L
TACITUS ON HOST AGE-TAKING AND HEROISM
9
TACITUS ON HOSTAGE-TAKING AND HEROISM
A
t the time when TacitUs was writing the Annals, the theme (){;
<heRomanized,benignlysubsemen~q_í-6lial hos..ge"""',
...,
deeply ingrained in Roman literatUre. It could be found in multiple authors regardless ofliterary genre., as writers ofthe Republic and eatly Principate usedit as one of the explanati()us ror Rome's prodigious success at the dawn ofits empire. As we have seel! repeatedly, hostage.. taking appeared in new legends for Rome's foundation and accounted foe triumphs over one impressive enemy aner another. The fact th:tt Polybius had done much to debufik: the stereotype of fue quislin: . hostage in his own case in order to gain some amount of credibili with his audienceshows the extent to which it wasconventional wis-i domo PlautUsjoked about it; Julius Caesar braggedabout it; and ináitt' case of AugtlStus, it was literally carved in stone, if one is to judgeby\ the wordsand images on the Res Gestaeand AraPads. Hostage-takin,g . had become an attractive endeavor: transforming a yotmg hostage and exercising influence over him in his later life constitUted an mexpensive, low-'risk method of winning ever more territory, orat least extending Rome's sphere ofinfluence. Longaner TacitUs,beliefin the tactic continued apace, the most telling evidence fur which wouId be the law ofMarcus Aurelius and Luc1us Veras, described in Chapter6, commanding special privileges for the farnilies ofcompliant detail1¡ees. But TácitUs, as we shall see, expressed some objections. Most prominendy in the Annals, Tacitus demolished the model of peac~fui expansion through the device of hostage-taking. Repeatedly he tells stories where foreiga hostages and the Romans who reIy on them fail utterly, while those who reject such a device are vasdy more
."."'ii!!.-",-,*."."'""",,,,
,,,,
-
TIBERIUS, GERMANICUS,
AND THE EAST
Throughout his record of Tiberius's policies with regard to Parthia and Armenia, TacitUs performs a thorough character assassination of 1
2
For a similar study ofTacitus's use of the figure of the client king in developing his characters. see Keitel 1978 and especia1ly Gowing 1990. Campbell 1993, 218 sees Tacitus's accounts of the failure of the hostages as an indictment ofParthia as an uncivilized land. See Mattern 1999, 176 on the importance ofthe perception ofvictory over Parthia. For a survey of scholarship on Tacitus's opinion of the Pax Romana, see Benario 1991.
225
224
~"'""
effective.1 Figures such as Germanicus and Corbulo handle hostages in what he views as propedy heroic ways, onen specifica11yworking against the commonly understood roles for hostages oudined in this book, whereas criticism is leve1ed, sometimes implicidy, sometimes explicidy, against Augustus, Tiberius, Claudius, and Nero, whose policies in geopolitics and dependence on hostages are seen as insufficient measures not in keeping with old Roman. values ofsheer destruction and humiliation of the enemy.2 Tacitusconsciously plays on his.readers,' expectations concerning hostagesin order!t()~~chieve his purpose:he will often first descripe the deployment of a hostage in accordance with the various themes ofhostage-taking -mostnotably those of reeducation andquasi-adoption recording eXcessiveoptimism on the part of those who control the hostage;but then underrnine these>expectations by revealingtllatthehostage'in question soondisapp(}ints, ahdmatters must be set1aright by oneof the historian'sheroes.. .Tadtus's negat~ve evaluation.of certain aspects ofhostage-taking is different from thatof Polybius discussed inthe preceding chapter:whereas Polybius denied the. assimila~~ve.qualityof hostage-taking in his case, Tacitus accepted that foreign hostages could be thoroughly reformed but denied that such aprocess. had any value for Rome in the long run.The .historian instead repeats. certain criticisms'of hostage figures, recasting them as illusory, dilatory, decadent, or weak, u;ua11ybecauseoftheirándOctri:-nation.Four'cases ttOtrl Tacitus's Annals are considered.iri this..chapter asexamples oHhehistorian'sview that those who manipulatehOstages by,focusingon theircoerGive value and ignoringtheir role asvassals are modylRomanswhose success servedto cast thevillainy and ineptitude ofthe JuHo--Clandian emperors in sharp relief.
._-
.l>
HOSTAGES
AND HOSTAGE-TAKING IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE
<TACITUSON¡<:HOSTAGEliTÁJ<:ING
AND
HEROlSM.
<n
Vonones,
a former Parthian
hostageicto whom,
evidently, greathope:s ti
Rometdask AugustttS toSynd:VOgqn,ieS,the eldest¡pfPhraates's hostage sons;oto takeithe,throne'i.Atigustlls.,is;said:to have taken this asa sign ofhisiliowns,magnificeD,(';e¡(magnijjcu111 sib¡);yetthe reader's knowledge of Phraates'sinsihcerity.tregdeis,.the kassertion almost,la1.lgl1'able.7In thespace<ioBasiJ:lgle senten<;e;!Tacitttsthen records,ttqat Y9!:lppes first
for Roman vassalage were atta~hed"With the<result that Tiberius and
even Augustusare revealedasunworthy of their power. Tacitusbegins <
the second book of the Annals with a quick summary of the submission of the sonsofPhÓ.ates IV, inwhichhe challengesthenoci,onthat,the hostages constituted a benevolenti<showOf respectcior a sign of Augus'tus's international prowess} As we have seen, some pridrexplana~(>ns, for Phraates'smotives''''r those ofVeUei1.lsPaterculus and Sueton,ius, nfq;r
encounterydy"gOodM.jll*t(il'mt.¡lthat,át¡.'ql1ickly
example ,.-<were infl:qencedby Augustus'sowninterpretation,mamely that the Parthians were intimidated by R()mamarnisand wereattempt.¡; ing to forestall an invasionbYiofferinghostages and by ',lllakinga show ofobsequiousness, Inr.his R,es,Cestae,Augustus de(';laresthat forcy <haq,< not ibeen, ny.cessary and that his oWll,auFtqritas.hadniade"theeas~epl kingbeholden<to hilll.+ At first, 1;a~~tusadrpjt~that 1?praate~s6ugh(:tdi pay respect to Augusttts, buthy then.defuses this,motivationby poin,t-. ing outthatPhraates had defeatedRj.onIY in thepast,and by rep~ating' the alternate version, espoused by Strabo,andJosepqp:s, that l?hrailt~~ was,hardlyin awe of Augustus;!butonly feared a,n:uprisingamong!his own people and accordinglyremo'fyd;the princes fr9illcontyntion,for his throne.5 In combining both expkmationsat once,<;racitUsnYlllph~sizes the preexisting tensions in Parthia and in effect argue~';<:;yeniin quick sUrntnary, that thesubmissionofthe hostages wasmoi~!:complex than Augustus allow;ed:the princeslllaYihave<betoke!:ledthYiking¡~()y"" alty, bttt'it was:onlyontheisutface,and inany case,<tht;:re.wery many othyrsin Parthia who ,were «'not Jjke-roinded;StillonlYisummarizing< yvents; TaCitus then passes oversomesixteen years ofi;¡?arthian poli';'.. tics,. whichhad seen thy death<ofPhraates<.JV in 2 BCE;ándthe.brief reigns of Phraates's successors, Phraataces and Orodes.6 Hy resumes his account in 6 CE, when a faction,pf p'arthian n,obility arrived in
una(:c~Pita~lt:;/:ti' i '"
Tac. Ann. 2.1.
,
I
Ziegler
'1964, SI-52;
Goodyear
,i«<i
.(,,'
,
' {
'"c"',
"iF,
< (F,
<"<o"
<
'<'<'
,
<.'
,1'\',
,<
'
i,<i,
< ,
,«'r,'
i
o
«'
,
('<"
i,<'
n
'.'
'<, '<
<,',
,r..
"
,""<
H'<'<
'''<,<',
'"
"',
,rid
¡
< <'i' <
,
«<,'
(
"
'<0.<
'e'
.<
,
loo{ ,
< "i
..."
,
<':
<
,«,<
'i
<
t
the ,R.om~~ ,~apits, of,ridi~g i1.la li!~er,)i~~ep.ingt() Gr~~~s~.a1.ldreceiy-c i,ng gllests oqp~Wy;.\¡~s,cording .vqD:°nef~, < ,'o ,..<"tO;1:';¡.ci,tlls, < ,r' ,opponents < rpeIl < ~uPPo,~ted 1,}.rt~paD:u:~";¡.ng~heI:A~~¡t~idprinc~,,tlD:de~\wh8~~le~~ers~hip
th~y, droyc¡YÓn,c;>n,<;;s ,off th~ .\throne(af;1d.in:t() neighborÍ1;1g1}rp.lynia.; TasItps ther(ii~plies~hatArtabapps i;yvoul~i¡hav:edeclared" ~W if th~ R,.omans spught to, defend yonones's claim to power in Ar!}l~pi<l',a,nd so the governor of Syria"Cn¡ticus Silanus, remov:ed,him and¡put him under guard in his province; Vonones was still sustained in luxury and ambiguously held the titleofking, but now it was what Tacitus caUsa ','
accurate").
0;'0
Tasitus gC;>,es¡,'9p, to" s~y that Vonol}es,;¡' }tollla1.l p:o~~e.sslqp'll}dslave1 was disliked' because hehad."neglected the tr~ditional, customs of an Arsacid monarch, such as'hti~ting and1i¿rsemanship, and had taken up
'
1981, 190 ("more
,
<'o {'iA,
O< ,!<
<
4 Mon. Anc. 32.2. Cf. Strabo 6.4.2. Vello Pat. 2.94.4; Suet. Aug. 21.3. 5 Tac. Ann. 2.1: Cf. Strabo, 16. 1.28;Joseph. AJ 18.42. Some see this view as more plapsible:
unwantedheir, see Chapter 5.
\',(
Sp,?n,it b,t;~a~y a s<?,)f~c<:¡~f~h~~,(su~iit :pu1~r)"lt~at¡tht; Parthia~~ ha4..dege?erateq;thataJcinghaq beenso~ght ttom aforeign ~ation; that he ha4,b~en 1 i, infected by the education (áitibus)ofttle eq,emy; that the dimne of tJ:e ArsiCids li. '. < <.'«\'«, ,<, i, O< :" ,()¡,<\{)~", \, . ',r <,,<'1 ,'é 1,:" { < ,:1',<,e\'<1' '< \i '< ,,' < 'o <", \ . <' was glven: an~",'" [Parthl~ was] consldered among the Rom,an provrnces. , Ti, away ,i , <\' ,,)',1 ",1< <0<,<, '<', < <,' ",. ,« 'l '.o' "v, , What wóuld J)etome üf tne glory 6f the men, who slaúghtered Cra,ssus arid dmve¡:oiitiM~tkAntbh'y, if tllispossessibn (mdndpiuin) of'Caesar; who súfferea inslavery (servitatemoperpessum),for so many,{ye~rs; carne to rule thé Paithiaris?8, ¡
<
J
.'d~teriorateg.aD:to:\hostil-
ity. tiriged \vj,th embarraSSmyntli¡~q~()rdingto!['a(;itus, after'iiVonones returnedjtO!AP~thiá!Nhis¡P~9pl(;\!haq¡i;~9fcomplaiI1ts:.that'?B:"()1:ne 'haa. be¡'¡~itl1~\oriet6 chdose: theirfkirig,wand that"'tlteikingthey ,chosewas
"sham.
,
"IO
On the trope of the 7 Tac. Ann. 2.2. 8 Tac. Ann. 2.2.
"
6 For a history of Roman and Parthian relátions in the intervening years (10/9 BCE to 6 CE), see Debeyoise 1938, 144...,151;Koesterrnann 1963, 259-260; Ziegler 196+, SI-56; and Goodyear 1981,190.
9 Tac. Ann. 2.3. Tac. Ann. 2.4: ludibrium.
10
226
227
III'¡¡¡¡
...
iiJ.
