caused me so much annoyance and trouble as you have because of these events – you who ought, as the only survivor of all the children that I have had in the past, to have taken their place and to have seen to it that I had the least possible anxiety in my old age; you who ought to have wished that all your actions should above all be agreeable to me, and should consider it impious to do anything of great importance contrary to my advice, especially when I have so brief a portion of my life left.” (Nepos, Fragments 1.2)

Cornelia’s voice is forceful and there is an assumption she gives her advice freely and expects it to be heeded. It seems this could be true. In another letter, she advised Gaius not to punish a politician who had been an enemy of his brother which he duly obeyed.

Cornelia, Mother of the Gracchi, by Jules Cavelier

This correspondence was studied decades later by Roman scholars such as Cicero who attributed both Gracchi Brothers’ notable eloquence to their mother’s influence. He also praised the beauty of her writing style. Yet there is supposition the fragmentary letters are not genuine but rather propaganda circulated by an elite faction opposed to the agrarian reforms. Yet, if the letter chastising him is valid, I can understand the passion in her voice. This is allegedly a private epistle to her only living child. By this stage she had buried eleven children. Is it any wonder she would agonise over his politics knowing he might be violently assassinated in a riot as had Tiberius? Sadly, Gaius’ fate was to suicide amid a massacre on the Aventine Hill.

After Gaius’ violent death, Cornelia retired to a villa in Misenum where she received learned men from all over the Roman world to discuss literature and freely share ideas. Plutarch’s description of her here is not of a mother disenchanted with her sons but instead proud of them while displaying the stoicism that enabled her to endure the unbearable loss of all her children and her husband.

‘She had many friends and kept a good table so that she might show hospitality, for she always had Greeks and other literary men about her, and all the reigning kings interchanged gifts with her. She was indeed very agreeable to her visitors and associates when she discoursed with them about the life and habits of her father Africanus, but most admirable when she spoke of her sons without grief or tears, and narrated their achievements and their fate to all enquirers as if she were speaking of men of the early days of Rome.’ (Plutarch’s Life of Tiberius Gracchus 19.2)

After Cornelia died at an advanced age, Rome revered her for embodying Roman virtues and voted for an expensive bronze statue to be erected in her honour. Yet the inscription on the base limits her identity to the men in her life ie her father and sons. (Interestingly, there is no mention of her being the ‘wife of’ Sempronius Gracchus even though he’d been a consul and a triumphing general.) The base still survives and can be seen in the Capitoline Museums in Rome. The inscription reads:

Cornelia Africani f(ilia) | Gracchorum (Daughter of Africanus | Mother of the Gracchi)

The Cornelia Pedestal, Capitoline Museums, Rome

The simplification of Cornelia’s character as an ideal mother and daughter sadly erodes her extraordinary erudition and unusual independence. Thank goodness for Plutarch! Although he writes about Cornelia through the lens of her son’s lives, at least he has given greater context to her than a worn inscription etched in weathered bronze.

Images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Elisabeth Storrs is the author of the A Tale of Ancient Rome series. Her latest release, is Fables & Lies: A World War II Novel about stolen treasure and the Aryan Myth. She is also the founder of the Historical Novel Society Australasia and the ARA Historical Novel Prize. Learn more at www.elisabethstorrs.com

The Greatest Hits of Tacitus - By L.J.Trafford

This month my book, Vitellius’ Feast, was published. It is the last in my four book series that looks at the year 69AD. A year that saw four men compete to become emperor: Galba, Otho, Vitellius and Vespasian. It was Vespasian that triumphed and founded a dynasty that lasted 26 years.

Our best source for all the events of this tumultuous year is Cornelius Tacitus. A teenager in 69AD Tacitus wrote an account of this year, and part of the following one, called The Histories. At the time he was writing, under the Emperor Trajan, many of the men who’d played pivotal roles in 69AD were still alive. He was able to interview them about their experiences. This is unusual in ancient history where many texts are written hundreds of years after the events they describe. It is why The Histories is quite so detailed in its depiction of a very dramatic time.

I’ve carried a copy of Tacitus’ Histories in my handbag the last six years as my constant go to reference book whilst I wrote my series.  It’s done many miles in and out of London, it’s been on holiday with me to the beach, it accompanied me to the York Roman Festival in June this year. It’s looking battered. But loved.

I’ve now finished writing about 69AD. I have no need to carry my Tacitus around. I’m feeling ever so slightly sad about this. So I thought as a farewell to The Histories I’d select my all time favourite bits from that book. A compilation album if you like.

The Greatest Quote of All Time. 

Tacitus’ strength is that he is infuriatingly quotable. “They create a desert and call it peace” being

The author's own copy of Tacitus. 

one of many such dinner party enhancing chit chat. But beating even that into submission is this fabulous line on 69AD‘s first emperor Galba:

“So long as he was a subject he seemed too great a man to be one and by common consent possessed the makings of a ruler – had he never ruled.” 

Ooooo it’s good. And so very versatile. I dug it up for when Gordon Brown succeeded Tony Blair, the election of Theresa May and when Chris Evans presented Top Gear. The key is to pause ominously before concluding in as deep a voice as you can manage, ‘had he never ruled.’


The Marriage Mystery 

Calvia Crispinilla had been Nero’s Mistress of the Wardrobe. She was charged with dressing the emperor's favourite eunuch, Sporus. In the aftermath of Nero’s death she fled to Africa and incited the governor there, Clodius Macer, into a rebellion. When this failed we might have expected Calvia to go the way of other traitors in this era. But she doesn’t. She lives to a ripe old age unmolested by official forces for her past actions. Why?
Tacitus tells us that she secured:

 “Her position by marriage to a senior statesman” 

Intriguingly he doesn’t name the senior statesman. Which makes me suspect it was:

a) Someone very, very important and 

b) Someone still alive at the time of Tacitus’ writing. 

