The Augustan Empire 43 BC

So much for paper arrangements; in the world beyond the drafting- board nature and chance play their part: disease and death, fire, flood and famine affect the stability of regimes. The years 23 and 22 в.с. were plague years all over Italy. Marcellus died (we do not know whether of plague), and there was no child of his marriage; that was a blow to Augustus' first attempt to create a succession, though the less urgent in that the ruler himself seemed out of danger. More urgent was the condition of the plebs of Rome, whose goodwill Agrippa had fostered. Along with its huge growth in numbers the plebs, overwhelmingly of freedman status, had acquired some political force.⁸¹ It is exaggerated to suppose that Augustus was either dependent on it or could ever have based power mainly upon it, but it had huge 'nuisance-value' and had to be managed and prevented from developing popular leaders. Along with plague went grave food shortage,⁸² and the commons were angry and disillusioned, calling upon the ruler to undo the careful paperwork and take official powers more plenary than he had ever yet had.

The year 22 B.C. was, in fact, fraught with ills. The statutory court for treason had to be convened for more than one case.⁸³ The trial of Marcus Primus, proconsul of Macedonia, for making war on the Odrysae of Thrace unprovoked and without authority, his claim to have done so at the behest of'Augustus or Marcellus', the appearance of Augustus at the tribunal to deny any such instruction, the question by defence counsel what standing he had to intervene, and his reply that his justification was 'the public interest': all that is a well-known story.⁸⁴ The matter was, no doubt, serious, especially as the resulting conviction of Primus was not unanimous; but it may have been accorded a significance beyond its deserts by being transposed to 23 в.с. It belongs, rather, to the category of 'famous repartees', Augustus' reply being reminiscent of that of Pericles, that moneys had been spent 'for a necessary purpose'.⁸⁵

But there was also a conspiracy by two persons, presumably to attempt what nature had failed to achieve.⁸⁶ One was a wholly unknown Fannius Caepio,⁸⁷ the other a certain Murena (so Dio calls him),⁸⁸ connected with a group close to the ruler: he was the brother, or half- brother, of Maecenas' wife, Terentia⁸⁹ and of Augustus' other equestrian

" See САН ix,² ch. 17. ⁸² Note the frumentatio recorded in RG 1 j. 1.

⁰ Its composition was, presumably, at least half non-senatorial. ^M Dio Liv.3.1-3.

•⁵ Plut. Per. 2J.1. ^M Dio Liv.3.4-8; Veil. Pat. 11.91.2. ⁸⁷ Syme 1986 (л 9;) 40, n.47.

*® Referred to in different sources as Licinius Murena and Varro Murena; doubdess he was also a Terentius, but he was not the mystery man in the consular Fasti for 23. Syme 1986 (л 93) 387-9.

" With whom Augustus was supposed to be having a liaison.

friend, Gaius Proculeius, and he was also the very defence counsel who had sought to embarrass Augustus at the trial of Marcus Primus. There is no reason to think that the charge was merely trumped up by Augus­tus.[192] There was a formal trial for treason,[193] and a conviction, but, again, short of unanimous. The sinister part of the tale is that the convicted men were not permitted to slip away into exile in the traditional way but apprehended and put to death.[194] Perhaps they failed to depart instantly enough. Maecenas is said by Suetonius to have given the nod to his wife to warn her brother to flee,[195] and commonly supposed to have lost his confidential standing with Augustus from that moment (though it is not clear that he did lose it abruptly, and Terentia hardly needed her husband as a go-between for information). Augustus celebrated his delivery from the plot (presumably to knife him) as a victory, and was furious at the lack of unanimity of the condemnation.