Treason (Maiestas) Trials: The "Reign of Terror"

Definitions
Treason trials form a particularly sinister part of Tacitus' account of the reign of Tiberius - his purpose being to highlight the gradual degeneration of his reign into tyranny

Maiestas - Tacitus 1.72
Treason was a long-established crime under Roman law, but it's definition was never precise

• Cicero - "an attack on the dignity and greatness of the Roman people"
• Tacitus - "official misconduct damaging the Roman state, such as the betrayal of an army or the incitement to sedition"
  Augustus - an offence or affront to the Princeps, though his definition was rarely enforced

"My purpose is not to relate at length every motion, but only such as were conspicuous for excellence or notorious for infamy. This I regard as history's highest function, to let no worthy action be un-commemorated, and to hold out the reprobation of posterity as a terror to evil words and deeds. So corrupted indeed and debased was that age by sycophancy that not only the foremost citizens who were forced to save their grandeur by servility, but every ex-consul, most of the ex-praetors and a host of inferior senators would rise in eager rivalry to propose shameful and preposterous motions. Tradition says that Tiberius as often as he left the Senate-House used to exclaim in Greek "How ready these men are to be slaves". Clearly, even he, with his dislike of public freedom, was disgusted at the abject abasement of his creatures"

Tacitus 3.69

Rationale of Tiberius

Lack of Precedent

When in AD 15, Tiberius was asked by a praetor, Q. Pompeius Macer, whether 'cases under treason law were to receive attention', he replied 'the laws must take their course'

However, no precedent had been set by Augustus, and so most of what happened were "test cases" where the law was gradually refined

The Effects of Sejanus' Coup

Sejanus' coup had undoubtedly psychologically affected Tiberius, who "became a cruel tyrant, as well a an abettor of cruelty in others"

Delatores (Informers)

• Rome has no public prosecutor, and so information was brought to the courts and the emperor by individuals
• Only individuals of the same class could bring cases against one-another with any genuine hope of succeeding, and so Senators themselves made up this group in Roman society
• Maiestas was considered a serious crime, and so prosecutions were handled by the Senate and Princeps, who acted as a "high court" for the most serious crimes in Ancient Rome
• If a charge of treason brought forward by a delator was upheld, they were awarded at least one-quarter of the guilty parties' property, whilst the remaining three-quarters went into the imperial treasury

Problems

• Delatores were encouraged to lie and manufacture evidence
• Allowed Senators to eliminate their rivals
• A Senator could make a pretty lucrative career out of delator-ing

"Reign of Terror"?

• Tacitus attempted to conjure in the minds of his readers an impression that the number and frequency of treason trials increased as Tiberius' reign progressed
• He builds up a picture of continuous prosecutions culminating in a "reign of terror"
• However, careful examination of Tacitus' account reveals that over a 23 year reign no more than 52 individuals were charged with treason, with only 12 being put to death and Tiberius only ordering the deaths of 8. Four of these eight were later found to have been innocent
• There are also numerous incidences of Tiberius intervening when he thought accusations were nonsensical or unfair, and often lessened the severity of sentences
• However, Tiberius does deserve blame for failing to define the parameters of maiestas or for checking the excessive activities of the delatores

So why the hate, Tacitus?

• Tacitus was a Roman Senator himself, who survived the reign of the cruel and paranoid Domitian
• After decades of dormant maiestas abuse, Domitian reintroduced the laws, using the precedent set by the rampant exploitation of the delatores during Tiberius' reign to institute a new reign of terror
• Since the Senate acted as the judge and jury for cases of maiestas, Tacitus himself would have been forced into condemning friends and colleagues to death on the behest of the emperor
• Likely, Tacitus blames Tiberius for failing to put a stop to the abuse of maiestas that ultimately caused misery and death for his own colleagues

Individual(s)	Source	Accusations	Outcome
Tacfarinas	Tacitus, 2.52 (pp 15)	Led a rebellion of deserters from Numidia in the province of Africa He originally served in the Roman army, but deserted He evaded capture by using guerrilla war tactics for 9 years straight He wrote a letter to Tiberius asking for land grants and independence from Rome	4 successive governors tried to subdue the revolt, 3 failed Blaesus offered an amnesty to Tacifarinas’ men, and subdued the rest of his army by force Dolabella, the last governor, successfully orchestrated an early morning attack that took Tacifarinas by surprise – Tacifarinas was killed in the fighting
Lucius Ennius	Tacitus 3.70 (pp 19)	An Equestrian – he melted down a silver statue of Tiberius and made it into a plate	Tiberius used his tribunician power to veto and block the trial. One of the censors, Capito, uncharacteristically urged Tiberius to reconsider his position, but Tiberius did not change his mind
Sosia	Tacitus 4.20 (pp 20)	Wife of Caius Silius, whose love of Agrippina mate her hated by the emperor. Silius was proconsul of Gaul, and was recalled under charge of extortion – for “it was characteristic of Tiberius to veil new devices in wickedness under ancient names” [Tacitus 4.19]	Sosia was banished. It was proposed that half her estate be given to the state and half to her children Another Senator proposed a quarter to the state and the rest to her children – this was the final outcome A new law was passed – innocent governors could be tried for their wives’ misdemeanours when in an official capacity
Vibius Serenus	Tacitus 4.30 (pp 21)	Vibius Serenus, proconsul of Further Spain, was condemned for violence in his official capacity, and was banished to the island of Amorgus for his savage temper. Serenus, Tacitus claims, had also earned the emperor’s ire for sending Tiberius a damning letter criticising him for not being rewarded for his efforts in a previous treason trial (where he was a delator)	“Ordered to end his own life by his own hands” This took place before his trial A new suggestion passed – that those who took their own life before the trial ended would not lose their property, but Tiberius defended the informers (“Guardians of the Commonwealth”) and annulled the proposal
Comminius Suilius Catus	Tacitus 4.31 (pp 21)	Convicted of writing libellous verses Accused of receiving money for a judicial decision False charge of treason	Tiberius vetoed it He was banished from Italy and exiled to an island Tiberius agreed with his removal from the Senate, but did not agree with a punishment of exile
Considius Proculus and Sancia Pompeia Macrina	Tacitus 6.18 (pp 23)	Worshipping Pompey the Great, an enemy of Julius Caesar Her husband and father-in-law had been condemned for treason – she was accused of being an accomplice	Considius Procolus was put to death and his sister was outlawed Exiled
Sextus Marius The Associates of Sejanus	Tacitus 6.19 (pp 23)	Incest with his daughter Associating with Sejanus	Thrown headlong from the Tarpeian Roack – Tiberius kept all of his gold mines in Spain, though they were given over to the state. Any who were imprisoned were killed and left in heaps in the Forum – Velleius Paterculus may have been one of the victims
Paulus	Seneca, 3.26-12 (t1, pp 104)	Held a chamber pot whilst wearing a ring with Tiberius on it	Turns out one of his slaves had nicked the ring so he was found innocent
Drusus Libo Florus Julius	Velleius Paterculus (C5, pp 95)	“Ungrateful revolutionary” – suggests some sort of rebellion   “Ferocious revolt”	Tiberius acted as one of the Senatorial jurors in his trial