Insert your own scandal here. 

The Difficulties of Organising a Coup

Galba was overthrown on 15th January by Otho. However this coup almost took place four days earlier:

“They were on the point of carrying Otho off to their barracks as he was returning home from a dinner, but were scared off by the uncertainties of night-time, the scattered location of the troops throughout Rome and the difficulty of achieving coordination between men who were the worse for drink.” 

Not unlike those heavy nights after last orders, when someone pipes up “Let’s all go clubbing!” And everyone is well up for it. Until a lone voice says, “I think we’ve all had enough. Let’s get a cab.”

Otho’s difficulties in coup organising continued on the appointed day when he went to meet his troops and discovered there were only twenty three of them. Never mind, Tacitus tells us: 

“Roughly the same number of soldiers joined the party along the way.” 

They made their way to the barracks where the duty officer in charge was somewhat surprised by the appearance of Otho and his army of 46. But decided to go along with it and Galba’s fate was sealed.He was decapitated in the Forum after only 7 months of rule. 

Vitellius’ Two Generals

In a plot twist worthy of a soap opera, after Otho had murdered his way to power, he entered the palace as Emperor and discovered rather a lot of post from Germania. It was not good news. On 1st January – two weeks earlier – Aulus Vitellius had been declared Emperor by the German legions. Two of his generals: Caecina Alienus and Fabius Valens were marching an army some 70,000 men towards Rome. Which I think we can all agree thoroughly serves Otho right.
Caecina and Valens are two of Tacitus’ most finely drawn characters. They are quite, quite brilliant.

Fabius Valens. 

Tactius states that Valens' reason for championing Vitellius was that he felt that Galba was not

Emperor Vitellius

sufficiently grateful for the murder of  Capito, the Governor of Lower Germania. Valens had claimed Capito was bound on insurrection and he had nobly killed him before he could put his dastardly plan into action. 

 “Some people believed in a different story,” says Tacitus. He then outlines an alternative sequence of events whereby Capito is murdered for not going along with a Valens proposed insurrection. Our historian stays very much on the fence but given that Valens a few weeks later proposes *guess what* an insurrection, I’m going to leap off that fence and declare Fabius Valens done it, in the barracks, with a sword.
Tacitus’ portrait of Valens’ is not flattering. Marching his troops down from Germany to Italy he threatened to burn down towns unless they paid him much money. If that was in short supply he was prepared to accept women as a substitute. Valens’ greed continued when he reached Rome and he helped himself to “mansions, parks and the riches of Empire.”

He is classic villain material. At least until his death when Tacitus throws us this little tip-bit:

 “During Nero’s reign he appeared on the music-hall stage at the emperor’s coming-of-age-party, ostensibly at imperial command and then voluntarily. In this, he displayed some skill, but little sense of decorum.” 

You what?? This hard nosed, greedy, cruel Roman general of the last several hundred pages was actually quite a good performer on the stage? Did he sing? Did he dance? I NEED more details. Naturally Tacitus the tease supplies none. Leaving us free to imagine Fabius Valens as quite a nifty little dancer. If only he’d stuck with that talent.

Caecina Alienus 

Vitellius’ other general was, as Tacitus tells us:

“Young, good looking, tall and upstanding, as well as possessing inordinate ambition and some skill in words.” 

Given how meanly mouthed Tacitus is in dishing out the compliments I believe from this we can deduce that Caecina was six foot plus of charming man hunk.
Hilariously, after only being posted in Germania for a short while, Caecina went full native and was never seen without a plaid tunic and *shock* trousers. During his march to Italy he manages to upset a previously entirely peaceable Gallic tribe into war and attempts to besiege the town of Plancentia drunk and without any siege equipment (read more about that disaster here in a previous History Girls piece ).
Caecina is a great example of how to manage the trickiness of 69AD politics. He starts off being obstinately for Galba. This steadfast loyalty to the emperor lasts up to the exact moment Galba discovers handsome, young Caecina has been embezzling funds. With a prosecution looming Caecina suddenly discovers that Vitellius would be a much better emperor. After fighting his way down to Italy on behalf of Vitellius and then enjoying all the splendours that are available to the emperor's close aids, Caecina notes that Vespasian is doing better and switches sides again. 

It’s mercenary, it’s self seeking. But it works. Caecina makes it to the end of 69AD. Unlike loyal nimble on his feet Fabius Valens, who does not. 

Sticks and Stones may break my bones

Having discovered that bit too late that 70,000 men are marching towards him, Otho tried everything in his power to induce Vitellius to relinquish his Imperial claim.  Or as Tacitus puts it:

 “ Otho kept up a lively correspondence with Vitellius. His letters were disfigured by alluring and

Otho lets it all hang out. Credit Ricardo André Frantz

unmanly bribes.” 

Vitellius responds in kind with similar bribery.  And with no deal forthcoming the men: “accused each other of debauchery and wickedness,” says Tacitus and concludes “Here at least they were both right.” Tee hee.

Elsewhere: 

“The Vitellians dismissed their opponents as flabby and idle crew of circus-fans and theatregoers.” Ouch. 

The Othonian retaliation is nowhere near as good, the Vitellians are:

 “A lot of foreigners and aliens.” 

Fail. 

The Worst Assassins in the World 

So far in 69AD we have had the worst organised coup in the world which was abandoned due to everyone being too drunk. We’ve had the worst siege in the world, which failed because everyone was too drunk. Now we move onto the worst assassins in the world. Will it be because of booze again?
No, it’s not even that good. Tacitus sets us up for disappointment:

 “ Assassins were were sent by Otho to Germany, and by Vitellius to the capital. Both parties failed to achieve anything.” 

