Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:17:33.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When did Valerius Maximus write the Dicta et Facta Memorabilia ?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

Jane Bellemore
Jane Bellemore*
Affiliation:
The Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There can be no doubt that Valerius Maximus completed the Dicta et Facta Memorabilia during the reign of Tiberius (A.D. 14-37), although he refers to this emperor only in general terms, as ‘Caesar’, for example, in the preface to the work or, more usually, as princeps. Despite the fact that Tiberius is not named as such, there are references that note his status as ruler of Rome. First, it is made clear by Valerius that Augustus is dead, and, in addition, there are two specific exempla that show that Tiberius is the current princeps.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 23 , 1989 , pp. 67 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for Classical Studies 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Val. Max. 1.7.1, 2; 3.8.8; 7.7.3, 4, 6; 9.15.2.

2 ‘If one of the gods had indicated to these men that some day their blood, the product of a succession of illustrious heroes, would combine to give birth to our emperor who protects us, they would have set aside their feud and formed a close alliance; they would have entrusted our country, which they themselves had saved, into the keeping of their common descendant.‘

3 For the action of Tiberius in 9 B.C. cf. Liv. Per. 142; Pliny N.H. 7.20; Dio 55.1.

4 ‘The example given above embellished antiquity, but an equally distinguished one occurred in our own times, an age which can boast the fraternal bond of the Claudian house — as the family was then — and now this bond is an ornament of the Julian clan.‘

5 R. Syme specifies A.D. 27: cf. History in Ovid (Oxford 1978) 161–2; see alsoEvans, H.B.Publica Carmina: Ovid’s Books From Exile (Lincoln, Nebraska 1983) 154. Google Scholar

6 Val. Max. 2.6.8, 6.1 Praef., 9.11 .ext.4. See Carter, C.J. ‘Valerius Maximus’ in Empire and Aftermath: Silver Latin II, ed. Dorey, T.A. (London 1975) 30–4.Google Scholar The sorts of arguments that draw Carter’s fire are best summarised in the RE article by R. Helm on Valerius Maximus (RE VIII A,I 90–3).

7 In exemplum 1.8.11, Valerius tells us of the preservation of the statue of Quinta Claudia, which was miraculously untouched when the temple in which it was housed, that of the Mater Deum, was gutted by fire. See Tac. Ann. 4.64.

8 The exempla that can be securely dated after 42 B.C.: 6.9.9 from 38 B.C; 1.7.7 from 31 B.C.; 3.8.8, 1.1.19 and 9.15.ext.2 from 30/29 B.C.; 8.7.3 from 28 B.C.; 5.5.3 from 9 B.C.; 1.8.11 from A.D. 3.

Less specific dating: 6.8.5 post 22 B.C.;7.6.6 ca 20 B.C.; 4.7.7 ca 12 B.C. Those exempla from the reign of Augustus: ?8.13.6; ?3.5.3; 9.15.2; 7.7.3; 7.7.4; 7.8.6; 9.15.ext.l; 1.7.2; and those from the reign of Tiberius: ?2.6.8; ?3.5.4; 9.11.ext4; 4.3.3.

We find, therefore, that the eighty odd years from 42 B.C. to A.D. 37 are represented by some twenty-three exempla, whereas, for example, there are over three hundred exempla for the eighty years prior to 42 B.C., over fourteen times the number for the eighty years to follow! In addition, for the years from 52 to 42, eight references for each year is the average.

Roman exempla that I cannot date: Parts of 1.1.1 ; 1.7.8; 2.2.7; Intro, to 2.8.2; Tuccia and Megullia in 4.4.10: 4.5. ext. 1:5.9.4; 6.1.3; 6.1.6; 6.1.10; Carbo Attienus et alii in 6.1.13; 6.3.9; 6.3.10; 6.3.11; 6.3.12; 7.3.10; 7.7.1; 8.1 Absol. 12; 8.2.4; 8.4.1; 8.4.2; 8.7.5; 9.5.ext.4; and 9.12.8.

9 Cic. De Orat. 2.335; cf.Litchfield, H.W. ‘National Exempla Virtutis in Roman Literature’, HSCPh 25 (1914) 1–71.Google Scholar

10 E.g. Tac. Ann. 4.34 ff., where we might suppose that Tacitus is giving us an insight into the feelings of contemporaries of Valerius Maximus. Cf. Tac. Ann. 1.2; Lucan Phars. 7.584 ff., 9.15 ff.; Pers. Sat. 5.84–5; Juv. Sat. 8.243–5; Plut. Brut. 47.4; Florus 2.14, 17; App. B.C. 4.97–8 (alleged speech of Cassius, the parricide).

11 2.6.8; 4.7. ext.2; 5.5.3.

12 It is not the case that there was no interest in events after 42 B.C. Livy in the preface to the Ab Urbe Condita Libri, Praef. 4, writing probably in the 20s, notes the interest of the reading public in contemporary affairs.

