Messalina

Little is know about Messalina. Her father, M. Valerius Messala, has left no trace in history, and it has been concluded due to a lack of honors that he died young. Both her father and mother, Domitia Lepida, were grandchildren of Augustus’ sister Octavia. Messalina was a cousin to the emperor Gaius and at his accession was unmarried although she was a desirable match and wealthy. Claudius married Messalina in 38 or early 39. Aelia Paetina was put aside for no other reason than Claudius’ position of importance in Gaius’ court required he have better connections. As this was Messalina’s first marriage she is thought to have been no more than 14 or 15 years old; Claudius was nearing 50. Her marriage to Claudius seems in striking contrast to her expectations and the timing of the marriage would appear to place Claudius in the succession, at least temporarily.

The first child of the marriage, Octavia, was born in 39 or early 40. The birth of a son, Tiberius Claudius Caesar Germanicus, later Britannicus, came on February 12, 41, less than three weeks after Claudius’ accession. Claudius allowed his wife the honors due an empress. Messalina’s birthday was officially celebrated, statues of her were erected in public places and she was given the privilege of occupying the front seats at the theater along with the Vestals. Messalina was offered the title of Augusta by the Senate but Claudius would not allow her the title (Dio 60.12.5).

In spite of her status, Messalina’s position as empress was insecure. Being married to a much older man she could expect Claudius to die before Britannicus could acquire official power. Her survival in such circumstances would be chancy at best. In order to acquire her security, Messalina acted like "Claudius’ Sejanus" destroying anyone who could be considered a threat to the security of the regime.

According to ancient sources, sex for Messalina seems to have been an end in itself. Juvenal has her attending a brothel under an assumed name (Sat. 6.120-32), Pliny claims she performed the feat of satisfying 25 men in 24 hours (NH 10.172) and Dio suggests she organized orgies for upper class women (60.18.1-2.) Although Messalina possibly had extra-marital affairs, much as her husband did, it was politically expedient to blacken her name following her death.

Rather than being a nymphomaniac Messalina employed sex to control politicians. A great worry for the empress was that Claudius needed to strengthen his ties to the bloodline of Augustus.

Messalina sought to eliminate her competition who also happened to be her husband’s enemies.

Messalina’s primary agent in her quest for security was Publius Suillius Rufus, a half-brother to Caesaonia, Gaius’ last wife. This association seems not to have brought him trouble. He had been a questor of Germanicus and when Claudius became emperor he shifted his allegiance to Messalina and became her tool for vengeance. The senator became wealthy in the bargain.

Dio reports that Messalina was offended by Julia Livilla because she did not show her proper respect and was jealous that the beautiful niece of Claudius was spending so much time with her uncle (60.8.5.) As the wife of Marcus Vinicius, who had been proposed for the principate, Livilla gave her husband credibility in his claim to the throne. It would not be difficult to convince Claudius of a threat in the general paranoia at the start of his reign.

Suetonius comments that Claudius had his niece put to death on "unspecified charges" with no defense allowed, a fairly common procedure in maiestas cases (Claud. 29.1.) Also, the Apocolocyntosis gives Claudius the responsibility for Livilla’s death (10.4, 13.5.) Seneca became implicated as Livilla’s paramour and his fate in the affair seems to confirm a political connection. There probably was a connection to the conspiracy of Gaetulicus during which Seneca had been under suspicion but was not punished due to lack of evidence. The philosopher was tried before the Senate and given the death sentence (Seneca Cons. Polyb. 13.2) but his punishment was commuted to exile on Corsica. The choice of the death penalty in an adultery case was extraordinary and proves that Seneca was dangerous enough to merit removal. He always insisted he had been wronged and he expressed the hope to the freedman Polybius that the emperor’s sense of justice would cause him to review his case (Claud. 17.3.) Within months of Livilla’s return from exile she found herself sent to Pandateria and before long she was executed; it took the fall of Messalina for Seneca to return to Rome.