~
~
"
'
HOSTAGES. AND HOSTAGE;.TAKING
IN THE ROMANEMPIRE
TACITUS
ONHOSTAGE~TAKING
AND HEROISM
¡
Tacitus's account;.passes over many de~~s ofVonones'sreign:whicli, can be recovered from, or atcleast cO'mpared with¡ 'othetlsources¡ . Vonones's éoins, for example, whose portrait types havebeendiscussed in Chapten6, indicate a reign ofnearly four years, h-om 8 to 12CE.F Mter leaving Parthiaaround 12 CE,Vonones see11l$to havelastediri Armeriia until as late as 16 cEbeforehe fled capture)'~2Itwasnot along reign iri either realm, but itisconsiderablymore substancial than what Tacitus'sbreath1ess:pacingin the Vononesstoryimplies:JTacitusmoved direcdy ..fromNonories's arrivahin,Patthi<\¡,!,.to;:hisvflights'frOtrlOppo"4 nents. Moreover, whileTacitus impliesa widespr~adnegativeireaction to Vonones on the part of the Pirthians, Josephus~s aceouJ').tn6'Veals that this wasamihbfitY pdiritof'víewiandsaysthat mos'\:df'Parth1[ suppottedVonones a~ains,ttheustirpet~ftab'inus. 13Neii:hethisiofiia is flatteringin their stories ofVoqpn.es;but th~Yb8thdiífer in qétiils'óf his career following his expulsion,h-orlfp'artb.íaaml ~U~b.ttoAr!;A~Qii¡ Tacitus's Vonones is acrea~ureof th~/Romans, W;hois shu~~JyabotÍt.. as a pawn inthe:E.ast; Cretiéus Silanus ,himself moves.Vononés~q Syria. Josephus affords Vonones more independence and reportsitha.'~ he fled Armenia of his own volition when. the faction in supporto:f Attabantis became morepówet6.i1;'accordingto him,Tibdius'poiritL éd1y refused to help himoWing to Vónones's.cowardiceP'jósePhtisls Silanusthenoffered him a.sylum"iriacKrtówledgement ófhis RóffiMiJ. educa.tiom'1I5 Oné could argue thit Ta.citus'shtirried!t~mpoJC~;0~é attributed to the fact thathe mi; simplyprovidihgastinUtiiryViribl to bring events uptó Tiberius's reign irinhelateteéhsé't, wliibl when the di~ression isset. Biltiri"thésé'passagés,'Tacitus is de:., interested in the nature and 'effect of RÓman meddlirigin Armeniai5.
owncandidatesin that reign;,yonbries<'Ís viewed as fitting the.same pátteth.16 Skiniriring over much ofwhat happened toVonones;Tacitus devot~. serious(,.attennonori1y toa single partof his tenure, inamely hiscultural. trarisformition, which sterilrtied from,his hostageShipand which. hel.d~scribesas theivery, soui'ce,oftheParthians2 (alleged) dis'" ~st.'\Tacitus"has ;idéliberatelyichosen. to<accerituatéfcertain ,unflat'" tering,~péctsofiVonones'si¡~~~r. '.which painthifu'#~iincompetent and)the,iiR:omans who mariipulated'l,1ipt;which\iridude,AugustUs~,¡a,s nUsguideq.:''. . Th~t¡Josephati ac~ourit'.8f }lonone~!..ends.)with;hisiasylumvini.Syria; but,.(['aci~t.1~'¡carrieg!;thi"()üghto'Vbhgn,es1sldeath iáhd'contiriues!to 'id~h,,; ign1.téihis::..character?along.,the:iway..Me says..thatdO' 18cE, Vonoiies;s presericeiin Syriá was ,\istidking point forinegotiattbns;between Rome an&ArtábanuSi!.?Ac.cordingjtorifa<;ifus;Vohonés stil1,had some<súp'? portamongiParthians at3;d'was..gathedng alliesalongthe Syrian bór:" der;.andArt~banus therefore".asked..tl1e.R:OInll,nstolremovehUh..(1ihis account .0fVohones's. pbpulárity/contradictstheihistorian's previously statedview~hat'W(])riOhes'sdownfall.,was'theiesult:o€universalPartliian hatred fQrhis.Romámnatrlre, .andinstead,isdn keepit).gwithgosephus1s story..offac~onalrivalry,),'TheRornatisnowhadá.riewigeneral'on'the scene',.."Ge1'1rian1cl1S¡thenephe'\V°fTi!>etius and;accor41ngtoTacitUs, abelOved"andcapableisoldier..~8Tacitus!says díat,Germanieus with... dl-ew<Vononesiintoi@ilic;ia"arid'.further;from:!f.!~atthia~'!par~y iinkeepcirig7with,IAtt"panus's!;re,quest"but;;alsÓ; '.in;'oroei- .tOitth:WartJGnaeus Calputm~s;'Pisot.~'to;\'whoin'EVonories]!iwaS'*most.pleasing(.0niolCCÓl1nt o~the'imany.sérvice$fan.d giftS'.(~€iaiet!doná)bywhidlihe .had.borind Plancina (Piso's wife) to hiin. "19 Piso and Plancina are well known
affairs:vatpidhis discussion ofVohones¡ he briefl~ sUJ:"Veys the hist8~ offour ill-advised' or immoral attempts by the Romans to back theit n Ziegler 1964, 56; Gomiella 2001,'69-'72. abbreviated Vonones's reign for efFect. 12
Gowing
199°, 319 also argues that Tatitris .
Ziegler ;964,57; Gonnella 2001,73. Cf. Karras-KIopproth 1988, 213.f
'3 Joseph. AJ 18.48. For the comparison of Tacitus with josephus, see Kahrstedt 195°, II-12; Chaumont 1976,85, n. 69; Koestermann 1963, 262-264; Gowing 1990,317-318. Paldel 1991, 124 prefers the Josephan version. '4 Joseph. AJ 18.51. Suet. Tib. 49 says that Tiberius put Vonones to death at this point, which difFers, as we shall see, fi:om Tac. Ann. 2.68. . 's Jos. AJ 18.52: Kcmx cx16&Ti'jS EV'POOIA1;I KOIA16i'jS.
,ó Tac. Ann.2.3'''4: the four exarriples are (1) Mark Antony's tteachero1.1s deception andexe~ .cution ofArtavasdes, (2) Augustus's subsequent support'of Tigranesand(3) of another Artavasdes, both.iOf whom weredeposed, and(4) Augustus's.donarionof the throne to Ariobarzanes of Media Atropatene, who dieddri some kind of unspecified accident. On the history ofRoman involvement in Armenia,see Debevoise 1938;152..,.153; Ziegler 1964, 60; Chaumont 1976,73-84; Goodyear 1981, ~95-196; and Paldel 1991, 123-124. '7 Tac. Ann. 2.58. ,s On the characterization ofGermanicus, see Walker 1952, u8-uo; Syme 1958, 392-395; Shotter 1968; Bird 1973; Goodyear 1981, 199; and especially Pelling 1993. '9 Tac. Ann. 2.58. Shotter 1974, 237 suggests Piso contrived Vonones's escape.
228
11>.
229
..IL!"...JL_-
.""""~..""
jjL '1<.""'-'"
'!..Ji!ÍL
il.Jf...~.JI!I!
~
.¡¡¡
HOSTAGESAND
HOSTAGE-TAKING
IN,THE ROMANEMPIRE
'TAClTUSON
HOSTAGE~TAKING'AND
HEROlSM
t,
as villains in Tacitus's narrative.2o As T:~ifusrecounts,they:were sent~ by Tiberius and by his mother Liviato, the East in order to "impede Germanicus's aspirations,"21 and they perpetually exhibit disgraceful habits: the historian accusesPiso ofinsultingGermanicus'rin spite .of the fact that Germanicusrescued him from a near shipwreck;arid his Piso proceeds to lead the army in thé East'inunacceptable ways, bypandering to the meek, removingthe..experienced,and::..ensouraging..corruption. Plancina'is .equally as shamefrlLin TacitUs;.asishe attended military exercises (for whatreasQn Tacitusdoes riot!\'spec':'" iEy)¡and..insulted Germanic1.ls's wife AgrippinatheEl9.et, ;aS!welhas Germanicushimself¡22 Notoribusly, the pairallegedIy)Went~on toipoison Germanicus, for whichcrime, amorigothers, Piso was..charg/.?g before thesenateand ultimately committedsuicide. 23:By;connecting Vonones with:thisquintessentiallyevil p:¡\iras a/.provider:'iofibribes,. Tacitus manages to degrade the.hostage's reputation eyénJurtherand also.to implicateTiberius once again.. By contrast Germanicus's.deci~ sion to sweep Vonones asideaccentuates his o~ dignity;24 . Tacitus furtherindicts the Principate'sbrand.ofhostage taking when he identifies the reason for Germanicus's eyentual.diplomátic successl withArtabanus. Germanicus is said tb have immediafely'seti.about reversing the failures' wrought. by the.tpolicy behind.Vonónes;.¡In Armenia"after Vonones hadbeen removed; ,he promoted tothe tni'one Zeno, a son ofking PolemoiofPontus, who hadbeen raiséd as a lip"stage . i/:lArmCnia.25Like Vonones, Zenoiwasaroyahhéiukeptin .a.lánd~ar fromhome, but his situationwasiobviorlsly diflerent: whereasVón.qhéS! had learned to live like a Roman,Zeno issaid to have11earnedtoi'iliV~i
likeamArmeniariFthe vety,.peoplehe was called on torulet. Tacitus says thatZerio'zmade' a more ..suitablecandidate because he. had endeared himselfto!thelócalslbYiwearingIArmenian.dothes andby demónstratingariappre~iationi;fOJ::1'\rrp.eniamiculture, .includingithe customs bf hllIitingandbahquetihg;hé'alsb chariged'h1s name toArtaxias, an obvi"" ousArrp.eriiannioniker¡l-6.ífOTacitUs',this was theperfectcompromise: it is;"only..aftér'Germanicus.ignores'Vohs:mes',pusl1ing:¡}lim,Jurthenwest in<t:he,!di1;~?'tiotl',ofR,omewhere¡lie!ljelQngs; thatthe' tWo sidesarrive át>an;,agr~jément:¡.For¡~ffienians,';¡Z.eNd~s'li~ of.{direcl:cQntac( witli théi~IriPePia$iqotirt,,"~ade¡him¡nio~e;att~~ctiye0a'he¡Parthial1s;,were .also deadyj¡pleaged:j1\.rt~J~ant1s.;abrpptly"wiil1:diew,{}lls'son;i<:9iod¿¡,/i\WhQ ha.J!,b~érisehtitotake#thé!ithrone,j'iand(jffered. a tr:éatyito 'Germanil cusirigl1tiaJter'iZeno's/\=oronatiori'¡/'Qi''PMiRomansLalso wereicoritenti; as!Z:énoi;was;!ah;btits~aer,...linked"ibybirth>to. the., reg'imerofPontus; whidh\was ,..a;ré1iaqleially;~~The'R:omansmade.ai'Spectacle:oftheir o\\l'n.superiority af'thebordnation, acCordirigtoiTacitus,in thatthey alohe'did'uot),boVV;:r? ''facitUs's..Gerinahict1sthus..is made to 'cdrrect ...
the.very:essenceo( Vononestsfiilt1re~'!which:was\his;Romanize&¡Zul... tural demeanorresirlting trom his hostageship:;.andpointedIyrepaired it. ~th};Vori()hes'sopp()sit:e} effededbYii;}\!different:;kii:íd;,of accUltúra... tio!ii0?oUnlikeA'ugtlstus,ahd TiBerius'who.sentthe.wrongman for thé j()b,!Germanicrls~asableto displaYi.Riome'sauihority. over th¿,realm, élaU:hiineriewmbriarch'siloyalty,.and¡;stave(offi,Par:tl1ian.opposiiio11. 'Ultirriatel~;i~lre;decriptionofNÓnQp.es'~idea:thdrives¡ Tacitus'siipo!nt home:.suppbsedIyBrístliÍíg athis'stationlirl'@ilicia;'yoridnes.brihedihis gtlards álld!iried'toescape"whén orliahuntingéxpedition!',Btit wprd:of 26 Tac. Ann. 2.56 atttibutes
20
For example, Tac. Ann. 2.43; 2.69; 6.26. See Walker 1952, II4-L23;Martin 1981~ P3; and Pelling 1993; 82-85. Shotter 1974discussesPiso's fulLcareer and argues that TacitUs distorted the character ofPiso in prder to pass a negative judgment ofTiberius. Griffin 1995 seesTacitUs's criticismofTiberius as directed toward the system ofthe Principate. Smith.1972, 84-85 seeks to rehabilitate Piso's memory.
Tac. An,:!. 2.43: ad spesGermanícícoercendas. Tac. Ann. 2.55. 23 Tac. Ann. 3.12-15.
21 22
the name tothe
27 Joseph. 4J 18.52; Tac Ann.2.58.
capita¡ city. .
