![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
Otho’s brief career in the Histories is framed by two symmetrical facinora, criminal coup and heroic suicide (1.21–22 and 2.47). Internal cross-references correlate these key moments, as commentators note, but formal-thematic continuity coexists with conspicuous psychological discontinuity. Where previous work has concentrated on the suicide that partially rehabilitates Otho, I focus instead on the frictions – rhetorical, psychological and ideological – and the dynamic interrelationship between the two passages. Otho’s internal rhetoric at 1.21–22, in counterpoint to the final public speech, offers a psychogram of ruthless ambition and obsession with exemplarity. His theatrical exit, typologically a literary Sterbeszene, enacts that obsession without erasing the treasonable past. Within the fray, Otho self-consciously styles himself as heroic exemplum; above the fray, the discordant aspects evidence Tacitus’ method of highlighting paradigmatic acts to memorialize or indict; and the paradoxical coniunctio oppositorum also captures the competing and distorting propaganda currents in civil war.
Aknowledgements
My warm thanks to the journal’s editor and anonymous readers for their very helpful comments and suggestions.
Notes
1 All translations are my own.
2 Cf. Labate (Citation1977–Citation1978, 40–41): “La complessità contraddittoria del personaggio tacitiano risulta proprio dal convergere delle qualità che hanno espressione compiuta nei facinora, dai quali è segnata la sua esistensa: il demagogo spregiudicato può quindi essere solerte imperator, l’uccisore di Galba può essere uomo politico accorto, sollecito per le sorti della stato.”
3 Cf. Ash (Citation2007, 200), “Otho’s predisposition to suicide is foreshadowed [at 1.21.2] before he even makes his bid for power.”
4 Thus Heubner (Citation1968, 185), who glosses: “Otho will sagen: ‘nicht nur Fortuna hat sich … jetzt an mir versucht, sondern auch ich habe es mit Fortuna aufgenommen, als ich damals den Griff nach der Herrschaft wagte.’”
5 E.g. Syme (Citation1958, 205), “a suicide more truly to be commended than when a good man took his own life in ostentatious rectitude, but with no advantage to the Commonwealth. Otho’s resolution averted any further shedding of Roman blood in a civil war.” Similarly Pöschl (Citation1959, xx–xxi); Harris (Citation1962); Schunk (Citation1964, 73–77); Schönlein (Citation1965, 116); Heubner (Citation1968, 181–190); Klingner (Citation1986, 425–427); Keitel (Citation1987; Citation1991, 2777–2783); Hutchinson (Citation1993, 257–261); Plass (Citation1995); Morgan (Citation2006, 141–144); Edwards (Citation2007, 35–39); Bittarello (Citation2011, 103). Critical voices are in a conspicuous minority: Warren (Citation2010, 212–125); Charles and Anagnostou-Laoutides (Citation2013, 216–217).
6 On this view Otho has become “ein Mann … , der sich völlig frei … entschlossen hat, dem Wohl des Gemeinwesens sein Leben zu opfern. Insofern ist er einem stoischen Helden vergleichbar, wie ja auch die nachfolgende Beschreibung seines Todes dem Muster von Catos Freitod nachgestaltet ist. Der Entschluß zum Freitod hat ihn völlig autark gemacht … ” (203; emphasis in the original). Duchêne (Citation2020, 219–220) similarly notes “une évolution progressive” from Otho’s seizure of power to his address to the praetorians (1.84.3), which shows how Tacitus “confère à son protagoniste une dimension dépassant celle d’un usurpateur.”
7 Thus his desire for a speedy burial ne amputaretur caput ludibrio futurum (“that his head might not be cut off and subjected to insult,” 2.49.3) “accentuates the inconsistent characterisation by triggering a recollection of Otho’s past crimes even at his most glorious moment” (Ash Citation1999, 83–84).