In 43, Julia, daughter of Drusus Caesar and Germanicus’ sister Livilla, an innocent and virtuous matron, was accused of immorality by Suillius. It is difficult to determine why Julia was a threat unless her son, Rubellius Plautus, was considered a rival to Britannicus. She may have been involved in some scheme with the Prefect of the Guard Catonius Justus, who was condemned before he could informed Claudius of Messalina’s intrigues. (Dio 60.18; Claud. 13.5). Tacitus and Dio attribute Julia’s downfall to the empress with Suillius acting as her agent (Ann. 13.32.5; 60.18.4.) Suetonius implies that the freedmen were also responsible and that Julia was allowed no defense (Claud. 29.1) while the Apocolocyntosis places the blame squarely on Claudius (10.4,13.5.) In 45, about three years later, an alleged conspiracy took place led by Assinius Gallus, who was Julia’s uncle, and T. Statilius Taurus Corvinus, both grandsons of famous orators. The accusation of a conspiracy was not taken seriously by anyone and was simply a "mopping up" exercise of Julia’s supporters. Gallus and Corvinus were sent into exile (Claud. 13.2.)

Messalina is accused of bringing down Valerius Asiaticus on the grounds that she wanted the gardens of Lucullus, which he owned, and because he was a lover of Poppaea Sabina, her rival for the actor Mnester. Asiaticus had a close connection with the imperial family. His wife, Lollia Saturnia, was sister to Gaius’ wife, Lollia Paulina and on her mother’s side was related to Tiberius. He had been in the running for the principate in 41 and had been ordinary consul in 46. He was in charge of recruiting troops in Gaul and so Asiaticus was a potential threat.

The charges leveled by Suillius were frivolous to the extreme. Asiaticus was charged with failure to maintain discipline among his troops and homosexual acts. The unfortunate man was brought in chains before Claudius and his council at the palace. Suillius bungled the case against Asiaticus and Claudius was about to acquit him when Vitellius, going through the motions of defending the accused, asked that on the basis of his service to the state Asiaticus should be allowed to choose the manner of his death. This supposedly confused Claudius into thinking the unfortunate man was guilty and he supported Vitellius. Both Asiaticus and Poppaea committed suicide.

It is impossible to understand fully why Asiaticus was a threat. That Messalina coveted his gardens is a lame excuse and one put forward against Agrippina during her attack on Statilius Taurus. (Ann. 11.1-,3; Dio 60.27.1-3, 29.4-6; J. A. 19.159.) The arrest and closet trial of Asiaticus hardened feelings among senators and equestrians against Messalina, and proved to be her downfall.

The Fall of Messalina

Messalina is said to have perished for the love of a man: Gaius Silius. Tacitus credits madness for Messalina’s fall and singles out Narcissus as the agent of her destruction. Dio says that the freedmen acted together fearful of their position after the empress had the freedman Polybius murdered. (61.31.2.) These are misleading statement for there certainly was a political reason behind the events leading to the "plot" against Claudius. (Ann. 11.12, 26-38; Claud. 26.2; Dio 61.31.1-5; Sat.10.329-345; J. A. 20.149.)

Silius was consul-designate, in his 30s and married to Junia Silanus, daughter of Marcus Silanus, and a sister-in-law to the emperor Gaius. Despite his apparent happiness, Messalina was able to persuade Silius to divorce his wife to openly carry on an affair (Ann. 11.12.) The affair led to serious plotting. Out of apparent concern for the empress, the childless Silius was unwilling to wait for Claudius to die and declared he was ready to marry Messalina and adopt Britannicus. The opportunity to carry out his coup came when Claudius went to Ostia to inspect progress on the harbor. In his absence Messalina "married" the consul-designate in a full ceremony. Tacitus and Suetonius admit the story sounds sensational but the latter suggests the marriage was pro forma with Claudius signing the marriage contract so that some calamity that was to befall Messalina’s husband might be averted (Claud. 29.3.) Another view is that the marriage was a fabrication invented by the freedmen to eliminate the empress.

Whether or not the marriage had Claudius’ consent the freedmen, led by Narcissus, felt threatened by Messalina. Narcissus had two concubines, Cleopatra and Calpurnia, convey a warning to Claudius about Messalina and convinced the emperor to call upon the freedman for advice. Narcissus performed his part admirably, informing Claudius that he was, in fact, divorced and the contract had been made public to the people, the Senate and, most important of all, the Praetorian Guards. He had no difficulty convincing Claudius to return to Rome.