Vitellius’ agents got lost amongst the throngs of Rome and didn’t get anywhere near the Palace. In the close knit quarters of the German legions a sudden influx of fresh faced Italians asking questions were soon detected.  There is something cheerfully familiar about abject failure. We are so used to picturing the Romans as all conquering war machines that I love these stories of incompetence and general crapness.


Domitian Throws A Strop 

Though Vespasian’s forces defeated those of Vitellius’ in December 69AD, the new emperor himself didn’t reach Rome until the following year. Representing the Flavian Dynasty was Vespasian’s 18

Domitian in the Vatican. Credit Steerpike

year old son Domitian, who just happened to be in Rome at the time. He’d been getting on with whatever 18 year olds did in Rome (wrestling, poetry, moping) when his Dad was suddenly declared Emperor. Vitellius ordered him to be placed under house arrest and here he languished until his father’s army reached the city. 

There is quite a story involving a daring escape, a disguise and high drama. But that’s not the story I want to tell. My story is in the latter part of The Histories that deals with the beginnings of the year 70AD – so the year after the year of the four emperors.

The emperor is in the east and two of Vespasian’s generals were battling it out to be top dog of Rome: Muscianus and Antonius Primus. Muscianus is the governor of Syria who first persuaded Vespasian to go for the Emperor-ship in an early case of FOMO. Primus is the general who took Rome from the Vitellians. So they are both well qualified to be running the place until Vespasian gets there.
And the young prince, Domitian? He's not completely ignored. They give him things to do. He gets to address the Senate. He hands out honours and offices. They let him sign things. At a certain point the denarius drops and poor Domitian suddenly gets it:

 “Domitian realized that his elders despised his youthfulness and ceased to discharge even the slightest official duties he had previously undertaken. “ 

In other words he threw a strop and refused to do anything. Presumably hoping that would show Muscianus and Primus that they needed him. They didn’t. Domitian stropped about in the hope that someone would notice his absence, until his father turned up in Rome. And likely clipped him round the ear.


And so there you have it. My favourite bits from The Histories. I could have chosen lots more, maybe that time the Praetorian Guard stormed through an Imperial dinner party or perhaps the Second Battle of Cremona that was fought entirely in the dark or Caecina's daring ambush plan that resulted in him being ambushed. But that's the beauty of that book. Every line is a gem.

L.J. Trafford is the author of The Four Emperors Series set in 69AD.

The Eunuch That Would Be Empress by L.J. Trafford

The list of the crimes of Nero runs something like this: He had his first wife executed, he had his mother executed, he kicked his pregnant second wife to death , he castrated a boy and made him to pretend to be his dead wife, he cheated in the Olympics, he allegedly fiddled whilst Rome burned, he was responsible for the first persecution of the Christians.

Nero

I want to look at just one of these in detail. I want to look at the castrated boy made to dress as Nero's deceased wife. His name was Sporus.

In 65AD Nero fell into an argument with his wife Poppaea Sabina, in a fit of anger he kicked her in the stomach. She was heavily pregnant at the time and this moment of temper killed her. There were naturally rumours that Poppaea's death was suspicious, she was said to have been poisoned. Nero had ordered his mother Agrippina to be killed, he was surely capable of anything. 

Tacitus, surprisingly for he accounts all other crimes to Nero and sees nothing in the way of positive traits in the emperor, takes issue with this. He does not believe it ,"For Nero wanted children and he loved his wife"

Nero was absolutely devastated by Poppea's death. She was not cremated , as was standard in Rome, but rather embalmed with spices. Her widower spoke at her state funeral, praising her looks and virtues.
And here enters Sporus, or rather here enters a boy that will be known as Sporus.


The Replacement 

Bust said to be of Poppaea who Sporus
greatly resembled

Cassius Dio tells us: 

"Nero missed her so greatly after her death that on learning of a woman who resembled her he at first sent for her and kept her; but later he caused a boy of the freedmen, whom he used to call Sporus, to be castrated, since he, too, resembled Sabina, and he used him in every way like a wife."

Sporus was handed over to Calvia Crispinilla, Nero's mistress of the wardrobe, who took care of the boy and was responsible for turning him into an Empress. 

 "He actually wore his hair parted, young women attended him whenever he went for a walk, he wore women's clothes and was forced to do everything else a woman does in the same way." 

Dio of Prusa

This was no private hobby.

“ This Sporus, decked out with the finery of the empresses and riding in a litter, he took with him to the assizes and marts of Greece, and later at Rome through the Street of the Images,fondly kissing him from time to time. “

Suetonius 

Sporus even accompanied Nero on his tour of Greece where:

 “He married him with all the usual ceremonies, including a dowry and a bridal veil, took him to his house attended by a great throng, and treated him as his wife.” 

Suetonius

But what are we the modern audience to make of this? What is Sporus to Nero? 

Does Nero truly believe Sporus is his dead wife, Poppaea? Is Sporus’ role to keep Nero’s grief at bay by the pretence that Poppaea isn’t dead?

I rather doubt this. Nero wasn’t so wrapped up in grief that he couldn’t see the imperative of remarrying and producing a much needed heir. Shortly after Poppaea's demise he took Statilia Messalina as be his third wife. Indeed she appears on the coinage with her husband, the emperor. Nero was certainly aware that Poppaea was dead. He was not deluded into thinking Sporus actually was Poppaea.
So let’s go back to our question: what was Sporus to Nero? 

