Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 July 2016
Dudley and Webster state that Vespasian left Britain in A.D. 44, the year following the invasion, in order to attend Claudius' triumph in Rome and receive the triumphalia ornamenta. Webster adheres to this view in a recently published article, and it has been adopted elsewhere. Such a view drastically curtails the duration of Vespasian's command in Britain. This in itself is not perhaps a serious objection to it, even though Suetonius' record of Vespasian's campaign suggests protracted operations. There are other objections that are far more serious.
2 The Roman Conquest of Britain, London, 1965, pp. 80, 89–90.Google ScholarPubMed
3 The precise date of Claudius' triumph is not recorded. Dio Cassius (60.23.1) states that ‘Claudius arrived in Rome after being away for six months … and celebrated his triumph’. Frere, S. S., Britannia, London, 1967, pp. 62 and 66, calculates that Claudius may have left Britain early in September at the latest, and that six months from late July would have meant a return to Rome in January 44. Dio's phrasing (‘… arrived … and celebrated’) may imply that the triumph followed without much delay, in which case it could have taken place in the spring of 44. On the other hand, Dio's capriciousness in expanding and in telescoping his narrative makes such an inference somewhat hazardous. The preparations on this occasion must have been particularly elaborate, for they included arrangements for the special festivals to be held at the same time (Dio Cassius, 60.23.4-5), for one of which special ballet dancers were brought from Asia Minor. Late spring or early summer may be a rather more probable date.Google Scholar
4 Webster, Graham, ‘The Military Situations in Britain between A.D. 43 and 71’, Britannia i (1970), pp. 180–181.Google Scholar
5 In the second edition of the Oxford Classical Dictionary (1970), s.v. Vespasian, G. E. F. Chilver writes: ‘Legate of II Augusta in the Claudian invasion of Britain, he commanded the left wing in the subsequent advance (43-4).’ In the first edition (1948), R. E. L.James was less explicit, but gave 44 as the date at which Vespasian received the triumphalia ornamenta. Collingwood (in Collingwood, R. G. and Myres, J. N. L., Roman Britain and the English Settlements, 2nd ed., Oxford, 1937, pp. 90–91), and, more significantly, S. S. Frere, op. cit., pp. 73-75, give no dates and do not discuss die duration of Vespasian's command in Britain.Google Scholar
6 Dudley and Webster (op. cit., pp. 89-90) state that ‘Vespasian's campaign in the south-west was probably completed by the end of the campaigning season of A.D. 43 [the italics are mine], since he was in Rome to receive his honours at the triumph of A.D. 44’. Similarly Webster in the article cited in note 4 writes (pp. 180-181): ‘A case has been made for putting much of the fighting in the south-west into the conquest year.’
7 Divus Vespasianus, 4.
8 For a detailed discussion of these questions see the Appendix.
9 See p. 152, note 22.
10 Divus Claudius, 17.
11 Secuti et triumphalia ornamenta eodem bello adepti.
12 Any who came would have automatically relinquished their appointments on entering the pomoerium, and one can hardly conceive that, for example, Aulus Plautius in Britain would have been given even so much as an option.
13 60.23.2.
14 Demosthenes, Against Meidias, 127: τοὑς βοηθοῦντας καὶ τοὑς συνεξεταξνους μετὰ τούτου, and Lucian Pro Imaginibus 15, ἐϒὼ δὲ καὶ συνετάξεσθαἰ σοι ξτοιμος έπΙ τῆς δὶκης, ‘I am ready even to be associated with you in the case’. See Liddell and Scott, 9th edition.
15 Suetonius, Galba, 7.
16 See note 10.
17 Hosidius Geta: Dio Cassius, 60.20.4; Vespasian: see note 7.
18 Hence [com(iti) divi] Claudi in Britannia seems an unpromising way of supplementing ILS 971, an acephalous inscription believed to concern this Hosidius (PW viii, col 2490).
19 A. E. Gordon, op. cit. (see p. 158), app. II, p. 310, is misleading when he writes: ‘Dio's plural number for the nonconsulars who received triumphal honours can be whittled down, I suspect, to the dual: Cn. Hosidius Geta … and Claudius' prospective … son-in-law Silanus’. Silanus, who was a member of the emperor's suite, should not be associated indiscriminately with Hosidius, who was not. Incidentally, Gordon does not mention Vespasian in this connexion. However, statements such as his may have encouraged the adoption of the view that is being criticized in this article.