In the meantime, Messalina and Silius were enjoying a Bacchic revel but messages soon arrived informing them the emperor had returned and uncovered their scheme. Panic seized the revelers and they fled. Messalina waited on the road to Ostia, with her children, hoping to intercept Claudius but the emperor believed he was in danger and entered the city quietly. Not knowing who he could trust, Claudius relieved the commander of the guard, Geta, for a day replacing him with Narcissus. Messalina eventually found Claudius but her attempts at an interview were blocked by Narcissus. The freedman took Claudius to Silius’ house where the emperor saw many of the imperial heirlooms that had been stripped from the palace. This made Claudius furious and he went to the praetorian camp where he conducted trials of the coup participants. Silius and other senators were executed while others were banished. By the evening, however, Claudius was in a more conciliatory mood, helped by wine. Narcissus was afraid he would pardon Messalina and, representing the orders as being from Claudius, sent a freedman named Euodus to carry out the execution of the empress.

Messalina was found in the Gardens of Lucullus with her mother preparing a petition for Claudius. When she saw the praetorians Messalina accepted her fate and ended her life, helped by one of the guards. News of Messalina’s death was brought to Claudius who acted with indifference and on taking his place at dinner inquired why the empress was not present. His bewildered reaction was probably put on to distance himself from Messalina’s murder (Claud. 39.1.) He did not oppose the senatorial decree removing Messalina’s name from inscriptions and destroying her statues.

More than sexual passion was involved in Messalina’s conspiracy as the concern about the loyalty of the praetorians confirms. The empress was a powerful figure at court and for her to take so many risks indicates that Messalina felt she was in a position that required desperate action. Many modern scholars believe that Messalina was in fear of Agrippina and her son, the future Nero, who at the Secular Games in 47 had attracted warmer applause than Britannicus. Agrippina had recently been widowed a second time and could offer Claudius the connection to Augustus that he needed. The empress could have had reason to fear being set aside and sought to replace her husband with Silius to secure her position and ensure the succession of her son. Such an act on Messalina’s part would indicate that she no longer enjoyed the loyalty of Claudius or, less believable, that she thought his death was near. Agrippina probably had the support of Vitellius and Pallas, both of whom had a finely tuned instinct for self-preservation. Messalina no longer count on the support imperial freedmen and so was forced to turn to the few sympathetic members of the Senate (after the Asiaticus affair) like Silius.

Agrippina

Of all the people who influenced Agrippina the one who affected her life the most was someone she hardly knew: Germanicus. His reputation and the magic of his name became his daughter’s birthright to power. Agrippina was born on November 6, 15 C.E. at the Rhine settlement of Ara Ubiorum, and since she was the first daughter born to her parents, she was named after her mother. One unusual feature, noted by Pliny the Elder, was that on the right side of her upper jaw Agrippina had a double set of canine teeth, a sign of Fortune’s favor (NH 7.71.) Following the death of her father Agrippina lived with her great-grandmother Livia until Tiberius selected Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus to be her husband. Tacitus (Ann. 4.75) mentioned the marriage at the end of his book covering the year 28 but only as an uncollected scrap of information so the actual date is not certain.

In 37, Agrippina gave birth to a son Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus, the future Nero, nine years after her marriage. In 39, she was connected to the conspiracy hatched by Gaetulicus against her brother, Gaius, through Marcus Lepidus, with whom she was romantically linked. Possibly, Agrippina contemplated marriage with Lepidus since her husband was fatally ill with dropsy. Gaetulicus needed a strong ally in Rome if his coup was to succeed. Lepidus, Gaius’ brother-in-law (widower of Drusilla,) had hopes of becoming the new princeps and readily joined the conspiracy (Claud. 9.1.) He had been considered Gaius’ heir apparent until the birth of his daughter Julia Drusilla. Lepidus needed a connection with a princess of the Julian house if he was to be a credible successor to Gaius. To remedy this, Lepidus had been playing a dangerous sexual game, none too discreetly, carrying on affairs with both Agrippina and Livilla. From Agrippina’s point of view, Lepidus as princeps could secure her son a place in the succession.

For her part in the conspiracy Agrippina was exiled to the to the Pontia islands to be recalled by Claudius less than two years later. To stay clear of Messalina, Agrippina kept a low profile and sought a new husband. Her first choice fell upon Galba, the future emperor, who was already married. This did not seem to be an obstacle to Agrippina but Galba passed on the opportunity (Galba 5.1, 7.1.) Instead, she married Gaius Sallastius Passienus Crispus, who had previously been married to Domitia, the sister of Domitius Ahenobarbus and so was Agrippina’s brother-in-law. He was a witty man with a lively sense of humor and was responsible for the famous comment on the relationship between Tiberius and Gaius, that the world had never known a better slave or a worse master (Cal. 10.2.) It is interesting that Pliny describes the marriage as making Passienus more distinguished, a probable reference to his new connection to the principate.