Chau~ont
1976, 85 rejects the Josephanacc?unt
on
the basis thatTacitus sáysthatan0rodes V\lilssent to'thethronein35 (Ann. 6.33),but there may'have been moré' than one son ~f Artabanuswith that.name. See Kahrstedt 1950; Ziegler 1964, 59;and Karras1.:Klopproth 1988, IIo-m. 28 On Rome's history of diplomacy with Pontus, see Barrett'1978, 439 and Paltiell991, 44. Goodyear 1981, 364-365 discusses the possible family link, through of Germanicus and Zeno.
Mark Antony,
24 Gowing 1990 discusses Tacitus's disdain for the personal relationships between the Parthian candidates and the emperors. 25 Tac. Ann; 2.56. For the circumstances ofZeno's lineagl" and career, see Kahrstedt 1950, 18; Koestermann 1963, 359-360; and Chaumont 1976, 86.
29 Moreover, Zeno's (Artaxias's) coinage advertised his links to Rome with the legend, "Germanicus Artaxias" (RIC 104). See also Chaumont 1976,87-88; Goodyear 1981, 365. 3° Gowing 199°, 325 sees the downfall ofVonones and the ascension of Zeno as fumes for Tacitus's account ofking Maroboduus.
230
231
¡¡¡¡
\!I'
.~
HOSTAGES AND H0STAGE~TAKING'IN
(
THE ROMAN EMPIRE
.TACITUS ON HOSTAGE-TAKING
ANDHEROISM
'L
his attempt preceded bim, and the bri~~'that wouldhave carried\hi~41 beyond Rome'sreach wasJmocked down in time; Vónonesbecame trapped; and the very guard who had accepted the bribe inthe first place ran himthrough.31 It is immediately aftenthis story that Taci~us begins.to recount Germanicus's. slow death and.therun;lOrs; entirely amplifiedby thehistorian, thatpoison had been administered by Piso:F The irony isevident,as the properRQmanhero whoreinoyeda worthless hostage came! to, be murdered by thatihostage's equa11yworthless champions, who were, asfar asTacitus sawit, agentsofanevil emperor. Mellor's generaL observation thatif'a,centraLtheme ofTadtus's histoiy is the linkbetweénthe d~dine of virtus;andthe loss'offreedóm,¡at Rome" canthusbeapplied to Tacitus's account.o(Vonones, TiMrius; and Germanicus: the absence'of Roman military prowess,and tra<J+;tion, exhibited by Vonones, coincides with an imperial abuse ofpower, alsoevident in Vonones through his ties with Piso and Tiberius¡33. Tacitus continues to excoriate Tiberiusand his reliance,on Jor't mer hostages in conductingdiplomacy and for~ign policy when h~" describes the nextattempts ¡by the Romans tb putdescendants>of: Phraates IV onthe<thronein Parthia.34 In 34 CEArtabanus; the,king who upset Vonones, was cha1lenged, by, a factiOl1¡which. turned te Romefqr support. Cassius Dio mentions brieflY'ithaf Tiberiuschqi, to send Phraates V, who had bythen been living in Rqme for;i{)v~ forty years)S Tacitus's account is more elaborate, but,also br~efi¡it reporting Phtaates V's campaign;again he ,takes.theiopportuniiYliit comment explicidyon the tactic.ofpromotingaforilier,hostage!t{)",~ foreign thtone.According tohim; a11:. that the ambassadors s{)ug~ upon appearing before Tiberius was Ha name and the emperor's
periliission,': disregardirig Phraates V~sleadership completely)~ The emperor' obliged"demonstrating,:: as Tacitus coniplains, ,~'hisrule of manipulatingJorelgn affairs by policy and,craft without a resoruo arms.:'137Accordingi:toTa~itus;, Phiaates'~ learneq. from,the failure ófhisL~lder\brótherWQnones and' dropped th~ Roman mannerisms and ,.culturethat" wouldi no:,doubt,be' used. against' him ,in, the ,East. His ,new;'¡pseudo-Parthian disguise;: .however, acc!Jrding to, Tacitus; w<is; not en:odgh: I tb .~.sustain',hi11l''as' his1true,'w:eak~hed,'sHf; lhidd~n ,.
b¿hin, s~ 1TIanners,P~?ve:<t;¡'~n~q~Atoi~sn;átive,custonisi" and h~ 'Fe , 9(a,r)llnes~ in Syri.a.38AnAlll~~s;qf course, cóuld stop the "
,'"
',,',
,'"
".
,',
..
'..'
"
'
,"
stron,ge~t9f gSRepls,~v~p~~d;1í~ h~en r~ared in his J.?:,tiveparthia, and Tacitu~'sdes'¿rÍpHone'(Bhta'ates'sdise.~se, ,wliatever jt was, as an indicatioPi ofhis; i,nnate incqmpetenCe d~monstrates plote dearly the historian's, a priort:di~9ai:ñlfor reformed, hostages.df,.judging by the Vonones' episode,the xeaderweJ,'et9, ~oncludeJ:nistakenly that the only propl~m;wjthjhqstage,.b~se9, strateg~~si"í3,:~, in pU1;War9appearances of culturalgem~anor,1a~itus: h~i-e?ffers~. corre~ti()n: the transformation óf él;hqstagei~ertain\r,i didtake plác;e,q1terin:g'~sveryheing; it w<isnot just
afa~~d~.
",
' ',."
, '
,',,'
'
"
Tacitus¡recordsanother atterp.pt:.t()m~ under Tiberius)mmediatt?lr, the~~(ter, ,
Phra~tes IVn¡:tmedTiridates. 39Lu . ,- , "
'
','"
"''''.
he J~arthianthione e vv!tha,grandson of s'\yasthe Roman gen'.,
"
'
eralJOf, the/ camp~lÍgn,.and ~ccpr. tjls"q'efore arriving in Parthia,he'a~te9 ~~h ':old,.fashio1,1e,,t?,e,",í:a4:vising Tiridat~s to¡take, a:s~hi~, :rple,models, bod;t:"his, gran' '~.r;"{P:hr,,,ates,.IV;'ap;d his,i~~fo~ter.f~tlJ.er'" Tibe1:iuÚ6 ,Tacitqs:¿'.rea er~\wouJ~have tÚ1.aerstoÓd'die" use '~(fi1iall~hgU.áge,ip,coni1ectionWith'h~stag~-ta~ng¡as another. way , ofexpresslng Rome'sab~014te,con~r()l) as with education. , T~ridates enjayed ,so1TIeiiJ.itiaIsuccess; but according' to Tacitus, once again the hostage met his demise ,through the recognition on the part ofthe, Parthians of his compromised identity as ,a h()stage. Tiridates's opponents are made to comment that Hitwas no Arsacid that held sway, ,
3' Tac. Ann. 2.68. There is an obvious temptation tocompare Vonones's attemptedescape with that of DemetIius, hostage of the Seleucids, whom Polybius says escaped while pretending to be on a hunting party. On Vonones's objectives in fleeing, see Cernjak 1986. 32 Tac. Anl,1.2.69-84. ' 33 Mellor 1993, 48. Cf. Gowing 1990, 325, who argues thatthe entire purposein discussing Germanicus, and also Corbulo to be discussed later, is to cornmenton the emperors. J4 On the notion that the stories of the next returned hostages, Phraates V and Tiridates, follow a deliberate pattern, see Gowing 1990,320. 60-63; and Paltiel1991, 150. 35 Cass. Dio, 58.26.
Cf. Kahrstedt
1950, 35; Ziegler 1964,
J6 Tac. Ann.6.31: 37 38 39 4°
nomine tantum et auctore opus.
Tac. Ann. 6.32: destinata retinens consílíis et astu res externas molíri, arma procul habere. Tac. Ann.:6.32: patriis moribus impar. On Tiridates's age, see Chapter 5. Tac. Ann. 6.37: prisca virtute; altor.
233
232
~
~
lIi
if/I,.
~
HOSTAGES.AND HOSTAGE4TAK:ING IN THEROMAN'EMPIRE
'/TAcrj,us,oN
HOSTNGE~TAIÚ[''I!,G!A~D
l-iEROISM
,'j but an empty name hOllsed inan.unV\la,~~keman\who wáSweakfi;o~ foreign softness."41 Not surprisingly,¡at'this point,Tiridatésgoesi.p.q.to fail, forcedto flee to Syria'forrrefuge with;theR.omans.,'Fhed.eb;tcle seernsdesigned by TaÓtÜs'to \ref!.est,poorly, bn the boast'thatRome exercised paternal authority9yer"the, EastoiTaÓtvs's¡:A.nnals"brea$:s;qff in along lacuna beforewecanfindolltwhat became,pf,Tirid#es;,but the..historian:s'disapprovalisiapparent:,;,;A.ugustah¡notiot).s¡(of.ruli.1J.g<t}ié, world likehis extended,.clan,',as!trllmpetec.t'i¡[or example,('c)n;\the~a' Pacis, were thus denied.,by,['acitllShto have/anysubstance\~n,practice;
((omitatemettemperantiam);,byand,large",however, Tacitus says,that.he was!just:rude¡"enough7toendeai,,;hirnSeJ[,MTith;the. Germans, plus his statUs..as,~eEhe'W:IQfIAt~nius¡!"Flavus'sbrother, won' him; at firstl, an opportunity to' prove,lllí1'iself.4!~Evenrnally, afaction.rose that 'challehged ¡tahCus,'re'gardless,ófhisl'tiestoIArininius;i as the ihdirect speech thatTaCitus ascrihes'to one ófhis~ative ,';:~:',l':>"t""i,:\:!y" ",'; ',', '1" ,/r",
ópponerits attests:0,
'." ,:':,,:,,:\.\'i ,i ,ill¡:,,';i,
.'
t t",,/,
'¡')',,"':,<\',:')I:', '",';':' ,1
I
'R:,s~~qvJ?;t~,i~g~f¡~fn:Y\:SiP~s~\H~er:!X"fW.as, :~h~re,"R~¡;:,2~~ " 1'. ," ,1" 1 o ,- ..'1 --' . ~ . '--
, '
s ''',;i"
his-. -- - - o o 0_- . in:l~lJi~}ftltJs'5':"on~ ~6tfta'~ffufc
f¿r~igh,:hi~rl~'Y;
'serviftiíde,''andiupbbliglng:'(inje
Tacitus again articulates';tné problemsiiwithfrelying dn"aífófit'fier hdstage ;-or one like'a hostage FwMn ne télls\1:he,stúiy ófalt!atferiipt by Claudius to influencé"the'eheruscanTthrúheby llleans'iÚfá re"'" forllled vassal¡just as Tiberius/hadídone\i11' PartlúawithVonone~ariq. the rest,42The pattern by núw willbé fahiiliar:lbY47CE,ra'civilwávthat had lasted forover twenty'yearsáll1óhgthe,Ch¿nikánsnad'res11ltediin the murders of the members úftheir iuling dynasty, and afactionctllus appealed' td';'Claudiusjaslcinginim,to'send .as...the"~e~t!ki~gi~~~..s~~.of Flavus;a Cheruscan nobleman living ih R:omesince hisiservÚ::e,as'an' auxiliary; Théiyoung ChéruscatÍ;witJ:fi;he révealinglyiR,;()lriinlrlame of Italicus, hadíbeen raised,iacc6rding to Tacitus¡ in1thetra.dit~6hsof bóth'German ;a:hdROnian,'.,wártareYTacitusJhasthéieí1'iperór,explic,j' id)" 'comparel t~icusWíth""a.hd'stage:'" His'ClatidiusicreriÍark:s'ithati!ith¿r{ d'ctasion was rhélllora1:'>lebecatise Idlicds"Wasithe first:iÍtlantoclairii'.f foreign throne'wlíowasraised~'nótYas a,1ióstage butas<atitizeno'143 As the'story continues, Italicus takes his place am.ong theCherusci; qut his expetiencesfollow tlíose ofVonones:he llladeotcasional missteps alllong his' subjects' owing to. ,the' culturaláemeaJ:1or he had acqúired in Rome, súch as when he.acted '~in an affable and restrained way" 41 Tac. A~n. 6.43: neque penes Arsadden imperium, sed inane nomen apud inbellem externa mollitia. Note the feminine quality ofhostage~takingdeployed by Tacitus as a criticism of the hostage. 42 In general,see Vessey 1971; K:eddie 1975; and again, Gowing 1990,321-322. 43 Tac. Ann. II .16: nec obsidem sed dvern. K:oestermann 196'7, 58,views Italicus as a pendant to Arminiuso ..
".
~
nibusY:~xternisY:
lf lta1icqs;has!hisfatheI',Flavus'smeiltali~l(paterna" mens)" ,[the'slfi:Üitióll'ls:all t4~¡'WQ\"se;b~Cáu~eJ]f1!l67o/'l~~as,fought, againsthis:cpuntry¡ and ancestral::gads I11Q¡;~i1npl~c<¡\~l~fltan!~1~Y).lso45 ,
';'!""'"