13 Suet. Claud. 41.2.

14 Modern scholars have shown that Valerius Maximus quite often uses sources earlier than Cicero and Livy, probably those sources used by these two themselves: cf. C.J. Carter, op.cit. (n.6) 36 ff.; Maslakov, G. ‘Valerius Maximus and Roman Historiography’, ANRW 2.32.1 (Berlin 1984) 457 ff.Google Scholar Note also the automatic assumption of Valerius’ dependence upon Livy made by Syme, R.The Augustan Aristocracy (Oxford 1986) 423.Google Scholar

15 For example, Valerius notes a collection by Pomponius Rufus (4.1.Praef.). Cf. C.J. Carter, op. cit. 36 ff.

16 Unless we count Asinius Pollio, who is actually cited by Valerius in exemplum 8.13.ext.4 but for events which ultimately go back to Herodotus. Asinius, we know, also ended his work on Roman history in 42 B.C.

17 Although the reader may not want to believe the implication of Valerius’ Preface, that he himself intends to scour the great writers for suitable exempla, this is the only firm programme that we have from him. We must accept that this is what he did. Valerius has taken excerpts from Cicero, Livy and their outstanding predecessors for events prior to 42, but he has failed to use almost all the works, even those of Livy which previously he had used extensively, for references to events after 42. If Valerius has excerpted material from collections of the Augustan period, he has certainly used them sparingly. For those who want to believe that Valerius wrote late in the reign of Tiberius, there remains to explain why he did not bring his exempla up to date in any systematic way. Why produce exempla at the rate of eight a year down to 42 then dramatically reduce the rate to something like one for every two or three years after 42?

18 Helm, R.RE VIII A, I 102 ff.;Google Scholarcf. Maslakov, G.ANRW 12.32.1 457 ff.Google Scholar

19 Livv Epit. 121.

20 Goold, G.P. (ed.), Manilius, Astronomica (London 1976) xiii.Google Scholar

21 Those exempla of a clearly different style: 4.7.7. (ref. to 12 B.C.?); the references to Drusus and Antonia (5.5.3, 4.3.3); 1.7.2; the references to Sextus Pompeius (2.6.8, 4.2.ext.2); and 9.11.ext.4.

22 ‘Let us move away from this sadly inexplicable example of an unrelenting friendship and recall one that was happy and straightforward. We shall set aside this friendship in the veritable domicile of happiness it deserves, away from all these references to tears, groans and bloodletting. In this location, it will glitter with love, esteem and superabundant riches. Let us bring back to life the friendships we assume were made sacred by the heroes of the past. Step forward, Decimus Laelius; you too, Marcus Agrippa. It was with discernment and by the grace of god that you, Laelius, chose your special friend from the ranks of mortals; you, Agrippa, chose from the ranks of the gods. Bring back to life with you the whole of your outstanding group, which was loaded down with rewards and praises, because, under your tutelage, these men gave their full and respectful due of true loyalty. A later age, in considering your constancy, your tireless service, your absolute discretion, your unwavering devotion to protect the dignity and welfare of your friends, the guard you stationed over your relationship and, lastly, the abundant fruits of those virtues, will take pains to cultivate the bond of friendship more readily and more scrupulously.’

23 I have dated this exemplum to 12 B.C. assuming that the eulogy of Agrippa best suits the year of his death.

24 ‘ So much love did our leader and father have for his brother Drusus that, when he found out that Drusus was suffering from a serious illness in Germany, he set off immediately from Ticinum, afraid for the life of his brother. He himself had come to meet his parents in Ticinum, where they were congratulating him on his victories. How suddenly and rapidly he traversed the distance from Ticinum to Germany (as if it were in one breath) is shown by the fact that he crossed the Alpes and the Rhine, continually changing horses, travelling day and night, to cover the 200 miles. With Namantabagius alone as his guide, he had to pass through lands only just conquered from the barbarians. Although he was involved in a very great and dangerous task and had only the one companion with him, the sacred spirit of piety, the gods who protect outstanding virtue and Jupiter, the most faithful custodian of the Roman Empire, accompanied him. ‘Similarly, although Drusus was more dead than alive, his morale low and his strength failing, nevertheless, right on the point of dying, he promptly ordered the legions, bearing his standards, to meet his brother and hail Tiberius as a conquering general. Drusus also ordered the general’s tent to be set up on his right-hand side; he wanted Tiberius to have and to hold the trappings of a man of consular standing and a triumphing general. At the very moment that Drusus was acknowledging openly the superior standing of his brother, he died. There is no other example of fraternal love that I can bring to bear in this instance, apart from that of Castor and Pollux.’

25 Cf. note 21.

26 The fact that Livy held back publication of his later history until the death of Augustus and the accession of Tiberius suggests that Livy, at least, expected that Tiberius would usher in an era of literary tolerance unknown in the last few years of the Principate of Augustus.