There is no information of how well or poorly the marriage fared. Passienus died during the 40s and received a public funeral. After his death, rumors circulated that Agrippina had poisoned her husband, it being fortunate for her to be free to marry Claudius, but there is no evidence that Passienus was murdered (Nero 6.3; Sat. 4.81.) Agrippina had the good sense to avoid dangerous situations that Messalina could turn to her advantage. The only clash between the women came in 47 during the Secular Games that Claudius held 64 years after those of Augustus. During the games young men performed the Lusus Troiae, a parade staged by boys from the aristocracy. Taking part were Britannicus (aged 6) and Nero (aged 9,) who was greeted by spontaneous applause far more enthusiastic than was Britannicus.

The Messalina affair had proved that Claudius’ regime was vulnerable. Although the emperor announced to the praetorians that he had taken a pledge to remain a widower (Claud. 26.2) it was clear that Claudius would not remain unmarried. Tacitus claims Claudius could not remain celibate and needed a wife to rule him. An unmarried Claudius would have been far from celibate and that he needed to be ruled was only more sneering. Tacitus says that there was a competition for Claudius’ fourth wife each favored by one of the imperial freedmen. Narcissus favored Claudius’ former wife, Aelia Paetina, Gaius’ ex-wife Lollia Paulina was favored by Callistus and Agrippina was supported by Pallas (Ann. 12.1).

Agrippina had overwhelming advantages. She was a Julian through her mother and a Claudian through her father. She could play a role in bridging the unpopularity that had bedeviled Claudius from the start of his reign. A coup against the regime would be almost out of the question. She also brought with her a grandson of Germanicus who would be an unimpeachable candidate for the principate. Claudius was clearly aware that the succession of his natural son would never guarantee the survival of his regime. Even before her marriage took place Agrippina began to strengthen Nero’s position in the succession by proposing her son be joint heir with Britannicus (only 7 years old in 48.) There were several precedents for this arrangement. Augustus had adopted his grandsons, Gaius and Lucius, as join heirs and caused Tiberius to select Germanicus and his own son, Drusus, as a pair. Tiberius eventually left two candidates: Gaius Caligula and Tiberius Gemellus.

As a way to cement the new family relationship, another marriage was proposed: Octavia and Nero. The obstacle was that Octavia was already betrothed to Lucius Silanus. The fact that Claudius had allowed the proposed marriage to stand reflects the power and status of the Junii Silani. Octavia was still not yet of marriageable age and this second betrothal was hatched, even before Agrippina and Claudius had made their own official. Claudius had given Lucius Silanus many honors: Silanus had been granted triumphal insignia in connection with the British triumph, he had been allowed to appear with Claudius on the Capitol stairs during the triumphal procession and been allowed an accelerated questorship. Silanus would be a tough opponent for Agrippina but she had the backing of many freedmen who feared Britannicus after their involvement in the fall of his mother. Vitellius handled the attack on Silanus but was directed by Agrippina (Ann. 12.3.2,4.1,9.2; Dio 60.31.8.)

Vitellius was censor in 48 and one of his duties was to scrutinize the Senate for those guilty of moral turpitude. Lucius Silanus had a sister, Junia Calvina, who was described as "rather wild" and for whom he had a great affection, referring to her as Juno. She had been Vitellius’ daughter-in-law but he set aside such family concerns and accused Silanus of incest with his sister, she playing Juno to his Jupiter. Silanus had no incentive for plotting against Claudius unless he felt himself in danger and tried to take some countermeasure that could easily be misconstrued. He found himself suddenly expelled from the Senate and forced to resign his praetorship on the day he took office (Apoc. 8.2; Ann. 12.4; Claud. 29.1-2; Dio 60.31.8.)

It is likely that Claudius and Agrippina put off announcement of their marriage until Silanus’ expulsion. Roman law and tradition forbade marriages between an uncle and niece, and no one was likely to turn a blind eye toward such a union. Tacitus noted that the marriage represented the depths of Agrippina’s moral degradation (Ann. 14.2.4.) The legal obstacle was enough for the marriage to be postponed but Vitellius came to the rescue with a plan that would make it seem that Claudius was yielding to the will of the people.

Early in 49, Vitellius delivered a speech before the Senate aimed at winning approval for the marriage. After preparing his ground by arguing the connections and abilities of Agrippina, he claimed that marriage to a brother’s child was not incestuous but simply novel, and was customary in other countries. Vitellius pointed out that at first cousins had not been permitted to marry but that was no longer prohibited. Moral standards changed as society changed.