8 This preoccupation is a topos at least since the Periclean epitaphios (Thuc. 2.42.3); see further Woodman (Citation1983, 172–173); Suerbaum (Citation2015, 573–574). Tacitean examples include Hist. 1.72.3, infamem uitam foedauit etiam exitu sero et inhonesto (“he disgraced an infamous life with a belated and shameful death”); 4.60.1, donec egregiam laudem fine turpi macularent … uitam orantes (“until they tarnished their outstanding glory with a shameful end … pleading for their lives”); Ann. 1.53.5, constantia mortis haud indignus Sempronio nomine: uita degenerauerat (“in his unflinching death he was not unworthy of the name of the Sempronii; in life, he had disgraced it”); 2.63.3, multum imminuta claritate ob nimiam uiuendi cupidinem (“his renown was greatly diminished by an excessive attachment to life”); 16.11.1, ne uitam proxime libertatem actam nouissimo seruitio foedaret (“lest he disgrace a life, lived very nearly in liberty, by a final act of servility”). There is a predilection for the paradox “bad life–good death / good life–bad death”: with Otho, the schema effectively highlights the dissonance in his character. Cf. also Horace’s Cleopatra, transmuting from fatale monstrum to non humilis mulier (C. 1.37).
9 Cf. Xiphilinus’ epitome of Dio 63.15.2 (Cary): “Thus he eclipsed (συνϵσκίασϵ) the impiousness and wickedness of his life. Having lived the most disgraceful of human lives, he died most nobly, and having seized power in the most villainous manner, he gave it up in the honourable way.” Cf. Zonar. 11.15, p. 46, 25–29 (Dindorf); Morgan (2007, 142).
10 Cf. also Keitel (Citation1987, 73): “Tacitus makes Otho’s ultimate bravery and self-sacrifice more plausible while consistently denigrating his acts as princeps in the intervening narrative.” Similarly Klingner (Citation1986, 425): “Othos rühmlicher Tod löscht freilich nach dem Urteil des Tacitus seine frühere Schuld nicht aus. Aber Tacitus hat ihm doch um seines Todes willen von vornherein mehr Größe zugemessen als die Überlieferung.” Hutchinson (Citation1993, 261): “It is precisely because [Tacitus] has generally portrayed Otho in so sordid a light that the laudatory effect of the present narration becomes critically acceptable. Tacitus suggests in his account of the death many pointed contrasts with Otho’s past conduct, and he forcefully reminds us of what people supposedly thought about Otho before his great deed (2.31.1).”
11 Quanto plus spei ostenditis, si uiuere placeret, tanto pulchrior mors erit (“the more hope you hold out, should I choose to live, the more glorious my death will be,” 2.47.1); ne plus quam semel certemus, penes me exemplum erit; hinc Othonem posteritas aestimet (“that we do not join battle more than once is the precedent I shall set; let posterity judge Otho by this” 2.47.2); satis sibi nominis, satis posteris suis nobilitatis quaesitum (“he had won enough fame for himself and enough distinction for his descendants,” 2.48.2).
12 On this passage (quoted and translated above), see Galtier (Citation2011, 208–209) who notes that Galba’s last words had also expressed “l’idée de transformer sa mort en don de soi pour Rome”: agerent ac ferirent, si ita 〈e〉 re publica uideretur (“they should strike and have done, if this seemed best for the state,” 1.41.2). Galba’s death was located by Tacitus near the Curtian lake (1.41.2), so named, according to Livy (7.6.5) after the spectacular deuotio of Marcus Curtius in 362 BC.
13 Cf. Sen. Prou. 2.9–12, with Grisé (Citation1982, 202–204); Edwards (Citation2007, 1–5, 114–116).
14 Edwards (Citation2007, 144–160); Ker (Citation2009, 17–62); Fögen (Citation2015); Lindl (Citation2020, 340-342, 362–376).
15 Cf. Arand (Citation2002, 132–133): “Wichtiger sind ihm [sc. Tacitus] jedoch die Verhaltensregeln fur einen würdigen Herrscher, die implizit in der Darstellung durchscheinen … Selbst der schlechte Herrscher beugt sich so am Schluß … den übermächtigen senatorischen Wertecodices. Er gibt damit ein positives Exemplum, daß die Regeln letztlich stärker sind als der Mensch und sein im Leben geformter Charakter. Tacitus legt auf derartige Erziehungsziele Wert, den [er] versteht sich … vor allem als Zeitkritiker und moralische Instanz.”