27 E.g. Tac. Ann. passim.

28 Evans, H.B.Publica Carmina: Ovid’s Books from Exile (Lincoln, Nebraska 1983) 159 ff.Google Scholar

29 1.1. Praef.; 2.9.6; 4.3.3; 8.13 Praef.; 9.11.ext.4.

30 Tac. Ann. l.77.

31 Jory, E.J. ‘The Literary Evidence for the Beginnings of Imperial Pantomime’, BICS 28 (1981) 152.Google Scholar

32 ‘I fully realize the treacherous path I have proceeded down, and so I shall deliberately retrace my steps. I do not want to be in the situation where, if I continue to pick over the pieces of similar sorts of flotsam, I shall find myself involved in an unedify ing series of descriptions.’

33 Tac. Ann. 2.37–8; Suet. Tib. 47.

34 Carter, C.J. ‘Valerius Maximus’ in Empire and Aftermath: Silver Latin II, ed. Dorey, T.A. (London 1975) 31 ff.Google Scholar

35 Val. Max. 2.6.8; cf. 4.7.ext.2.

36 Carter, op.cit. 31 ff.

37 Carter, op.cit. 32; Levick, B.Tiberius the Politician (London 1976) 173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38 Carter, op.cit. 31 and 33.

39 Carter, op.cit. 33.

40 Vell. Pat. 2.129.2, 2.130.3. See also Tac. Ann. 2.27 ff.

41 Swan, P.M.D. ‘A Study of Conspiracies Against Emperors of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty’, PhD. Harvard (1964) 83–93.Google Scholar

42 A parallel for exemplum 9.11.ext.4 can be found in the work of a contemporary of Valerius, Manilius (Astron. 2.599–607). Manilius also appears to give his readers details of a failed conspiracy that similarly had flourished under the guise of amicitia. It too allegedly had threatened national security. According to its position in the text of the Astronomica, this conspiracy must have been an attempt made late in the reign of Augustus, presumably a conspiracy launched against Augustus. It cannot refer to the attempt of Libo Drusus against Tiberius. It is interesting, however, that another writer of the period has made an allusion to a conspiracy that we cannot readily identify. For this reason, the veiled reference by Valerius to a so-called friend of the emperor who violated the bond of friendship in such a despicable fashion may refer to a conspirator we may never be able to identify. We cannot assume automatically that his reference is to Sejanus or even to Libo Drusus for that matter. Without a specific identification, exemplum 9.11.ext.4 cannot be dated.

43 That this is an externum exemplum suggests a non-Roman conspirator, ideal for the likes of Sejanus, the ‘municipal adulterer’ (Tac. Ann. 4.1 ff.). In the text of Valerius there is a parallel for such an externum exemplum in the case of a woman of Mediolanum in court before Augustus (9.15 .ext. 1), but, we should note, Valerius is not always strict in his placement of ‘Roman’ and externa exempla, as we can see, for example, in exemplum 7.7.4, an anecdote dealing with people from Ariminum, which is found among the ‘Roman’ examples, not among the ‘foreign’. Also, although we do not know the birthplace of Sextus Pompeius, we should note that Valerius refers to this man among both the domestic and foreign examples. He cites the Cean adventure of Pompeius among the Roman examples (2.6.8) and expands upon his own friendship with Pompeius among the foreign (4.7.ext.l).

44 B. Levick, op.cit (n.37) 149 ff. Cf. Goodyear, F.R.D.The Annals of Tacitus 2 (Cambridge 1981) ad 2.27–41.1.Google Scholar

45 Suet Tib. 61.1; cf. Levick, op.cit 149.

46 Seneca the Elder, however, records some of the sentiments of Asilius Sabinus who was certainly a contemporary of Tiberius. Sabinus, it seems, may have called the associates of Sejanus, and therefore, by implication, Sejanus himself, parricides (Sen. Contr. 9.4.21). There is, unfortunately, a textual problem in Seneca’s work right at this point, so we cannot be certain that contemporaries considered Sejanus a parricide.

47 Was Sextus Pompeius, the consul of A.D. 14, on the ‘hit-list’ of Libo Drusus? Or is Valerius so vehement against Libo Drusus because of the association of the houses of the Scribonii and the Pompeii, which might have incriminated Pompeius in the designs of Libo Drusus? Did Valerius need to affirm the loyalty of the Pompeii towards the princeps?

48 Tac. Ann. 2.27 ff.

49 ‘The man who attempted to subvert the order of things by abusing the bonds of friendship has been destroyed, lock stock and barrel, by the power of the Roman people. He is paying his penalty in hell, if the gods of the underworld have deigned to receive him there.’

50 See Ehrenberg, V. and Jones, A.H.M.Documents Illustrating the Reigns of Augustus and Tiberius, 2nd edit. (Oxford 1976) 42–3;Google Scholar cf. B. Levick, op.cit. (n.37) 170 ff.

51 Tac. Ann. 2.32.