,: /':,
"," "',,, "::':I'i, ',,"
'
'
i,,"
,
~sl~Fi~~~! t~~s,¡,i~; 1llg,out 'wa
tr-~~. bk
~~~6i:,"\J?~~~"
:,~«¡;:¡,.
entered '.
an
¡
"
",'
'"..
'
F~~~\; ~~,~hpdi~~}' p,o~nt~ ather..Flavus had fought for us~i,>~f;t(:tfr:i~?r]:
at the request,.of
herusc"
li:~~f:~~'
, t the 'behest
'~,r~~y,'~~t(a ~(~~FI/e~~:~:~9~~ ~d' h~;~r~" ~i~~~n,{ir~.;' aft!§,t~~< c°'Y<\ra. )-:l1s,flefenst¡, "ac;c()rd1llg !O,T!latus" en~ ,.\Vltt,., ~ asc:usatlOp' ,.. li :,', ':," ""¡",.,,.. " .."' 1': 'o''':.. ,'" """q,'i"; i".,,) ;,i ','J.!'.,¡".",,'''',,:.''. th;~¡"t?,O~,~~~~,~P~I,?~~,~~m a;e~w mon,expectqtlOns th:at''''''"aneralsed a , '" "''''1'' ,¡, 'O"," ',' "
R.oí1'ieo46'1'acltus's kilicusthü ,.""""..',;',"","," "1" .,:1",,' ", ,"'l"":""; '~'í' '''' éldem:onstrable"~our , ,', ' ,'", "in ,i
n~s'iri his' inde end~nt " h ,1" "¡",,, ; I""":P ".1"\:,, lstorlantells ii,rhe' 'eo-", ' i' ,,'.. ",..,' "..,.. " '.".." /" ' '. "..".P, ~nd f~~~i~bl: Tadt\Ís~~~iHzJsi:ll;; ~e;t:bfrtili¿il~'~
1 P
"rf~Y~n'F,~t?c~~~~¡c:2~automatlcally suppúrt , ','''' 'i" , ' " i . "¡"""
,,;'i,
, ',,,',',,
""'i""i"""""X",,,,,,,"l',,
""'1""'"''
r~lgnlI,l one,.short.sentén~e,
",1, :H"',")
¡,r"
i ""."(1",,,,;,,:,,,,,.:'1
reE~rting'~hat"h~,lurched i~tO civil.war, ~Ó~ a"(fii¿t;""but' ~ asl~t~r ex ': ¿lléd: ~tÓi1~;~d' ,'" arioth~; ~o1Il~b~éi~: "'n;:'."""1:.I',:,.",,,,,,,,,,,',,' ': p"";¡""'\' ." "..i,!"'¡'.",X:"",,. '\;."" """
b
In 1the'::', end, Ticltllssays thal: 'ltaliCus, onbalall2e, f, " , " r,' , o,.. ' '" ","', '" Ch~rusci.47
'
"..
"
.,
"beleagÜered" llls '" "'." '''','''':" ",
""
,
'
.
'."
With all the significance attached to Italicus's famiÍy in this episode and in the quote above, readers of the contro~~~sYlsurrounding' his 44 Taco Ann. 1l.16. 45 Tac. Ann. 1l.IÓ. 46 Taco Anno ll. 17o 47 Taco Ann. llol7: adflictabat. 235
234
"
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE~TAKING'.N
T~CITt,1S.0N
THEROMAN'EMPIRE
HOSrAGE",?TAKING AND HEROISM
,
BoobIlan4ofhis;Jeedu~atioh"o~c;;is'1~d to think ofhim along similar
cultural demeanor at thispoinNin/1~nals'FBdok;lr; would\ha,,¡ be en reminded of the momentous; éven picwresque/debate bet\Veen Italicus's father Flavus aridhis undeArmiriius/.which appeared ear;+. lier in the text,in Book 2. In a/set piecedésigned>to'cohimenttron the state of Rome's relations with'Germany and die; genéral\na~ure of Roman imperial rule,a'acitusstagéd adebate,betWeen,¡thé twb
lines as\}Vell,¡with¡dIe'formida~leArminius as a foil to them all. Ret1.lrning\to th~ sto~;efltaliclls,'in its aftermath onefinds that the failure,fof It~kus,;.(and,,~hus,!\~f~C1audius) is followed by.the success of a,.nev,{:Rqmang7!leral appoirited¡to the region -:,GnaeusDomitius Corbulq,,;-;féwith a,difi"erent,{iplQre Roman~.' brand. of hostage-taking highligh,ted
brothers at the Weser River ",hich seprrated l~o~~: te~~it9ry{~0~ the .Germr~~ tribes.; The.~rothers ;~la'Jsan~'~i~~~~~~a~~~t~\i~~:i tially.joi~ed~heRomariS '~s,au~i~i~g1'/pro~~bl~:.,~~~~.~~.:th~~~~~/~r Augtls~us,'put~lle~' wef~..~ó'Y.Wi 8Pposi~eysi4esq~~pg'~<?i~;Fim~ius's defe(;tion anq spe(;t<;tc~arslapghterqf'thrt~&om.all.l~gions.at~py!~at-;; tle .of theTeu,toberg.Foresf In9(:;E. 4~\Iri;.Tacit\i~;s;,draJ:lÍap,C;Sc~ne;\of their reunion, thet\Vo shout ih otderitoheheardibyet,.tl1erumble óf thecutrent. Tacitus'siFlav).Ísrattles off the benditsthathehas'etiCd1:ítiL.. tered on the Roman side increased pay, Iriilitarydecoratións, statUs;
reverseq.theqamagedonebyJtaliGuS
comfort. In resp<:>nse,Arminius dedarss,f Flavus ~o'l1a,\~ suc<::)lmb~;" to slavery, to have f?rsaken his land, liberty'!5q~salld fa~y,\~nq. . havehpcom~in ,essem:e,a "qese~ter and t~aitor.H+:Iit¿fGit~s'~c~¡ { of the exchang~, Arminius is Inea~t to ~e the.sympa~?etiE'~gpt~.:;< speeches are longyr than Fl~V\Ís'sl~d h~g~ts the,.pn~ WOf~.~~r~o'¡ after a long record ofArtninius's .career, wh~.phiismarkedfoy c¡opr ~nd convic~on, '.T-acitus~~nct!1ate~the;.story ,o(,~1is:i4e#tp",~~~~, Ish eulog,y, m wplch ?e. IS c~:d~?e hber~t?rf<?rG~rm~&i~&(~n end, TaCltus says that his her olsm was. fittIng forJhe ROme/;,of! .
1'he words. mark the ,~nd?f'th~4nnals,B:bo~.*;~~is&had;;gR,e with thestory of thepatheti~ Vor,lQn.es;theGO~tr~~t.ccipl~:'r?t;.beep .~ccidental: VononeS,and Arminiusboth;spent~.~gnifi5~tP¿Gi
of time in Ro~e and ~ad,serve~.thT'emperor, butob'i°1.lsly
"
very different endingsY Tht: reader would come to findsimi1ariti~ between Flavus and Vonones; reading ofItalicus, Flavus's son, later,i
48 Wells ~999, 231 suggests that Arminius may have sti1lbeen on the Roman side as late as 7-8 CE during the Pannonian revolt. 49 Tac. Ann. 2.9-10: desertoret proditor. 5° Tac. Ann. 2.88. On Tacitus's sympathetic treatment of Arnúnius, see Wa1ker 1952, 3° and Mellor 1993, 26 and 109. 51 Cf. Wa1ker 1952, 124 who sees the death scene of Arminius as a complement to that of Germanicus.
to both,theCherusci
.
and to
52 Tac. Ann. 11.18. 53 Tac. Ann. II.I9. On Corbulo's' 61-{i7 and LevickI990, 153.
campaign
against the Frisü, see Koestermann
1967,
54 Tac. Ann. 11.20: beatos quortdam duces Romanos. Corbulo's longing for the past is also in Cass. Dio, 60.3°.5. See Wa1ker 1952, 207 and Martín 1981, 155.
237
236
..Ulllb...
Coib\llo ¡is' said. to. have
Roman iptef~sts in Ger~an,Yj T ion,waSfbe+l?:gtormentedby tlw pirate ,Gan,pasc.us,w40 llad be' uited byJ~.ome like, FlavJls and l).rminilis',b1.lttha,ddéserted"and u(ed' his;knowledgeof R:om¡¡.n'.terri.:. to,ry td:target tb,e wealthiest victinlS.5~;:rHereeducationofGámlaScus. thu~ had.J>ackf1red on the;Rpmans,(and true.mi1ítary; acumen: here, provided Py Corbulo;was needed tocorrect it, Corbulo moved against the neighboring Frisians; Tacitus .recor'ds that 'hecompelled them to subnlit hostages, and ,then imposed, on them a Roman style ofgov"'i ernment, \complete with senate,. elected ;magisJ:rates,.and new laws.53. Tacitus seems.:deliberate in..ihisjUxtapositionofCorbulo's bold seizure ofhostages~th <;Blaudius'sfailure in tryingto.r~j,pstate arieari-hostage whom 'henad.ihherited;.Tacitus's:Corbulo comes across aS,acountervailingwetotne emperor. ,Moreovér, Corbulo 's;.[drthright 'method ofconquestproved.the folly ofltalicus~Romaniiation:cultural assim+ilation.oftheGermans'does ultimatelyfáke;plaÚ,according to !J'acitus, in thatCorbulo .impdsed, ¡l newsystem of'politicsalong the lines of the Rorhanmodel,but 'as he. tellsit¡ force is .crucial tO.'its success, not the indirect, failingmethod of hostage.,-taking:IGiven: tl}atTacitus used. Gorbulo 's m¿nlbÍrsas'á souréé foi. the Aitrl'alS;S4ohewonders the extent towhich the gener;tirnmself.drewaftention to his ho~tages and compared theni with the emperor's. In any>case,Ta:citusends the story of Corbulo's accomplishments in Germany with a final dig at Claudius: the emperor is said to have been nervous about Corbulo's success and therefore withdrew him &om the region. Before his reassignment,
-
.
by t]:le historian..,lmmediately,.
~
~-í'A
--",,"
JIIIL."'_.
...
~
>lo
11
Ir
~~-
,
HOSTAGESAND HOSTAGE+TAKINGIN THE ROM!A:N}EMPIRE
Tac~~us'sC~rb~lo>?rodáiII\SJ(,Y'~Happ~~¡~~r~,th~:ii~e~~r~¿1:,b;fdté" i' day. ss TaCltussahgnments()f~~orbulo<wlth R()mesglort()us!,past and..of the emperorwjth:.its lack1uster.present;echo tht';,¡,discrepancy between Vonones's 'cm;rent weakness::and¡,hi$f.p~()ple's"past%'acqoi11:-i, plishments" quoted above. Qnceagain;,<IT'acitui!:pajnts,theÚpolÜ;:Yf1~M benevolent ,hostage-taking asacrecent. phenomenon;:~ltnu1tanequsly associating it withJtilio--Claudi¡fu,decádence, ".L.
,,'"
L>¡<' "'.:
.
:1'.."
"
,..: "),1'
d::AÚDIOS LONGINÚS ANU THEEA:ST" 'f
, ,,: ',: ,'" ": '",,:' "" ,,', ::\/.:., , : Tacitus! resumes1hi~:dis:c:u.ssion:of;ithe:P~tthian ho~t~g~'s\:it;l,¡:B9ql~i!~¡~¡ ande the fa111i1iaé.p\ltline is. retraced: :an"emp~rqt's poli.sy:@fi::r~in~~at~l)g a.former,hostage fails,bec:ause!of the:p()stag~.'sifatal.r~ed1J;q#~()ri,:anq;" a bet,ter Roman. - specifically to fix. the damage.S6 Jn47cE"
<!I
l,i:l:I'A9Tl!S'ON!HOSrA"GE'2TAKING
anO' old'-fash:ioned:\pne;# j$1:~quirf:?<'\.. Claudius,:trieq.todsel)d';rv1e4erdates,:¡
anothhgrandson ofPhraate~ Iy pres\l~ably:b()rn:incaptjyjty,Ja~itt request ofPar~hi¡m,envoysiwho are saidtohave, corn~:'Jo.,B-6~~'Y~:\l~' of their tradition.pfrespect.. ;rac~tus,has,th~.:envoysY..$J~plain.tha~;:th:~ "children::of the kings wer~:giyen as ,hostages..,~n;.tl1~.rfj.rstplace]'56" "
~:despotto'sla~e;"-'
AND HEROISM,
in favor. bf the Rornan'approach,"'"
td(;~tiz~n:"sR;'I;,::,:~d«..