20 60.20.4.
21 If this Hosidius was identical with the Hosidius who had already served as a legatus praetorius in Mauretania and was to be consul not later than 47, his early recall from Britain becomes much more probable. His stint thus completed, and completed with honour, he might have been invited to accompany the triumph with his consulship already in view. But the identity is only a possibility. See Syme, R., AJPh 77 (1956), p. 270.Google Scholar
22 Suetonius, Divus Vespasianus, 4: quare triumphalia ornamenta … accepit.
23 Tacitus, Agricola, 39 (end) and 40.
24 Tacitus, Annals, 12.38.
25 From this and the succeeding examples it appears that in general the decreeing of triumphalia ornamenta followed closely on the achievements that seemed to deserve them. Hence one should not be tempted to suppose that, in spite of what Tacitus (Annals, 14.39) writes, Petronius Turpilianus campaigned in Britain during his tenure as governor in 61-63 because triumphalia ornamenta were granted to him in (Annals, 15.72). The award is more likely to have been made as a consequence of services rendered in the recent suppression of the conspiracy of Piso, as the context indicates, a point made by C. Barini, op. cit. (see p. 158), p. 88. Possibly we can also deduce that it was essentially the victory of Mons Graupius that caused Agricola to qualify for the honour. However, practices may have differed in the Flavian period.
26 Annals, 12.39.
27 Annals, 11.20.
28 Annals, 4.23: nam priores duces ubi impetrando triumphalium insigni sufficere res suas crediderant, hostem omittebant.
29 See p. 150 and the Appendix, pp. 160-62.
30 This might possibly have been the case with Hosidius Geta: see note 21.
31 Suetonius, Tiberius, 20.
32 Some may have been absent: see C. Barini, op. cit. (p. 158), p. 38.
33 See p. 150.
34 See the Appendix, p. 160, note 95. But the unique ovatio of Aulus Plautius may have been one more of these rare occasions: see p. 160, note 94.
35 See p. 152.
36 The duration of his command for seven years (see note 43) seems to indicate this.
37 Tacitus, Annals 1.3 and 31.
38 Annals, 1.72.
39 Annals, 1.55.
40 Annals, 2.41.
41 Annals, 3.42.
42 Annals, 3.45.
43 Annals, 4.18.
44 See pp. 151-52.
45 See pp. 156-57.
46 Dio Cassius, 60.30.1.
47 See Dio Cassius, 60.29.1.
48 Cassii Dionis historiarum Romanarum quae supersunt, ed. Boissevain, V. P., vol. iii, Berlin, 1901, p. 3. Boissevain's comment on 60.30.1 is: Dio vel Xiphilinus hic erraverit necesse est. fortasse Dio res a Vespasiano fortiter gestas enarrans, tanquam in transcursu memoraverat in ludaea eum quondam a filio e periculo ereptum fuisse.Google Scholar
49 No such incident is recounted by Josephus, but incidents that he does mention make it credible. For instance, Titus shows his concern when Vespasian is wounded at Jotapata (BJ 3.22, & 236-239), and, still more significantly, when Vespasian, trapped in Gamala, has to fight his way out of the town, Josephus explains why Titus was not there to help him ‘having just then been dispatched to Mucianus in Syria’ (BJ 4.5, & 30-35).
50 This suggestion is made by A. W. Braithwaite in his edition of Suetonius, Divus Vespasianus, Oxford, 1927, p. 28 (commenting on chapter 4). On p. 27 he writes: ‘In 47 Vespasian was still in Britain, according to Dio's chronology …’, a view shared by C. Barini, op. cit. (p. 158), p. 75.Google Scholar
51 For Dio's anecdotal treatment of military operations, see Millar, Fergus, A Study of Dio Cassius, Oxford, 1964, p. 149Google Scholar; and for his practice of arranging his narrative ‘in large resumptive sections’, Ibid., P. 55.
52 60.21.5.
53 60.22.1-2.
54 60.22.3-5.
55 60.23.1.
56 60.23.6.