The Actress

Coin of Nero and Poppaea

One important point to note is that Sporus was the name Nero gave to the boy.
Sporus in Greek translates as seed /semen or if we take it coarser, spunk. Nero castrates a boy and then names him spunk. How cruelly apt and one that begs the question, was it a joke? Is castrating a boy, dressing him up as your dead wife and parading him round the city Nero’s idea of fun?
There’s a certain theatrical element here that is very Nero; the dressing up, the extravagant public kisses, the wedding.
This wasn’t Nero first ‘unofficial’ wedding. There’s been a previous one to his freedman Doryphorus. Only this time Nero had been the bride not the groom

“He was even married to this man in the same way that he himself had married Sporus, going so far as to imitate the cries and lamentations of a maiden being “ 

Suetonius

This puts the Sporus wedding in another light. A bit of play acting?
It seems likely. Nowhere in any of the accounts of Sporus does it state that Nero loved him. Early in his reign Nero had fallen deeply in love with a freedwomen named Acte. So much so that:

"He all but made his lawful wife, after bribing some ex-consuls to perjure themselves by swearing that she was of royal birth." 

Suetonius

Forbidden by the differences in their class from marrying Nero here is desperately trying to make it legitimate. There is no such attempt in the marriage to Sporus.
This is a faux wedding, a faux marriage.
A bit of sexual role play?

A rather odd scenario described by Suetonius suggests that Nero had incorporated dressing up and role play into his pleasures:

“He at last devised a kind of game, in which, covered with the skin of some wild animal, he was let loose from a cage and attacked the private parts of men and women, who were bound to stakes, and when he had sated his mad lust, was dispatched by his freedman Doryphorus” 

“Dispatched” in this case has a double meaning. This appears to be some sort of role play based on the beast hunts of the arena. The participants being Nero's household slaves and freedmen. Note again Doryphorus is present, Nero’s ‘husband’.

Sporus to Nero was part of an act, an elaborate play with defined roles. Sporus the bride. Nero the husband.
Interestingly both Richard Holland and Edward Champlin in their biographies of Nero are doubtful on whether the relationship between Nero and Sporus was sexual.

Holland states:

"The Emperor may only ever have pretended to have sex with his Poppaea-substitute as part of the protocol sustaining the fantasy." 

Note that in the wedding to Doryphorus Nero 'imitated' the noises of a maiden being flowered. However the wild beast scenario very definitely involves actual consummation, Nero's lusts are said to be sated. 

The Eunuch's Tale

In 68AD Nero's fantasy world came crashing down. A revolt in Gaul had rapidly spread. Galba had been named emperor. Nero was declared an enemy of the state. On the morning of 9th June Nero awoke to find the palace empty. His praetorian prefect Nymphidius Sabinus had convinced his private body guard to desert. Nero fled the city, with him went two of his freedmen and Sporus. They holed up in a villa outside the city, here Nero "would beg Sporus to begin to lament and wail, and now entreat someone to help him take his life by setting him the example" Suetonius
Sporus did not set the example. Nero stabbed himself in the throat, aided by his freedman, the artist was dead.

Emperor Otho, another of Sporus' conquests

What did Nero's death mean for Sporus?
Apparently business as normal, for he pops up almost instantly in the company of Nymphidius Sabinus, the Prefect who had aided Nero's overthrow.

"Whom he had sent for at once, while Nero's body was yet burning on its pyre, and treated as his consort, and addressed by the name of Poppaea), he aspired to the succession of the empire. " 

Plutarch

And then after Sabinus meets a sticky end there is a short pause and here new emperor Otho is described as having 'intimacy with Sporus' Cassius Dio.

There's somewhat of a profession empress air about this. We've been asking what was Sporus to Nero? We've examined what Nero might have felt about the eunuch. At no point have we asked what Sporus' view was.  That Sporus pops up twice later playing exactly the same role suggests that either he was irresistibly gorgeous to both Sabinus and Otho or maybe just maybe he offered himself as 'Empress'. 

Perhaps even if Nero didn't truly buy the fantasy of his reborn Poppaea, Sporus did. When Nero was forced to flee, maybe Sporus accompanied him as a dutiful wife.

After Otho's death in the spring of 69AD Vitellius became emperor. He did not require an empress. He had quite different plans for Sporus.

"It was proposed that Sporus should be brought on to the stage in the rôle of a maiden being ravished" Cassius Dio.

If Sporus was purely the play thing in a succession of emperor's fantasies wouldn't we expect him to play along with this? He'd participated in his public marriage to Nero. He'd paraded about on the arm of Nymphidius Sabinus. But Sporus doesn't. Tragically this is what happens

"He would not endure the shame and committed suicide beforehand." 

Cassius Dio

Was this the final escape for a much abused slave? Or was it to do with the role itself, one as a maiden and not the Empress Sporus felt himself to be? 

There are a lot of perhapses and maybes here. We shall never truly know exactly what role Sporus performed for Nero and others. We shall never know how he felt about this performance. Was he sadly abused slave who could take it no longer or was he the lowly born eunuch enjoying his moment in the light of the distinctly glamorous palace life?

What we do know is that he was, for a brief but wondrous period, Empress in name.


L.J. Trafford is the author of the Four Emperors series of books that features Nero and Sporus. 

Countdown to a Coup by L.J. Trafford

“Once killing starts it is difficult to draw a line.” 

So, said Tacitus about the 15th January 69AD. This was the day that Emperor Galba was overthrown by Otho. Thus giving what would be known as the year of the four emperors a very bloody start.
Galba had only been emperor since June the previous year. He’d only actually been in Rome since October 68AD. He was dead a mere three months later.

What in the Gods name had gone wrong?


Galba


On paper Galba had every credential necessary to be emperor. As Suetonius drily puts it “It would be a long story to give in detail his illustrious ancestors and the honorary inscriptions of the entire race, but I shall give a brief account of his immediate family”

Galba obtained the favour of Augustus’ wife, Livia whose influence promoted and enriched him. Caligula had made him Governor of Upper Germany, Claudius gave him the governorship of Africa and Nero bequeathed him the same position in Spain. He was illustrious enough to be considered a potential match for Nero’s mother Agrippina after she lost her husband.

