Hadrian and Lucius Verus

Author(s): T. D. Barnes
Source: The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 57, No. 1/2 (1967), pp. 65-79
Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/299345 .
Accessed: 01/04/2013 05:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Roman Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HADRIAN

AND LUCIUS

VERUS

By T. D. BARNES*

At the age of sixty the emperor Hadrian cast about for a successor. His first choice
was L. Ceionius Commodus, his second T. Aurelius Fulvus Boionius Arrius Antoninus.
Both being adopted in turn by the ailing emperor, the former died before Hadrian while
the latter survived to succeed him. Modern scholarship has indulged in long speculations
about the motives of Hadrian and the political intrigues of his final years.1 This paper will
not attempt to add to such speculations but will examine the precise details of the dynastic
settlements of 136 and 138 upon which they are based. For due weight has not been given
to certain relevant and important statements in the Historia Augusta, and as a result the
facts have been misrepresented. Moreover, since some of these statements occur in the
Vita Veri, the excellent worth of which has too often been denigrated, an analysis of that
will be necessary. The partial interdependence of the historical and the literary problems
dictates the separate yet combined treatment adopted here. The first part of this paper
will discuss the biography of Lucius Verus in the Historia Augusta, the second the dynastic
plans of Hadrian. The evidence and arguments employed in each part will, it is hoped,
both confirm and be confirmed by the thesis advanced in the other.
I.

THE VITA VERI

Is the Vita Veri a valuable historical source ? The modern verdict has tended to be
very unfavourable.2 Mommsen drew a sharp distinction among the vitae down to the
Diadumenus between the nine lives of recognized emperors (i.e. of Hadrian, Pius, Marcus,
Commodus, Pertinax, Didius Julianus, Septimius Severus, Caracalla and Macrinus) and
the seven lives of joint emperors (i.e. Verus, Geta), Caesars (i.e. Aelius Caesar, Diadumenus)
and usurpers (i.e. Avidius Cassius, Pescennius Niger, Clodius Albinus). The former,
Mommsen declared, are ' echte allerdings vielfach zerriittete ,Geschichtsquellen ', the
latter ' enthalten wenig oder gar kein eigenes wirklich geschichtliches Material und sind
wesentlich entweder aus jenen der ersten zusammengestoppelt oder gefllscht '. Schulz,
asserting that the Vita Veri was not one of the notorious secondary lives (or Nebenviten),
argued that it derived ultimately from a biography of the early third century whose author
was' ein Historiker, der an Scharfblick und Einsicht den vielgeriihmten Dio weit iibertrifft '.
Indeed he was even able to print the original text of this author.5 Schulz's work, however,
does not inspire confidence: his criteria were purely formal 6 and led him to believe in
'eine primaire Heliusvita '.7 Weber attacked both the methods and the conclusions of
Schulz. The vita, he maintained, was the work of a compiler who used an annalistic source
to compose biographies: since there was little in it, if anything, which need come from a
reliable monograph on Lucius, therefore there was no monograph.8 But Weber's method
too raises serious doubts. It is only by starting from the assumption that a biographer
cannot have described the adoptions of 138 in the lives of all the emperors concerned in
* I am grateful to Professor Syme and Dr. F. G. B.
Millar for their help and criticisms throughout and to
Professor Bowersock for reading the first part of this
paper. The following abbreviations will be used:
Birley
A. R. Birley, Marcus Aurelius (i966);
Lecrivain= Ch. Lecrivain, Jitudes sur l'Histoire
Auguste(1904);
Lessing = K. Lessing, Scriptorum

Historiae Augustae Lexicon (I9oI-6);

Schwende-

mann = J. Schwendemann, Der historische Wert der

Vita Marci bei den Scriptores Historiae Augustae

BMC (simp.) = H. Mattingly,BMC Roman

EmpireIV (I940).

(I923);

1 To cite only two fairly recent articles, J. Carco-

pino, 'L'h6redit6 dynastique chez les Antonins ',

= Passion et
z6z ff., esp. 285-32I
(I949),
politique chez les C6sars (1958), 143 ff., esp. 173-222;
and H.-G. Pflaum, 'Le Reglement successoral
d'Hadrien', Historia-Augusta-Colloquium Bonn 1963
(I964),
95 ff.
2
And still is: e.g. Birley 3I2 'the so-called

R1TALI

" minor lives "-those of " Helius Verus ", L. Verus

... are virtually worthless as independent sources'.
3

Th. Mommsen, Hermesxxv

(I890),

246

Ges.

Schr. VII, 319.

4 0. Th. Schulz, Das Kaiserhaus der Antonine und
der letzte Historiker Roms (1907), 3 (the passage
quoted), 56 ff. (on the Vita Veri).
6 Op. cit. ZI5 ff.
6 This, the standard objection to Schulz, was first
formulated by K. Honn, Deutsche Literaturzeitung
I908, I002

Jhrg.

ff.

and by W. Weber, Gott. Gel. Anz.

(I908),
945 ff.
op.
cit. 57, 224;
(1904), I25 ff., 142.
7

170.

Leben des Kaisers Hadrian

That one did not exist is a

certain deduction from Aelius 2, 9 f. and the Historia

Augusta's ignorance of Aelius' birthday (known to
Philocalus (CIL I2, p. 255) and perhaps appearing in
the Feriale Duranum (col. i, i i/iz) * see The Excavations at Dura-Europuls, Final Report v. i, The Parchments and Papyri (i959), 205 f.).
8 Weber, op. cit. 957 ff., esp. 971.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

66

T. D. BARNES

them that he reaches the conclusion that the Historia Augusta employed an annalistic source
which narrated the settlement of that year once only.9 Lambrechts, writing more than
twenty years later, accepted the opinion then prevailing that for the second century the
Historia Augusta had both a biographical source, which was to be identified as Marius
Maximus, and an annalistic source, from which derived almost all that was of historical
value.10 Since Marius did not write a life of Lucius,"1 and the annalistic source cannot have
described the reign of Lucius separately from that of Marcus, the Vita Veri must come
entirely from the pen of its author. Hence it is, in essence, ' un developpement de certaines
phrases de la Vita Marci qui ont servi de substrat 'aune vaste amplification o"ul'imagination
de l'auteur avait libre jeu '.12 Lambrechts pronounced the life to be of exiguous historical
value and dismissed the last seven chapters with an exclamation mark.13 But whence on
this view come such valuable and authentic details as the title Medicus (7, 2) and the names
of Martius Verus (7, i) and Apolaustus (8, iO) or the sneer at Panthea (7, IO) ? Moreover,
Marius Maximus is not the principal source of those sections of the early part of the Historia
Augusta which are admitted by all to be biographical. Although many still continue to
ignore his conclusions,14 Barbieri has shown that Marius is never the main source for any
vita: wherever he is cited it is to confirm or to supplement.15 It is consequently necessary
to discard the assumption of an annalistic and a biographical source which provided
respectively political narrative and personalia.16
Let us postulate instead one main source-an unknown biographer, writing perhaps in
the reign of Severus Alexander and composing sober, factual lives of the legitimate emperors,
among whom will be classed Lucius Verus.17 This hypothesis (it is no more than that)
can be tested by an analysis of the Vita Veri which not only employs formal and stylistic
criteria but also examines its historical accuracy. As there is extant no other ancient account
of the life and reign of Lucius with which the vita can be compared as a whole, the evidence
and arguments relevant to each section must be set out for the most part sentence by
sentence.18 A full discussion will be given only where it seems unavoidable: otherwise
the annotation is as brief as possible.
1,1-5 Introduction
1,1/2 Perhaps the polemic is directed at the main source; for Eutropius (VIII, io), Aurelius
Victor (i6, 3-9) and the Epitome(i6, 5 f.) narrateLucius' life within ratherthan before their accounts
of Marcus.
9 Ibid. 959 ff.

10P. Lambrechts, ' L'Empereur Lucius Verus:

Essai de rehabilitation', Ant. Cl. III (I934),
I73 ff.
The theory of an annalistic source, held by Weber,
loc. cit., by E. Hohl, Bursians Jahresber. CLXXI (I915),
ioi f. and by N. H. Baynes, The Historia Augusta;
its date and purpose (I926), 67 ff., was propounded
at length by J. M. Heer, 'Der historische Wert der
Vita Commodi in der Sammlung der Scriptores
Historiae Augustae', Philol. Suppl. ix (I90I),
i f.,
and by Schwendemann, and seemed to acquire
implicit confirmation from the purely historical
investigation of J. Hasebroek, Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte des Kaisers Septimius Severus (i92I).
The critique of G. Barbieri, Ann. della R. Sc. Norm.
Sup. di Pisa2 III (I934),
525 ff. fails to distinguish
this theory from the view that the main source for
the second century was biographical (as postulated
here and argued by L6crivain I03 ff., esp. I9I f.).
" Marius certainly wrote a life of Elagabalus
(Elagabalus i i, 6), but not a life of Alexander:
Alexander 5, 4; ZI, 4; 30, 6; 65, 4 all refer to
Marius on earlier emperors, while from 48, 6 f. it
follows that the author of the Historia Augusta knew
of no biography of Alexander by him. It is tempting
to suppose that he wrote precisely of those twelve
Caesars listed by Ausonius, Caesares xiii-xxiv
(compare also Quadrigae Tyrannorum I, 2). If so,
he wrote no life of Verus.
12 Lambrechts, loc. cit. I78.
13 Ibid. i8o: 'Mais la vita Veri est un ceuvre de

maigre valeur historique. Elle ne present quelque

interet documentaire que jusqu'en 4, 4, et encore ! '.
14See A. D. E. Cameron, Hermes XCII (I964), 373
('clearly his (sc. Marius') work formed the basis of
the Historia Augusta up to Elagabalus and perhaps
Alexander '), A. R. Birley, Historia xv (I966), 249
(' I must confess to a predilection for the view that
the major source for the lives of the emperors from
Hadrian to Elagabalus was L. Marius Maximus '),
H.-G. Pflaum, Bonner Historia-Augusta-Colloquium
1964/1965 (I966), I52 (' La source (sc. of the Pius),
sans doute Marius Maximus '), and W. Seston, ibid.
2i8 ('Rien ne nous garantit formellement qu'elle
(sc. the main source of the Pertinax) soit la Vita
Pertinacis qu'6crivit Marius Maximus; mais rien
ne s'y oppose '). Cf. also E. Hohl, Miscellanea
Academica Berolinensia (I950),
287 ff.; 'Kaiser
Commodus und Herodian',
SDAW, Klf.Ges.,
I, 3 f.
I954,
1"G. Barbieri, RFIC xxxii (I954), 36 ff., 262 ff.;
the point had already been made by Lecrivain I93 ff.
16 It was already admitted by Hohl,
loc. cit.,
Lambrechts, op. cit. I77, and Baynes, loc. cit.,
that the two strands could no longer be disentangled.
17 Cf.
R. Syme, Ammianus and the Historia
Augusta (forthcoming).
18 The style of treatment adopted here differs from
that of W. H. Fisher in his analysis of the Vita
Aureliani (JRS xix (1929), 125 ff.). This is partly
for the reason stated in the text, partly because there
is a comparative wealth of widely scattered evidence
which bears upon the Vita Veri.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HADRIAN AND LUCIUS VERUS