,:;i:,¡;\,"1 \1"
thatof"
governor
:,.;.'
'iMter, settitig. up,¡Qthe¡:ide,Ü, ofl a.hostagé' ,whO'is viewed as a"kind of Roripn;so.~i¡andi'who hasbeen:;enlightened byJesso1J;sin Roman statecra:fthíra~ittls,quashes1ifwith theiensuing narrative .ofMeherdates's collapse; iGáibs:ea~sius ';Longinus,,:'was.,instructedto : lead th~'yóung M~l1erdates bapk!to ;Parthia;ih~;is"sáidbYI:;tacitusijto.havetexhibitc# .an dld~fa~hiQnl;f~:niÓf<ility'¡tandjt~.,'liaYe'H~~n "~.~~orthy' :ofhis;~ce~tots¡1:<?~¡. IÍ1ké~pitl~\with:iTacitus's:so,ri'yept~db,;ofRast~huesbeing a,t()ddswith nyw<~ttitudes:to'Yai¿¡;hdst<lge~~, ge:iRpr,trays,Longinus 'as'neF;VousaQQut thei.rni~sioitfiíhis,]~,Ó~ginus¡¡:adm9riis1ies ',Mehérdatesí..tó'move, quitk1y aria wto.press:bis::adyantag~,:Atcdrding:, to .TaCitUsi'¡Meherdates¿then . .dia'preÓs'e1yilfe .\opp~site, lingering ldr too ..long!in!.one:pH~e,arldj lik6¡;his.l1o~tag¿re1ativesl?efore.;hilll¡!"~quating hisgreat fort;Unelwith exce.ss/'6~.M~,'is:~ventuaU~"c~pture(hby the :Bartliian kingGótarztfs¡ whoaccordihg~o:iraÓtus;i~,rebukedijim as nd'i.memb~r,df theArsaCid RoinanÚm) , ap.d..order~d.
faffiily?but.a{oreign-:bornRdmanp(aliengen~m
that; he"beallowed
to.liv:e butwith ,his:earsi.chopped..off as,~;sigiffof
his.iownclernency:ahd,.~saninswt;agaiQ.~t'Ethe' Roma,n'S} ,,(in nos::dehon7
thatifthey disapproved':oftheiqegime athome;()ne,)qowd,return}~9 the:emperorand senate,¡.and a'better.king;a(:custo11i1~d;to JR.,21l1~J mores,c()uld be surntr).oJ:}ed."F. Accordingto Tacitus'I..~lau4ip~;ytg~
e.\'ta~erto);'~~~"I:!Onginus. here ,fepresents' the. sa~ei:virtties as.:the fóiléd Germ,anicusaríd Corb1ilo .i-:-.' bcive, 'fast;"pra¿tical,:.ev:~h: moral:íFhef~ct
resporidedby::equatinghimselt with Augpst\ls}fo~ ta¡¿~~g'0<l~Yap.t:¡ of the defer~nce of the.¡.Partgiansand. fors~ndÍl1:g,9Ut.\a,\ijJ:J.:gs his ownsubjects requested him;s8 As we"have~~~P:Ó!!'al"Jjer,4q~
yet.again,:.'the'poor staie, asI'acit~s;: sees,;L~l';of; Jü1io?,(;,laudian foreign pólicy;:;chfractérizedbYian;oy~rzeQ1ousltrU:stinhostage"":taking; , .,
'
is precisely; the ','¿Ómpany",wgich .the .emp~ror~h~U¡desthew.
that his cQurse,?f áctionl waS::disregardéd ,by;;the ¡liostagedempnstrates; I
,
o1J;.~
'
NERO'i~P~BW..~p,.AND,
TtIEEAS,T:f
question of former hostages;' and Tacitus:s;reader'~omes,to.awai uninspiring denouement.paudius" a~visesM,ehetdates,.who is¡¡a a '~fosterchild" ofthe, city, that he shouldreject;,thetraditionaJ. politi9.: relationship.thatexist;ed between ruler'and tlwed.in Parthia that<óf
Mehérdates',~as',the'¡ast of 'the Pgraatean host,~.gesmentionedby :our SOlltÚS,bút as Tacitusdéscribeslt,: thepractf&bfiaking hostages, with
55 Tac. Ann. 15.16.
6? Tac. Ann. 12.12:
.
,''''.''::'''''
',,""
238
,,'
,",',
'"'",',;,.,,':,,,.',.;.,.",':
,.
,
59 Tac. Ann.
56 Keit~l 1978, 466 reads Meherdates in light of the civil war.between Mithridates and Varda~es. On the pattern followed by Meherdates, see Ziegler 1964, 65; Martin 1981, 153-154; and Gowing 1990, 320-32I. 57 Tac. Ann. 12.10: ideo regum/iberosobsidesdari, ut, sidomestid imperii taedeat,sit regressus ad' principem patresque,quornm moribus adsuifactusrex me/ior adsasceretur. 58 Tacitus alsonotes that Claudius chose. not to equate himseIf with Tiberius, who also had sent out hostages.
,1', "'.
Longinus,
'w,,:..
. "\;
'.','"
'1'
'"",:,
12.10: alumnus urbis. . . dominationem et ser1{os... rectorem et aves. revocarepriscummorem.. .dignum..maioribus suis. On.the
see Koestermann"I967,.,:127.".128;
Keitel
1978,
467-468;
and
character of Martin
1981,
169.. 61 Tac. Ann. 12.12: summamfortunam in luxu ratum. 62 Tac. Ann. 12.14.Gowing199°,32largues that thepunishmentand especiallyGotarzes's vaunted clementia are meant to recall ironically Claudius's speech. Cf. Martin.1981, 154. Ziegler 1964, 66 n. 15° drawsa comparison with the punishment ofthe pseudo-Smerdis in Herodotus 3.69. Cf. Hyrcanus, the Hasmonaean king captured bythe Parthians.
239
~
',¡"i
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE-TAKING
'.TACITUS¡ONHO!>TAGE~TAKING
IN THEROMAN:El\.1PIRE
¡.
a larger ,than ,life statue intheTemple of.Mars the .Avenger after Volqgaeses simply retired in ,order tó deal with civil unrest athome, and not because,ofNero's m¡u1euv~rs.~8By.contrast,. Tacitus says that what. sincerel):(;pleased the senate,beyond their.éJ:1!.ptypraise ofNero, was when"C.orbulQ was put incharge. Sirnilarly.when Corbulo arrives in the,;gast,.he, is likewise .depicted ,<\$the one whom theallied kings respect,;¡\nq.:not..his co-comrnander'Quadrattts.~.9 Tacitus thus.dra\V~ attentip.Q to\the~differeqc~)betwe~n theilluspry,.andthe real; betvye~tl Net:o¡,;¡n,i:l",€or1;mlo,..an, interesHhathe,re~in~n th~, ensuing descrip,.. tions.,Qfthe!,campaigps !in :Ó¡q;tenia;¡nd"the.function 'pf th~ hostages.. Ah~e start¡pf,the,'.!c~p;1Pilign \Corb~10.and<Quadrá~~14emand. that Vologaeses baek down,! subm,it.4pstages" and,.cpntinue '.'¡the,reverence, fori theRoman people in,keeping'i witb,;,their¡ ances~<;>1~s'customs,~:;?~ AccordingqtQ Tacitus¡..yologaeses: agreed; butoruy so.,that..he 'cQuld "pt:'epare;for.war,.orexpel suspecte4 pretenders.in .the name ofhostageship,"(~,ln depIoying the. farniliar;tJ::opeofhostages as hated heirs, Tacitusisuggeststhat thesuprnissioni~ similar to .that ofP~:r:aates U,r/ssons generations pefore, unde't Augustus:\~)I1ceagain;the respect embodied by the:hostag~s was only;.rhetorical, and in reality,. tb,e,.Parthian,king was taking advantage of the ;R:omaps.N:evertheless for the,mom,ent, the,hostages are'.soughtiafter by both Quadratus and Corbulo\as symbols pf their,o:wn rol~int,he.diplomatic ,coup.As,Seen;)n Chapter 4, the two competeq. for the right tohold the¡,hostages, a dispute settled by putting th~ issue to a yote, py.the hostages themsylves, which~came out in Corb,ulo 's,'favor;7~Again,:,the¡'fqCUS¡ i,sO.Qtruthversu~illusiop.:. Corbu,lo. is.said t~ nave earne<:l;the;4óstag~s'!respectthrough Jrisprior gl9r)r,ju,st%as 'the senitors arid allié,d,;}cings had thÓrigntmore"})'igh1y of
the expectation of manipulating them fóftheir. symbolic imdpolitic:ij value continued, still to no avail. As'3éorbulo's comrnandshifts"'fibm Germany to Armenia" Tacitus continues to sethis rililítary itcComplishments against the contrasting background'of eínperors dependent on wieldin'g former hostages;..rather than fightihg toachieve{Rrome's interests.63 By SI CE; aniArsacid; Vologaeseso"elirninatedhisrivals"in Parthia andruled alone;.his farnily,background'(l{(~wasbohtof:aG'ieek woman) suggeststhat he may have been,acceptable,to,theR..oirIans.64 He entered Armenia and deposed. R:hadamistus; whd;had¡exhibíred a virulent hatred for R:ome.. Vologaesesapparently,had encountered little objection bothfrom 'thenatives andfrom,R:oII1e.6SHe~ppointed his brother, another Tiridates,to the'Afmenia1l.ithrone, butibYSJí.<CE; this settlement had be come unacceptaple to theRo1l.1ans. Accdrdirig to Tacitus, Nero decided to a~t,.orderihglegions'tó bestationedalorig the Armenianborder,instiuctifignearbyalliéd'kings t6piepáre them~ selvesfor a campaign,and sending Corbulo,tojoin Gaiu~lJmrnidius Quadratus, the governor of Syria.,'as the joint l~adérsiof'the'effoi:t;6f Tacitus lays the groundwork for thediscrepaneies betWeenY¡Corbulb and Nero right away. He begins by reportingrumors that theipeo,; pIe ofR:ome were skeptical ofNero's.ability; given that h~ wisliri&r the control of a woma:n (his, m'other,Agrippiná t'he :Younger)'aha his "teachers" (BurrusandSeneca).67Moreover; Tacitu$Lderides'tl1é senate forfalling ihtoits "customary syc?phancy" (su~tatwadul~tion~m) by offeringNero triumphal decorations, public cotnniemorations, ang
6) On the heroism ofCorbulb,
see'GilmartinJ,973i583
and Martin a981,
18O-18!, w
attributes the p~aise to T~~itus's ~se ofCor?ulo's~emqirs asa source.. Fo:a re~.~sessme] ofCorbulo, see'Walker Í952,29. OnTacihi;'s Criti(;is~ ofNero, bothsubdeandovéi .
him(HiarlofNef6:
1938,176-177;Kahrstedt1950,24-36;and Zieglet 1964,66-67. drove out Mithridates,
.'
.
,."
"'.
.
'i
68 Tac. Ann. 13.8.
,
69 Tac. Ann. 13.8. cf. Gilmartin
who had been
1973, 587-589.
7° Tac. Ann. 13.9: so/itam prioribus reverentiam in populum Romanum continuaret. 71 Tac. Ánn. 13.9: quo bellum ex commodo pararet an ut aemu/ationis suspectosper nomen obsidum amoveret.
66 Tac. Ann. 13.7-8. For a discussion ofCorbulo's a11iesin the campaign, see Barrett 1979 and Paltiel 1991. For Corbulo's career and the nature ofhis imperium, see Vervaet 1999 b. For a general history ofthe campaign, see Ziegler 1964, 72'-77 and Millar 1993,54-66. 67 Tac. Ann. 13.6. Cf. Gilmartin 1973, 586.
72 Tac. Ann. 13.9. Koestermann memoirs.
1967, 252 attributes the record ofthe 'victory'
to Corbulo's
241
240
..
~
.
When it becomes clear that Vologaeses's'hostages were insincere arid meimingless, Tacitus's Corbulo, ever painted as aman of action, again
in.his Armenian poliey, see W,,*er 1952; 22I ¡iClassen'I988, J12; ahd<{qwing 1990,'.:32~¡~ Chaumont 1976, 101-II6 notes its adherenceto Tacite¡¡npattern. ~yme 1958,492 497 views the account has meant to have a bearing on contemporary policy in the earlyi second century; cf. Vervaet 1999V 64 Tac. Ann. 12.44. For the historicalbackground ofVologaeses's accession, see Debevoise 65 Tac. An~. 12.44-47 describes lÍow Rhadarnistus made king by Rome.