At seventy-three years old he was experienced beyond all in governing an empire and had the respect of most. When Nero’s reign faltered and ultimately collapsed, Galba seemed to be the perfect step in.

As Tacitus notes “As long as he remained a subject he seemed too great a man to be one, and by common consent possessed the makings of a ruler." And then adds the kicker finish "Had he never ruled.”

Galba was a great man. He might have been a great emperor at the right time; 68/-69 AD was not that time. Right from his entry into Rome Galba wrong -footed in almost every sphere.
In more stable times his keenness to balance the books, to rebuild the machinery of government, to stamp control on the army and the Praetorian Guard might have borne fruit. Certainly, Vespasian tackled many of the same problems with not a little success.
Galba, however, suffered from the record set by his predecessor. Though Nero had not been popular with the Senate and upper classes, he was wildly so with the people of Rome and the provinces. Setting himself up as the antithesis of the popular, charming, glamorous Nero could only leave Galba noticeably lacking in Imperial qualities.

It also exposed him as a hypocrite for as he blanketed Rome in stern austerity his aids: Vinius, Laco and Icelus were busy enriching themselves. It is likely Galba was unaware of such corruption and theft from his supporters. He should have been.
As Galba selectively punished Nero’s closest lackies and attempted to claim back moneys given them, he declined to reward the Praetorian Guard who had made him emperor. It was certainly a grave error but not necessarily fatal, had it not been for the machinations of Marcus Salvius Otho.


Otho

Whereas Galba had chalked up a long, distinguished and incident free career as a public servant, Marcus Salvius Otho had obtained honours by a quite different method. After a wild youth that included that odd Roman adolescent pastime of going about the city at night beating up the populace (a favourite game of both Nero and Caligula, quite why is anyone’s guess) he aspired to a position in Nero’s court.

These youthful hobbies were clearly extravagant and notorious enough that Otho felt he couldn’t rely on a personal recommendation to secure a role at court. Instead he set about seducing an Imperial freedwoman of older years (decrepit as Suetonius not so tactfully puts it). This got him in. And when he was in he soon impressed emperor Nero (immorally according to some, by force of personality and similarity to the emperor by others, possibly a combination of the two by me).

So ‘in’ was Otho that on the infamous day Nero planned to murder his mother, Agrippina, Otho held a banquet for mother and son to deflect suspicion of the grim deed about to be enacted.

This imperial favour was not to last. The two friends comprehensively fell out over a woman: Poppaea Sabina. There was much speculation about the relationship between Otho, Poppaea and Nero. She married Otho, but was this just a favour to the emperor so that he might have easy access to the woman he desired?
Or did Otho genuinely love Poppaea and the emperor stole his wife from him?
Or was there some strange ménage a trois occurring that was wrecked by jealousy?
Whatever the truth, Otho and Poppaea divorced, Nero and Poppaea married and Otho found himself appointed governor of Lusitania (modern day Portugal).

Here Otho surprised all by being a competent Governor. Was this time away from court shenanigans the making of him? Had he finally grown into responsibility?

We shall never know. But what we do know is that Otho was one of the very first governors to side with Galba. His rush to Galba’s side indicates that his old pal Nero was clearly not forgiven for the Poppaea humiliation.



October - December 68AD
Otho travelled with the new emperor, Galba from Spain to Rome. He made a friend of Galba’s aid, Titus Vinius, perhaps using some of the charm that had won him Nero’s friendship. There was talk of cementing this friendship by way of a marriage between Vinius' daughter and Otho. Otho also set about winning the troops round:

 “Whenever he entertained the prince at dinner, he gave a gold piece to each man of the cohort on guard, and put all the soldiers under obligation in one form or another. Chosen arbiter by a man who was at law with his neighbour about a part of his estate, he bought the whole property and presented it to him. As a result there was hardly anyone who did not both think and openly declare that he alone was worthy to succeed to the empire.” Plutarch

Was this what he had wanted from the offset, to be Galba’s heir? Galba was 73, he was a widower (with a taste for sturdy, hard young men) and no children. Galba was no long time buddy of Otho’s; two more different men could scarcely be found. Galba was an old school stern patrician with an extensive career in dutiful public service. Otho was forty years his junior and had gained his governorship of a province by way of scandalously handing over his wife to Nero.
Why would Otho believe Galba would make him his heir?
Yet the sources are unanimous that he did. It is reminiscent of the adventurer spirit that had led to the younger Otho shamelessly to court a much older woman to get to Nero.
Otho was happily prepared to court the entire army, praetorian guard, city populace and Titus Vinius to get to Galba.
But of course this came at a price, a very high price. A price that Otho had no means to pay. Unless he had access to the Imperial treasury that is….



January 69AD
Galba had ignored all pressures from his advisers (Vinius heavily promoting Otho) to name an heir. He was far too busy sorting out the mess Nero had left behind. But then something suddenly changed

Coin of Galba

his mind.

News reached Rome that on 1st January the German legions had declined to offer the traditional new year oath of loyalty to the emperor Galba. They’d instead offered an oath of loyalty to their own governor Vitellius and declared him emperor.

This forced Galba’s hand. He needed to lay down a secured accession to meet this new threat.

The announcement was due to take place on 10th January.


Otho awaited with eagerness.




10th January 69AD
It was a dark and stormy day…. No really it was. Here’s Tacitus “The 10th January was an unpleasantly rainy day, abnormally disturbed by thunder, lightening and a threatening sky.”

Galba summoned his chosen heir and announced his decision.
This new Caesar was not Otho. It was a man named Piso Licinianus.