16 Cf. 1.5.2; 13.2; 41.2; Plut. Galba 21.2, “but Galba always showed clearly that he placed the public good before his private interests (πρὸ τοῦ ἰδίου τὸ κοινὸν τιθέμϵνος).”
17 Cf. also inserendo saepius querelas et ambiguos de Galba sermones quaeque alia turbamenta uolgi (“often slipping in complaints and double-edged remarks about Galba, and other things to incite the common soldiers,” 1.23.1); uitia, quibus solis gloriatur, euertere imperium; (“the vices that are his only boasts have undermined the empire,” 30.1); ut turbidis rebus euenit; (“as happens in times of upheaval,” 31.1); and more generally Sall. Cat. 37.3.
18 Suetonius is more explicit here (Otho 5.1–2): sperauerat autem fore ut adoptaretur a Galba, idque in dies expectabat. sed postquam Pisone praelato spe decidit, ad uim conuersus est instigante super animi dolorem etiam magnitudine aeris alieni. neque enim dissimulabat, nisi principem se stare non posse, nihilque referre ab hoste in acie an in foro sub creditoribus caderet (“However, he had hoped to be adopted by Galba, and expected it day by day. But when Piso was preferred and Otho was disappointed in this hope, he turned to force; in addition to feelings of resentment, he was spurred on by the enormity of his debts. For he made no secret of the fact that he could not stand on his feet unless he became emperor, and that it made no difference whether he fell at the hands of the enemy in battle or at those of his creditors in the forum”). Cf. Plut. Galba 21.3; Morgan (Citation2006, 63).
19 “Internal focalization looks at events in the perspective of one of the narrative’s characters, without necessarily using this character’s voice. The reader is merely told what this character knows and sees” (Schmitz Citation2007, 57; cf. Fludernik Citation2009, 102–103). Otho’s ruminations in 1.21 have been termed “monologue” (Keitel Citation1987, 73), “inner monologue” (Perkins Citation1993, 851), “discours intérieur” (Utard Citation2004, 429–431) and “ce débat intérieur largement inspiré des suasoriae” (Galtier Citation2011, 131; cf. Aubrion Citation1985, 540–542). Plutarch also touches on Otho’s thoughts, though less analytically than Tacitus: ἐπϵφαίνϵτο πολλὰ σημϵῖα τῇ μορφῇ πικρῶς καὶ σὺν ὀργῇ τῆς ἐλπίδος τὴν ἀπότϵυξιν φέροντος, ἧς πρῶτος ἀξιωθϵὶς καὶ τοῦ τυχϵῖν ἐγγυτάτω γϵνόμϵνος, τὸ μὴ τυχϵῖν ἐποιϵῖτο σημϵῖον ἔχθους ἅμα καὶ κακονοίας τοῦ Γάλβα πρὸς αὐτόν. ὅθϵν οὐδ’ ἄφοβος ἦν πϵρὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν Πϵίσωνα δϵδιώς, καὶ τὸν Γάλβαν προβαλλόμϵνος, καὶ τῷ Οὐινίῳ χαλϵπαίνων, ἀπῄϵι πολλῶν παθῶν πλήρης (“There were many signs that he took the disappointment of his hope with bitterness and anger. Having been the first to be thought worthy [of becoming Galba’s successor], and having come very near to attaining this, he took his failure to achieve it as a mark of Galba’s hatred and hostility towards him. So he was not without apprehension for the future, and fearing Piso, blaming Galba, and furious with Vinius, he went off full of different emotions,” Plut. Galba 23.5–6).