AND HEROISM
~
, ,'L ~........
~
ii
.
lO
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE- TAKlNGIN
THEROMAN
EMPIR,E
TACITUS
Right away,;.qorbulo -;-the man.Whú by pursuinganall out campaign against Tir.idates had 're~isted;,toeno~moUs,.acclaim, the institution ot hostage~taking' as iÍt had, be~n practice~ with Vologaeses - cedes auth9rityal1d is reassigned,tp~Yt'ia:iotakeover~he.provirtce atter the recent:ideath ofhis,cp.:.c°will;1rl4er; Quagratus..As,T~dtus describes it, .the liaid'-won. advantages;>q(GQrbulo dn Arirtenia.,immediately h~gin t9. uniaveLVologaeses:s:su~jrtts.complaiIi that' :"they.haddescended to the,:,¡Jevebot contemp,t). ".tlil~y;were ,:assaulted;¡notev~n ~ya R:ornanigeneral but hy~t ess:ofa:,ho~age,,¡whp ~::was .d,etainedJor
probablr because hisqwn memoirS'W~~~iOnept'['acitus's soutces;'!ido¡s not hesitate to res9rt toarms; Jacit~stcoD;1par~sGpfbu~oiwith:'LtJ,CullÜS and Pompey as'he'1p.arch~s his armies~own,theírifami1iarpaths,into Armenia.73 Ignoring thehostagtt~; Corbulosharpens disFiplineifU;l1ong his troops, raises auxiliaries,slee~ps.inteJ;lts~yeniip' the defld'pfjwinter, andkills thosewho tryto dysert. In atdJficJ;lgF9ntr"~St;Jaci,tbs's"Qorb410 ~'seeksqut abattlf' while ':firid~t.ysirnanage~.to/avo*d(;ommi~tingí,bi~ troops.74 Tacitus enhancesi<z:orbtilo's'initiativ~ by.rethph'}#2;ing;~.p:,~.fapti thatheis ,doing alJ..qft.p:isága1ns~ith~,'conveO¡tiQn:spfpeacefur.p:qst'}g~4i. taking;che ,..says,that.;[firidátesisert,sqvors.~pi'~slc..C;:prkWq:iWhyi'h~i::was attacking .'eyen'ii'fteritlieYiha~given hos~age~'/i(Faci~us;i Of(;()q{S~;ii4;ls already,.~ett4~ireaderknow' that. thehostages ;v\I"efy,.otn9i;v:alue;i~¡;I<:l Corpulq 's fOf~sightiand initiatiyeiisIthtJ,siBcreasinglYixal()riz~d.,Tiri41 &'1tes.continqesto fall back. artd . er; ,,,',"" TíJ.citus,.c9titinues,toi.d~scribeinUm "'" .,"" '.. "". ousfeats otCorbulo's couragei~nd, ingenuity,bu.ildipg ppconside¡;ablé momentum in hisreport: Corpulo takesa;\'Vell'-deten~e4fót'tress\Y;itlx7 outilosing a single man;he is hard;-pressed.by,poóJ:iirrationsandiharsh conditions yet still captures twoi~trongh9lqsh'hé (')rder~i*:(orcedllfa~cl?c: to push Tiridates even turther tO.itheborder'evenatteriheiis:alre;¡.dy on the run.75
'
When Tacitus has reached a!¡1ointwher~@o~p!,110:iisirtitótíJ,l contr!)l i
er9:
.,
( ,
By slaughter and arson [Corbulo]destroyedievery placewh~Fe..he',observed that,men opposed us, ar<;Lhe H:sJ1rB~dc()n~r()~()f Atl11~nia.;:r;heiJ]ig~~~~~ arriy~.~(cUl1Jfldverli~:1)igrane~) .H~,~;¡,.~tP,Fen y'h9s~n b)',~et'9;~9íta~.\OOyu,)J . .', command;. . but bécause he had been a hostagein the citYfor a l()l).gi,t he had deteriorateg. to a s~~yishpassivity.76 . . ,
poody aridsqmlnders the~r mahp~wer¡~ultimatel)'::Corbulo mu~t return to ,rescuetra.pped;Ro1p.an;:ill:m1~s:and¡drive Vologaeses out a.secon'd time. 78Thecamp~gn1end$;}Y~~h'Tigranes'deposed and Córbulo offerirtg' new. t~rrnsto Tiridatdsi. S9i'long 'ilshe,tadmits Rome's hegemony and; tam9usly,' goes. t9iRomedn person:to,lbe; crowned inpublicby Nero himselE 79 ,.,,':.. /:1;: .,' By: this' point;;,ia.citus~s'\'pi$dain:,.f'dli: the; retormed;lh0stage given in peace is ,U1Ú:f¡.istakable;,Bú(theídeaof ~,~tetormation"ds not entirely jettisoned::¡in¡ the:'eJ1s11ingi:l~rráriy~::of~6d)ulo,heAdemonstrates'that !!ee~i1Gatibh¡,i6.gortet6tr<fctly~~fttlt;physiCa1\subjugation¡¡ can.be,al'finit. As Tao1tus tellS\iit;oÍ1c~júorbÚl6is'back"in\\charge, ,he;is.,said:;to' .act as1ateacherto ,Tiridat¿;s:wheri:\thei~o áre in:aconterence,iC017.b't,1io answerS Tiri<:lates's questi<'lhs abouttne: inipressive .Roman¡ ,milita¡::Y, 77 Tac.Atln.
73 Tac. Ann, 13.34. On the comparison of Corbulo with Luchllus and Pompey, see Koesterrnann 1967, 301 and Gilmartin 1973, 591. ' 74 Tac, Ann, 13.35-37: quaesito diu proelio.The account is clearly exaggerated,.as, ~emon.L, strated/by the story ofthe soldier whose arms,fell offfromcoJd when he was carrying; firewood. ' 75 Tac. Ann, 13.38-41; 14.23-26. Cf. Isaac 1990, 25 on Tacitus's characterization acc1irnatization of the army. See also Barrett 1979. 76 Tac. Ann, 14.26.
242
ofthe
.
so, many:,years, anipng¡:I~, a~es:,(ma~dpia)."Z?:¡::radtus's¡ref~rence to ch~tteJhs significa' . orstbcJabel.:he §rstlgay~...to .Vonones when¡de~cdbing ;the Rarth~ati\réadionS,to,h}m., Aridthet;warerupts as 1" i ..' , , , Vologa~sesándTiridates:,: . ei!!new;aManta~ ill"Armenia,.takirtg the, opp9rtunity lofjC~tq . epaiture(Tacitris"dévotes much éfttention to;this second:coi:iflict:!,@a:~senhius Paetus'leadsthe.Roman ..' ., , .' . ' "torees
ot Arm~nia atter.many sacrificesandstruggles,hé aQ~u.ptlrbHngs.the' st9ry.>toáhalt when,;hereintroducesN
Or::;rHOSTAGE';TAKIt:'lG AND HEROISM
15.1.
,
78 Tac. Ann, ,.15,6- 18. Pa~t.us's lailu~ei,rf?~~a~d wit~ ~;,It?man defeat at tht;, Cau<line fo~ks (15,~5). ?n Tacit~s's' cn~~~steii~~oH\of P~e~s;i~7~ ?~tin ~973,(íIQ7-619; Cliauniont 1976, lII-II3;P~rierl?,?1~253-'-254; ~dl\1attem~999, 17i. GO~l1g 1990, 3~8 notes the antitlletical <iliaJi~betWee~ P~efus andCorb~~.,,' .'.'.' 79 Tac. Ann. 15.24-28. In po&aying1,Corbillo'sreturn, TaqtUs llearkens back to thesuccessfill Lucullus (15.27).For Tiridatd's c6ronatiob: In Rome, see Suet, Nero 13; Cass. Dio,'43.1.2; an.d on its importance as an expression ofRornanvalues, see Mattem 1999, 177.
243
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE-TAKING
IN THE ItOMAN EMPIRE
explainin,g the system ofwatches, signM~iand exPressions<ofhonor.80 ti Notably, the lessonCorbulo gives is noi:hing like thatteceived.by the hostages who were ftedy given to Augustus <lndhis successors; at'least as Tacitus describesit: the emphasis is not onbanqueting,noron philosophy, nor on governrnent, but on theirresistiblen<lture ofRornan arms, and the "studentl,' has been forciblyreduced beforehar1dJF "Eh€! punctu<ltioncomeS when Tirid<ltes sübinits hisdaugh'ter asiáhóstage to Corbulo, jtist before setting ofHor Rome. Tlfesfory thusehds'well for Rome, butiónlyas a,direct.tdult,of, first,Corbu16 'sreali~atior1'tn¡(t Vologaeses's host:<lgeswere,insihcere and; second,his returl1 tobattle aftet. <lfotrner', hOstage;,appoihted
by N erd, had<failed;
EPILOGlJE:
~
,r;(:0'iA :f' V'i("..~'¡ars!!~eteriifying~p:mo~t
"
Tne notrnsof Rot1í<ln hostage~taking ate ctitical in'Tacitus's attempts to de.velop'his characters .and articubte his thesis,.on'tne shortcomings of the ]ulio-Claudianernperors. He takes a dirQ:view of hostage-taking wnen it is, done: irtesponsibly as the only rnethod of entry into a foreign territory. Repeatedly, he 'ptesents, a hurnber'qf dichotoinies between, on the óne hand, hostages ,andhostage"-takers, and, on theother hand, the 'ptoperRoman soldiet, "-'ipassive verSus active,. decadent versusOld..fashioned,slaveiversus free, ,slowversus fastoHe rejects thevalueFofthe host-guest,father-son, te<lcher...student paradigms in explicit terrns, recasfingthe act of edudtiot1 arid fosterage as tant<lrnount todisrespectfuland fruitless enSlavement, These are .
constructs th<lt, <lcéórdingto Tacitus, the enemy l1everifailstO' 4etect, andthat thus onIy breed resentment and foment, futther resistance. The resistance is ali the mote successfulbe2ausé' the,gtíard'setagainst them - the former hostage hihlself - isnot:;upfottne!óhallenge;Tne figure of thehostage and nis malleability wer~thus sdzed on by the historian as opportunities to commentonRorn<ln order, both at home and abroad. 80 Tac. A,m. 15.30. cf. Gilmartin 81 In this sense, Corbulo's
1973, 624 and Chaumont
J;I1ode of reeducaclng
Tiridates
1976, II7-II8. is similar to, that of Ta(;itus's
father-in",law, Agricola, about whom Ta<;itUs wrote much earlier in his career. lA that case (Agr. 20.1), Tacitus describes a process of hostage acculturation that meets with extraordinary success under Agricola's watch. By contrast with the Julio-Claudians; Agricola, after receiving the hostages, surrounded the donor tribes with garrisons and forts, and only then promoted their RomanÍzation. See Chapter 6.