57 60.21.4.
58 We are concerned here not with Dio's historical accuracy, but only with his arrangement, his interpretation, and his association of ideas.
59 See Fergus Millar, op. cit. (note 51), pp. 149 ff.
60 Chronological overlapping at the beginning of the resumption would be improbable if we can judge from Dio's treatment of Caesar's Gallic campaigns. Here the account is resumed three times without overlapping. See the analysis in Fergus Millar, op. cit. (note 51), p. 55.
61 Hist., 2.5: consilio ac, si res posceret, manu hostibus obniti.
62 Once we dissociate Vespasian from Claudius' triumph, there is nothing in theory to prevent us from extending his tenure in Britain until 51, the year of his consulship, as indeed is implied by S. Peine, op. cit. (seep. 158), p. 362. But such along tenure is unlikely. According to Professor Syme (Tacitus, Oxford, 1958, p. 67), the command of a legion was on the average ‘a triennial tenure’. If Vespasian assumed command of Leg. II Augusta in Germany in 42 and relinquished it after some years in Britain in 46-47, there would be a resemblance in circumstances between his tenure and that of T. Aurelius Fulvus, who commanded Leg. III Gallica in Armenia in 64 and on the Danube in 68-69, and thereafter seems to have left it (cited by R. Syme, op. cit., p. 166, n. 7).Google ScholarPubMed
63 Divus Vespasianus, 4: inde in Britanniam translatus tricies cum hoste conflixit. duas ualidissimas gentes superque uiginti oppida et insulam Vectem Britanniae proximam in dicionem redegit. See p. 149.
64 See note 6.
65 Not perhaps intrinsically impossible, but virtually so. The operations of Vespasian, as they are recorded, cannot be fitted into the months of, say, August, September and October 43; and a winter offensive following the first season in a strange island is unlikely. An absence of major winter campaigning is indicated also by the need to move supplies by sea associated with the building of a base at Fishbourne and then on Poole Harbour. Altogether, with such time-consuming operations to be organized apart from the business of fighting, the idea becomes more and more implausible. Even if the first few months of 44 were available (see note 3), it scarcely gains in credibility.
66 Tacitus, Agricola, 13: et terrorem statim intulit Petilius Cerialis, Brigantum ciuitatem, quae numerosissima prouinciae totius perhibetur, adgressus.
67 Ib., multa proelia, et aliquando rum incruenta.
68 See Tacitus, Annals, 14.32 with the comment (temeritatem Petilii) in 33. This was only the first of several instances of his impetuousness recorded by Tacitus. The others are to be found in the Histories.
69 Petilius must have returned to Rome not later than the spring of 74 since he was consul suffectus in May of that year.
70 Tacitus, Agricola, 13: magnamque Brigantum partem aut uictoria amplexus est aut bello, where bello implies ‘overrunning’ as opposed to uictoria ‘conquest’.
71 The usual interpretation of Tacitus, Agricola, 20.
72 Omitting A.D. 43 on the supposition that after the delayed start (Dio Cassius, 60.19.2-3) there would have been little left of the campaigning season following the fall of Camulodunum. If 47 is to be omitted on the supposition that Vespasian left early in the year, then he, like Petilius, had three seasons for his campaign.
73 See p. 151 and note 22.
74 Cf. p. 150 and notes 10, 11 and 34.
75 54.24.7.
76 Dio Cassius, 54.24.8.
77 Suetonius, Tiberius, 9: but this is a controversial point: see L. R. Taylor, l.c.
78 See, e.g. Tacitus, Hist., 2.77 (a remark made to Vespasian before he became emperor), tuae domui triumphale nomen, and Hist., 4.8, Vespasianum senem triumphalem.
79 Suetonius, Divus Augustus, 31.
80 Mommsen, p. 111.
81 Mommsen, p. 78. We are of course discussing the uir triumphalis as such, and are not concerned with the use of almost all the insignia by, for instance, magistrates opening the Ludi Apollinares, as in the scene described by Juvenal (Sat. 10, 36-46). See Mommsen, pp. 48-49, and Gordon's caution, pp. 307-8.