67

1,3a Born L. Ceionius Commodus and presumably becoming L. Aelius Commodus in I36
(see below), Lucius was from 138 L. Aelius Aurelius Commodus and from i6i Imp. Caes. L.
Aurelius Verus Augustus (PIR2C 6o6). He never bore the name Antoninus, which also appearsat
EutropiusVIII, 9/IO; HA, Pius 10, 3; Diadumenus6, 6.
1,3b/4a The categorizationof emperors as boni or mali is a constant theme of the author,
and constatalmost invariablyintroduces an assertionof his own (see Lessing, s.v. princeps,constat).
1,4b/5 The difference between the divi fratres is expressed accurately and concisely: secta
and adumbrareare found here only in the Historia Augusta.
Whateverthe intention of the author (cf. Marcus29, 6) I, 5 ought to apply to Marcus,of whom
Dio (LXXII (LXXI), 34, 5) says orrscocbs &X-qec5s
ayace6Sayvrlpi`v Kai oUEV TrpOO7rOI1TOV EIXE. What
Marcus says of Lucius in his Meditationsis revealing: he does not thank the gods for giving him
a good brother(i, I7, i), but for giving him a brotherwhose charactermade him mindful of himself
and who honouredand loved him (i, 17, 4: 8UVa ?VOU p?v Si& iTOou&?reyelpaf "? ip6s ?rrw?Asiav ?aU,
&ala 8? Kai TU11 Kai cTOppy1 Ev'ppaivovros PE). Does the ambiguous compliment mask disapproval?
1,6-4,3

Lucius' family, upbringing and life until 162

With the exception of two short passages and two textual difficulties (2, 6-8; 3, 6/7; and
3, I ; 4, 3) all is in order. In particular,genuine names are given.
1,6 Though the words may be the author's own (note statio: cf. Lewis and Short, s.v.), the
facts are correct (PIR2C 605), except that Aelius was hardly the first Caesar (cf. PIR2F 399) and
he was never called Verus.
1,7 The grandfathersare L. Ceionius Commodus (ord. io6) and C. Avidius Nigrinus (suff.
iiO). The great-grandfathersare L. Ceionius Commodus (ord. 78) and Avidius Nigrinus (PIR2A
E. Groag, Die romischenReichsbeamten
von Achaia (1939), 42: there is no other evidence
1407;
that he became consul), together with a Fabius and a Plautius (inferredfrom the names of Lucius'
sisters, Ceionia Fabia and Ceionia Plautia (PIR2C 6I2, 614)). Eligible consular Fabii and Plautii
can be found, and hence consularmaioresplurimiincluding the illustriousPlautii of Tibur (R. Syme,
Athenaeum xxxv (3957),306 ff., Pflaum, op. cit. (n. i), 99 ff.).
1,8 The place of Lucius' birth follows from his being born in his father's praetorship: the
year of his birth is given by the HistoriaAugustaas 130 (2, IO; Pius 4, 6), while for the praetorship,
though it gives an unusually long gap between praetorship and consulate for a patrician, 130 is not
impossible (cf. J. Morris,Listy Filologicke87 (I964), 3 i6 ff.). The day of Lucius' birth is confirmed
by inscriptions (W. F. Snyder, YCS VII (1940), 252 f.).
The words ' qui rerum potitus est' are a scholiastic addition by the author which perhaps
also embracesthe words ' quo et Nero ' : Nero's birthdaywas to be found at Suetonius, Nero 6, I.
1,9 For the truth of this see Syme, loc. cit. 315.
2,1-3 See the second part of this paper.
2,4a This seems to be out of its correct place and reappears at 7, 7: perhaps the source
mentioned the marriagetwice.
2,4b Antoninus and his family when in Rome lived in the domus Tiberiana: HA, Pius IO, 4,
Marcus 6, 3 ; Dio LXXII (LXXI), 35, 4.
2,5 All the teachers of Lucius except two are well documented: Telephus (P-W V A, 369),
Hephaestio (PIR2H 84), Harpocratio(PIR2H i9), Caninius Celer (PIR2C 388), Herodes Atticus
(PIR2C 802), CorneliusFronto (PIR2C 1364), Apollonius the philosopher(PIR2A 929) and Sextus
(P-W IIA, 2057). Scaurinus (PIR1T 70) and Apolloniusthe rhetorpresentsome difficulty. Scaurinus'
father is well attested (P-W V A, 672), but this is the sole mention of the son, apart perhaps from
HA, Alexander3, 3, which produces a fictitious ' Scaurinus, Scaurini filius, doctor celeberrimus'.
The invention of a second Scaurinuscounts for the genuineness of the first rather than against it
but proof is impossible. There are several possible identificationsof Apollonius:
(i) PIR2A 93Ia (= ii, p. xiv) is too late and a grammaticus.
(2) Aurelius Apollonius, procurator Augusti in Asia and procurator Augustorumof Thrace
(PIR2A 1454): the procuratorshipsseem to be of the wrong type for a rhetor (cf. H.-G. Pflaum,
Les procurateurs equestres (I950),

i8i).

the son of the philosopherApollonius (PIR2A 930: known only from Fronto, Ad M. Caes.
8I Hout).
V, 5I
(4) Flavius Apollonius, a pinacothecisbefore 153 (PIR2F 211).
(5) Aelius Apollonius, a procuratorin Crete about i68 (PIR2A 143): surely too humble a post
for the tutor of an emperor.
(6) the assumed father and (7) the assumed grandfatherof P. Aelius Apollonius, the Athenian
sophist of the age of Severus (PIR2A I42).
The most likely of the suggested identificationsis with (v), but Apollonius can be historicalwithout
being otherwise known.
(3)

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

68

T.

D.

BARNES

2,6-8 Apart from a, 7 ' amavit autem in pueritia versus facere, post orationes' (compare
Epitome i6, 6 'carminum, maxime tragicorum,studiosus '), this section arouses grave suspicions.
First on formal grounds: 2, 9a belongs with the list of Lucius' teachers in 2, 5. Next on stylistic
grounds: amareuniceoccurs in the Historia Augustain six other passages, five of which are fiction
(see Lessing, s.v. unice). Thirdly, the content. The aim is to disparagethe emperor'sachievements
and to emphasize his respect for scholars: his talents are belittled (2, 6 ' nec tamen ingeniosus ad
litteras') and what merit there is in his writings is ascribed to the diserti et eruditi with whom he
surroundedhimself (2, 8). Now, if there is a Tendenzin the HistoriaAugusta(and many have been
imagined), it is surely the value, and the parody, of scholarship.
2,9a Chancehas preservedan acephalousinscriptionwhich perfectlyfits Nicomedes: '[... qui
et] Ceionius et Aelius vocitatus est, L. Caesarisfuit a cubiculo et divi Veri imp. nutr[itor]' (ILS
no. I63).
1740, cf. H.-G. Pflaum, Carrieresprocuratoriennes
(I96o-I),
2,9b This seems in character(cf. I, 4b; 3, 6; 6, 9; 8, 7 ff.; I0, 8/9), but ' iocis decenter'
is suspect (cf. 7, 4; Lessing, s.v. iocus). The initial ' fuit' does not condemn the sentence (as held
by Lambrechts, op. cit. I79): cf. io, 6, Lessing, s.v.
2,10a CompareMarcus 5, 5; the phrase 'in (familiam)Aureliam ' puts Antoninus' adoption
of Lucius and Marcus before his own adoption by Hadrian.
2,10b Cf. 2, gb
2,11 Lucius lived in the emperor'shouse (2, 4b) and was conspicuously deprived by Pius of
any share in the glory of the imperial family (PIR2 II, p. I39: the coins of Alexandria,on which
Lucius does not appearuntil i6o/i (J. Vogt, Die Alexandrinischen
Miinzen(I924), I, III ; 2, 62 ff.),
are typical).
3,1/2 ' Qua die togam virilem Verus accepit, Antoninus Pius ea occasione, qua patris templum
dedicabat, populo liberalis fuit, mediusque inter Pium et Marcum idem se resedit, cum quaestor
populo munus daret.'
The passage is confused, with difficultiesboth linguistic and historical. ' Qua die' is a relative
without an antecedent, since ' ea occasione ' is qualified by ' qua patris templum dedicabat'. The
clause ' mediusque . .. idem se resedit ' carriesthe implicationthat the precedingclause has the same
subject; but in the transmitted text it is different. The coherence of the whole sentence is
historicallyimpossible. Lucius probably assumed the toga virilis in 146 (cf. J. Marquardt-A.Mau,
Das Privatlebender Romer2 (i886), 127 ff.). But whatever its date Antoninus could never have
celebrated Lucius' arrival at man's estate as a public festival (cf. 2, II; 3, 4): and in fact the
occasion can be assignedno liberalitasAugusti(BMC XLVI, cf. FO xxvii).19 There was a distribution

to the populaceof Rome(Pius'third)about142 (BMCXLVI,

LVII,

33), one in I45 to celebratethe

marriageof Faustinato Marcus (BMC XLVI, 78 f., cf. LXIV f.; FO xxvii; HA, Pius I0, 2), another
in 148 to commemoratethe nine-hundredthanniversaryof Rome and Antoninus'decennalia(BMC
XLVI, 78, 90, cf. FO xxviii) and one in 151 (BMC I05, 309 f., 313 ff., FO xxix) which could mark
the dedicationof the templeof Hadrian(BMCXLIV, LXIX). Henceit becomesnecessaryto conjecture
carelessabridgementof a fuller source (note the very late usage se resedit: E. L6fstedt, Philologischer

zur Peregrinatio
Kommentar
Aetheriae(I9iI),

I41

f.), andthat the sourceoriginallyran

when Lucius assumed the toga virilis there was no liberalitas;

(2) at the distributionof largesse to celebrate the dedication of the temple of Hadrian Lucius
appearedwith Antoninus and Marcus;
(3) when giving games as quaestor Lucius sat between his father and brother.
Of these (3) alone is reproducedundistorted in the Historia Augusta.
3,3 Lucius' quaestorshipand immediate consulship appear also at Pius IO, 3, cf. 6, io. His
colleague holding the fasces was T. Sextius Lateranus (PIR1S 468). The manuscript reading
' Sextilio ' perhapspreserves a mistakeof the authorhimself (cf., e.g., Pius I, 7; 8, 8; A. R. Birley,
Historiaxv (I966), 249). CILXVI, I04 makesa contrarymistake,havingStatioforStatilio. Lucius'
second consulate, and Marcus' third, fall in i6i.
3,4 Compare2, I I: if both come from the main source, then that was concernedto emphasize
that all Lucius' honours before the death of Pius had been catalogued.
3,5 While Pius was alive, Lucius was officiallyneitherAugustus nor Caesar(PIR2 II, p. 139);
the rest is unverifiablebut bears the stamp of verisimilitude.
3,6/7 Lucius' love of the circus and of gladiatorialdisplaysis genuine enough (cf. 4, 8; i0, 9),
and the last sentence of 3, 6 rings true. Yet the hand of the author too is easily discernible. The
clause ' quod eum pater ita in adoptionemPii transire iusserat ut nepotem appellaret' is nonsense.
(i)

19D. van Berchem, Les Distributions de bld et

d'argent ai la plebe romaine sous l'Empire (I939),
I54
does, it is true, assign Pius' liberalitas III to the
tirocinium of Lucius, citing the passage under
discussion and RIC III (I930), 2I, 35, I09.
But he

assumes that the date can be I44:

against which
there are purely numismatic arguments, viz. that the
coins of liberalitas III ought to belong to 142 (BMC
xlvi).