244
THEAúTAR AND THE COLUMN
..'",
p~qp~e; teal,~it1gtJ1is,leadersmay
<~<~,~?'~'~iJbe~,gft>y<J:OP!j,~!1'?<IW'\,cm ''IX \\I!at;¡h<)"
'Yin
them,.,orthey ,~¡Ins~ythat theya,)Zoidthern'J'Whateve~J1ispplicies a~ein,
.
prac~ice;a,Je¡Id~r,rnay'manip]Jlate..p.is image ei~l1er,.¡Isuniv~rsalftiehd er aS9plJ.queiÍl:~gh~rq',n,orde,r:to calhl th¿nt1r:.ve~i'Jo(hisJóllowers., an,dto 'YÍntl1~wover tqhisiSide/ln, <V1cieí:1t'Rqme,c1'\ugustvs'sAltarofReace' atJ,q,:rrajan,'~victoW:'f.:o~umn.,á~eyivid'ex¡J.mply§iotthetwoi'extremes., The form~r~"as we,have .,seen, displ¡Iy~<\),quiyt,rgarchforward,}with~ chihiren" wOrnep.'ipriests"and sena,tors;¡facial~".expr;~s~i8ns a,re serene andifli~itied,iand n,Ol1,ept;tb,émseerns fierCe.,f\.f¡gure evenl1o1dsa finger to{the;:ItJ,outh, seeiningly.hu~hing both,feJlow;statues ancl,the peqplp watching,them. Traj.¡Ih's'colu.tJ,1nialsqdepices;-a:.processipt1 :of sqrts,'but it is:cly;¡rlW.iradicaliyidifferel1,t; it is:a,,¡;nilitary carnpaignthat la~tsfor a 10ngtiItJ,e,'iGovers.ItJ,alfy.~~e~!í~tJ,1;l~esllqts ofnóise";ln,d spirals skyward eutdof sight.,l\1!,th~wnile'iR9matJ,soldiers'~emoIistrate g~it., anddeterinination;. andthe,pnIpOking ernpero~iis cooland inconf~9h The.arcl1itectural forms alonetelli¡qfvastlr: different ,ways,ofthinking, 'Fhe former: agenerOUS sanctuary;.open, to the sky;¡:.with pig )Vide doorways inviting' a breeze; the latter: "an :upward: thrust; towering over its foundation, a metaphor of aggression. One is low, theother tali; one may shade the viewer; the other makes him squint.I Yetfor ali their differences, the two monuments deliver a sin1ilarmessage: Rome is safe. In both cases, theRomans move in tandem; on the column, the I
For other readings of the monuments 122-146; and Clarke 2003, 19-41.
side by side, see Huet
245
1996; Campbell
2002,
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE-TAKING. IN THE ROMANEMPIRE
EPILOGUE:rTHE
AVrAR¡AND 'fHE COLUMN
.,¿
,concerried;:':g6rie are, the smiles,:\ahdthe playfuI tugs on the' togas that ¿haracterized,those on the Ara;Pacis¡¡ífhese children.arenot guests in iRome,not 's~dehts ofRioman cuIdIre, n(kpar~icipantS in Romanreli,~
order and symmetry of Rorne is eSPr7i~y contrasted with thechaos, of the Dacians. Bo~h of these ernperdrs-long-lived,successfPl~ilap,g. for the rnost part fondly rernernberedby
history - sougl1t to conveya
In addition to themonuments both malcing theyie"Yer fee1likepe is out ofhat:m's way,they havé~oinething.~ls~" rnoresp~c,~fic,in c01111J1on: theyare the only rnonument~ frdmt1:te ,ancient! city(extant,that is) that show Romans '.,alongsj<iefhe..,chjJdr~n .of anoutsi4~r7Ie<tcler¡fi~s ,. we hav:eseen,. thetwoforeign children:Qll;theAra'Eacis are)arrapge~;
gion;:rai:her, the);"are the emDdOitnent..of.the helplessness and despair 'ofany' E>acIansv'whosomeHow;~rnanag~á,to;surviveH'iInother words; this:is :Traj~,';Winning arwar. ' ,,;iIiwóítl4;u;~e that the~depiction ofthéchildrerLofthe rion-"~dman iulirigídass: on1both ofthe~e' :rnonurpents,; aswell,as .in::wqrks\ofiother in~dia: ;TI,íad~tri~cá1cdntrxbutioiis :tdthel,¡e"dmans' senseof,théir4,pbce . .in,the'¡Mediterran~arh'f:h~¡Waysiiri ';~hich ,the~.hildre"n,of¡¡the.foi::¡¡:ign
in correspondence \Vitht?e<iompass g.irectjo;iof't~e~r .hQ.F1!~~~r the"Gallic}} childfaces:the north\V;est;theiiOne,\dresse~)jmad~~id~~a eas~ern.,~tyleslippers lookshome\V;a,rd tothe southandeast (f'igqres,j7;" 4). 1'heir. n:lostimportant aHributeris thaf theJ':,aré.n;otRornan¡,püft!:tpy' are also shown young, happy;under!cOntrol;~ndaloneforif1ie'~om;J¡ns; to supervise. The ,periphery.that:they..represent;;i~r\W0111dibeniJJder"i. stood, \V;asin virtuallythe samestate~i1'hesetwo'children haveappear~d' so many timesin.this;hook that.one might thinkth~tthey! :w:eFeápig,.; gerpresence on the .altar:.than!th~Y really!are.Being atoddler ang.¡~ preadoleS'cent,;;they do nottakeuprnuch room, but thattalso seents¡to ". be part!ofthe pqint: it literaUygdes without saying iil.thisixegifi1e"that' the bordersare takencare of. ,'I'bis is.Augusttts avoidir~Wá{"'Ta'n
'elite',~~\etrea~ed;in''Rome;'b~;~~eYi ~ostag:~;'orstuae~~;~u~~.~s' 01: recru~ts¡ie}qÜarned,~he,strengtll ,\and".characterofRome sipreell11~ent '.positiondIi' an internacional': híerarchy. It.,triar be usefuVtQ' think~"rof th¿' pdctlct;.'.of' hostage~taking,.ih. Romariailtiqúiti)";asáhalogous.to early.nptiQns .0E:stapego~tirig:Wliereas in Gre'ekieligion.;sotnekind oE:being,i ¡eitherhuman ,.oI-ahÜnal. (apharmakos)¡,,'was'ritually",assigned as.:}¡;vessélifor.,aconinÚmal 'hriL.(~miasÍ11á)s.áhd'tneu' .ceremoniously driven:'fromithehüman realm,takirig his ~Icargo?) Yvithhim, ,likeWÍse ihe 'diplomatic!hostage bore the.intensity/ofithe former hatred oftwo worlds.iHecarrieda miasma.ofconflict; all tension,was piledon him sothat;once .he"was moved ,to/t,!1:ec\ sidé, frieridli~!.relations ,qmld ensue.When'these friendlier relatioils becaroe no~,niíilized,and.warfare
sense of pro~lJ,edty ~nd securiyr; it ..~~ jus~fp.at!they about how to get there. ," '.
hag.diff7Fent{ic\e~ ". '
.
QnTrajan's colurnn, tJ:teforeignchiJclrepare ~soi':difficuk\to'~e buttheirlqcation is ¡equallyxritical'."to, theoveral1.'icornp()sitiono[J.tl
forgotten, the 'int~nsityof theHo~tage'~<~ias~aa~cordinglyfaded: But jf.the'se!,relaticms<broke' do~;.,theii4ostage\'was, in thedry if nOt"in
monUrnent.
practice;,.tó1suffer the' con&equences; sheddihg\alonedie'blood'ofwar. In th~\n~gotiatioils precedingt~esuDmissioti ofhostages,' thectwosidés défi:ned.and' artiÓ.l1ated:what was;"to hec'ome',a tiew'.'Orddor business
'.
They, areiat.the.1..ver-y.".top;,..;toward.i.tPe[aJ."row's;.head,."'S
to speak.tFhe culminating scene of'¡theJongi'fwistyi'epic-in'-stdrié\
o~the .sons of;Decepalusbeing,forciblydetained)icbpt'not iharmed,i:~ Roman centurions,ás their fathér;'petrified¡isknockedqbwn, hum.il iated, and slaughtéred beforethem (Figures 9' and.ro). It ispossibl: that theapparent gash in Decebalus's throat was.self.i.inflicted, but th scene is stillone ofutter viQlenC;:e;the ne:x;~imageto the rightis of his , decapitated head being shown to thetroops. 3 Asfar as the children. are 2
-
bétween them by meaÍls ofi treaty;lusuaÍly ""7which was tÍntendéd to' bring an' end to, the .alterilationbetweenudiplomacyand ..wartare. Mterhostages hadbeengiven; thé tw0.popuIations ,""buId beahle t0 interact according to a se!:of ruIes,lon a day-to-day' basis;o'predictahly. The hostageeffectively,froze the new:status qua, arrivedat through war andother interactions, and made it reliable. Nev:ertheless, it was always
Kuttner 1995 makes a thorough case for a now lost monument that depicted..the sur-
render of the same "Gallic" child as appears on the Ara Pacis, an image that one ofthe Boscoreale cups preserves in miniature. 3 See the chapter in Lepper and Frere 1988 appropriate1y tided "Mopping upo?' esp. 177. Lica 2000, 202-208 discusses the oblique evidence for Dacian hostages, suggesting,
246
genera1ly, thatthey appearon the column, but not isolating this scene in particular, No hostages are mentioned in Cassius Dio's account ofTrajan's wars; but'Cass. Dio:79'.27.5 mentions hostages detained by Caracalla but recovered angrily. by the Dacians.
.247
~
EPILOGUE: THE ALTAR AND THE COLUMN
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE- TAKING IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE
a uniquely Roman brand of peace that q~ickly adrnittedthat. the"pain , of war could easily return some' time in the future, only exercis~d at that point on the person of the hostage. As the hostage passed &om one worId into the Limbo bordering another, he removed war to a different place; but he did noteliminate it. The rangeofhuman responses to victory and defeat included too many powerful atixieties.,... greed, ambition, fear, resentment to trustthat feelfugs of hostility w:ould dissipate on their own, or abide by the economy of superior strength over relative weakness, or yield to the weighe ofpromises. Hostage;;;.takingwasa mea.ns ofharnessingthÓse same, poweñúl'human anxieties and driving them in a different direction. In theory, the life and well-being of one or a few people were injeopardy, and the threats against themhad theeffect of distracting an entire society, or at least the ruling dass thatmade the decisions, from acting i'rila.rger interests; in theory, the hostage donors would act to preservethe hostages. All eyes, then, were on the hostage. Was he happy? Was he uncomfortable? Was he safe? Was he threatened? Talking about the hostage in different ways, writers and artists and this includes emperots whose art form was theitpublic image.;... couldexpress their opinibn's'a'rid make their casesabout the natuté of the peace at hand. The children on
-
-
the Ara Pacis suggest that a willingIy submissive periphery Was already in place; the princes on Trajan's ColUI1Úl,however, were detained, it would seem, because Rome hadto hold iis heel on the dowt{trod:... den north. The various motifsdiscussed in thechaptersof thisbook might be said to line up under the headings of the two n1onuments. The Ara Pacis children are certainly guests in Rome; their proximity to ihe biological children of the ruling family also implies that they had a filial associa.tion. Moreover,when a Roinan "rea.d" theyouth on their faces, they would think of their impressionability and of the potential for teaching them a ne\v, less dangerous opinion of their capital city. A century later, however, on Trajan's column, the boys are taken against their will, and their faces are marked by anguish. Tl¡ese will be hóstages of the variety found in our modern popular culture: a gun held to their heads, or rather knife to their throats, in effect challenging the Dacians, daring them to make a move while also congratulating the Romans. They serve to expand on the defining theme of the whole monument: Rome's overwhelming, pitiless military 248 /'
prowess. They will be the walking¡ ,talking trophi~s of the .Dacian wars.. Although the two monuments and the different ethics of security that they connote can beuseful in dividing up the seemingly conflicting images ofhostage-taki~g, qescri1?ed in. tl1is book, itshpuld be remembered that the categoriesare. not ex.clúsive: the.\Ílnage of a student learning Roman culture could be wielded\as evidence of that hostage'shumiliation rather!:han his opportunities. iFor example,
to Tacitus, when. Agricola combinedthe right amo.untof force and
physica1ántimidatioq...withthe re~9ucatioJ;lo€thehost~gesiq.B.~itain, he was showing the \vayto the enslavement of the population. Moreover, when' Dio Chrysostom alluded to .asexual relationship between Philip 11and his overseer, it was,in.the vein of mentoring, even charity, and not...at .all.thehorror show:of,;rap!:¡i01=thei;GOmedYii.of deqadeJ;l(:~ thatappearimmpst accounts of ahostage'ssexuality.iDepending qn a number
of factors
-
author, genre, era
-
the motifS of hostage-talcing