82 Mommsen, pp. 80-81.
83 Mommsen, p. 64.
84 Mommsen, pp. 66, 78-79, 81.
85 Mommsen, pp. 53, 79-80.
86 Mommsen, pp. 53-54.
87 See note 84.
88 Tacitus, Annals, 423. It may be considerations such as those just mentioned that led Marquardt (p. 344) to cite as the relevant ornamenta the toga picta or the tunica palmata and the corona laurea. Here may be a slip for ‘and’ caused by Suetonius' use of the phrase uestis palmata for the garb worn by Crassus at Claudius' triumph (see note 89). Since the toga picta was also called toga palmata by authors from the latter part of the first century A.D. onwards (PW viia 1, col. 505, s.v. Triumphus), uestis palmata probably stands for uestis triumphalis. To the uestis triumphalis and the laurel crown, C. Barini, p. 24, adds the sceptre, on what grounds it is not clear.
89 Suetonius, Divus Claudius, 17.
90 See note 88.
91 Dio Cassius, 51.20.2.
92 Apart from Crassus the only winner of an award on two occasions apart from members of the imperial family seems to have been Lucius Apronius: see Tacitus, Annals, 1.72, 3.21, 4.23, and Gordon, p. 309.
93 According to Suetonius (Nero, 15), Nero granted triumphalia ornamenta to some members of the equestrian order.
94 Mommsen, p. 77.
95 In line with this process of elimination, L. R. Taylor, after describing the award as ‘the privilege of making a public appearance with at least some of the insignia that had belonged to the triumphatores’ (p. 169), comes to the bleak conclusion (p. 170) that ‘the chief feature of the triumphal ornaments was the right to wear the praetexta’. Opportunities for exercising even this right in virtue of the award may have been rare, and perhaps restricted to triumphs and ovationes: see p. 153 and note 34. The only probable occasions recorded appear to be Tiberius' triumph of A.D. 12 (Suetonius, Tiberius, 20) and Claudius' of A.D. 44 (Suetonius, Divus Claudius, 17).
96 See note 79.
97 Dio Cassius, 55.10.3.
98 Annals, 4.23.
99 Tacitus, Agricola, 40.
100 Mommsen, p. 93, n. I.
101 Peine discusses the point at issue on pp. 319-23.
102 p. 25 and n. 3 and (much more cautious) p. 114, n. I. Cf. White, A. N. Sherwin, The Letters of Pliny, Oxford, 1966, p. 153 (commenting on Ep. 2.7, the award of a statua triumphalis): ‘This honour appears to rank higher than that of the ornamenta triumphalia.’Google Scholar
103 Agricola, 40. For the list, see Peine, p. 317.
104 Hist., 1.79 and Ep., 2.7 respectively.
105 See note 102.
106 Peine, pp. 321-22.
107 See p. 160.
108 See note 98.
109 Annals, 15.72.
110 p. 321.
111 Sat., 1.128-29.
112 deinde forum iurisque peritus Apollo (courts sat there overlooked by an ivory Apollo).
113 atque triumphales (sc. statuae).
114 NH., 33.131.
115 p. 321.
116 Dio Cassius, 55.10.3.
117 tinguit Aegyptus argentum ut in uasis Anubim suum spectet, pingitque, non caelat argentum. unde transiit materia et ad triumphales statuas; mirumque, crescit pretium fulgoris excaecati. id autem fit hoc modo …
118 The nature of the substance is explained by Bailey, K. C., The Elder Pliny's Chapters on Chemical Subjects, Vol. i, London, 1929. commentary ad loc.Google Scholar
119 autem is resumptive.
120 I am grateful to Dr. Peter Woodward of the School of Chemistry, University of Bristol, for helping me with the technical details of this section.
121 See p. 159.
122 That is, if the expression statua triumphalis can be taken to imply ‘dressed in the uestis triumphalis’.
123 Mommsen, p. 112.
124 Peine, pp. 330-91, passim.
125 Peine, p. 324.
126 Vellcius Paterculus, 2.115.
127 Tacitus, Hist., 4.4.
128 Cf. Mommsen, p. 112, n. 1.
129 tribuit. Annals, 15.72.
130 Agricola, 40.
131 ενειμε, Dio Cassius, 60.23.2.
132 accepit, Suetonius, Divus Vespasianus, 4.