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

69

HADRIAN AND LUCIUS VERUS

Lucius' simplicitasingenii seems to derive from a misunderstandingof the source of I, 5 ; and if

he were simple and pure, why (or how) should he be exhorted to imitate his brother ? 20
3,8/4,1 If the words 'participatu etiam imperatoriae potestatis' be excepted (the phrase
belongs to the author: H. Dessau, Hermesxxiv (I889), 389), there is no repetition. The facts which
can be checked are all correct (Schwendemanniz8 ff.).
4,2 Something similar is recorded by Marcus himself (MeditationsI, I7, 4: TOIl
a8?XoL.

-rii" Kad o'ropyfi

E*ypaivoVTos

I-E).

'Vel praeses imperatori' spoils an apt simile and is the author's infelicitous addition to bring
it up to date.
4,3 U. Obrecht, Historiae AugustaeScriptoresSex (I677), Notae z8 f., plausibly argued that
there was a lacuna in the text: comparisonwith Marcus 7, 9 suggested some such supplement as
' et pro consensu imperii < vicena milia nummum singulis promisit. Lucius principio > graviter
se et ad Marci mores egit '. But, as in 3, I/2, the trouble may lie rather in hasty and careless
composition by the author himself. For the donative see further BMC CXVI, 387 ff.
4,4-6,6 Theprofligaciesof Lucius
The whole section is an insertion into the main source which breaksup the narrative: compare
4, 4 ' ubi vero in Syriam profectus est ' with 6, 7 ' profectum eum ad Parthicum bellum '. It is
almost entirelythe author'sown composition: note, for example,the illogicality of describingLucius'
debaucheriesat Rome (4, 5 ff.) in this context, the high rhetorical style at 5, 2-4 (' donatos . . .
donatos ...

donata ...

donatos . . . data . . . data ...

data . .': cf. the examples discussed by

H. L. Zernial, Uber den Satzschluss in der Historia Augusta (I956)) and the pseudo-scholarly
aetiology at 6, 5. Nonetheless, the style and content of some sentences look genuine (viz. 4, 8;
4, IO; and perhaps 5, 7). The germinal ideas were provided by the sober biographicalsource:
4, 8 'amavit et aurigas prasino favens' and io, 9 'Volucrem ex equi nomine quem dilexit' lie
behind 6, z-6, while io, 8 'vitae semper luxuriosae atque in pluribus Nero praetercrudelitatemet
ludibria ' provided both the comparisonto other 'bad emperors' at 4, 6 and the impetus to employ
Suetonius. The use which is made of this author can best be seen in tabularform.
Suet., Cal. i : ganeas atque adulteria capillamento celatus et veste longa noctibus obiret
Cal. 55, 3: Incitato equo . . . praeter equile
marmoreumet praesepe eburneum praeterque
purpurea tegumenta ac monilia e gemmis
domum etiam et familiamet supellectilemdedit
consulatum quoque traditur destinasse
Nero z6, I: post crepusculumstatim adrepto
pilleo vel galero popinas inibat circumquevicos
vagabaturludibundus nec sine pernicie tamen,
siquidem redeuntis a cena verberareac repugnantesvulnerarecloacisquedemergereassuerat,
tabernas etiam effringereet expilare; . . . ac
saepe in eius modi rixis oculorum et vitae periculum adiit, a quodam laticlavio

...

Verus4, 6: in tantum vitiorum Gaianorum...

fuisse aemulumut vagareturnocte per tabernas
ac lupanaria obtecto capite cucullione vulgari
viatorio
Verus 6, 3 f.: nam et Volucri equo prasino
aureum simulacrum fecerat, quod secum
portabat; cui quidem passas uvas et nucleos in
vicem hordei in praesepe21 ponebat, quem
sagis fuco tinctis coopertum in Tiberianam ad
se adduci iubebat, cui mortuo sepulchrum in
Vaticanofecit
Verus4, 6: in tantum vitiorum . . . Neronianorum.. fuisse aemulum,ut vagareturnocte
per tabernasac lupanariaobtecto capite cucullione vulgari viatorio et comisaretur cum
triconibus, committeret rixas, dissimulans quis
esset, saepeque efflictum livida facie redisse et
in tabernis agnitum, cum sese absconderet

prope ad

necem caesus
Nero 27, 2: epulas a medio die ad mediam
noctem protrahebat
Nero 30, 3: numquam minus mille carrucis
fecisse iter traditur, soleis mularum argenteis,
canusinatismulionibus
Vit. 13: nec cuiquam minus singuli apparatus
quadringenismilibus nummum constiterunt

Verus4, 9: trahens cenas in noctem

Verus 5, 4: data et vehicula cum mulabus et
mulionibus cum iuncturis argenteis
Verus5, 5: omne autem conviviumaestimatum
dicitur sexagies centenis milibus sestertiorum

Of the pairs of parallelpassagesonly one shows indubitableimitation by the Historia Augusta:

at 5, 4 mulionibusis meant to mean 'male mules' (which is impossible) through an easy misunder20 Lecrivain 24i
branded the passage as ' pleine
de contradictions '.
21 Praesepe occurs
elsewhere in the Historia

Augusta only at Elagabalus 21, 2 ' misit et uvas

Apamenas in praesepia equis suis ', which is modelled on Verus 6, 4.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

70

T. D.

BARNES

standing of Suetonius, Nero 30, 3.22 In all the other cases Suetonius seems to have furnished not
the words, but an idea to be copied or a story to be outdone. A complex example of the author's
method can be discovered or conjectured. io, 9 calicem crystallinumprovided the calices . . .

of 5, 3, whileMarcusI7, 4 (fromEutropiusVIII,
crystallinos

I3,

or his source)gavethe combination

myrrinoset crystallinosand the epithet Alexandrinosmight come from Suetonius, Aug. 7I 'cum et
Alexandriacapta nihil sibi praeterunum myrrinumcalicem ex instrumento regio retinuerit et mox
vasa aurea assiduissimi usus conflaveritomnia' (cf. Verus 5, 3 ' data et vasa aurea').
4,8 Perhapsimplicit criticism of Lucius is to be found on the first page of Marcus'Meditations
F
(I, 5: frap6c TOil TpOqEkos TO [JTjTEFTpaacavXos [J1Q'TE
IXflTE TTa?1o'a'pio5
BEVETiaV0&
EKovTappos yevEcaeal).
Though the vices were common enough, Lucius was notoriously addicted to them: cf. Fronto,
Principia Historiae i8
I99 Hout: ' Ipsa haec cum prioris vitae non nullis detrectationibus
lacessunt. Ex summa civilis scientiae rationesumptavidentur,ne histrionum quidem ceterorumque
scaenae aut circi aut harenae artificum indiligentem principem fuisse, ut qui sciret populum
Romanum duabus praecipue rebus, annona et spectaculis, teneri.' Lucius' support of the Greens
appearsalso in a confused form at Malalas 28z Bonn: 6 8'E acCors M&pKoS'Av-rcovivos Pacl?E>Ov
gXahpE
T-

lTpaalvco pep?t.

4,10 This is the sole occurrence of permodicusin the Historia Augusta.

Redensartender Rlimer
5,1 Perhaps proverbial(A. Otto, Die SprichaOrterund sprichwortliche
(I890),
but possibly intended explicitly to cap Ausonius, Ephemeris5, 5 f.:
9I);
quinque advocavi; sex enim convivium
cum rege iustum; si super convicium est.
Varro had permitted any number from three to nine (Aulus Gellius xiii, II).23
6,4 Suetonius, Claud. 2I, 2 recorded horse-raceson the Vatican, but something differentmay
have been in the author's mind. Can it be ridicule of the Christians' holy basilica ? Compare
Tyranni Trzginta29: ' novo iniuriae genere imago in crucem sublata persultante vulgo, quasi
patibulo ipse Celsus videretur adfixus '. Is this an over-subtle allusion to the Christological
wrangles of the fourth century ? If there is an anti-Christianstrand in the Historia Augusta, it
consists in such parody and in fictions like Hadrian'sletter to Servianus(QuadrigaeTyrannorum7/8)
and Alexander's private chapel (Alexander29, z) rather than in Geschichtsapologetik
(as J. Straub,
HeidnischeGeschichtsapologetik
in der christlichenSpatantike (I963)). But the idea of the horse's
graveprobablycomes from Hadrian20, 12 ' equos et canes sic amavit,ut eis sepulchraconstitueret':
cf. also Elagabalus23, i ' elefantorum quattuor quadrigasin Vaticano agitasse, dirutis sepulchris
quae obsistebant'.
6,5 Brabiumappears to be an almost exclusively Christianword, at least outside the glossographers(TLL II, 2I53).
6,7-8,5 Lucius in the East
6,7-7,10 The relationshipof this passage to Marcus 8, IO-9, 6 deserves at least a very short
discussion. This contains facts not in Marcus 8, Io-9, 6: therefore not merely a developmentof it
(as Lambrechts,op. cit. 179 ff.). Marcus8, Io/II contains facts not in Verus6, 7: hence that is not
merely an expansionof this. Now Marcus8, I2 et Verusquidembegins with almost the same words
as 8, IO et Verumquidem; 8, 12 has the inaccurateapudAntiochiamet Daphnen(cf. Verus7, 3) and
the perhapsimprobable ' armisquese gladiatoriis
exercuit'; 8, 14 asserts implausibly Marcus'
complete control of the war and produces a very late usage, Romae positus meaning ' residing at
Rome ' (cf. A. Souter, A Glossaryof Later Latin (I949), 3 iO). Hence both Marcus 8, io/i i; 9, i-6

and Verus6, 7 if. come from the main source: Marcus 8, I2-I4 is the author's own and based on
the Verus.
6,7 Coins of i62 advertise Lucius' profectio (BMC CXVIII, 4II f.) and give prominence to
2 Hout does not belong in
Salus Augustorum(BMC 409 if.). (Fronto, Ad VerumImp. Ii, 6
I26
i62 but after Lucius' return in I66, as Mommsen saw (Hermes VIII (I873-4),
Ges. Schr.
2I5 f.
IV, 485

f.).)