"As for Piso, those who were present at the scene and observed his voice and countenance were amazed to see him receive so great a favour without great emotion, though not without appreciation; whereas in the outward aspect of Otho there were many clear signs of the bitterness and anger with which he took the disappointment of his hopes." Plutarch

Otho had been so sure of his success, so completely and utterly convinced that Galba would name him as his heir. No doubt all those around him had been saying the same. It was a huge shock to his ego. It was also a huge shock to his creditors who'd been rubbing their hands with glee at getting their money back once Otho was Caesar.
Which put Otho in an awkward position. A position he needed to somehow escape from.

"He flatly declared that he could not keep on his feet unless he became emperor, and that it made no difference whether he fell at the hands of the enemy in battle or at those of his creditors in the Forum."

And so a plot was formed.



11th January 69AD
Otho set his freedman, Onomastus to the task. Working on the good favours Otho had already built up by personal charisma, Onomastus added further coinage and extravagant promises.

So successful was he with the soldiers that they decided they would carry Otho off immediately to their barracks and declare him emperor. But this was abandoned, according to Tacitus, because of the "difficulty of achieving coordination between men who were the worse for drink."

Which begs the question was Onomastus handing out wine skins as bribes?



12-14th January 69AD
We'll assume a lot of plotting was going on. Perhaps some charming. Maybe a bit less heavy drinking.



15th January 69AD
Dawn – Galba and a handful of notable personages, including Otho, were offering a sacrifice at a temple. The priest Umbricius examined the entrails of the sacrificial victim and declared, with a hint of drama I believe we cam assume, that "treachery hung over the emperor's head".
 Umbicius then proceeded to helpfully point to where he felt that treachery might be hanging from. His finger was directed straight at the man standing behind Galba, Otho.

There are no set rules, as far as I'm aware, as to how one ought to behave when accused by a priest in a temple full of people of high treason.
Plutarch says this was how Otho took it:

 "He stood there in confusion and with a countenance changing to all sorts of colours through fear."

There has to be some doubt as to Plutarch's version of this tale. If the prophecy was delivered so unambiguously why wasn't Otho arrested at the scene? Why was he allowed to just leave?

Leave he did, arm in arm with Onomastus to where he had been promised a force to declare him emperor


Morning - There were twenty three soldiers waiting to salute Emperor Otho. Though horrified by their lack of numbers, Otho did not back down. And anyway on the way to the praetorian barracks Tacitus says they picked up roughly the same number of soldiers. So forty six then.

Imperial palace overlooking the Forum

Whilst Otho settled into the Praetorian barracks with his forty six men news was fast reaching Galba on the Palatine Hill that something was afoot. News had also reached the general populace that something exciting was happening. They gathered outside the palace yelling death to the conspirators as if at the games.
Inside the palace Galba was caught between two courses; should he stay in the palace, arm the Imperial slaves and let this conspiracy fizzle out?

Or should they leave the palace and set to stamping it out forcefully before it could spread?


As the debate raged a messenger came with news: Otho had been murdered at the barracks by the Praetorian Guard.

Outside the palace the plebs cheered at this wonderful news. Galba buckled on his breastplate and was carried out on a chair to meet his loyal public and celebtrate the demise of the traitor.



Afternoon  - The thing was Otho wasn't dead. He was very much alive and his agents were the ones

who'd spread this very rumour with express purpose of getting Galba to leave the palace

It was a trap.

As Galba, along with heir Piso, were carried through the sea of spectators Otho ordered his (now many more than forty six) men to rush in. As the armed soldiers poured in panic ensued amongst the civilians and they hastened to evacuate the forum.

Galba found his chair bashed hither and thither. His panicked bearers dropped the chair and legged it. Galba fell to the ground. With the swords above him he bared his throat and told them to strike and be done with it. It was to be his last command as emperor.

Piso ran to safety at the nearby House of the Vestals. He was dragged out and hacked to death.

Both their heads were cut off, impaled and carried in procession about the Forum,

Forum at night

Evening - "The forum was still bloodstained and littered with bodies when Otho was carried through it to the Capitol and from there to the palace." Tacitus

Otho did not long enjoy the position he had so bloodily obtained. On reaching the palace he was given full access to the Imperial correspondence and the news that Vitellius had been made emperor by the German legions and that 70,000 men were marching to Rome to claim this throne.


Had he known that would he ever had enacted the coup of the 15th January? A sensible man would not but Otho I think we can say was an adventurer with a heavy reckless streak. Ultimately that streak was his undoing.

Roman sea-borne trading and the port of Ostia by Alison Morton

The Romans were organised, truly organised in complex ways not seen again until at least the 18th and 19th centuries. Trade was vital to Ancient Rome. The empire cost a vast sum of money to run and trade brought in much of that money. The population of the city of Rome grew to over one million and demand for more and different goods and services to build and maintain a high status lifestyle fuelled trade from further and further afield.

Roman trade routes map (ORBIS, Stanford Uni)

In addition to the 80,000 kilometres of first class roads (as at c. AD 200) built primarily for the movement of military forces, used by the imperial courier service, for government administration and lastly for trade, sea routes crossed the Empire through the Mediterranean from Spain, France and North Africa to Syria, north to Britannia and east to the Black Sea.  They supported trade between a network of coastal cities - Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Carthage. These cities were serviced by a road network permitting trade within their respective hinterlands. River transport was not so widespread as the major pan-European rivers, the Rhine and the Danube, were military frontiers, not the core of the Empire.

The Romans built lighthouses, harbour complexes, docks and warehouses to further sea trade and make it secure. The Roman navy (classis) tried with varying success to keep the Mediterranean Sea safe from pirates. Although the navy was instrumental in the Roman conquest of the Mediterranean basin, it never enjoyed the prestige of the Roman legions. Romans were a primarily land-based people, and relied partially on other nationalities such as Greeks, Phoenicians and the Egyptians, to build and man their ships. Partly because of this, the navy was never wholly embraced by the Roman state, and deemed somewhat "un-Roman". Unlike modern naval forces, the Roman navy even at its height never existed as an autonomous service, but operated as an adjunct to the Roman army.

