Sejanus

In this article, the author focuses upon the testimonies on the trial of the senator Cremutius Cordus, author of Annales, who was charged in AD 25 with the accusation de majestate. Among the ancient sources, the historian Cassius Dio has not been considered worthy of special attention. Dio’s concise style and elliptic wording has conveyed the idea that he cannot furnish much additional information to what already said by Tacitus in his historical work (Ann. IV, 34-35). However, Dio’s text may give us an insight into a plurality of accusations de maiestate against Cremutius, whereas, according to Tacitus, Cremutius was brought into a trial “only” for having praised Brutus and Cassius. Through a detailed analysis of the testimony of Dio, we will try both to clarify some aspects of the Cremutius-case, and to cast light on the documentary relevance of the passage in Dio.

The argument of this paper is centred on early modern Tacitism and emergent political theory in Ben Jonson’s England and his play Sejanus His Fall. Early modern political theory displayed a shift from a Christian humanist framework to what has been termed as Tacitean politics. In this paper, I will be discussing how Ben Jonson’s Sejanus His Fall comments on current political affairs via contemporary Tacitism and particularly George Buchanan’s political theory, especially his oeuvre De Jure Regni Apud Scotos; A Dialogue Concerning the Rights of the Crown in Scotland. Jonsonian scholarship has successfully discussed Ben Jonson’s sources and focused mainly on the famous Flemish influence of Justus Lipsius’s Tacitism but has overlooked George Buchanan’s thought and his importance in the drama of Ben Jonson and his play Sejanus His Fall.

The career of the praetorian prefect Plautianus might initially appear to form a typical literary topos in which a meteoric rise precedes an ignominious downfall. Analysis of the limited literary evidence for the praefecti during the imperial period shows that they cannot be grouped so easily. It is noteworthy, then, that Dio ends his account of the life of Sejanus by claiming that he had exercised greater power as prefect than any other individual, with the solitary exception of Plautianus. While the senator implicates Caracalla as the architect of Plautianus’ downfall, the reference to Plautianus suggests that a direct comparison between the two prefects was intended. This paper will explore why Dio might have drawn such parallels, considering specifically whether this couplet should be seen as one in a larger pattern, or something unique. In addition to improving our understanding of Dio’s methodology concerning the Severan period, this will also potentially alter our perception of Sejanus’ downfall, for which, in the absence of a Tacitean account, scholars are reliant on Dio’s prose.

Hamlet’s Moment identifies a turning point in the history of English drama and early modern political culture: the moment when the business of politics became a matter of dramatic representation. Drama turned from open, military conflict to diplomacy and court policy, from the public contestation of power to the technologies of government. Tragedies of state turned into tragedies of state servants, inviting the public to consider politics as a profession—to imagine what it meant to have a political career.
By staging intelligence derived from diplomatic sources, and by inflecting the action and discourse of their plays with a Machiavellian style of political analysis, playwrights such as Shakespeare, Jonson, Chapman, Marston transformed political knowledge into a more broadly useful type of cultural capital, something even people without political agency could deploy in conversation and use in claiming social distinction. In Hamlet’s moment, the public stage created the political competence that enabled the rise of the modern public sphere.

The career of the praetorian prefect Plautianus might initially appear to form a typical literary topos in which a meteoric rise to power precedes an ignominious downfall. Analysis of the limited literary evidence for the praefecti during the imperial period shows that they cannot be grouped so easily, however, and that this description is atypical.

It is noteworthy, then, that Dio ends his account of the life of Sejanus by claiming that he had exercised greater power as prefect than any other individual, with the solitary exception of Plautianus. While the senator implicates Caracalla as the architect of Plautianus’ downfall, his dislike for the emperor being well-known, the reference to Plautianus at the end of the earlier episode suggests that a direct comparison between the two prefects was intended.

If Dio’s accounts of Plautianus and Sejanus are compared, clear similarities between the two narratives emerge. Both men experience incredible influence with the emperor in the aftermath of assuming sole command of the praetorians, both are given a multitude of honours, and both suffer catastrophic downfalls, following a range of bad omens and prodigies. This paper will explore why Dio might have drawn such parallels, considering specifically whether this couplet should be seen as one in a larger pattern, or something truly unique. In addition to improving our understanding of Dio’s methodology when writing about the Severan period, this will also potentially alter our perception of Sejanus’ downfall, for which, in the absence of a Tacitean account, scholars are reliant on Dio’s prose.

... The program features an article by Mike Blakemore, media director of Amnesty International, on "prisoners of conscience," another example of the strained attempts by this production to be a modern condemnation of both civil violence and capital punishment. ... Kristen Mcdermott. ...

Nel presente articolo, l’autrice si concentra sulle testimonianze riguardanti il caso del senatore Cremuzio Cordo, autore di Annales, accusato nel 25 d.C. de maiestate. Tra le testimonianze possedute, quella trasmessa dallo storico bitinico Cassio Dione (LVII, 24, 2-4) ha ricevuto poca attenzione da parte degli studiosi, poiche considerate piu esaustive le informazioni riferite sulla vicenda da Tacito (Ann. IV, 34-35). Attraverso una disamina approfondita della notizia dionea ci si propone di spiegare alcuni luoghi del testo che, poco perspicui a causa della loro sinteticita espressiva, non sono stati oggetto di un’adeguata esegesi. Pertanto, ci si propone sia di chiarire alcuni aspetti della vicenda di Cremuzio, sia di rimarcare il valore documentario dell’opera di Cassio Dione.

Attraverso lo studio diacronico di eventi chiave, si è tentato di ricostruire il legame tra mutilazione dei cadaveri e damnatio memoriae a partire dall'età tardo- repubblicana e primo imperiale.

Through key moments of Roman history, the aim of the present work is to highlight the strict relationship between political mutilation of bodies and damnatio memoriae in the Late Republic and the Early Principate

Valerius’ treatment of amicitia is strange indeed. Although he extols Roman friendships and ostensibly positions these as positive paradigms to emulate, all are set in moments of great civil upheaval: the Gracchan turmoil, the Social Wars, or the more recent Civil War. All feature excessive violence, all are marked by brutality and strife, and all showcase some form of Roman savagery against one another. Most strikingly, the ideas about friendship and loyalty Valerius advances emphatically privilege private allegiance over public fealty, and he repeatedly praises those who support their friends even when they harbor revolutionary designs that threaten social and political order – a vision of amicitia completely antithetical to Roman attitudes towards civic loyalty, dutifulness, and responsibility. The foreign exempla that serve as a foil render this all the more curious: although Valerius derides Greeks and their friendship and seems explicitly to condemn them, the paradigms he himself records reaffirm the humane values of that bond and stress its potential for maintaining civic harmony. My paper will explore this apparent tension, arguing that this extraordinary rendition of amicitia is a deliberate provocation carefully designed to challenge readers to think critically about the place and value of loyalty and friendship. One implication of my reading is that Valerius’ exempla are not only concerned with ethics and rhetoric but are also topical, underpinned by a cohesive social and political theory that identifies amicitia (or the perversion of amicitia) as particularly threatening to political stability. Relatedly, the chronological progression of these exempla through late Republican history is not accidental, but an authorial strategy that serves to underscore the reciprocal relationship between friendship and civic duty and the consequences of perverting either – a theme I show Valerius picks up not only from Cicero’s de Amicitia, but – importantly – Sallust’s Conspiracy of Catiline. Thus I argue that Valerius’ paradigms subtly encourage us to examine what it means to be an amicus in Rome at all periods, but especially during the early empire, with its novel pressures and demands on social relationships – and in the aftermath of Sejanus’ destructive relationship to Tiberius.