22
Elsewhere the Historia Augusta uses mulio in its
correct sense five times (Lessing, s.v.).
23 There are other possible echoes of Ausonius in
the Historia Augusta. The story at Hadrian zo, 8 is
patently modelled on Ausonius, Epigrammata
xxxvii (xvTI)-unless
both are translating independently from a lost Greek original. For the ioca and
the anecdote interrupt the description of Hadrian's
feats of memory (2o, 6/7; 20, 9-12),
while ' patri
negavi iam tuo ' said by Lais has far more point
than 'iam hoc patri tuo negavi' in the mouth of
Hadrian. Macrinus ii, 6 ('gabalus iste fuit') may
be inspired by the lost second distich of Caesares

xxiv (if Fragmenta Poetaram Latinorum (ed. W.

Morel), Incerti fr. 58 really is from Ausonius), and
Macrinus 14, 2 by the first pentameter of the same
poem: for Macrinus 7, 7 ('versus extant cuiusdam
poetae, quibus ostenditur Antonini nomen coepisse a
Pio et paulatim per Antoninos usque ad sordes ultimas
pervenisse ') seems to be an explicit allusion to
Ausonius' Caesares. It is also possible that Hadrian
z5, 9 imitates Parentalia xxvii, though both may
derive separately from Septimius Serenus. I have
made only a very cursory search: others may well
be able to add far more convincing examples than
those collected here.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7I

HADRIAN AND LUCIUS VERUS

It is probably no more than coincidence that the only two surviving inscriptions which can
certainly be referredto L. (Aelius) Aurelius Apolaustus (see on 8, io) were erected at Capua and
Canusium(ILS 5188/9), or that Herodes Atticus 'colonized' Canusium and attended to its watersupply (Philostratus, VS, p. 55I). (The twin inscriptions from Hydruntum (ILS 359) need imply
neither that both the emperorswere close at hand (which is implied to be false here and at Marcus
8, iO) nor that Lucius set sail from that town instead of Brundisium.)
Lucius'journey. That Lucius travelled the whole way by sea is confirmed by Pausaniasviii,
29,

3:

VUV
i'JOVCA

'OV99EV

Pco
paicov pcataES

TE Kca 8ca(aVT

Ep1

V 6p

avT?Adat

vavaUiv K'EOaXaaaTS

?VOS ?TrtfTr8ETOV

'S

TOV aV6XOUV

'ES

TrO6xtv EAUTpOV OiJV

'Av'AvTt6XEtaV

?E'TpEpV

EV

TOUTO TOV ToTaiov.24

No recordremainsof his stay in Corinth,but his visit to Athens was markedby the appearance
of a shooting star which is duly recordedby pious chroniclers(Eusebius, Chronicon,GCS 20, 222;
47, 204; Cassiodorus, Chronicon,
PL 69, 1233 = MGH Auct.Ant. XI, I43; Syncellus, 664 Bonn:
always under the year i62).
When Herodes Atticus was accused before Marcus at Sirmium he
retorted angrily 'rTaurca pot P AouKov tEVica Ov aCi pot ErrEpyas ' (Philostratus, VS, p. 56I). Lucius,
presumablyon accountof his illness, arrivedtoo late for the mysteriesat Eleusis: they were repeated
so that he could be initiated (Sylloge3 869, ef. 872). Direct proof of the stately progress25 along
the Asian coast exists for Ephesus alone. There P. Vedius Antoninus was honoured by ot ?1Ti T0
yEiu,a TrpayCCTrEVuoPEVOt
(cf. Forsch.in Ephesosii (i9I2), I83, no. 76: Iuvepyac ispou y2CriucTos) especially
for 'yuvpvatapX1laavTa
8? Kic ?V -raTS 'rt8iTdcatS -roT PEYTUOU acv-roipa&opos AovKioU ACvpTIAiou
OnIpou
Kca PEy&AotS 'pyOtS KEKOUrPT<6Ta TjV iTortv' (JOAI XLIV
cVEV8ECS TrraatS adS hTrE8?IT)aEV
jpcatS TToAAXoS
(I959), Beiblatt, 257 if., no. 3; cf. J. and L. Robert, Bull. Ep. I959, no. 38I). For other cities the
evidence is consistent with an imperial visit but far from proving one: compare the counterexamples of Cyzicus (CW 742,26 BMC Mysia 49 (galley)), Caesareain Cappadocia(BMC Syria 69 f.
(Mt. Argaeus etc.)), Amastris (BMC Pontus 88 f. (galley)) and Narbo (ILS 6965: a dedication to
Lucius in I64 by the decumaniNarbonenses). What follows is merely a selection:
Chios: IGRRiv, 934 (i62): a statue of Lucius
Mitylene: CW I397 (Pallas sacrificing),I398 (the emperormounted)
Pergamum: CW 963 (Heracles, the Erymanthianboar and Eurystheus)
Cos: CW 2764 (Heracles)
Rhodes: CW 28oi (Dionysus)
Patara: IGRR III, 665 (cf. E. L. Hicks, YHS x (I889), 78): altars to Marcus, Faustina and
Lucius; 666 (= CIG 4283b): Lucius honoured as aCAoT1p
Side: CW 3456 (Pallas Nicephoros)
Seleucia ad Calycadnum: CW4459 (Spes).
7,1a The contraryis not proved by the panegyrics of Fronto (Ad VerumImp. ii, I, 22 f. =
I22 f. Hout; Principia Historiae 8 ff. = I95 ff. Hout).
791b The war lasted from I62 to I66 (cf. 6, 7; 8, 5), but the phraseper quadriennium
may be
inserted from 7, 3. Lucius stayed in or near Antioch (7, 3), while the actual fighting was done
by others (cf. OrosiusvII, I5, 3 'per strenuissimosduces magnis rebus gestis') : the most important
generals were Statius Priscus (ILS I092, 23Ii), Avidius Cassius (Dio LXXI, 2) and Martius Verus
(See furtherP-W III, 1842 ff.) The achievements of the Romans are described
(ILS 23II).
accurately,if not in correct temporal order (ibid.).27
7,2 Marcus took the titles Armeniacus(cf. Fronto, Ad VerumImp.ii, I, 5 II 5 Hout) and
ParthicusMaximus a year later than his brother (C. H. Dodd, Num. Chr.4XI (I9 II), 209 if.): both
added Medicus in i66, probablyon Lucius' return (ibid., cf. ILS 366).
7,3 Xiphilinus' epitome of Dio (LXXI, 2, 2) and Eutropius (viii, IO, 2) assert that Lucius
stayed in Antioch: neither author could be expected to furnish the details given here. Winters
by the sea at Laodicea and summers in shaded Daphne fit in with Lucius' known propensities,and
the only contraryevidence is unreliable(viz. Vita Abercii45 : (sc. Lucius) V'TrE-rpEYEV EiS 'AvrtoXEtav
-rv 'rrIA&qvnSKa'KE!

IsEXE{'acEV).

' Reliquam partem (sc. anni) Antiochiae' perhaps derives from the author's ignorant attempt
to harmonizethe preceding words with 7, Ia: Daphne was a suburb of Antioch (cf. G. Downey,
A History of Antioch (I96I), I9).
7,4/5 7, 6 follows on from 7, 3: note especiallyad Euphratentamen. 7, 4 anticipatesthe balder
24 IGRR
I, IO46 shows the presence of S]sKav&v
5 ?tv-V6Xrcp TpaT-ropicpin Alexandria between I6I
and I63: perhaps part of the fleet sent to com-

mandeer supplies.
25 To the suspicious mind 'inter symphonias et
cantica ' may recall Suetonius, Cal. 37, z 'inter
choros ac symphonias '.
26
CW = Catalogue sommaire de la Collection

Waddington, by E. Babelon, Rev. Num. 4, I/II (I 897/8).

The coins cited here all bear the name of Lucius,
and the description is always of the reverse.
27 Babylonem refers to the area, not the town
in
(P-W
II, 2700 ff.): it corresponds to MeaorToTapia
the title of Antiochianus' work on the Parthian war
(Lucian, Quomodo Historia 30).

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

72

T.

D.

