Conspiracy Narratives in Roman History

Conclusion

conclusion I brought myself down. I gave them a sword. And they stuck it in. . . . And, I guess, if I’d been in their position, I’d have done the same thing. —richard m. nixon1 The prevalence of conspiracy in the Roman literary imagination is testimony to the fear that it generated and the need to assuage that fear by retelling the stories of how conspiracies were detected, suppressed, and punished.We have examined five conspiracy narratives with a view to the mode of presentation, the hermeneutic principle, and narrative continuity. Naturally, each narrative demonstrates these three principles to a greater or lesser degree, and each is a unique assemblage of stylistic and substantive elements. Any conclusions drawn must acknowledge the vast differences in time and place, political and social circumstance. As the only extant monograph devoted solely to conspiracy, Sallust’s Bellum Catilinae serves as a sort of model text against which the others are compared . In it, we see evidence of Sallust’s attempts to maintain narrative continuity , his manipulation of suspense, and the importance of Fulvia and the Allobroges to the revelation of the conspiracy and so the salvation of the res publica. Although the Bacchanalian affair is not technically a political conspiracy involving threats of assassination and political revolution, nevertheless Livy’s account (as well as the inscription of the senatus consultum) casts the affair as a coniuratio, thereby imbuing the events with all the moral and political weight that conspiracy bears. Perhaps more than any other narrative examined here, Livy’s account seeks to contain the fear that such a conspiracy engenders. Tacitus’ account of the Pisonian conspiracy forces the reader to admit that the return to a republic is in no way a viable solution to the ills that plague the principate. Although the assassination of Nero could restore a sense of political order, the conspirators are not up to the task of govern- conspiracy narratives in roman history ing, and so—with characteristic Tacitean irony—there are no heroes. Only Epicharis comes shining through, however, and in this respect she approximates her republican forbears, Fulvia and Hispala, whose actions in the face of treacherous conspiracy can be considered praiseworthy. Narratives of successful conspiracies are noticeably different from the narratives of betrayed conspiracies.While one might dismiss Josephus’ account for any number of reasons (e.g., historical unreliability or ideological bias2), still one cannot discount the high degree of self-confidencewith which he narrates the assassination of Caligula. His anecdote about the torture of Quintilia points us to the recurring phenomenon, that women’s bodies are often conduits for the transfer of sensitive information about conspiracies. Finally, Appian rounds out this investigation quite neatly, allowing us to conclude with the most famous conspiracy in Roman history from the most distant vantage point. Of all the historians considered, Appian receives the most layered and most nuanced tradition about his topic—and manages to create from it one of our most suspenseful and engaging narratives. It has been the aim of this book to show that the specific phenomenon of conspiracy provides a unique opportunity for us to observe the ways historians handle the more general difficulties faced when attempting to achieve narrative continuity. Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus had to contend with the veil of secrecy that obscured the conspiracies they tried to narrate. By admitting their uncertainty in the first person, by shifting responsibility to unnamed sources, byemploying internal focalization and indefinite pronouns, these authors negotiated an epistemological gap and created a rhetoric of conspiracy by which to persuade the reader that their version of the events was credible, so as to create narratives that dispelled fear and deterred further thoughts of uprising. Josephus and Appian, on the other hand, were able to narrate assassination with a much greater degree of confidence because the conspiracies succeeded and the shroud of secrecyand silencewas thrown off. Both authors worked diligently to maintain suspense throughout their narratives. Furthermore, this study has examined conspiracies through the lenses of social status, gender, and ethnicity. Conspiracy effaces the boundaries between free and slave, male and female, Roman and foreigner. Sallust tells that Catiline attracted to his cause different kinds of men and even women (Cat. 24.3).Tacitus marvels that the secrets of the Pisonian conspiracy were guarded by men and women, young and old, rich and poor alike (Ann. 15.54.1). Livy reports that the Bacchic rites tainted...