20 Stupra nunc et comissationes et feminarum coetus uoluit animo: haec principatus praemia putat (“already he contemplates in his imagination adulteries, revelries and companies of women: these he considers the prizes of imperial power,” 1.30.1). Piso seems to have “read” chapters 1.21–22, thus giving internal narrative validity to the earlier subjective dimension. For a similar introspective dimension, see also (e.g.) Agrippina’s reflections after surviving the attempted assassination by shipwreck (illic reputans … obseruans etiam, Ann. 14.6.1), or Nero’s anxious thoughts on learning of her survival (Ann. 14.7). On the effect of the internal focalization, see Lindl (Citation2020, 194–197, 275–278), who remarks (210), “Interne Fokalisierungen gewähren … reizvolle Einblicke in Gedanken, Gefühle sowie Motive einzelner Protagonisten und bieten somit bei bedeutenden historischen Geschehnissen eine unmittelbare Miterlebensperspektive.”
21 Psycho-cybernetics, a branch of motivational psychology popularized by Maxwell Maltz, holds that consciously re-imag(in)ing oneself can work as a propulsion mechanism to steer the subject towards a desired goal or target: “Realizing that our actions, feelings and behavior are the result of our own images and beliefs gives us the lever that psychology has always needed for changing personality” (Maltz Citation1960, 34). Of course, this can cut both ways to initiate a beneficent or a vicious cycle. “Positive thinking” and the “success mechanism” require that we “dehypnotize” ourselves from false beliefs – but conversely the same system can trigger paranoid fantasies and powerful rationalizations for action: thus various monologues of self-incitement in Seneca’s tragedies (e.g. Ag. 108–130, 192–202, 226–233; Thy. 192–204; cf. Galtier Citation2011, 131–132 n. 397). Otho’s fears in Tacitus have an analogous psychological and rhetorical function.
22 1.6.2; 31.2; 37.2–4; 87.1; Plut. Galba 15.4; Ash (Citation1999, 76–78); Morgan (Citation2006, 43–45). Galba’s cruelty as a threat to Otho and his supporters is articulated most fully at 1.37 – where however the drastic language (Ash Citation1999, 77) works rather to build solidarity with the troops (adeo manifestum est neque perire nos neque saluos esse nisi una posse, “so clear is it that we must stand or fall together,” 1.37.2). Cf. also 1.32.1, where the Galbans in a moment of over-heated enthusiasm clamour loudly for the destruction of Otho and his conspirators (dissono clamore caedem Othonis et coniuratorum exitium poscentium, “clamouring with discordant shouts for the death of Otho and the destruction of the conspirators.”)
23 Kneppe (Citation1994, 190) takes Otho’s fear as auto-suggestion, “doch hat sie offenbar einen realen Hintergrund: occidi Othonem posse.” Heubner (Citation1963, 60) argues for feigned metus: “Die Worte [fingebat et metum] bedeuten also, daß er sich sozusagen eine psychologische Feder einsetzt, indem er sich Grund zur Furcht vorspiegelt.” Pöschl (Citation1972, 15), “Doch läßt Tacitus durchblicken, diese Angst könnte nur ein vorgeschobenes Motiv sein, um seine Gier zu bemänteln … Hier wird also der der modernen Psychologie und Psychanalyse wohlbekannte Vorgang der Verdrängung beschrieben. Die eigentliche Triebkraft, die Gier, wird durch eine andere, moralisch weniger anrüchige, die Angst, verdrängt.” Similarly Kirchner (Citation2001, 103 n. 15), “Otho spricht von Angst, obwohl Gier ihn antreibt”; Warren (Citation2010, 167–170), “Otho created the fear that gave scope for greed” (168); Galtier (Citation2011, 131 n. 397) terms this “une forme d’auto-persuasion fondée sur une excitation volontaire du metus … il se forge des craintes imaginaires pout attiser sa passion du pouvoir.” The most detailed comment is in Plass (Citation1995, 132), who argues that “[Otho’s] own ‘pretense’ of fear may mean that he was justifying his ambitious plans to others … But the phrasing of Tacitus’ account could equally well represent what Otho was telling himself. In that case, he would not have been deceiving himself with unreal fear so much as psyching himself up to action by running through mental simulations of real danger. That special sense of fingo is part of the meaning of fingebant simul credebantque – “were talking themselves into really believing” – in Tacitus’ Annals 5.10.2. In any case – self-justification or auto-suggestion, calculated or honest – things become real in good measure as they are thought to be so.” Similarly Haynes (Citation2003, 55), “the prime goads to his motivation, paradoxically, are the ones that he invents himself … These are in one sense excuses with which he can justify his criminal action … ”.