BARNES

7, IO 'unde in eum a Syris multa sunt dicta', and has the two motifs of ioca and works still extant
so dear to the writer of the Historia Augusta (see Lessing, s.v. iocus, exsta(n)t).
7,6 A statue of Lucius erected at Dura-Europus by AopiAXtos
o E'rrio-r&r-s
'HXAo'8pos
(SEG II,
8I7) is not proof of an imperial visit, nor is Lucius' crowning of Sohaemus proof of his presence
in Armenia (as Birley I75, n. 2, sees). But Eutropius (viii, I0, 2) says that Lucius was 'Antiochiae
et circa Armeniamagens '.
7,7 Lucius' return to Ephesus appearsto be attested by the inscriptionquoted above (on 6, 9)
in I63 (the title Armeniacus appears about September (Dodd, loc. cit.)). The date is normally
assumed to be I64 (H.-G. Pflaum, J. des Savants I961, 32; Birley i74).
But the only explicit
evidence (Vita Abercii44 ff.) seems to point to i66, since Lucilla was born in I49 (cf. FO xxviii).
Nothing forbids assigningthe marriageto I63, even if Lucilla was born in I49 or I50 (M. K. Hopkins,
PopulationStudiesXVIII (I965), 309 if.). Mediobellitemporeat Marcus9, 4 cannotbe pressedto
mean i 64 precisely.
7,8 Sohaemus was left as king of Armenia (P-W IIIA, 798 f.), Avidius Cassiusas governorof
Syria (PIR2A I402) and Martius Verus as governor of Cappadocia(P-W XIV,2024 ff.).
7,10 No statue shows Lucius beardless as emperor, but that does not necessarily disprove
the story. Yet even if it is only rumour, it may be contemporary: for the vulgaris amica is real
enough. She was Panthea of Smyrna, whose beauty Lucian suggested surpassed that of the
goddesses (Imagines,esp. io, Pro Imaginibus; cf. Scholia in Lucianum(ed. H. Rabe), 207). Her
devotion to Lucius outlasted his death (Marcus, MeditationsVIII, 37). The tone of vulgarisamica
may be a clue to the attitude of the postulated third-centurybiographer. Lucius had the reputation
of being KixTayv'va1o0
5ro2X accordingto Malalas (282 Bonn).
8,1-4 For the plague see J. F. Gilliam, AJP LXXXII(I96I), 225 ff., whose salutary attack on
exaggerationsof the importanceof this epidemic perhapsgoes too far. The legions from the Danube
(P-W XII, I296 ff.) returnedoverlandthrough Asia Minor (cf. OGIS 5 II (Aezani),JOAI xv (I9I2),
Beiblatt, I64 f. (Ephesus)).
8,3 The sack of Seleuciaby Avidius Cassius(Dio LXXI, 2, 3) occurredvery soon after December
I65 (R. H. McDowell, Coin,s
from Seleuciaon the Tigris (I935), 85 ff., 234). The temple of Apollo
appearedalso in the narrativeof AmmianusMarcellinus (cf. xxiii, 6, 24).
8,4 Asinius Quadratus(PIR2A I245; FGH 97) lived in the middle of the third century. His
did
XlurT-Ip{s ought to end in 247: perhapshe never finishedit (cf. FGH 97 T I). His flapewa&
not deal just with the war of I6i to i66 (cf. F 28), but will have included at least Severus
Alexander'sPersian expedition. (For the developmentof a different view see F. Millar, A Study
of CassiusDio (I964), 6I f., 192.)
8,5 For the imperialtitles see Dodd, loc. cit. The triumph was celebratedon the twelfth day
of October I66 (HA, Marcus 12, 8; CommodusII, 13). The Misenum fleet (or at least part of it)
was still at Seleucia Pieria at the end of May (FIRA2 III, 132). Lucius seems to have returned to
Rome by late August (ILS 366).
8,6-9,11 Luciusafter his returnto Italy in I66.
The necessaryevidence is now lackingto confirmmuch of this section, which will in consequence
be left unannotated. There is, however, something which may be held to corroborateits general
accuracy. Even the panegyrist Fronto was unable to ignore Lucius' fondness for actors: ' illud
etiam opprobrio ductum bello < incipiente > histriones ex urbe in Suriam accisse ' (Principia
Historiae I8 - I99 Hout). His reply to the accusation is not convincing: ' sed profecto sicut
arborum altissimas vehementius ventis quati videmus, ita virtutes maximas invidia criminosius
in< sect > atur'.
8,7 Paris seems to appear on a mutilated inscription from Nemausus (ILS 5203: 'd. [m.]
Afrodis ... symmele . . . grex Ga[ll.] Memphi et Paridis, P.M. et Sextis administrantibus'). But,
since actors' names are few and often repeated, this Memphius and Paris need have nothing to do
with Lucius.
8,8/9 The first clause of 8, 8 is plain in style and content: the rest of 8, 8/9 is suspect-it
is too long and fluent for the postulated source.
8,10 Two Apolausti are to be distinguished (they are conflated in PIR2A 148). The one,
L. (Aelius) Aurelius Apolaustus, was in Rome before the Parthian war (Fronto, Ad VerumImp.
I, I= -III
Hout; for the date see Th. Mommsen, HermesVIII (I873-4), 213 f. Ges. Schr. iv,
483 f.): he was a libertusof Lucius (ILS 5I88) and is, perhaps significantly (cf. 6, 7), honoured
at Capua and Canusium (ILS 5188/9). The other, L. Aurelius Apolaustus Memphius (ILS 5i87,
5190/I),
iS the pantomimusbrought back from Syria; who was thereforenamed after Lucius' former
favourite.

8,11 The words et Alexandria are the author's addition: he has forgotten to change the

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HADRIAN AND LUCIUS VERUS

73

singular pascitur. He has a prejudice against Egyptians: see especially Tyranni Triginta 22,
QuadrigaeTyrannorum7/8.
9,2 Libo's mission is not elsewhere recorded (PIR2A 668), but is without doubt historical.
Cn. CalpurniusPiso in 17 (PIR2C 287) is a close and unfortunateprecedent; and M. Vettulenus
SEG XVI, 257) was also sent as ovvcTrorios
Civica Barbarus (PIR2C 602, with AE 1958, I5
Owo O4pou ?inapetdlcKp v a-TpaEiVa, perhaps to replace him (cf. Marcus 9, 4).
9,3-6 Of the freedmenof Lucius, Geminus(PIR2G i62) appearsonly here and at Marcus15, 2
(derived from this passage ?), Agaclytus (PIR2A 452) in the same two passages and at Verus Ic, 5,
and Coedes only here (A. Stein, PIR2C I236 considersthe name corrupt),while Eclectus is comparatively well attested (PIR2E 3).
There is no other evidence for Agaclytus' marriageto Libo's widow, but his son marriedVibia
Aurelia Sabina (G. Barbieri,NdS I953, 157; Pflaum, loc. cit. 39 f.).
9,7-9,11 The chronologyof the northernexpedition of the divifratres and the barbarianattack
on Aquileia is much disputed: see now J. Fitz, Historia xv (I966), 336 if. The salient facts which
confirmthe accuracyof this passage are as follows. Trouble had begun before Lucius' return from
the east (HA, Marcus I2, I3) and the emperors'departurewas delayedby the plague (ibid. I2, I4 ff.).
On a diploma dated 5th May I67 (CIL xvi, 123) the emperors are accorded a fifth imperatorial
salutationwhich first appearson the coins of the second issue of I68 (BMC cxxii, 448 ff.). Some
time after May I67 there were incursions into Roman territory on the Danube (cf. CIL III, pp.
921 ff. (Verespatak,Dacia)). Marcus and Lucius were still in Rome in January i68 (Fragmentum
Vaticanum195), and set out later in the same year (BMC ibid.). They crossed the Julian Alps and
conducted an expedition into Pannonia or beyond (ILS I098; IIOO, which calls it a bellum
Germanicum),returning to Aquileia for the winter of i68/9 (Galen xiv, 649 f.; xIx, 17 f. Kuhn).
Before the end of I68 (if reliancebe placed on an inscriptionof a proc. Aug. (sic) in I68: R. Egger,
FriihchristlicheKirchenbautenim siidlichenNoricum (I9I6), 98, quoted by Fitz, loc. cit. 340) the
emperors set off for Rome (implied by Galen xix, i8 Kuhn) and Lucius died of a stroke 28 at
Altinum. (The whole Latin chronographicaltradition mentions Altinum, usually in the phrase
inter Concordiamet Altinum; the Chronographerof 354 (MGH Auct. Ant. IX, I47) and Aurelius
Victor (i6, 9) give Altinum as the exact place of Lucius' death).
9,9 Cf. Marcus14: the words are the author'sown (cf. Lessing, s.v. disputare).That, however,
is no proof that the source failed to describe the war here as well as in its account of Marcus.
10/11 Appendix: personaliaand rumours
10,1-5 Speculationon the source or sources used for this section is probably not profitable;
but for iO, 2 see note 88. The stories had at least some contemporarybasis. Marcus suspected
Herodes Atticus of being a guilty accompliceof Lucius, but Philostratusdoes not specify any details
(VS, p. 560). And Dio reported a plot by Lucius which was forestalled by his being poisoned
?EEyETaUyap vETra
(LXXI, 3, I':
TcaTa Kic TI -rrvevrpa MapKp ?lErp3ovXExKCbs, fpiw tI Kac spaata,
(appIxKp
Sta(peapivat). Perhaps the temporarydisfavourof P. Helvius Pertinax (HA, Pertinax 2, 4) is also
relevant.
10,1 Julian records Faustina's infidelity to Marcus as an accepted fact (Caesares3I2B, o*SE
iKoapiav o6i5aav), as does Ausonius

(Caesares xvii).

10,6 The author (and possibly his source) put fuit as first word in the sentence for preference,
whereas Suetonius had favoured the second place: compare the physical descriptions at Aug. 79,
Tib. 68, Cal. 50, Nero 5I, Galba 2I, Vesp. 20, Dom. i8. The known statues and busts of Lucius
tally with the descriptionhere, even down to the details of the almost frowningbrow and the ' barba
prope barbaricedemissa' (see M. Wegner, Das romischeHerrscherbildII, 4: Die Herrscherbildnisse
in antoninischerZeit (I939), Tfln. 39-46). Lucius' dislike of close cropping of hair is mentioned
by the contemporaryGalen (xvii, 2, I50 Kuhn).
10,7 Golden hair is a divine attribute(cf. A. Alfoldi, Rom. Mitt. L (I935), I42 f.): Caligula
had often appearedwith a golden beard, holding a thunderboltor a trident or a caduceus,all symbols
of divinity (Suetonius, Cal. 52).
10,8/9 The evidence cited above on 4, 8; 8, 6 ff. suggests that 'vitae semper luxuriosae' is
not far from the truth, and 'in pluribus Nero praeter crudelitatemet ludibria' is merely an apt
and pointed form of the statement which appears in the Epitomeas 'ingenii aspernatque lascivi'
(i6, 6), and in Eutropius as 'ingenii parum civilis' (viii, i0, 8).
11,1 This necrologicalnotice is correcton Lucius' place of burial (ILS 369) and on his father's
(ILS 329). The length of his life and his reign are both wrong: he lived almost exactly thirty-eight
years and was emperor less than nine (see PIR2 II, p. I4I). A very similar mistake about his reign
28 For an earlier illness of the same
type see
Fronto, Ad Verum Imp. iI, 6 -I26
Hout and for

its date see above on 6, 7.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

74

T.

D. BARNES

is made by Eutropius(VIII, 10, 4) and the Epitome(i6, 5), both having his death ' undecimo imperii
anno'. The length of Lucius' life could have been deduced from the reign-length and 2, io/Ii.
11,2-5 ii, 2 seems to be the result of the author's own hasty revision (compare io, 2); the
bogus address to Diocletian was therefore an afterthought.
From this investigation of the Vita Veri, incomplete though it is, three important
results emerge. First, the value of the vita itself: not one of the inferior lives in the
Historia Augusta, the Veruswill stand comparison with any of the lives of legitimate emperors
from Hadrian to Caracalla. If there is undue concentration on Lucius' delinquencies, that
is surely because the emperor really was something of a playboy. Secondly, the analysis
is powerful support for the theory that the main source for the second century was a biographer. An annalist and Marius Maximus have already been excluded as the principal
source. But, if those parts of the life of Lucius which have been shown by independent
evidence to be sound-viz. i, 6-4, 3 (except 2, 6-8; 3, 6/7); 6, 7-9, ii (except 7, 4/5;
I-are
8, 4 (since though sound it is the author's addition); 8, 8/9; 9, 9) and io, 6-I,
selected and placed together, they will form a sober biography which, although it has few
pretensions to gracefulness of style, is recognizably on the Suetonian model.29 The theory
is strengthened by an examination of other vitae.30 The Pius,31 the Pertinax 32 and the
Didius Julianus 33 are as simple in structure as the Verus, while the lives of Marcus,34 of
Commodus,35 of Septimius Severus 36 and of Caracalla 37 are only slightly more complex,
and even in the more complicated Hadrian 38 the same biographer can be discerned. In
all these cases the assumption that the Historia Augusta has largely drawn on a series of
rather humble and factual imperial biographies 39 will readily explain the facts: can the
same be said of any other theory ?
Finally, the analysis will justify the reliance placed upon the Historia Augusta in the
second part of this paper. For it has shown that the context in which Lucius' part in the
dynastic settlements of 136 and 138 is described is a reliable one. Although the two halves
of the argument are interdependent, the whole is not thereby rendered circular: an escape
from circularity has been provided by the citation of additional evidence to establish the
value of the Vita Veri as a historical source.

