The History of Rome: Rise and Fall of the Empire. John Bagnell Bury
districts in Cilicia as a compensation. But a few years later (45 A.D.) he was deposed, for what reason is unknown, and his brother, a youth named Cotys, was set up in his stead and at first supported by a considerable Roman force under Aulus Didius Gallus, who was probably governor of Moesia. When the Romans departed, leaving only a few cohorts under a knight named Julius Aquila, Mithradates saw his opportunity. Collecting a band of men, who were exiles like himself, he overthrew the king of the Dandaridae, a people which dwelled near the Hypanis (the Kuban), and established himself as ruler over them. Cotys and Aquila were alarmed at the prospect of an invasion by Mithradates at the head of the Dindarids, especially as the Siraci, another obscure people of those regions, had assumed a hostile attitude. Accordingly they sought the alliance of Eunones, king of the Aorsi, another race whose exact home is uncertain. It was resolved to anticipate the designs of the dethroned king of Bosporus by attacking him in his new Dandarid realm. The army of Cotys consisted of the Roman cohorts, native Bosporan troops, and cavalry supplied by Eunones. Mithradates, having no adequate forces to oppose to this attack, was defeated, and Soza, the town of Dandarica, was occupied by the invaders. The victors then proceeded against the Siraci, and laid siege to their town, named Uspe, which was built on high ground and also fortified by art. The place was easily taken, and the inhabitants, although they had offered submission, were massacred. After the fall of Uspe the king of the Siraci deserted the cause of Mithradates, and prostrated himself before the image of the Emperor. The Romans were very proud of this expedition. They had advanced within three days’ journey of the banks of the Tanais, which in their geography was regarded as one of the limits of the known world. But as they returned by sea, some ships were wrecked on the shores of the Tauri, and the barbarians slew one of the prefects and some of the soldiers,
For Mithradates it only remained to throw himself on the mercy of some protector. Not trusting his brother Cotys, and there being no Roman officer of influence on the spot, he gave himself up to Eunones, king of the Aorsi. Eunones undertook his cause, and sent envoys to Claudius, begging mercy for the captive. After some hesitation, the Emperor decided on exercising clemency; Mithradates was conducted to Rome, and is said to have spoken bold words in the imperial presence: “I have returned to you of my own free will; if you do not believe it, let me go, and look for me!” The fate of Mithradates is uncertain, but he was probably kept, like Maroboduus, in some Italian city.
But the most important change was the restoration of the kingdom of Herod. Judea, which since his death had been governed by a Roman procurator, was given along with Samaria to his grandson Agrippa, who had played a prominent part in securing the accession of Claudius. This change was at least as much a matter of policy as a reward to Agrippa. It was intended to soothe the bad feeling against the Roman government which had been stirred up among the Jews under the reign of Gaius. Two edicts were issued, according, first to the Jews of Alexandria, and then to the Jews of the whole Empire, the free exercise of their worship. Agrippa was very popular with the Jews, and he was also popular with the Greeks. At Jerusalem he was a Jew; at Caesarea he was a gentile. On two occasions the governor of Syria, Vibius Marsus, was obliged to interfere with his policy; in 42 A.D., to prevent him from fortifying the new town of Jerusalem, and in the following year, to put a stop to a suspicious congress of kings—Antiochus of Commagene, Cotys of Little Armenia, Sampsigeram of Emesa, Polemo of Pontus—who had assembled at Tiberias to meet Agrippa. But the restored kingdom of Judea was of short duration. Agrippa died, eaten up of worms, in -14 A.D., and his son, who was kept as a hostage at Rome, was not deemed competent to succeed him. Judea was placed again under the government of a procurator, but, to assume the discontent of the Jews and prevent disturbances, the nomination of the high priest and the administration of the treasure of the temple were not assigned to him but to king Herod of the Syrian Chalcis, a brother of Agrippa. At this time Judea was much disturbed by brigands as well as by the fanatical hatred of the Jews against the Pagans; and the constant interference of the governor of Syria was required. The administration of Judea was one of the most difficult problems that the Roman had to deal with; and they committed the error of not stationing sufficiently large military forces in that province.
In 53 A.D., Claudius granted immunity from tribute to the island of Cos, as a personal favor to his physician Xenophon, who belonged to the Asclepiadae, a family of medical priests, who lived in that island. The Emperor made one of his characteristic speeches in the senate, going into the ancient history of the Coans, and then letting out the true motive of his proposal by mentioning; Xenophon, their distinguished countryman. About the same time, tribute was remitted for five years to Byzantium, which had suffered severely from the Bosporan war and from disturbances in Thrace when that country was made a province. The history of the war for Armenia must be reserved for another chapter.
It may be asked how far the administration of the Empire was guided by the mind of Claudius, and how far the measures of his reign were due to his advisers. On this it is impossible to speak with certainty. There is a curious contrast between his rather ridiculous personality and the not inconsiderable positive results of his reign. However much he owed to his able councilors, it is certain that he impressed many of his measures with his personal stamp. If he was weak-minded, easily influenced by women and freedmen, immoderate in sensual indulgence, and fond of wine and gambling, it must not be forgotten that he was well educated. Nor is it fair to blame him for the prominent part which the freed-men of his household played in the administration of the state, it must be remembered that the Emperor had neither official ministers nor a regular civil service at his disposal. He was supposed to be his own secretary of state and his own treasurer; and he was therefore obliged to have recourse to the services of his freedmen for carrying on the business of the state. Augustus himself had depended on freedmen after the death of his advisers Agrippa and Maecenas. Tiberius and Gaius also employed them, but did not admit them to their confidence. They occupied, however, such a position that their influence over a weak-minded Princeps was almost a matter of course. This happened in the case of Claudius. He needed councilors to lean upon, and the freedmen were there, at his hand. His most trusted advisers were Narcissus, who held the post of ab epistulis, or secretary; Pallas, who was the a rationibus, or steward and accountant; Callistus, the a libellis, who received all petitions preferred to the Emperor; and Polybius, who assisted his master in his studies, and had himself won a place in literature by translating Homer into Latin and Virgil into Greek. These Greeks were well-educated men, capable and versatile; and it would be an error of prejudice to ridicule the government of Claudius as being conducted by a company of menials. They were doubtless far more competent to perform the duties of their offices and to advise the Emperor than the officials of equestrian and senatorian rank. But in consequence of their position they were overbearing and avaricious. Having no social position they sought a compensation in amassing wealth, and their administration was consequently marked by the grossest corruption. They sold appointments to the highest bidders; they compassed the confiscation of the estates of nobles on false or frivolous charges; they extorted bribes by threats.
SECT. IV. — MESSALINA
In these malpractices the freedmen were aided and abetted by the Empress Messalina. In his youth Claudius had been betrothed to Aemilia Lepida, daughter of the younger Julia, but the marriage was broken off on account of her mother’s misconduct. He lost a second bride, Livia Camilla, through her death on the wedding-day, and finally married Plautia Urgulanilla, daughter of Plautius Silvanus, who had distinguished himself in Illyricum. Plautia was repudiated on account of an intrigue with a freedman, and Claudius then married Aelia Paetina, by whom he had one daughter. Aelia was also divorced, but for no serious cause, and (about 38 A.D.) Claudius took a third wife, as has been already mentioned, Valeria Messalina. This remarkable woman was descended, on the father’s side, from the race of the orator Messalla Corvinus; but by her mother, Domitia Lepida, she was connected with the family of the Caesars. Claudius and Lepida were cousins, being both the grandchildren of Antonius the triumvir and Octavia, the sister of Augustus. The name of Messalina has become proverbial for unblushing sensuality. The tales that have been preserved of her vices and her orgies bear on them the marks of exaggeration, but there can be no doubt that her conduct was dissolute, and that she exercised an evil influence on the women of Rome. She is said to have carried on criminal intrigues with the Emperor’s freedmen, especially with Narcissus. It seems certain that she and they combined to hoodwink Claudius. They concealed her love affairs with others,