Выбрать главу

priest of another tribe, the Chatti; and an impressive roster of other Ger-

man leaders, their wives, and children. Only one German, Strabo ex-

plains, found a different place: Segestes, Thusnelda’s father and a Roman

collaborator, “was present at the triumph over his nearest and dearest, as

guest of honor.”4

Tacitus, however, strikes a discordant note, with a characteristically

cynical narrative of the triumph. It is a nice reminder that the very same

ceremony can for some observers be a glorious celebration, for others

a hypocritical sham. Tacitus opens his account of the year 15 with impli-

cations, already, of impropriety: “A triumph was decreed to Germanicus,

while the war was still going on. ”5 Precedents can be found for such a premature anticipation of victory.6 And, in any case, exactly what counted

as the definitive end of a war must often have been harder to deter-

mine at the time than it appears with the benefit of hindsight. In fact,

the declaration of a triumph might more than once have been a use-

ful device for drawing a final line under an uncertainly completed cam-

paign, asserting—rather than merely recognizing—its end. But Tacitus

presents the train of events and the culminating procession as yet an-

other example of the corruption of imperial rule, and in particular of

Tiberius’ jealousy of the dashing young prince and of his attempts to

rein in Germanicus’ success under the veil of empty honor.

“The procession,” he writes, “displayed spoils and captives, replicas

(simulacra) of mountains, of rivers and of battles.” But it was not only

the geographical features on show that were a pretense ( simulcra in the

Th e

R o m a n Tr i u m p h

1 1 0

pejorative sense). So too the whole victory being celebrated: “Seeing

that he had been forbidden to finish off (conficere) the war, it was taken as finished (pro confecto). ” The very success of the sham spelled danger. “The impressive sight of the general, and his five children who

shared his chariot, riveted the attention of the spectators. But this

concealed an underlying anxiety, as they reflected that popularity had

not turned out well for his father, Drusus, that his uncle Marcellus

had died at an early age despite the passionate support of the plebs, and

that the enthusiasms of the Roman people were short-lived and ill-

omened.”7

Piloty’s painting combines the accounts of Tacitus and Strabo. The

scene on the imperial dais echoes all the Tacitean misgivings. A distinc-

tively clad German, who must be Segestes, can hardly bear to watch as

his family members walk by as captives. Tiberius himself, flanked by his

sinister right-hand man Sejanus, looks decidedly grumpy—if not half

asleep—at having to sit through the lavish celebration, sham or not. (It

is, of course, in the very nature of successful shams that they merge into

what they are pretending—but, at the same time, trying not—to be.)

Only the imperial ladies seem to be having a good time, gawping at the

exotic display.

But, unlike the image conjured by Tacitus, all eyes are not on the tri-

umphing prince. He is only just entering the scene, a small figure in the

background, half in shadow, crammed into the chariot with his five

youngsters. The foreground is dominated instead by the captives listed

by Strabo. The priest Libes is dragged along by a leering Roman soldier

who tugs at the old man’s beard. An assortment of German women look

alternately fearsomely wild or resigned to their fate. But unquestionably

the star of the show is the central, spotlit figure of Thusnelda, captive

wife of the rebel Arminius, with little Thumelicus at her side. She is

passing directly in front of the emperor and cuts a fine contrast with

Tiberius: for it is she who behaves as a proud monarch, tall and un-

bowed; the ruler of the Roman world is hunched up on his dais, with his

minders, merely a bit-part in the grand display. Here the triumphal vic-

tim has become the victor; all eyes are on her.

Captives on Parade

111

Piloty is playing with one of the commonest tropes of nineteenth-

century nationalism, taking the most prominent victims of Roman con-

quest and transforming them into heroes of the nation-states of Europe.

Boudicca, Vercingetorix, Thusnelda, and Arminius (“Herman the Ger-

man”) were all conscripted into the patriotic pantheon of their home

countries in northern Europe. But, knowingly or not, Piloty is also pick-

ing up key themes in Roman commentaries on the celebrations of tri-

umph: that the gaze of the audience was perilously hard to control; that

the general risked being up-staged by his exotic victims; that the noble

(or pitiful) captives might always steal the show. At the center of the pa-

rade lay a dynamic tension—a competition for the eyes of the specta-

tor—between victor and victim (see Frontispiece).

Most modern studies of the triumph have focused on the success-

ful general. This chapter offers a new perspective by concentrating on

the defeated. It aims to explore the victims’ role in the culture of the

triumph: from the (not so) simple facts of their number, identity, and

ultimate fate to the moral lessons they had to teach and their potential

rivalry in the economy of the spectacle with the general himself.

THE VICTIM’S POINT OF VIEW?

The second poem in Ovid’s collection of Amores (Love Poems) written in

the late 20s bce opens with the poet complaining of a sleepless night,

tossing and turning. The diagnosis is soon clear: our poet has become a

victim of the fire-power of Love (“Yes, Cupid’s slender arrows have

lodged in my heart”). Resistance is futile, and indeed will only make

matters worse. So he opts for unconditional surrender and (as we have

already glimpsed in Chapter 2) takes his due place as a captive in Cupid’s

triumphal procession.

So I’m coming clean, Cupid: here I am, your latest victim,

Hands raised in surrender. Do what you like with me.

No need for military action. I want terms, an armistice—

You wouldn’t look good defeating an unarmed foe.

Th e

R o m a n Tr i u m p h

1 1 2

Put on a wreath of myrtle, yoke up your mother’s pigeons—

Your stepfather himself will lend you a fine

Chariot: mount it, drive in triumph through the cheering

Rabble, skillfully whipping your birds ahead,

With your train of prisoners behind you, besotted youths and

maidens,

Such pomp, such magnificence, your very own,

Triumph: and I’ll be there too, fresh-wounded, your latest

Prisoner—displaying my captive mind—

With Conscience, hands bound behind her, and Modesty, and all

Love’s

Other enemies, whipped into line.

You’ll have them all scared cold, while the populace goes crazy,

Waves to its conquering hero, splits its lungs.

And what an escort—the Blandishment Corps, the Illusion

And Passion Brigade, your regular bodyguard:

These are the troops you employ to conquer men and immortals—

Without them, why, you’re nothing, a snail unshelled.

How proudly your mother will applaud your triumphal progress

From high Olympus, shower roses on your head;

Wings bright-bejewelled, jewels starring your hair, you’ll

Ride in a car of gold, all gold yourself.

What’s more, if I know you, even on this occasion