II.

HADRIAN

AND THE CEIONII

IN

136

AND

138

That the main purpose of Hadrian, when he made the dynastic settlements of 136 and
138, was to ensure the ultimate succession of M. Annius Verus, the future emperor Marcus
29

(190I),
30

Cf. F. Leo, Die griechisch-romische Biographie

272

if.

For all the vitae mentioned see the extremely

brief analyses by Lecrivain 103 ff.
31 Cf. H.-G. Pflaum, Bonner Historia-AugustaColloquium 1964/1965 (I966), 143 ff.
32 Cf. R. Werner,
'Der historische Wert der
Pertinaxvita in den Scriptores Historiae Augustae ',
Klio xxvi (1933), 283 ff.; H. Kolbe, Bonn. Jhrb.
CLXII (I962), 407 if.
33 Cf. PIR2D
77; 0. Th. Schulz, Beitrdge zur
Kritik unserer litterarischen Uberlieferung fiur die Zeit
von Commodus'Sturze bis auf den Tod des M. Aurelius
Antoninus (1903), 26 ff.
34 Schwendemann obfuscates a simple matter by
his assumption about the sources (n. io):
I-14,
20, Ib-27,9(?)
with some subtractions form a
Suetonian biography.
3"Heer, op. cit., had produced the same obfuscation as Schwendemann: there is no reason why one
main (biographical) source should not be the basis
of 1-17.
36 Cf. Hasebroek, op. cit. ; T. D. Bames, Historia
XvI (i967),

87 ff. The greater part of

I9, i-5 is factually accurate.

1-17,

4 and

37 Cf. W. Reusch, 'Der

historische Wert der
Caracallavita in den Scriptores Historiae Augustae'
Klio, Beiheft xxiv (I 93 I).
38 Especially in I-14.

39 Where did the series end ? None will question

that it included Caracalla (cf. Reusch, op. cit.;
E. Hohl, Miscellanea Academica Berolinensia (i950),
287 ff.). L6crivain I8z ff. thought that it included
a life of Macrinus. But that is explicitly denied by
the preface to the ]M'Iacrinus(I, I): ' vitae illorun
*

. .qui

non diu imperarunt

in obscuro latent

. . .:

nos tamen ex diversis historicis eruta in lucem

proferemus'. The problem concentrates, therefore,
on the Geta. The only possible trace of the postulated biographer is at 3, I (for the rest see Schulz,
op. cit. I14 ff.; L6crivain z26o f.). The consular
date has recently been argued to be correct, except
that Vitellio is a perversion of Vettuleno (A. R.
Birley, Historia xv (I966), 251 if.) ; but the day and
the place of Geta's birth both seem to be wrong
(cf. Passio Perpetuae 7; HA, Severus 4, 2; and the
examples of variatio of facts in the Historia Augusta
collected by LUcrivain 396). A. von Domaszewski,
' Die Personennamen bei den Scriptores Historiae
Augustae ', Heidelberger SB, Phil.-hist. Ki., I9I8,
I 3, 6z pointed out a possible resemblance to
Suetonius, Cal. 8, I ' C. Caesar natus est patre suo et
C. Fonteio Capitone coss. ubi natus sit incertum
diversitas tradentium facit '-and a page later a
letter contains the date ' xv Kal. lun ' (ibid. 8, 4).
See further R. Symne, Ammianus and the Historia
Augusta, ch. xxi.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HADRIAN AND LUCIUS VERUS

75

Aurelius, is both asserted by ancient authors 40 and believed by many modern scholars.4'
But is this view of Hadrian's intentions, which are not open to direct scrutiny, justified
by the facts, which are ?
Late in 136 Hadrian adopted L. Ceionius Commodus, a consul ordinarius of that year,42
to whose daughter Ceionia Fabia Marcus had already been betrothed in accordance with
his wishes. 43 Ceionius became L. Aelius Caesar and received tribuniciapotestas and imperium
He had a son
proconsulare, and almost at once entered upon a second ordinary consulate.
of his own, and he was not compelled by Hadrian to adopt another. Prima facie therefore
the line of succession is Ceionius, followed by his son, with Marcus in third place only.
The position of Marcus is made clear by an analogous case. Faustus Cornelius Sulla Felix
married Antonia, a daughter of the emperor Claudius: 5 but that had given him little
claim to the succession in 54.46
Perhaps, however, the adoption of Ceionius was no more than a stratagem. Hadrian
(it has been alleged) would have adopted Marcus, had he been old enough: Ceionius was
merely intended to hold his position until the youth was of a suitable age.47 In support
of this view two arguments are invoked: that Ceionius' children were expressly excluded
from the succession, and that Hadrian adopted Ceionius in the firm belief that he would
soon perish.48 If both arguments are valid, it follows that Hadrian had in mind some
successor other than Ceionius, who must be Marcus. Conversely, if they are unfounded,
Ceionius himself was the destined heir.
The precise legal details of the adoption of Ceionius Commodus are nowhere fully
on record. A priori, the children ought to follow the paterfamilias into his new gens.49
It had been thus in A.D. 4. Ti. Claudius Nero had a son of his blood, Nero Claudius
Drusus, and was forced to adopt his nephew, who was probably called Nero Claudius
Drusus Germanicus.50 Tiberius was then adopted by Augustus, becoming Ti. Julius
Augusti filius Caesar; 51 and, no further legal act being performed or needed, both his
sons passed automatically into the family of Augustus. Drusus Caesar and Germanicus
henceforward bore the names Drusus Julius Ti. f. Augusti nepos Caesar 52 and Germanicus
Julius Ti. f. Augusti nepos Caesar.53 In 136 Ceionius' young son ought similarly to follow
his father. But a form of adoption could undoubtedly be discovered or invented which
would prevent this. Neither Trajan in 97 54 nor Hadrian in I17 55 had been adopted
according to the due form of law. All that was necessary was to know the wishes of a
childless princeps: if it was expedient, they could be given the force of law.56
40

Eutropius viii, ii; HA, Marcus i6, 6 f.

For example, A. Stein, P-W iII (I898), I833 f.;
A. von Domaszewski, Geschichte der romischen
Kaiser iI (I909),
2II ; H. Saekel, Klio xii (I9I2),
I23 ff.; W. Hiuttl, Antoninus Pius I(I936),
41 f.;
W. Weber, CAH XI (1936), 322 f.; E. Homo,
41

Le Haut-Empire(I93I),

530

f.; A. Solari, L'Impero

Romano iII (I945),

155; A. S. L. Farquharson,
Marcus Aurelius (I95I), 24 ff.; A. Piganiol, Histoire
de Rome5 (I962), 293;
Pflaum, op. cit. (n. i);
Birley 45 ff. There has also been explicit dissent:
e.g. B. W. Henderson, The Life and Principate of the
Emperor Hadrian (I923), 26I ; A. Garzetti, L'Impero
da Tiberio agli Antonini (I960), 689.
42 In
general see PIR2C 605.
43 HA, Marcus 4, 5.
44 The evidence is collected at PIR2C 60o.
45 PIR2C I464, A 886.
46 Sulla is not mentioned by Tacitus in his narrative of the year 54. In 55, however, it was plausible
to accuse Pallas and Burrus of plotting to elevate him
to be emperor, and it was Nero's fear which led to
his exile in 58 and death in 62 (Tacitus, Ann. Xiii,
23, 47;
47
48

XIV, 57).

So most of the scholars cited in note 41.

The case is put most clearly and effectively by

Pflaum, op. cit. (n.

49

I),

103

ff.

Cf. M. Kaser, Das r6mische Privatrecht

i (I955)

290 ff.

50For the order of events see H. U. Instinsky,

Hermes xciv (I966), 324 ff. The original name of

Germanicus must be inferred from that of his father

it is nowhere on epigraphic record.
(see PIR21 zzl)
51 ILS 107 ; PIR2C 94I52 ILS 107, I66 etc.; PIR'I 2I9.
53 ILS 107, 173 etc.; PIRI 22I.
54 Trajan was 'absens
et ignarus' (Pliny, Pan.
9, 3): Nerva's calling of a ' contio hominum
deorurmque ' (ibid. 8, 3) is a dubious appeal to a
'higher legality' (cf. Kaser, op. cit. 292 f.).
55 S. Brassloff, Hermes XLIX (1914),
590 ff. argued
that Hadrian's adoption was testamentary. M.-H.
Pr6vost, ' Les Adoptions politiques 'a Rome',
Publications de l'Institut de Droit Romain de 1'Universite' de Paris v (I949), 5I f., develops this theory by
claiming that the adoption derived its validity from
that of Trajan's will, which was itself valid as being
a ' testament militaire que Trajan lui-m8me, precisement, avait rdglement6 '. But Hadrian received
litterae adoptionis on the ninth day of August I 7 and
ordered that day to be celebrated as the natalis
adoptionis (HA, Hadrian 4, 6), while his natalis
imrperii was the eleventh, on which he heard of
Trajan's death (ibid. 4, 7; W. F. Snyder, YCS vii
(I 940), 243 f .).
"I The principle 'quod principi placuit, legis
habet vigorem ' (Ulpian, Digest I, 4, ; cf. Gaius,
Inst. I, 5) is no harsh imposition from above: the
initiative to enhance the emperor's powers almost
invariably comes from below (cf. A. Alfoldi, Rom.
Mitt. XLIX (I934), I ff. ; L (1935), 1 flf.)