By the end of his speech, primed by the friends and allies of Agrippina, the senators went pouring out of the house declaring that if Claudius would not listen to their appeal they would force him. They were joined by other insistent crowds (Ann. 12.7.1-3; Claud. 26.3; Dio 60.31.8.)

This demonstration of support for an emperor who was not popular suggests that there was general approval of Claudius’ marriage to the daughter of Germanicus. Claudius came down from the palace to meet the crowd in the Forum and listen to the shouts of encouragement. Following this, a hasty meeting of the Senate took place where Claudius formally asked the senators for a decree to allow marriage between and uncle and niece not just for him but on general principle. This freedom remained in force until 342. That this legislation was not repealed for such a long time suggests that Claudius’ marriage was not so shocking. However, the union between a man and his uterine niece (the daughter of a sister) remained prohibited.

The marriage of Claudius and Agrippina took place soon after, Tacitus dryly remarking that the state was now in the hands of a woman who, unlike Messalina, lusted after power. For him, Agrippina was an austere woman free from any promiscuous conduct unless it contributed to her power (Ann. 12.7.5-7; Claud. 26.3; Dio 60.31.8.) The marriage had one embarrassing development. As pontifex maximus, Claudius prescribed expiatory sacrifices to be carried out by the priests to purge the supposed incest of Lucius Silvanus and his sister. Some would have felt Claudius a hypocrite, and the hard feelings would have been aggravated by the suicide (the Apocolocyntosis says Claudius had him murdered) of the humiliated Silvanus timed to coincide with Claudius’ wedding (8.2, 10.4, 11.2; Ann. 12.8.1; Dio 60.81.8.)

Agrippina brought a keen political sense to Claudius’ reign. His reign falls into two distinct parts, from his accession to the death of Messalina, followed by his marriage to Agrippina to his death in 54. The success of Claudius’ reign could be gauged by the intensity of the opposition. During Claudius’ reign 35 senators and from 221 to over 300 equestrians were executed (Claud. 29.2.) During the "Messalina years" the names of victims seem endless from Appius Silanus to Gaius Silius. During the years following his marriage to Agrippina this list of victims shrinks remarkably despite Dio’s claim that Agrippina used murder for profit (60/61.32.3.) Those executed were given a public trial. The recorded victims were: Lollia, Gaius’ ex-wife, the ex-consul Statilius Taurus, Sosibus, Britannicus’ tutor and Lepida, Agrippina’s former sister-in-law. From this, it can be gleaned that Claudius’ reign improved measurably and there are recorded instances of co-operation between the Senate and palace.

Shortly after the marriage, a motion was introduced in the Senate to call upon Claudius to betroth Octavia to Nero, made using the same canvassing method (Ann. 12.9.) Sometime before this Agrippina engineered the recall of Seneca to assume the duties of Nero’s tutor. Seneca was selected because he shared Agrippina’s political views and the way to rule the Roman state was with a "constitutional" form of principate operating with a consensus (Nero 52.) In 50, Seneca was elected to the praetorship. Agrippina and Seneca had a close association since 39 and it is not inconceivable that they had an affair although there is no indication of when, and the example of Messalina would not be lost on Claudius’ new wife. The ending of their love affair may explain their increasing estrangement during Nero’s reign.

Claudius’ desire to be succeeded by his natural son was secondary to the survival of his regime. Britannicus was not excluded from power, he was too young to hold any offices. He also suffered from epilepsy since childhood which if a serious form of the disease could jeopardize his chances to succeed his father (Ann. 13.16.3.) Doubts of Britannicus’ paternity represent the standard calumny against imperial children too young to assume their rightful place in power, the same was said of Tiberius Gemellus. There is no reason to believe that Claudius turned against his son (Nero 33.3, Titus 2; Dio 67.33.3.) Although she worked hard to establish her son’s primacy Agrippina had nothing to gain by antagonizing her stepson. On the contrary, should anything happen to Nero the succession must pass to Britannicus (Ann. 12.26.2.)