Trade was facilitated by a single official currency and no complicating customs dues. Trade developed in complexity and reach  as peace became more established and with more trade, prosperity increased. When the Empire disintegrated in the late AD 400s, overseas markets disappeared, supply and distribution routes became unsafe and trade collapsed. The Mediterranean Sea became a dangerous place for merchants as there were no powers to control the activities of pirates who marauded as far north as the English Channel.

What was acquired from where?
The Romans imported a whole variety of materials: beef, corn, glassware, iron, lead, leather, marble, olive oil, perfumes, purple dye, silk, silver, spices, timber, tin and wine. The main trading partners were in Spain, France, the Middle East and North Africa. Britain exported lead, woollen products and tin. In return, it imported from Rome wine, olive oil, pottery and papyrus.

Bireme (Creative Commons)

Ostia, Rome's port
The most important sea port was Ostia situated at the mouth of the River Tiber and only 15 miles from Rome. According to an inscription, the original castrum (military camp) of Ostia was established in the 7th century BC. However, the oldest archaeological remains so far discovered date back to only the 4th century BC when Rome fought several naval actions. The traditional birth date of the Roman navy is set at ca. 311 BC, when, after the conquest of Campania, two new officials, the duumviri navales classis ornandae reficiendaeque causa, were tasked with the maintenance of a fleet. The most ancient buildings currently visible in Ostia are from the 3rd century BC, notably the castrum. From this point on, Ostia starts to play an important role as a military harbour. When Rome installed a new naval magistracy in 267 BC, one of the officials was permanently based in Ostia. Traders and artisans settled in Ostia to make a living in and around the harbour.

Goods could be quickly moved to Rome in barges up the River Tiber after slaves had unloaded and transferred cargo from merchant ships. The Romans built the world's first dual carriageway, via Portuensis, between Rome and Ostia. In 68 BC, the town was sacked by pirates. During the sack, the port was set on fire, the consular war fleet was destroyed, and two prominent senators kidnapped. This attack caused such panic in Rome that Pompey the Great arranged for the tribune Aulus Gabinius to propose a law, the Lex Gabinia, to allow Pompey to raise an army and destroy the pirates. Within a year, the pirates had been defeated.

Development
Ostia was further developed during the first century AD under the influence of Tiberius, who ordered the building of the town's first forum. Temples, bathhouses, a theatre, shops, warehouses, construction yards, workshops, guilds became an integral part of the town.

Ostia Antica forum (author photo)

With the expansion of the physical city and the demands of the population of Rome, traffic on the river became ever more congested. Manoeuvring became impossible on the 100 metre wide river and silting exacerbated the problem. To guarantee a consistent supply of corn for Rome, the emperor Claudius started to build a new harbour (portus) in 42 AD two miles north of Ostia on the northern mouths of the Tiber.

(ostia-antica.org)

Two curving moles were built out into the sea. Between the moles, on an island formed by sinking a large merchantman, a four-storied lighthouse was built. This harbour became silted up and around about 110 AD the emperor Trajan enlarged the new harbour with a huge land-locked inner hexagonal basin still visible today. Its form was hexagonal in order to reduce the erosive forces of the waves. The harbours were connected with the Tiber by canals.

Hexagonal basin (Uni Southampton)

The new Trajanic harbour was described as 'Portus Ostiensis' and the council and magistrates of Ostia also controlled the daily life of Portus. The harbours of Ostia continued their function as a major port as can be seen by traces of the many corn warehouses. This development took business away from Ostia itself which acted principally at that time as a river port only and began its commercial decline. One can only imagine the wrangling between the established guilds, merchants and city councillors in old Ostia and the up and coming traders of the modern, specifically designed new Portus.

Ostia and Portus grew to 50,000 inhabitants in the 2nd century, reaching a peak of some 100,000 inhabitants in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD. Portus was critically important for supplying the ever-growing city of imperial Rome with foodstuffs and materials from across the Mediterranean.  It also acted as both a point of export for supplies and products from the Tiber Valley to the north of Rome, and a major hub for the redistribution of goods from ports across the Mediterranean. It must also have acted as a major conduit for people visiting Rome from around the Mediterranean.

Roman port litho, Seewesen by Walter Muller, 1893

Ostia was to play a major part in the downfall of Rome when Alaric the Goth captured it in AD 409 knowing that this would starve Rome of much needed food. The port began to enter a period of slow decline from the late 5th century AD onwards, although it was the scene of a major struggle between Byzantine and Ostrogothic troops during the Gothic wars (AD 535-553).

Ostia Antica chandler’s floor (author photo)

Today Ostia Antica in an outstanding site for tourists and students alike and noted for the excellent preservation of its ancient buildings, magnificent frescoes and impressive mosaics (http://www.ostia-antica.org).

Portus is the centre of an exciting project led by the University of Southampton (http://www.portusproject.org/). In 2014, a new canal and town wall at Ostia was discovered. In 2016, the Portus Project launched a series of online ‘tours’ https://tour.portusproject.org/en/about  (Click the menu bars at the top right to start).

I shall be following the project with great interest…

–––––––––

Alison Morton is the author of the Roma Nova thriller series.
More at alison-morton.com

LISTENING TO LINDSEY DAVIS by Penny Dolan

One of the speakers I was longing to hear at HARROGATE HISTORY FESTIVAL was author LINDSEY DAVIS. Best known her historical whodunnit series about Marcus Didius Falco, she could not ignore her well-loved hero, but she introduced some other of her titles too. 