24 Emphasis on the hypothetical scenario is notable.
25 Cf. Kirchner (Citation2001, 103) on the sententia suspectum semper: “In diesem Gedankengang dient die Sentenz geradezu als Obersatz eines rhetorischen Syllogismus, dessen scheinbar kühle Logik freilich Othos Gier nach einem Putsch gegen Galba wirksam steigert.”
26 Voltu habituque moris antiqui et aestimatione recta seuerus (“in expression and manner of the old type, and on a just assessment he was stern,” 1.14.2); sermo erga patrem imperatoremque reuerens, de se moderatus (“his language to his father and emperor was respectful, and he spoke modestly about himself,” 1.17.1); Pisonis comis oratio (“Piso’s speech was graceful,” 1.19.1).
27 On this sententia as self-exhortation, cf. Kirchner (Citation2001, 105), “Otho stützt mit einer Sentenz eine Selbstaufforderung: (I,21,2) proinde agendum audendumque, dum … ”.
28 Merito perire glossed by Heraeus (Citation1929, 42–43) as “den Tod durch eigne Verantwortung erleiden, d.h. sich den Tod durch kühne Unternehmungen verdienen.”
29 In the context of his treasonous reflections, “fame with posterity” is jarring and ironic – especially by comparison with (e.g.) Augustus’ studied attention to exemplarity and auto-exemplarity (on which see Ramage [Citation1987, 21–28]; Lowrie [Citation2007, 102–112]).
30 Noted by Kirchner (Citation2001, 137). Chilver’s (Citation1979, 84) suggestion, on obliuione … distingui (1.21.2), that here, “for the first time, T[acitus] looks forward to Otho’s suicide” makes sense in light of the thematic calculus; cf. Keitel (Citation1987, 79), “Otho’s monologue forecasts his concern for his posthumous reputation, and when the moment comes, he earns his death as a uir acer should (1.21.2)”; Perkins (Citation1993, 851); Ash (Citation2007, 200).
31 Cf. also Charles and Anagnostou-Laotides (Citation2013, 210–222).
32 Krohn (Citation1934); Pöschl (Citation1959, xix–xxii; 1972, 24–26) (“Das Stehenbleiben vor dem Unvereinbaren … ist darauf zurückzuführen, daß dem Tacitus daran liegt, die Widersprüche zu betonen”); Daitz (Citation1960, 47–52); Römer (Citation1999, 297, 307); Lindl (Citation2020, 332–354, esp. 348–349).
33 See (e.g.) Pöschl (Citation1959, xxxi–xxxv; Citation1972, 14–22); Ries (Citation1969, 95–132); Neumeister (Citation1986); Vielberg (Citation2000).
34 Quis ad uos processerim, commilitones, dicere non possum, quia nec priuatum me uocare sustineo princeps a uobis nominatus, nec principem alio imperante. uestrum quoque nomen in incerto erit, donec dubitabitur, imperatorem populi Romani in castris an hostem habeatis (“I cannot tell, fellow soldiers, in what capacity I have come before you, since I can hardly call myself a private citizen, after having been named your emperor, nor can I call myself an emperor while another is ruler. Your own designation will also be ambiguous as long as there will be any doubt whether you have in your camp the emperor of the Roman people or a public enemy,” 1.37.1). He goes on to charge Galba with cynical use of misnomers (1.37.4, falsis nominibus) – the same game that Otho himself is playing. Overarching metus temporum conduces to such misuse and manipulation (1.49.3). For the Roman historians’ reception of the Thucydidean typology, see Batstone (Citation2010, 45–71); Spielberg (Citation2017); and on Tacitus in particular, Keitel (Citation2006, 222–224); Sailor (Citation2008, 192–205); Spielberg (Citation2017, 353–357).