Agrippina’s son was adopted on February 25, 50 and became Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus Caesar. At the same time, Agrippina was granted the title Augusta and became Iulia Augusta Agrippina, the first woman since Livia to be allowed the title, but Livia received the title only on Augustus’ death. Tacitus informs us that the adoption had been the work of Pallas but Claudius saw the importance of promoting Nero early. The popularity of Nero demanded his inclusion as a successor to the principate because his selection would help to ensure the survival of the regime. If prevented from holding power Nero would be a potent threat to Britannicus. At the time of his adoption Nero was made consul-designate (the office to be held in his 20th year.) He also received the title princeps iuventutis. The remarkable feature of Nero’s advancement was that as consul-designate he was granted proconsular authority outside the limits of Rome. This gave him power independent from his status as Claudius’ son and must have been deemed essential as a safeguard to the succession. In the games that followed the ceremony, Nero wore magisterial robes while Britannicus wore the white and purple toga of youth. To the crowd it must have been clear which was preferred for the succession (Ann. 12.41.4.)

In 51, Nero assumed the toga virilis a few months ahead of schedule, planned, no doubt, to correspond with Claudius’ holding of the office of consul which enhanced the ceremony and as Augustus had been in 5 and 2 BCE for Gaius and Lucius. This same year saw a startling innovation in the gold and silver coinage. Agrippina’s portrait appeared on the reverse with Claudius on the obverse and so did Nero, with cos design among his titles. The appearance of a successor as a reverse type on the coinage of his predecessor was unprecedented. It is probably that Claudius and Agrippina disagreed over Nero becoming the sole successor. For a while, Narcissus would have supported Agrippina since Nero could save him from the wrath of Britannicus. However, the failure of the scheme to drain the Fucine Lake which placed Claudius in danger of drowning and made the regime look silly doomed the freedman.

There was friction between the imperial brothers. On a chance meeting, Nero greeted his stepbrother as "Britannicus" but was answered with "Domitius" (Ann. 12.41.6-7; Nero 7.1.) Agrippina exploited the insult, perhaps an innocent mistake, and convinced Claudius of the danger of factions within the palace. She began to slowly remove Britannicus’ tutors and loyal freedmen. The most important, Sosibus, was executed for potting against Nero. Britannicus’ retainers would have remained loyal to the memory of Messalina and it was probably prudent that they were removed (Ann. 12.26.2,41.8.) Tacitus claims that Agrippina also got rid of officers of the praetorian guard who were sympathetic toward Britannicus by promoting them out of the guards and into the legions. Epigraphical evidence shows that it was a regular practice of the praetorians for a centurion or tribune to join a legion at a higher centurionate following service in the guards. Agrippina merely devised a stratagem to remove any officers she did not trust by appearing to promote them. She was able to persuade Claudius that the efficiency of the guards was in jeopardy from the two commanders, Geta and Crispinus. They were replaced by a single commander Sextus Afranius Burrus, destined to play and important role during the next decade (Ann. 12.42.2, 13.2.2.)

During 51, in a last effort to thwart Agrippina, some conservative senators led by Junius Lupus brought a charge of maiestas against Vitellius, who by now was very ill. Tacitus claims that Claudius was persuaded to take the charges seriously but was convinced by Agrippina they were false, another attempt to show the old emperor was under his wife’s thumb (Ann. 12.42.4-5, Vit. 3.1.) The attempt to bring down Vitellius was courageous, if suicidal, but the motive becomes clear since Lupus was a relative of Lucius Junius Silvanus. It has been suggested that Claudius was responsible for the charges in order to curb Agrippina’s unbridled power and keep Vitellius in check but the evidence is that emperor and empress were acting in concert. Fortunately for Lupus, he was only exiled as a result.

The last recorded victim of Agrippina was Domitia Lepida, the mother of Messalina and her former sister-in-law. Tacitus brushes off the entire affair saying it arose from "female reasons" and their jealousy over Nero (Ann. 12.64.4-6, 65.1-2.) It was to Domitia that Nero was entrusted when his mother was sent into exile in 39 and she remained close to him. She also was the grandmother of Britannicus and could serve to remind people of his Julian family links even if they were not as strong as Nero’s. Domitia was accused of magical acts against Agrippina and threatening the security of Italy by failing to keep her slaves in order. The latter charge seems to suggest she was training armed bands with the intent to stage a coup. Domitia was executed despite the entreaties of Narcissus (Ann. 12.64-65.)

