INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. White the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 74-10,982 KARGE, Ellen B., 1937- ASPECTS OF TACITUS' PRESENTATION OF TIBERIUS AS PRINCEPS AND PROCONSUL. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1973 Language and Literature, classical University Microfilms, A XEROX Company , Ann Arbor, Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. ASPECTS OF TACITUS' PRESENTATION OF TIBERIUS AS PRINCEPS AND PROCONSUL DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Ellen Karge, Staatsexamen ****** The Ohio State University 1973 Reading Committee: Approved By Charles L. Babcock Mark P. 0. Morford Adviser Carl Schlam Department of Classics Meiner lieben Mutter, Frau Dita Karge, gewidmet. Weihnachten 1973 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is primarily indebted to my adviser, Professor Charles L. Babcock, whose teaching of Tacitus' Annals motivated me to begin this writing. He has consist­ ently contributed personal interest, effort and time to both my graduate career and to this thesis, and more than this, his knowledge and his standards of scholarship have enlivened my interest 'in Classics. I thank him for his patient direction, advice and encouragement at crucial stages of thinking through central points of this thesis and for sharing with me his invaluable insights into the complex work of this author. I am also grateful to my readers on the examination committee. Professor M.P.O. Morford has been a major source of strength necessary to sustain my work and as the reader of this dissertation has with his expert understanding of Tacitus made many perceptive comments and helpful criticism. Professor Carl Schlam made a number of useful sugges­ tions, as the dissertation was in progress, and has pro­ vided encouragement. I also wish to thank my reading com­ mittee once again for recommending stylistic adjustments, and catching with their good ears many of my repetitions and Germanic inconsonances. My gratitude goes to Professor Stanley Kahrl for his support and his willingness to serve on my oral committee. I am grateful to Mrs. R. F. Sapp and Mrs. Martha Coolidge, iii without whose assistance the final draft of this disserta­ tion would have never materialized in time. My very special thanks go once again to chairman Professor Morford and the entire faculty and staff of the Classics department for contributing to make my years of the doctoral program one of the most challenging and one of the most delightful experiences of my life, and with a bold conjecture into Tacitus' Annals I would like to say sine ira [sed magno cum] studio iiia VITA November 28, 1937 Born, Elmshorn, Germany 1964 ........... Staatsexamen in Latin and French, University of Hamburg, Germany Summer, 1958 . University of Montpellier, France Winter, 1961 . University of Grenoble, France 1964-65 ........ Assistant in German Civilization and Language, Lyc6e Camille S£e, Paris 1965-67 ..... Studienreferendarin/Assessorin, Gymnasium Helene Lange, Hamburg 1967-68 ........ Instructor in Latin and German, University of North Dakota • 1968-69 ........ Assistant Professor of Latin and German, Madison College, Virginia 1968-73 ......... Teaching Associate in Classics, The Ohio State University FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field; Classics Studies in Tacitus' Annals, Roman Historiography and Epigraphy, and Horace: Professor Charles L. Babcock Studies in Tacitus' Histories and Roman Historiography: Professor Mark P. 0. Morford Studies in Greek Literature and Historiography: Professor Robert Lenardon iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOV7LEDGMENTS......................................' iii V I T A ............... iv INTRODUCTION ....................................... vi Chapter I. THE PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION IN THE REIGN OF TIBERIUS .......... 1 Part I. Augustus1 and Tiberius' Appointments to Provincial Governorships .......... 2 Part II. Tacitus' View on Appointments to Provincial Governorships and on Individual Governors Appointed by Augustus and Tiberius ............... 57 II. THE PROCESS OF GOVERNMENT IN MILITARY AND DIPLOMATIC SITUATIONS.......................... 99 Part I. The Mutinies in Pannonia and on the Rhine in A.D. 1 4 ........................ 100 Part II. The Campaigns in Germany in A.D. 15 and 1 6 ................................ 123 Part III. The E a s t .............................. 150 III. TACITUS' PRESENTATION OF PROVINCIAL AFFAIRS ON THE NORTHERN FRONTIER AND IN THE EAST . 177 Part I. The Mutinies in Pannonia and on the R h i n e ............................ 177 Part II. Tacitus' View on Germanicus' Campaigns in Germany ................... 217 Part III. Tacitus' View of the Settlement of the Affairs in the E a s t ............... 259 CONCLUSIONS .............................. 282 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................ 288 v INTRODUCTION The testimony of the reign of Tiberius in our ancient sources displays to a large extent consensus on the histor­ ical facts and the personal history of the first successor of Augustus. Except for Velleius Paterculus, the contempor­ ary and admirer of Tiberius, who writes from the stand­ point of a military equestrian to whom the principate afforded opportunities for advancement and whose enthusi­ asm for the regime is therefore understandable, Suetonius and Dio Cassius are in general.in accordance with Tacitus' gloomy picture of Tiberius. They rank as independent authorities,1 since there is no clear sign that Suetonius uses Tacitus, and Dio Cassius, though he could have used Tacitus, has often more details, which suggests that he went back to sources nearer the events. R. Syme2 con­ cludes that the picture of Tiberius, which reflects in all three authors the same diagnosis, a gradual deterioration in his character and of his reign, has fixed shortly after Tiberius' life-time, and belongs to the consensus of educated opinion, supplemented in Tacitus' account by ^R. Syme, Tacitus, vol. I (Oxford 1958), p. 420. 2Ibid., p. 421. vi documentary evidence and converted into a work of art by his literary techniques. The question is whether this picture is true or whether Tiberius was not a better princeps than tradition has it. Tacitus professes to write sine ira et studio,^- a standard claim in ancient historians, but does he measure up to this ideal or has he fallen into the trap of the consensus on Tiberius? This is one of the central ques­ tions asked about Tacitus in the scholarship in the last century. Tacitus' picture of Tiberius was commonly accepted until the second half of the nineteenth century. Then it was attacked on the basis of the discovery of new evidence, mainly inscriptional, and on the basis of the accepting of a new approach towards historiography’, oriented by factual and impartial information, not by personal inter­ pretation. This prompted a reappraisal of Tacitus' Tiberius with the result that the. balance was tilted in 2 favor of Tiberius against ancient tradition. F. B. Marsh3 admits that Tiberius was unpopular from •^Ann. 1,1. ^Cf. F.R.D. Goodyear, Tacitus, Greece and Rome Surveys (Oxford, 1970), p. 30 ff. 3F. B. Marsh, The Reign of Tiberius (Oxford 1931), pp. 218-229. • • VI i the beginning because of his reserved manner, yet that the idea of dissimulatio and of the gradual deterioration of his character remains hypothetical. Marsh praises him highly for his administrative capabilities and calls him one of the greatest Roman emperors. Still he cannot deny that despite Tiberius' good intentions the constitution of Augustus broke down in his. hands, but Marsh does not consider