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

76

T. D.

BARNES

What cannot be decided on a priori grounds can, however, be decided on the evidence.
The Historia Augusta asserts three times that the young Lucius entered the family of
Hadrian.57 Although two of the passages concerned may easily be set aside, there is one
which occurs in a reliable context, and the statement must therefore be accepted unless
controverted by other evidence. Apparent contrary evidence has been produced, namely
a stamp on some tiles, dated by the consuls of I38, which reads ' ex pr(aediis) L. Ceio(nii)
Com(modi) C(aesaris) f(ili) .58 Is this not proof that Lucius' name, and therefore his legal
position, remained unaltered in I36 ? 59 But the relevance and cogency of an argument
based on a tile-stamp are highly dubious. The stamp may belong after Lucius' adoption by
Antoninus, or even after the death of Hadrian.60 More important, tile-stamps are no
evidence for precise nomenclature. If a man's name has changed, there is no guarantee that
the change will appear there. Legal niceties are not observed, indeed they are often transgressed. In I48 Lucius is styled' L. Ael(ii) Caes(aris) 61 and about the same year some tiles
62 yet no-one would conclude from
bear the stamp ' L. Aeli Caes(aris) Com(modi) f(ili)
these either that Lucius could legitimately be called Caesar before i6I 63 or that his father
never became L. Aelius Caesar. Again, many fragments of wine-jars from the Monte
Testaccio carry the names of the ordinary consuls of I54: while on the great majority
they appear as ' Commodo et Laterano ', twice it is as ' Commodi filio et Laterano '.64 At
least as late as I54, therefore, L. Aelius Caesar was commonly called Commodus. Hence
the persistence of his son's old name after I36 is neither surprising nor relevant to determining what name he was legally entitled to bear.
Nevertheless, even if Ceionius Commodus' son became a member of the imperial
family in I36, might not the father still have been adopted precisely because he was mortally
ill ? On general grounds it seems unlikely. Hadrian himself was gravely sick at the time,65
and so could feel no certainty of outliving even one who was declining fast. And if both
he and his adoptive son were to die together-or if the Caesar died and Hadrian were
unable to make a fresh disposition before his own death-his legacy would be an infant
heir and civil war. The mission to Pannonia was not a subtle device to hasten the end
of a man with a lung disease.66 The Quadi were giving trouble and some show of force
was necessary to cow them.67 Ceionius, so far from being familiar to the troops on whom
his power was to depend, had probably never seen an army in his life.68 The future
emperor ought therefore, at whatever cost, to show himself an imperator and win cheap glory.
The sources too lend little support to the view that Hadrian expected his Caesar to
die. Dio related that it was because he had despaired of his own life that Hadrian adopted
Ceionius although he was vomiting blood.69 A year later, according to Dio, Ceionius was
suddenly carried off by a severe haemorrhage: 70 by implication, therefore, he had recovered
fully from his earlier illness. Dio also put into Hadrian's mouth, when he declared his
intention to adopt Arrius Antoninus, a conventional speech entirely of his own composition
which implies that Ceionius was sound of mind and body: 71 and Dio is not the historian
57Aelius 7, 2; Verus I, 3 ; 2, I. On the last two
see above: the Aelius consists entirely of fiction and
of material drawn from other parts of the Historia
Augusta (E. Hohl, ' Ober die Glaubwurdigkeit der
Historia Augusta', SDAW, Ki. f. Ges., 1953, 2,
23 ff.).

CIL xv, 732.

The argument was first stated by Th. Mommsen, Ramisches Staatsrecht II3 (I889), 1I39, Anm. I :
'iubrigens muss er (sc. Lucius) vor der Adoption
des Vaters emancipirt worden sein, da er auf einem
vor seiner Adoption durch Pius geschriebenen
Ziegel sich L. Ceio(nius) Com(modus) C(aesaris)
f(ilius) nennt '.
60 Hadrian died on the tenth day of July 138 (HA,
Hadrian 25, 6).
6' CIL xv, 733.
62 CIL xv, 734.
Note also CIL xv, 735 : 'L. Aeli
Aug(usti) Pii f(ili) '. H. Dressel, ad loc., punctuates
after 'Aeli'.
But it is easier to take 'Augusti' with
what precedes. If so, that gives another example of
an error.
63 See above, on Verus 2, I i ff.

64 CIL xv, 3695 ff. passim, esp. 4294-4338.

Discounting those where the form of Lucius' name is

4308) unmistakably have

not certain, two (4302,
' Commodi filio', four (3807, 4294, 4330, 4337)

'Commodo
modo'.

Augusti filio',

17, I ; HA, Hadrian23, 7.

Cf. MAMA
Pflaum, op. cit. 104.

Dio LXIX,

58

65

66 So

(Laodiceain Phrygia):
78

the rest plain 'Com-

1TpEapv-w<Cos

AoiKiov Kaiaapa u-s TTavvoviav ...

67 Cf. P-W Suppl. Ix, 554; Hiittl,

The best evidence is ILS

78, 84: see PIR2H 30.
68 Cf. E. Birley, PBA XXXIX

1058,

. ..

VI,

1TpOIKa lTpOr

op. cit. 271 ff.

with CIL xvi,

197 ff.
(I953),
69 Dio LXIX, 17, I : &pg&pEvoS 85 VOaEIV... &TrsyvCOij
Kal
i'a -roT-ro K6ppio8ov pjv AoCKnov, Ka'iTOI
pEv picoaEaoai,
allia pouvra, Kaiaapa 'PcopaioiS &irdtSuEv.
70 Dio
-rov
LXIX, 20, I : tlTE1 8a vvPTI -rTOvAonKtov
-roe aipa-ros rTo?Qou
KoppoSov 9CafpviTsiyKaTraOeipefivaiCrrro
TE Kaci cipoou
tKlTEar-ToS ...
71 Dio LXIX, 20, 2 ff. ; cf. F. Millar, A Study of
Cassius Dio (I964), 71.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

77

HADRIAN AND LUCIUS VERUS

deliberately to introduce a speech at variance with the facts.72 The Historia Augusta has
two accounts of the adoption in I36. The more sober, in the Vita Hadriani, implies that
Hadrian came to know of his son's illness after the adoption, not before.73 It also relates
that Hadrian was accustomed to say ' I have leant upon a collapsing wall': if true, does
that not entail that at the time Hadrian thought the wall was sound ? It is only in the
Vita Aelii that Ceionius' illness assumes an important role.74 Hadrian (it is alleged)
changed his mind at once and could have removed Aelius from the imperial family had
he lived. For careful writers told how Hadrian knew his horoscope, and some even spoke
of a secret compact. It was, moreover, common knowledge that the emperor often applied
to his son certain verses originally used by Virgil of Marcellus. Yet even here, where
so many of the details must be the author's invention,75 there is no hint that Hadrian
expected Ceionius' death at the time of his adoption.
In 136, therefore, Hadrian adopted L. Ceionius Commodus in the hope that he would
be his successor, and by that adoption Commodus' son became the emperor's grandson.
M. Annius Verus was no more than Commodus' destined son-in-law.
On the Kalends of January 138 Aelius Caesar died. On the twenty-fifth day of
February Hadrian adopted Arrius Antoninus, who, as a condition of his own adoption,
adopted Lucius, the young son of Aelius Caesar, and Annius Verus, the nephew of his own
wife. 76 In addition, Antoninus' daughter Annia Galeria Faustina was betrothed to Lucius,
while Marcus' engagement to Ceionia Fabia stood unaltered.
Two aspects of this second settlement deserve emphasis. First, Lucius seems in some
vague and undefinable way to be given precedence over Marcus. The epitome of Dio is
quite explicit: 'Hadrian made Antoninus adopt Commodus' son Commodus and also
in addition M. Annius Verus '.77 The same fact is perhaps reflected in a confused sentence
in the Historia Augusta: Hadrian adopted Antoninus on the condition that he should
adopt as his sons Annius Verus and M. Antoninus.78 By the latter Marcus must be meant:
hence ' Annius Verus ' means Lucius.79 Secondly, Lucius had the better of the proposed
dynastic matches. The Vita Marci and the Vita Veri, both in reliable contexts,80 record
respectively the breaking off of Marcus' betrothal to Ceionia Fabia after Hadrian's death
and the engagement of Lucius to Faustina.81 It appears, therefore, that the youth whom
Hadrian had determined should eventually succeed to the throne of the Caesars was not
Marcus: it was Lucius.
The intentions of Hadrian can not only be inferred from what he did: they were
portrayed in stone by an artist at Ephesus. A relief discovered in I903 near the library of
Ephesus,82 and long supposed to depict the imperial family of the i6o's,83 is now generally
recognized to depict the imperial family in I38, between the adoption of Antoninus and
72 Millar, op. cit. 78 if. On the other side it may
be urged that Dio did not always harmonize his
speeches with their context.
13 Hadrian 23, I0 ff., partly developed at Aelius
6, I ff. with a typical variatio of the amount of the
donative (compare Hadrian Zx, 4 with Aelius 5, 4 f.;

Maximini I2, I, with I2, 6).

74 Aelius 3, 7 if-

" The bogus 'careful writers' and the use of

Aeneid vi are both stigmata of the author (as was
pointed out by H. Dessau, Hermes XXIV (I889),
382 if.; Hermes xxvII (I892), 582 if.).
76 Marcus' name is wrongly given prior place at
Aelius 6, 9; Pius 4, 5. The error is natural: cf.
J. Linderski, Historia xiv (i965), 423 ff., for a similar
distortion of the order of the consuls of 59 B.c. The
inversion is reproduced by the scholars cited in note
41, and by H. Schiller, Geschichte der ro'mischen
Kaiserzeit (I883), 628;
P. von Rohden, P-W I
H. M. D.
(i894),
2283 ; P-W ii (I896), 2497;
Parker, A History of the Roman World, I38-337
(I935),
4 ; E. Albertini, L'Empire Romain (I938),
194;
B. Orgeval, L'EmpereurHadrien (1950), 33.
Not however by R. Sy ne, Tacitus (1958), 6oI.
7I Dio LXIX, 21,
I : ET?i
E 8& nV -rrals &pptvcovrTai8cov,

K6ojobov kenor ?ijav

Kopp68ov uvi
M&pKov 'Avviov OvQijpov.
78 Hadrian 24, I.
i calls him
79 Eutropius VIII, 9,

T v T?

a0~

Kxal9ri

p'

TO,fTlc

Lucius Annius
Antoninus Verus; the Epitome I6, 5, L. Annius
Verus; at HA, Pius 6, Io he is Annius Verus, while
his brother is M. Antoninus in 6, 9.
80 See respectively
Schwendemann II8 ff., and
above, pp. 67-9.
81 Marcus 6, 2;
Verus Z, 3. (Aelius 6, 9 clearly
depends upon one or both of these passages: cf.
note I9.)
Marcus 6, z is now disfigured by a lacuna:
almost certainly there originally stood there a reference to Lucius' betrothal to Faustina (cf. Verus 2, 3).
82 First published
by R. Heberdey, YOAI vii
(I904),
Beiblatt, 49 ff. (with photographs). Reproductions are to be found also at Rom. Mitt. XLVIII (1933),
Tfl. 5o; J. M. C. Toynbee, Art of the Romans
(I965), pl. 4z; R. Brilliant, Gesture and Rank in
Roman Art (I963),
83

295;

fig. 3.83.