Death and Deification

Claudius may have had a premonition of his end since he appointed no magistrates beyond the month of his death. According to Suetonius and Dio, Claudius hugged Britannicus saying he wished to make amends and looked forward to the day when his son would reach manhood, and was prepared to make him his successor "so the Roman people would at last have a genuine Caesar" (Claud. 43; Dio 60.34.1.) Tacitus gives a version of this story but with Narcissus vowing to right the wrongs committed against Britannicus, suicidally declaring to punish the murderers of his mother (Ann. 12.65, 66.3.) The story, however, is meant to provide justification for Agrippina to seek Claudius’ murder. Tacitus gives Narcissus the active role to indicate that Claudius was feeble and unable to work his will. But the fact that Narcissus was allowed to remain unmolested at court is an indication that Claudius was fully in charge of affairs. This story is also strongly reminiscent of Augustus’ supposed reconciliation with Agrippa Postumous which persuaded Livia to murder him. The only development along these lines which is not suspect is one by Suetonius that Claudius made his will and sealed it (Claud. 44.1.)

If Britannicus’ claim to power was to be maintained he had to assume the toga virilis by the age of 14 (March 55). The advancement of his son may have been a sharply disputed topic between Claudius and Agrippina. Suetonius notes that Claudius regretted his advancement of Nero. However, it is unlikely that Claudius was opposed to Nero’s place in the succession. He had declared Nero was capable of administering the State (Dio 61.33.9) but wanted to stick to the original plan of both Nero and Britannicus succeeding him (Claud. 44.1); Agrippina was equally determined to have Nero alone succeed Claudius.

The timeliness of Claudius’ death predisposes us to believe he was murdered. Narcissus was absent when Claudius died, gone to Sinuessa on the suggestion of Agrippina for his gout. This fosters suspicion but Narcissus could not have guaranteed Claudius’ life and his absence only helped to make Nero’s succession smoother. Claudius had always been weak and was 64 years old. He may have been ill during the autumn of 51 but certainly had a serious illness late in 52 or early 53 (Dio 60/61.33.9-10.)

Ancient historians are in general agreement that Agrippina murdered Claudius. Josephus expressed reservations by using phrases such as "it was reported by some" but this is a minority opinion (J.A. 20.8.1-2.) Claudius, like many rulers, took small amounts of poison to build up and immunity, a serious complication for Agrippina. Rather than using a slow-acting or a rapid poison that would give itself away she procured something powerful that would befuddle him and gradually cause death from Locusta, who was recently convicted on a charge of poisoning.

If Claudius was murdered it cannot be proven. The diverse accounts of his death make it impossible to be sure of the facts. What is known is that Claudius attended a priestly banquet on the capitol for the Augustalia of October 12. His taster, the eunuch Halotus, was present. The next day he had his last dinner at the palace. Tacitus says the task of administering the drug was given to Halotus traditionally in a dish of mushrooms to which Agrippina had added a concoction made by the imprisoned Locusta. The first attempt failed and Claudius’ doctor put a poisoned feather down his throat which proved to be the fatal blow (Ann. 12.66.4-5.) Suetonius is undecided on who did the murder naming both Halotus and Agrippina and mentioning both dinners (Claud. 45.2.)

Halotus suffered no stain on his reputation for his role in the murder and was rewarded with a procuratorship by Galba, who also had Locusta executed (Galba 15.2.) Pliny wrote that Agrippina actually used a poisonous mushroom which makes real sense since Seneca reported that a careless selection of mushrooms accidentally poisoned his friend, Annaeus Serenus, the prefect of the watch along with some of his officers. (Pliny NH 22.96; Nero 33.1;Dio 60.34.4.)

The effects of the poison are as various as the discussion of the plot itself. Suetonius says that Claudius lost the power to speak and had terrible pain as he died, just before dawn. He also suggests a second dose of poison was administered using a highly improbable syringe. Dio says the poison made it appear Claudius was merely drunk, not an uncommon habit for him. Suetonius also reports other authorities stating that Claudius passed out, vomited the contents of his stomach and seemed to recover before given more poison (Dio 61.34.3;Claud. 44.3)

Tacitus reflects the traditional belief concerning Claudius’ death. He says that Claudius survived the first dose of poison perhaps from his sluggish condition or from his acquired immunity, and passed the poison by bowel movement. Then, the emperor was given a second dose by Agrippina aided by a doctor, Gaius Stertenius Xenophon, who had been highly regarded by Claudius but seemed happy to commit murder for profit using a poisoned feather pretending he was attempting to induce vomiting (Ann. 12.61.)