Like others at this festival, Lindsey Davis credited Rosemary Sutcliff’s books for inspiring her love of history and writing.  However, in 1989, when she started on her series, she was the only author in England writing about the Romans. Now she knows of thirty-five people who are, today, "writing in the Roman era.” 

Lindsey Davis worked as a civil servant for thirteen years, and suggested that it is good for writers to have a career first. Often those hailed as writers at twenty give up by the time they reached thirty five. Her first success was a romantic novel that, to her surprise, was a runner-up for the 1985 Georgette Heyer Historical Novel prize. 

Having attended, she said, the kind of school that taught her to be a good hard-working girl, Lindsey Davis decided that she would set herself to write a book a year, and to write the kind of book that nobody else was doing. After finishing her first Roman book, THE COURSE OF HONOUR, about Vespasian and his lover Antonia Caenis, she discovered that editors were unwilling to publish it, saying “The Romans were too hard”. The book was not published for another ten years, but she still believes it was her best book. 

Just as importantly, this was the work where she found her writing voice.  She always felt that “Vespasian was a good story” but it was published on the worst day of the year, the second of January, the day where books are buried. Then, needing to find something fast to write about, Lindsey Davis re-used her “Roman background” research, and, as an echo of the world-weary detectives on the radio, she found Falco’s distinctive, first person voice.

She was pleased when THE SILVER PIGS - the first Falco story - was praised for its historical accuracy. Back then she knew no academics. nor could she afford to take public transport to study at a library, so most of her research was from titles found cheaply in second-hand bookshops. 

Lindsey Davis said that she enjoys writing because “you can start off without knowing anything at all about the story”. Those crime serials on the radio had made her fond of baddies and heroes like Philip Marlowe. All she knew when she began was that Falco “was a gumshoe who stops being a gum shoe”. She did the wrong things too: she had no “body” until a third of the way through the plot and she killed off the blonde. By LAST ACT IN PALMYRA, Falco’s character has developed and he is no longer a cheap tec, but has become a spy.

Although the Romans are known for their many gods, she views religion as a fourth generation atheist, and felt that religious practice was, to Falco, mostly a social duty.  

Another advantage of the series, Lindsey Davis found, was that she could go on holiday to interesting places for research. Visiting Italy, she observed that what was important to Italians was “family”, so as the books grew, so did the Falco family, friends and relations until she decided the series was a kind of “The Roman Archers”. She based Falco’s mum, who appears in Book Two, loosely on her own mother but said that she got to know all the rest of the family by “colouring them in as I went along”. She explained that the bankers and publishers were often the bad guys. In fact, in that era, a publisher would be a banker, and Falco himself would need the complication of patronage. 

 The early book was influenced by the fashion for “makeovers” on television, and the archaeological discoveries on and around the site of Fishbourne Roman Palace in Sussex, which Vespasian had probably visited. 

Lindsey Davis’s training in the Ministry of Works helped her spot some likely corruption. The small Roman villa down the coast is made of exactly the same materials so perhaps the project manager was creaming off the stock for his own uses? 

This observation might not be true but, as she said so inspiringly, “we can write the possible”.

The Romans, however, are not "her" period. That is the English Civil War, whose history she followed for her novel: ”REBELS & TRAITORS”. 

Lindsey Davis’s family comes from Birmingham, where swords were made for the Parliamentarians so you can tell her view of the Royalists. 

Again, publishers told her “you can’t sell a story based in Birmingham” to which she replied, “But you can sell a story with rape, pillage and murder”, all though she also added that it was just a love story between two people form different traditions.

Lindsey Davis seemed to have found “MASTER AND GOD” a tough novel to write. 

(At this point, my friend whispered in my ear that it was a terrific book and how cross she was that she'd lost her copy. Now she just has an e-book version. Me, I bought the book!)

The Emperor Domitian is, Lindsey Davis said, so horrible that she had to put in other characters that she could enjoy writing. He is  not some kind of “joke god”, but an obsessive man dangerously full of paranoia. She said that he was understandable once she saw Domitian as the child born and treated as the “spare” heir, at a time when that would make him very vulnerable, even to members of his own family. 

Despite the requests, Lindsey Davis felt that she had written all she could about Falco. He had reached the end of his story and got what he had always needed: money to look after his family, and the uncomfortable burdens that brings. Falco had, she said, become “a pinko liberal who can’t relate to having slaves.” 

So, finally, Lindsey Davis spoke of her newest character, FLAVIA ALBA, who is both Falco’s adopted, British born daughter, and a female investigator, and who appears in THE IDES OF APRIL, a spin-off series. 

Lindsey Davis warned fans that this new series had only the faintest links to Falco. This is Flavia’s book and readers must not expect to find themselves in a Falco story. Flavia has her own set of skills, and as a woman, she has the advantage of being able to enter places where Falco could not. And more besides, I'd imagine.

Besides, in a rather nice twist, Flavia Alba doesn't live in Falco’s villa. Lindsey Davis has settled her in the disreputable Fountains Court, where Falco lived so many years before. If it has anything like the charm of Falco, this will be a treat indeed, and the season of special book gifts has arrived.

Moreover, Lindsey Davis is very proud of the short chapters in THE IDES OF APRIL, especially the chapter that is just one word long: “OUCH!”   

One day, she wants to write a chapter that is just punctuation. Will that chapter be in the sequel, ENEMIES AT DAWN, I wonder? 

SO, FLAVIA ALBA, 

WE WHO ARE ABOUT TO READ, 

SALUTE YOU!

Besides, how can you not be intrigued by an author who has a section of her website designated “RANTS?”  A policy I might adopt!

Thank you for your talk, Lindsay Davis, and I hope that these notes on your session at the Harrogate History Festival ring true, and apologies for any errors or omissions.

Penny Dolan

www.pennydolan.com