TIBERIUS THE TYRANT.
ITo THE EDITOR OF TUE "SPECTATOR.")
SIR,—AS a general rule I hold that time is ill spent in pro- testing against an inadequate review, but on the present occasion I feel that the honour of two columns in the Spectator (April 26th), of which I am fully sensible, may be
too dearly bought, and must ask you to allow me to make my protest accordingly.
Had your reviewer described the nature of the evidence which I have brought forward in favour of the Emperor Tiberius, and
then proved that it wasunsound, or attempted to do so honestly and fairly, I should have raised no objection ; but as he contents himself with general observations, and simply describes the book as setting "before us the personal view of a sincere advocate," adding, "yet his arguments are generally the arguments of in- clination, and have but an insecure basis of fact," in other words,
as he practically impeaches my historical veracity, I cannot let the matter pass. Our chief authorities for the life of Tiberius are Paterculus, Tacitus, and Suetonius. Paterculus, whom your reviewer ignores, was a contemporary of Tiberius, and was a member of his Headquarters Staff for nine years, sharing in his Pannonian and German campaigns. His facts are those of an eye-witness. Tacitus and Suetonius wrote some sixty years after the death of Tiberius ; they had to depend upon the work of previous historians, upon private memoirs, and upon public documents ; of these the latter alone were absolutely trustworthy ; wherever Tacitus makes statements in favour of Tiberius they rest on the evidence of such documents, and such statements abound in Tacitus ; in fact, Tacitus is, after all, the chief witness for the defence on questions of fact. Paterculus is held to be a flatterer, yet his summary of the reign of Tiberius up to 30 A.D. is absolutely in accordance with a similar summary made by Tacitus up to 23 A.D. The speeches and letters attri- buted to Tiberius by Tacitus show internal evidence of being genuine except in one instance, and uniformly support the evidence of his public actions in his favour. Suetonius is a very gossipy writer, and loves a scandal, but even he supplies anecdotes in favour of Tiberius. All these I have used in my book ; if your reviewer had doubts of my veracity, it was his duty to refer to his Tacitus and confute me finally.
I have been at some pains to indicate the origin of the Tiberius myth ; I have shown why Tacitus was inclined to his personal view, how he was himself staggered by the contradictions between his authorities ; I have shown the tainted sources from which some of his material was drawn ; I have endeavoured to distinguish between that part of his work which is evidence, and that which is not ; I have shown that the indirect evidence, such as that supplied by the first book of the Epistles of Horace, is in accordance with the direct evidence, which shows Tiberius a man of unimpeachable private character at least up to 26 A.D., when he withdrew himself from public observation, and always an able and just administrator. According to your reviewer, I have done nothing of the kind. Again, your reviewer says, "the case of Germanicus and Piso cannot be lightly set aside, nor is the career 'of an upstart like Sejanus creditable to the Emperor." I have devoted twenty-two pages to the case of Germanieus and Piso, and I have shown, what really required very little showing, that Sejanus was not an upstart except in the eyes of the old Roman nobility, that he was nearly of the same age as Tiberius, that his public career began under Augustus, that his father was Governor of Egypt and for many years Commander-in-Chief • in Italy ; we should not call the sons of Lord Cromer or Lord Roberts upstarts. I hold no brief for Sejanus. As to the excesses at Capreae, I require something more definite than the nasty stories in Suetonius, some probability of accessible evi- dence, before I believe that a man who, according to the same Suetonius, preserved his health by following a strict self- imposed regimen after the age of thirty, suddenly at the age of sixty-eight changed the whole tenor of his life, and then lived for eleven years more. I have not excluded the possibility of a case of "senile perversity," but will your reviewer, who seems to be better versed in this branch of pathology than I am, kindly give me an authentic case of a man hitherto chaste and temperate having suddenly changed at the age of sixty-eight and continued to live for eleven years? The evidence of the temperate and chaste life up to then is to be found in all the authorities ; there is also the evidence of silence, for Agrippina, a bitter personal enemy, would hardly have failed to mention lapses from morality in the Memoir which Tacitus used. Suetonius tells us a few stories of the life at Rhodes ; none suggest evil living, three of them suggest a life spent in the exercise of private charity and intellectual pursuits. And after all, why should I, after nearly two thousand years, be interested in rehabilitating the character of Tiberius at the expense of my own reputation, why should I adopt an un- supported prejudice in his favour ? I find the contrast between the evidence and the verdict supremely interesting, but I do not tamper with or reject the evidence. The only evidence which I have preferred to ignore is evidence which could only have been based on irresponsible gossip. I do not believe in the harems of the modern Popes, or the flirtations of the late Mr. Gladstone; the Italian gutter Press believes in the former, and a distinguished Fn nch journalist once published a circumstantial account of the latter. I believe the stories of the excesses of Tiberius at Capreae to rest on similar evidence.
Filgrave, Newport Pagnell.
[We publish Mr. Tarver's letter, though we cannot as a rule publish reviews of reviews, nor can we enter upon a controversy, which must, if once begun, take up far morp space than we can possibly afford. Our publication a Mr. Tarver's letter must not, however, be taken as an admission that our reviewer was in any way unjust to Mr. Tarver's book. Surely a critic, if he is not convinced by an author's arguments, has a right to express his opinion.—ED.
Spectator.]
Previous page