could be used for different agendas. Over time, certain ways ofthinking about hostages fell in and °\lt of fashion, "and the motif of one regimecould,be apprppriatedat'ldr~deployedi.n anothyrvvith a new meaning. Do the two monuments reflect different ways of thinking that were current and predominant in their eraS?Can we fill in the century that separated them w:it4a story of g~t'lera1attitudes tpwardhostagesch:mg.;: ing over time? If so, whatis thatstory?'.ifrying.itotrackcontin,uity/and change in Roman antiquity can easily seem like a fool's errando Naturally, our evidence is fi:agmentary. All wereceive are flashes oflight, interspersed sporadically, some times shining together, other times faint andthimMoreover, :J.ttemptsto"fill the gapbe~eeJ:l the. altíl,ran,9the column are hazardous because the foreign boys may just reflect context, as opposed to trend: perhaps Augustus's periphery waspeaceful; Trajan's certain1y was resdess. But other scenarios also could explain the images: Augustus wanted. to seem in blissful control. for obvious reasons having to do with the long civil war, which perhaps had litde to do with the actual periphery; and Trajan, not a part of the old Flaviandynasty,perhaps wanted tOseemto be ready and willing to use overwhelming force, and not just against the Dacians. With fragmentary artd contentious evidence, one turns to ancillary sources in the 249
\
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE-'TAKtNGIN
THE ROMAN EMPIRE
EPILOGUE:,THE;ALT
AR.iANDTHECOLUMN
~r hope that clusters ofreferences froI}l4t~g~San;teor.i'similar contexts ~r~ the monuments can attain a criticaL.mass whereby we can di~cern a pattern. The Augustanperiod seems tOibeamongthe bestcilluminatedby these. "flashes of light."Three t~enqscan be tracedin theevideh~e of the Augustan age aSiwehave,it.Ii\irst, there seen1sto:have been a general acceptarice'of the t<Wng.,pf:hQstages.as.:áf<.>rrn .0[; viCtor.yir¡. and of i~self.:.rhe resto~,th~,¡f.-ugustan' cdmpleXnt!aJ;~h~ altar:spellsj'it. out: the emper<.>r{~ .R.esGfsfae.totht1rIot'thttuq¡.p~ts hisabjjityt()i\vin without figpting¡as];>rovén.Jw the. sor¡.S\qf!Ppraates rv"under;'hi,si~;:J.re;. his and Agripl?a:~q¡.apof th~World:t.Qth~iSÓllthmakes,the efCteritgfi his dominion .quani:ifiable,"asimuch\fur.iheringthe;causéofl1mpire..as mere1y reflectingit;0tt thisscore;¡l'\Ügustus .rnayihave'be'en' tákirig/á. pageittorn his adoptive t;:J.thet'~pl'lY1:>qok:~i~aesa.t's cotn.Ínentaries with their recordsof theuqflappabledétention of;hostages wereiq¡.eant topersuadethe Rómagsat.. horne that.l1is.grip onGaul,anq..eyen Britain, wassecurei~hatis moreimportan,t isthat<21.aesar's reportofthy detention of'rthose.hostages.was taket).up and repeated by st!bsequent historians. ::rhe hostagecould connote. victor.y.tegardless ofhowIJ,ej. was. acquired. Livy's version of the Lucanian hostages ,he1d byS~ipio' Barbatus suggyststlIat the consul t'eceivédthemwith<.>utafight;itis. a revision of the olqer stor.ytold on the.tombofthe"~~ipids,wher~ Barbatus iSi.portr;¡.yedasm<.>reOfa"conqueror,butitd<.>esn'ot dim\ni~p;; hisprestigei¡Fotthe motif. of theefficaty .ofpea,cefi,tl stibmission'it.d¡, work, it .calls fot'al1other; second motif: AUgu~tanstorie$bfhostage takip.g oftende~lare that hostages learnsOIlféthillg,aboutRome whiJ they ..'lfe there.t[n keeping, with thé:notion that:i-willing submissiqpY\ wa's tantaInounhto;'physicalrdominatigl1,hQstages wereexpected¡t~~ become Roman ándthrough theiNvassalage'give'.areturn.on an initial.. investment, .as \ theeconomic and emptional expenses of war'w~re;it ' avoided.For exainple, Livy goes abQveand beyond Polybius's stor.y of Antiochus IV's acculturation to include a.;unique record of n~w¡ gladiatoriah exhibitions in Antioch anda temple to Jupiter Optimus Maximus, the '!atter of which is sure1y a misrepresentation, at best an exaggeration¡ The tradition .of Juba's transformation, which caE be corroborated by his 'portraits and his efforts, if nothis successes, at urban reform in Mauretania, has its earliest literary;¡testimony in Strabo,
whojs.happy tOhreport ofRome's'absorption of theknown world. The emperor himselfdaims a personal reSponsibility for this success: a third aspect of wha~ might be.called the Augustanvie~ of hostagt;s is thaqheenterprise was ; honorable, with a ,prot~col ~nd'cpdtfof ethics that~;boun4 ihe' periphery to '¡~..Orlle , . ), whi1e';also signaling th~. moral ' . superiority ~f the' host(lge""taker. Itr ;l1ivy,Scipid '1\tticanus in Sp~n acteq"with.,idecprum in returning¡, Iberian hostages'"'" totheir honies'~., "> .. ,. .' "" . " ' Again~;h~(:g<:>es'. b~yond the .,.]>olybianaccount when, he\~~ys:\adowr.y' was pr~v~&F~t6 oneofth~m;Alohgtlps'lin~ ,o'~l1i~king,'the slaughter of lIos~agesbec.omes ~n¿onscionabk. 0nly;, the"horrible Samnites 'af the Caudine' Forks ,w6uld be capable' of executing' thel~hostagys;,"Livy is sure.to point out,thatwhen theRomans kWed hostages;a~.inthecas~;' ofthe Thuri<ms and,Tarentinesin the,Second Punic War, it becaus/;< .. '''.' ." '.', '''." . W'as '.' . Rome was the victim:tlIe Thurians'ah&Tarei;1tines had'tried ta escape, even though the.R:orhans were housing them in the Atrium Libertatis,'01:' Hall ,of Freedom. Moreover, Ovid drew a line under the sacrosanctit:y of the hostage when he replaced: Lycaon.'s'son with Lycaon's hostage ' and replaced:Uupiter with a' thinly disguised Augustus iri .the story of the moral transgression thaded to the great flood. H()~tages',were clearly"respect~d,;figuresi such: that '&o~e's veryfoul1ded,'Romulus' . I I , " and Remus, may havebeenhostages themselv;es, given:by:AeneaS to' ~, . Latinusin afriepdlY,¡lgreem~nt that~aq:ordin.g to a source'of;DionysIus of Halicarnassus,' also ,of the\~ugpst~n age,.melded Jh~)nyoraces: hltQ one, harmoniojiswhole. This encapsulati~n Of;i,Au~~~anattit~de~ .;is not meant tÚ iI11plwthat;~he1~attwh9 was h<?nor~dby:the>Aralfacis als6 commissioneq"the literáture;iNis fruitless;tolook that: , , . , "., ',' ,. ,'. ': fpr.clues '. Augustus 'Ipeddled .p.irectly in ,.J:~ivy's,01:-in Ovia's¡,or,inDionysius's ¡ literar.y lives: Nevertheless,i the trend ofbenign. tllinking on hostages iSi inescapable. Even if Livy and ;Dionysiusofl'Ialicarnassus are quoting others, they are stillpreservjng traditions, and,their decisions 01'1what to amplify and sustain reflect the climatein whiCh they worked: Vergil's famous dictum that Rorne will humble the haughty and give laws to the rest of the world is a capstone ofsorts: hostages' at this time were' thought to be agents of change on the peripher.y, both for igood and for the better. .'
It is fair to say that this notion was demolished in the Trajanic periodo A host of writers during the early secondcentury CEbetray
250
251
iII
~..
_...
"'
..
HOSTAGES AND HOSTAGE.:TAKINGIN
THE ROMAN EMPIRE
EPILOGUE: THE ALTAR. A:ND THE COLUMN
.~t
their cynicism with'respect to allthree tr~,~.asoutlined earlier;;to them,;~ hostage-taking alone did notequ:al a.mi1iÍ:aryvictory;hostages.learned nothing in Rome, or if they did learn sométhing, it was notpretty; and the emperors who played this game. were not wor~hy ,of respect but instead deserved contempt. Mosídf thesecritiques'ate deliyered in the form of negativeasses~ments of the JuJ.io-Claudians"A1JgI.lstl.ls inclu4ed. Tacitus'sAnnals, inpresenting,its parade.ofPaithian:losers, points outboth that thegains measuredby thehostages .,wereiil11JSo~ and that the mannerstijeylearnedin Romeon1yseJ;Ye.dtoffiíJ,ke thet;n effete, unwarlike, ..lazy,.an&ultimately'~orthless. Juvenal, too,'makes the acquired effeminacy of hostagesclear enough,.in.his secondSatiré about;¡fbuggere4..and debauched .Zalaces from;Armenia,andAchil).es Tatius's understanding:..of hostage-takingas apéllqgo¡Js,to)a,veritable seminar iri sexual immorality alsobearsitout.;racitusgoes ontoimply; that perhaps ifthe hostageshad been"detained,andindoctrinated with the right.admixture of force, as proven byhis heroes, Germanicus, Corbulo, Agricola, and others, then thestrategy mayhave be en'<lprof, ...
itableone; But the blind faith in hostages,it wasargued,:did.littlemore than provide the masseswitha good show, as Sue,tonius<:;laims was thecasewithCaliguJ.a and TacituswithDomitian;itwasan experisive deception auhat, as suggestedby Pliny's Panegyricto Trajan.J1Jst asLiVYi was aproduet ofhis time(if not oftheemperor's patromtge, direcdy), so tooare these others writing under a¡newRome: as TrajaI4self., consciously marched on Daciavand then,.AtmeniaandMesopotamia'.! and received thesubmission ofAtabia, he',reinvigoratedRome's n;rilitary ethos. New storiesof hostage-taking,and ¡cqntrastsJbetween the; brave and the cowardly¡theactivean&the paSsivé, thét9ugh;"and.the', meekwere deliberately sketched at thedawn ofwhat§Fl'ajan prefer#e&; to herald as a new day.As the emperorgáthered his armies, he acquired a sort of intellectualfuel from writers and artists wno created foils.oút of the preceding emperors; the Julio-Claudians wererefashionedas antitheses of proper Romanvalues. Hostage-tilingof the benevolent, . pacifying' sort" it was decided, was not in the Roman blood afterall. In conclusion, it would seem that betWeen thereigns of AUgl.lstus and Trajan, the Roman attitude toward the periphery, as gauged by its attitudes toward hostages, shifted ttom one ofwelcoming eondescension to that of stampedirigmilitary ambition. It would be too simplistic "
to' say, of course, that the discrepancy between the monuments is a reswt of the Romans, in the intérval, moving from avoiding wars to winning them, It is important to note that we are not saying that the hostages themselves. und,er Trajan ~éie less malleable, or more threatened, or more decadent; or less liked. With all the rhetorical constructions and oft-used tropes ofhos~~ge-tiling, the aet of recovering the "lived experience" of the hostages becomes problematic. The trends assignedearlier to both p~riods, fore~~mp~e, have their outli~rs: Qvi4's stories of hostagesinhis Unes on Lycaon and Scylla may nave been\spoofing the ~mperor.as mu:ch as respecting him, and Oppian; in ~s~n~~ost~~e exc~~geJeexplai~ T:2i~~bJole~ and:~p~~ia~~ in a second-centurYFontext,:necess~rilysubseribes to therosy picture of hostage út9pia tp.athls contet;npor~fiesby andlafge seet;ne.Qto, qespise. , .. ...' ') "J'.'..' ,. ,..,) .', .".. '.{" ..'
But t¡9t.only ar~,the,trenqsde~cribecihere POf9uSandnonexcl4sive, butin addition the sourcesthat constitute the trends do notnecessarily,represenfthetruth about thehostagesandthdse who took theni.
Traja~'sgainsiin'D;~Si;ihadtdib:~h~rfd~p by;la~ere11lp;e~ors,. w~ich is not theimpressionleft by.the"cohlt);1n. or 'by theviolént detention of,the ..h'ostages.4.0rdeiingtlle, scwptQtsto d~pict.hillJ;<l$a geIieral and tohighlight the blopdy slaughter ofDecebalus coilld be a case of protesting too much/ Shouldwe think:.iof7AugJJ~tus, then, asall that different [rom Trajan, even thoughihe Wasinot remembered for his soldiel'lyskills? Otir inforri1atidnis iÍ1cómpléteand'it is difficult to know fO,r . cdrtain "w nát'happened. "The, truth is.tnaf we do not. see .
:i ..
,. ,
...,
,
"
. ,."...,
,
4 In general, see Bennett 1997, 85-103. On the retrel1chment under Hadrian"with the buffer of so-called free Dacia; see Ellis 1998, 221 and Diaconescu 2004, 126. On revolts by the free Dacians .in 138-140 and 156-157, see Musat and Ardeleanu 1985, 58. Cass. Dio, 79.27.5 discusses a War under Caracalla. Ellis 199'8, 229""'233 doubts the feasibility of widespread genocide of the Dacians under Trajan, wruch is suggested by passages in Eutropius's Breviarium; Ellis argues instead that the absellce ofDacian names ili existing epigraphy reflects cultural difference rather than radical demograpruc changes.
252
~
.."'Ji
°9.lyth~. hosta~es dn J'raj\m'S,C9lumn or on 'the,'Altar of Peace; we al~o see the Romans seeing them,pr creatingthem, and ih the end, that is just as important.
253
.. ~ ..