Accusation alone is not enough to prove Agrippina murdered Claudius but circumstantial evidence tends to place blame on her. The longer the succession was delayed the more likely Nero would have to share it with Britannicus. If Britannicus’ claim to power was to be maintained he had to assume the toga virilis by the age of 14 (March 55). The advancement of his son may have been a sharply disputed topic between Claudius and Agrippina. Suetonius notes that Claudius regretted his advancement of Nero. However, it is unlikely that Claudius was opposed to Nero’s place in the succession, he wanted to stick to the original plan (Claud. 44.1.) There may have been reasons to be concerned over Britannicus’ ability to hold power. Tacitus claims that Britannicus was an intelligent boy but also mentions that he suffered from epilepsy (Ann. 13.16.3.)

It is noteworthy that a unusually high number of magistrates died in the months before Claudius. The emperor liked to remain in Rome during the summer to hold court rather than travel to the countryside. According to the Apocolocyntosis it was an unhealthy summer and in the satire Claudius is carried off by Febris (Fever). This might reflect a tradition that Claudius died of malaria. Several natural causes of death have been put forward from a heart attack to gastro-enteritis (Apoc. 6-7; Nero 7.2; Dio 60.33.9.)

Claudius’ death was kept a secret while the Senate convened and priests spoke prayers for his recovery (Victor De Caes. 4.) His body was smothered in blankets to hinder rigor mortis and prevent a time of death being from being discovered. Agrippina issued bulletins, just like Livia following Augustus’ death, and prevented Britannicus and his sisters from seeing their father. While this was going on Nero was being prepared to become Claudius’ sole successor. Britannicus may have been Claudius’ rightful heir but Nero had become his legal heir and had been clearly marked out for the succession. Burrus was probably busy ensuring a loyal cohort of guards would be on duty for the announcement and Seneca prepared a speech for the young Nero to deliver before the guards and the senate. That time was needed to prepare Nero’s accession suggests that Claudius’’ murder was not pre-meditated leaving the conspirators scrambling. Another reason may have been to make the death fit an auspicious time predicted by astrologers. This may be behind a remark may in the Apocolocyntosis where October 13 is declared "the first of a highly auspicious age" (1,3; Ann. 12.68.3; Nero 8.1.) It was finally announced that Claudius died shortly after midday and, if the Apocolocyntosis can be taken as reflecting the official account, he died happily watching comic actors (4.)

The Senate met late that day anticipating the reading of Claudius’ will, but it was never read. Dio claims that Nero destroyed the will because it favored Britannicus. Suetonius also claims Claudius had changed the document following his reconciliation with his son (Claud. 44.1; Dio 61.1.1-2; Ann. 12.69.5.) It is doubtful that Claudius would have named his son as his sole successor leaving him to face an impossible task of consolidating his power. Traditionalist that Claudius was he probably divided his estate between Nero and Britannicus and commended both of them to the care of the Senate as join heirs.

Following the ceremony established for Augustus’ funeral, Agrippina would have had Claudius’ body lie in state for six days before it was cremated and placed in the mausoleum of Augustus (October 18.) Nero delivered the funeral eulogy written by Seneca. On October 19, Nero entered the Senate and formally requested that Claudius be deified. This was essential for Agrippina as it would sanction the regime and she could look forward on her death to being raised among the gods; also, Nero could style himself Divi Filius. A grand and massive temple was begun on the Caelian Hill dwarfing all other sacred precincts in Rome. But it was not finished by the time of Agrippina’s murder in 59, and construction was abandoned. The temple was completed in the reign of Vespasian who wished to advertise his connection to Claudius to help legitimize his own regime.

© David A. Wend 1999

1 Bauman, B. A., Women and Politics in Ancient Rome,(London, 1992), p. 171

2 Barrett, op. cit., p. 91 note 88.

3 Barrett, op. cit., pp. 93-4.

4 Barrett, op. cit., p. 85.

5 Also, see Syme, Ronald, Tacitus, (Oxford University Press), p. 358.

6 Barrett, op. cit., p. 119.

7 Barrett, op. cit., p. 126.

8 For a contrary view, see Bagnani, Gilbert,"The Case of the Poisoned Mushrooms," Phoenix 1(1946),15-20.

9 For an interesting hypothesis on Nero’s origins, see Burns, Jasper K.,"Was Nero the natural son of Claudius?" The Celator (December, 1996), 6-11.

10 See Barrett, op. cit., p. 142 note 166 and Bagnani, op. cit., p. 18.