Ancient Rome and Modern America; A Comparative Study of Morals and MannersFerrero, Guglielmo
History
Ancient Rome and Modern America; A Comparative Study of Morals and Manners
Ferrero, Guglielmo
America -- Civilization; Europe -- Civilization; Justice, Administration of -- Rome; Progress
In any case there was no other tribunal; and between the two evils,
Tiberius could only choose the lesser. However, he realised so clearly
the gravity of the dangers which surrounded the course of justice, in
the midst of so many frenzied passions, in this trial which had been
engineered by insensate hatreds and rancours, that when, as president
of the Senate, he had to open the sessions, he made a speech, the
gist of which Tacitus has preserved for us. Whoever reads it cannot
help recognising the spirit of profound wisdom and equity which
inspires it. Tiberius explained quite clearly to the Senate that
the charge of poisoning levelled against Piso, if true, would be an
extremely serious matter. He reminded them, however, that Piso was a
prominent man, who had rendered eminent services to the Republic and
belonged to one of the most ancient and noble families in Rome. They
must, therefore, bring the most serene impartiality to bear on their
judgment, forgetting who was the accused, if they found him guilty,
forgetting who was the victim, if they found him innocent. However
great his affection for Germanicus might be, nothing would induce him
to wish for the sacrifice on the latter’s tomb, of an innocent man, for
the satisfaction of the insensate mania for revenge which had taken
possession of the public.
The speech was a wise and humane one; but what could sober words, even
from an Emperor’s mouth, avail when passions are aroused? The Senate
allotted two days to the prosecution, three to the defence. There was
to be an interval of six days between the two sections of the trial.
For two whole days, the accusers talked, reconstructing, as Cicero had
done in Verres’s case, the whole history of Piso’s life. They went
so far as to accuse him of having misgoverned the previous provinces
he had had; they went minutely into the history of his government in
Syria, and repeated the fantastic story of the poisoning. Tacitus
himself recognised that the charges were very weak, especially the
accusation of poisoning, which was the only serious one. Accordingly,
the first impression made by the trial was very uncertain. The public
was prejudiced in favour of the prosecution; in the Senate there
was a strong party hostile to Piso. After all, however, the Senate
was a great political body, and many of its members could not but
recognise that the charges were slender ones. Everybody felt that the
issue depended on Tiberius, who could, according as he showed himself
favourable or the reverse, weigh down the scales on the side of
acquittal or of conviction. Everybody, therefore, looked towards him,
with hope or with anxiety. But Tiberius listened to the prosecution
without moving an eyelid, as impassive as a statue, without allowing
a glimpse into his secret thoughts on the subject. Could he act
otherwise? If he had shown himself favourable to Piso, he would have
been accused of shielding the murderers of Germanicus, through hatred
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account