E.g. by E. Strong, Roman Sculpture (1907),

La

Scultura

Romana

ii

(I926),

Z58.

That

interpretation is impossible:
with Lucius Verus
still alive, Commodus and Annius Caesar must
appear in the family group either together or not at
all (cf. PIR2A 698).

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

78

T. D. BARNES

the death of Hadrian.84 The relief shows the young Lucius standing between Anltoninus
and Hadrian. Antoninus is flanked by Marcus on the left, and on the right a girl's head
(it must be Faustina the younger) peeps over Hadrian's shoulder. The emperor's hand
rests, palm upwards, upon the boy's shoulder, by which Antoninus is clasping him to his
side. In the middle and above Lucius' head there appears a sceptre, symbol of imperial
majesty.85 The purport of the relief is manifest: the throne is destined to pass to Lucius,
who, however, needs a guardian-and the guardian is to be Antoninus assisted by Marcus.
The favours shown by Hadrian to Marcus are often adduced as proof that the youth
was especially dear to the emperor, and hence that he was picked out as future emperor.86
Another view is possible. Perhaps what favours there were given had to be forced on
Hadrian by Marcus' social standing and relatives. For it is far from improbable that the
influential nobles to whom Marcus was linked by ties of blood had renounced their own
conflicting claims to the empire in order to put their hope in such a high-born and wellconnected young man.87
Eutropius states outright that Hadrian had had plans to leave Marcus his successor
had he been old enough; and Eutropius, or else his source, is copied by the Historia
Augusta.88 But in both authors this assertion appears as an inference from the fact that
Hadrian had chosen Marcus as Antoninus' son-in-law. Since the premise is false, the
conclusion has no value as evidence.
Xiphilinus' epitome of Dio speaks of Hadrian's favouring Marcus. Hadrian (he
writes) kept urging Antoninus to adopt Lucius and Marcus, but preferred the latter because
of his kinship and his age, and because he was already displaying great strength of character.
Accordingly he punningly called him 'Verissimus '.89 But in this passage has Xiphilinus
perhaps abbreviated too carelessly ? There is no other evidence that Marcus was related
to Hadrian; and, though some distant link may be deduced from the existence of a L.
Dasumius Hadrianus,90 and from Marcus' mythical ancestor Dasummus,91 the degree of
kinship seems too remote to count for very much. Antoninus on the other hand was
Marcus' uncle and later conspicuously favoured his nephew above Lucius.92 Moreover,
the logic of the passage requires that it should be Antoninus who is said to favour Marcus.
If both Antoninus and Hadrian favour Marcus, there is no need of long exhortations: but
if Hadrian favoured Lucius (as has already been argued), the reluctance of Antoninus is
understandable.93 The hypothesis seems inevitable that Dio in the original recorded that
Antoninus (not Hadrian) favoured Marcus. And that would be consonant with a statement
Dio makes when delivering his final verdict on Marcus: he was adopted by Hadrian
because of his numerous, wealthy and influential relatives.94
It was surely Marcus' relatives who secured for him two marks of distinction at a very
early age. When he was six he was granted the equus publicus, an exceptional but not
unparalleled honour for one so young.95 At the age of seven Hadrian made him a salius
84
The correct date was first perceived by F. von
Lorentz, Ram. Mitt. XLVIII (1933), 308 ff. For a
select bibliography see J. Inan and E. Rosenbaum,
Roman and Early Byzantine Portrait Sculpture in
Asia Minor (I966), 71. Inan and Rosenbaum follow
F. Eichler, Bericht uiber den VI. Internationalen
Kongress fur Archdologie, Berlin 21.-26.
August
1939 (1940),
488 if., in assigning the series of reliefs
to which this belongs to a monument commemorating
the Parthian War of i62-6, though they do not deny
that the relief's ' dramatic date ' is 138. But is there
really anything which compels the late dating ?
Toynbee, op. cit. 65 f., evidently does not think so.
85 Cf. A. Alf6ldi, Rom. Mitt. L (I935),
124 f.;
Lewis and Short, s.v. sceptrum.
86 See the works cited in note 41.
87 Cf. Hadrian 24, 6 f. For Marcus'
relatives see
the sterrimata facing PIR2 I, p. II8; Pflaum, op. cit.
122;
and Birley 3I8 ff.
88 Eutropius viii,
ii ; HA, Marcus i6, 7. The
Historia Augusta refines the reasoning behind
Eutropiias' statement, which perhaps indicates the
use of him as a source (H. Dessau, Hermes xxiv

(1889), 367 ff.). But Marcus 15, 5 contains a story

not in Eutropius, but found in Aurelius Victor
(I 6, 7). Use of a common source is, therefore, at least
an equal possibility.
89 Dio LXIX 21, 2:
Kal 6p:p-OTEpOUS
p?v ?0aTroticaa0at
-@ 'AvrCvivc,?
-rv
U TOV OUTi1pov
Si& -rT?
?KEvE,
TrpoeTiUpflaE
aUyyiv?1av aOcToOKal St& -r?AvfKi'av, Kal OT6qp%awv
ypvXilS
?ppco,U?vrcaT&-rv
d()p'o;i Kal OIP:I'paalpovc)Torv,
1r5rIiTr?':rracvEv,
TOO'PCOtIaOkO
&arw&xt.
PpaT-roSgvvoiav
Yrp6O-ThV
KIopywOwI?VOS,
90 Syme, op. cit. 794; PIR2H 5.
91HA, Marcus I, 6.
92

See above cn Verus2,

II ff.

93 Hadrian declared Antoninus as his heir on 23

January (HA, Hadrian I, 3; 26, 6; cf. PIR2 I,

p. 28), a full month before the actual adoption
(Pius 4, 6).
94 Dio LXXII (LxxI) 35, 2/3:
TOiS T? yap
oUyy1Ev?ct Tr&aci,
O0TCO-rTIgr waTS &v
1ToMoTS Kai 8UVaTOTS1r?vOUCiOtS
T? OCJoctV,
CbaO'
tp??V
Or6 YT&vrcov c?rT65v
Kai St&
6.yarTriG?ivat,
-roO-ro
iT
95

6 -roiD 'A8ptavo

OrT p&atora

s -r6 y6voS

rTotTEiS . . .

HA, Marcus 4, I. Cf. ILS 6305: 'honorato

equo publ. ab imp. Antonino Aug. cum ageret
aetatis an. V '; also ILS 13 I 6/7.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HADRIAN AND LUCIUS VERUS

79

Palatinus.6 Such signs of imperial favour were easy to bestow and need signify nothing
The nickname 'Verissimus' was double-edged.97
about Hadrian's real intentions.
Ostensibly it denoted honour: but what could be better as well-disguised ridicule of the
priggish darling of high society who in his twelfth year assumed the garb of a Cynic
philosopher ? 98 Moreover, propaganda may soon have obfuscated the truth about Hadrian
and Marcus. It is related that Marcus was brought up ' in Hadriani gremio '.99 Now that
must be false, since Marcus lived his early life in Rome 100at the time when, except for
the years I25 to I28, Hadrian was travelling throughout the empire.'0' In Hadrian's
autobiography, and on the arch at Beneventum, the impression was carefully fostered that
the emperor had always been marked out as Trajan's successor; 102 in the I40's it would
have been politic to create a similar illusion about Marcus.103
To recapitulate, Marcus was not Hadrian's chosen heir. It was a Ceionius whom
Hadrian was determined to install as emperor. With the passing of the years his intentions
were not entirely frustrated. For twenty-three years Antoninus gave precedence to Marcus
and kept Lucius in a position of unmistakable inferiority. But he did not murder him,
and that was justification enough for his own adoption by Hadrian. In i6i Marcus alone
was saluted emperor by the army and the Senate. Yet he knew the truth about the dynastic
compact of I38, and his philosophy would not allow him any longer to delay the fulfilment
of Hadrian's wishes.
The Queen's College, Oxford.
96 Marcus 4, 2.
The case of Marcus is unique
according to R. Cirilli, Les pr4tres danseurs de Rome
(I913),
59 f., followed by P-W I A, i88z f. But
M. Annius Flavius Libo (PIR2A 648) was a salius
Palatinus twenty-six years before his consulship in
as an imperial relative he may have been
204;
consul at about thirty-three (cf. Syme, op. cit. 653
f.; J. Morris, Listy Filologicke 87 (I964), 3I6 ff.).
Others too may have been salii in their boyhood:
perhaps C. Bruttius Praesens, salius in I99, if he is
indeed the consul of 2I7 (PIR2B I66).
There is
little enough evidence for the membership of the
collegium-only the fragmentary CIL vi, I978-84.
97 Cf. Hohl, op. cit. (n. 57) 37:
'Da dieser
Superlativ im Munde eines Hadrian ein von Ironie
nicht ganz freies Lob dargestellt haben diirfte,
k6nnte man den Necknamen mit " Wahrheitsfanatiker" zu verdeutschen suchen'.
Verissimus
appears in all seriousness, however, on an Ostian
inscription of I43 (AI I940, 62) and in the Apology
of Justin.

98 HA, Marcus 2, 6.
99Marcus, 4, I.
100
Marcus I, 7; I, I0; 2, I ff.; Marcus, Med.
1, 4.
101See W. Weber, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte
des Kaisers Hadrianus (I 907), I 97 ff. In I2 5 Hadrian
had returned to Rome some time before midSeptember (E. Bourguet, De Rebus Delphicis Im82 f.) ; in iz8 he was at
peratoriae Aetatis (I905),
Lambaesis on the first day of July (ILS 9I33).
Weber,
102 HA, Hadrian 3, 3 ; 3, 5 ; 3, IO f.;
op. cit. 20 ff. F. J. Hassel, Der Trajansbogen in
Benevent (I966), contends that the arch was completed in III4 (not early in the reign of Hadrian), but
he brings no real argument apart from the date on
the dedicatory inscription which it bears.
103 Marcus was, it is true, designated quaestor on
the proposal of Hadrian (Marcus 5, 6). Again, that
need not denote especial favour: the consulate,
though easy to give (cf. Res Gestae I4), was withheld.

Corrigendum. Frl. H. Temporini of Tiibingen has kindly pointed out to me that neither
Marcus 6, 2 nor Versus 2, 3 (cited in n. 8I, above) necessarily implies that the betrothal
of Lucius to Faustina was ever a fait accompli. Nevertheless, my thesis (I believe) still
stands unimpaired, since both passages (on any interpretation) state that it was Lucius, not
Marcus, whom Hadrian desired as the future son-in-law of Antoninus.

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:03:26 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions