the death of scipio aemilianus

The Death of Scipio AemilianusAuthor(s): Ian WorthingtonSource: Hermes, 117. Bd., H. 2 (1989), pp. 253-256Published by: Franz Steiner VerlagStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4476690 .

Accessed: 14/11/2013 11:55

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 ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Franz Steiner Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hermes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 148.61.13.133 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:55:13 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fsv

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4476690?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Miszellen 253

THE DEATH OF SCIPIO AEMILIANUS

The sudden death of P. Scipio Aemilianus in 129 BC seems to have pro- voked no small amount of controversy in antiquity, and various theories were put forward to account for his demise, most of which revolve around his being murdered. Today, modern scholars follow the ancient belief that he either committed suicide or was murdered for political reasons, often mentioning his death merely en passant when dealing with the wider context of the Gracchan legislation'. However, are there sufficient grounds for accepting that he did take his own life or was murdered? If we review both the evidence and the immediate political background we may advance another, perhaps more plausi- ble, explanation.

We are, of course, reliant on much later sources for the incident, and of these Appian supplies the most details (BC 1,20). Scipio went to bed one night, placing beside himself a tablet on which he intended to write a speech for delivery the next day in the Senate, but was found dead in the morning. Appian then speculates that either Cornelia, mother of Ti. Gracchus, and her daughter Sempronia, Scipio's wife, murdered him, or he committed suicide, or that strangers (t?voI) suffocated him in the night. Plutarch (Romulus 27,4) echoes the possible suicide or suffocation at the hands of enemies, adding that Scipio may have died as a result of general ill-health (6vta piukot Vo06aj), and in C. Gracchus (10,4) tells us that bruises and other such marks were allegedly evident on Scipio's corpse. We may schematize the causes thus2:

Appian Plut. Romulus Plut. C. Gracchus

Murdered by Cornelia and Sempronia

Suicide Suicide

Suffocation by Suffocation by enemies strangers

Natural causes Death from alleged marks of violence

There are immediate similarities and it is safe to assume that Appian and Plutarch used the same source, possibly two sources. Let us now examine each cause in order to assess its validity, particularly when related to the political background. Where Scipio is alleged to have died from suffocation/beatings to the body this can only have been the result of a political assassination, and as such involves three categories of people given the political situation: the Latins and Italian allies, the Roman people and the Senate. What causes we

I For example, DAVID SToCKTON, The Gracchi, Oxford, 1979, p. 90; cf. p. 93, MICHAEL CRAWFORD, The Roman Republic, London, 1981, p. 114 (Scipio died of disease). H. LAST in: CAH ix, Cambridge 1962, pp. 44-45 has some discussion on Scipio's death.

2 To avoid repetition all references to Appian, BC are to 1,20, Plutarch, Romulus to 27,4 and Plutarch, C. Gracchus (CG) to 10,4, unless otherwise stated.

Hermes, 117. Band, Heft 2 (1989) ? Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden GmbH, Sitz Stuttgart



254 Miszellen

have for Scipio's death, then, may be conveniently discussed in the following order:

(1) Cornelia and Sempronia (2) Suicide (3) Political murder, backed by:

(i) non-Romans (ii) Roman people

(iii) the Senate (4) Natural causes

(1) For Cornelia a possible repeal of Ti. Gracchus' land law prompted her to murder Scipio, the principal opponent of the Gracchan land commission, and her daughter Sempronia conspired with her because she was 60?iyop(piav Kic &itcuv OVTx' ?ct?pyro o5t' at?py?V. These factors according to Ap- pian. Whilst it is true that Scipio was outspoken in his opposition to the land commission no moves were made to invalidate the lex Sempronia agraria after Tiberius' murder and the commission probably continued its work on some scale at least3. Moreover, according to Appian (BC 1,19) Aemilianus was careful not to attack the Gracchan law too directly; the implication to be drawn is that he realized he would be both unsuccessful and dangerously un- popular4. Cornelia's motivation therefore becomes questionable. Indeed, C. Gracchus existed to continue his brother's work, as Cornelia would have been well aware. According to Plutarch (CG 10,5) Gaius was implicated in Scipio's murder, but Cornelia (and Sempronia) would hardly have acted in any way that would harm the Gracchan cause, and therefore it is difficult to accept that she killed Scipio for such reasons. As for Sempronia, her action for the reasons as outlined by Appian seems too extreme, and if Cornelia was not implicated, as is argued above, this throws doubt on the reliability of Appian .

(2) Appian's explanation that Scipio, realising the ultimate failure of his policies, committed suicide sounds weak and fabricated to explain his sudden death by unnamed sources (6;q ?iVot 8owOiov: Appian; oi [Xt'yovOIV]: Plutarch). Suicide does not seem in keeping with a character like that of Scipio Aemilianus, and we should seriously question whether he would have been so daunted by the political opposition or anger of the people that he resorted to such drastic means. Furthermore, if he had decided to kill himself that night (by poison according to Plutarch in 'Romulus') he would hardly have placed writing material next to him in order to compose a speech for the following day.

(3) What of a political assassination? We may exclude the Latins and Italian allies since Scipio was currently championing their cause and it would hardly be in their best interests to have him killed.

3 See LAST, CAH ix p. 44 and STOCKTON, op. cit. pp. 92-93. 4 See STOCKTON, op. cit. pp. 88-90 on the support for the Gracchan legislation following the

death of Ti. Gracchus. 5 It is odd that the conspiracy of the two women, and especially Sempronia's reasons, is

omitted from Plutarch's accounts since this is the type of anecdote that he would have delighted to recount.



Miszellen 255

However, Scipio's popularity with the Roman people had waned as a result of his attitude towards the non-Romans, and Appian tells us that the people rejoiced at his death. Perhaps some of these were the ones who entered his house and killed him, but if so were they acting on their own initiative or as part of a general conspiracy? Were the people really so worried over the plight of the non-Romans that it was decided to murder Scipio? More likely is that when he "switched allegiance" to the Latins and Italian allies the people felt only anger and a sense of betrayal toward! Scipio, whom they had twice elected to the consulship (Appian, BC 1,19), and as a result he lost much valuable popular support. This is not a sufficient pretext for assassination, and indeed when Arrian states that the people were still angry with him (Opy14O6iCVOV FtM), and hence rejoiced at his death, there is an implication that in time they would have forgiven him.

This leaves us with the Senate, but again there are no adequate grounds for arguing that a senatorial conspiracy existed against Scipio. If anything, a recent bill to exclude senators from the eighteen centuries of cavalry in the Comitia Centuriata had been ridiculed by him, a reaction which could only have met with popularity given the anti-senatorial nature of the bill6.

(4) Death is most likely to have occurred as a result of natural causes (although not because of general ill-health as Plutarch in the 'Romulus' would have us believe), and this is the argument of this paper. The suggestion is put forward, in the light of Plutarch's statement (Romulus 27,4) that he died at home tesa- Witvov, that as a result of overindulging himself at dinner Scipio choked to death by vomiting. We know that Scipio was under much political pressure; his successful stand against Carbo's proposal in 131 or 130 to allow reelection to the tribunate along with his favouring of the non-Romans had earned him intense unpopularity, and on the day of his death we learn from Plutarch (CG; cf. Appian, BC 1,19) that Fulvius Flaccus had abused him in the Senate. It is quite likely that Scipio arrived home, ate and drank far too much after a particularly >>hard day?, and realising that he was in no fit condi- tion to compose his speech for the next day's Senate went to bed with the intention of writing it after a few hours' sleep, hence the materials by his bedside. However, during the night he vomited, and drowned when the vomit entered the trachea and through that to the lungs, as is medically possible. He would not have awakened owing to the sedatory effects of the alcohol con- sumed. Such an unpleasant end would not leave any visible signs on the body, and this is confirmed by Appian, whilst Plutarch (CG) tells us that certain bruises and other marks of violence were only thought to be (K6ot?v) on Scipio's body.

Scipio's death was exploited for political purposes; for example, his sup- porters seem to have implicated Fulvius Flaccus and even Gaius Gracchus (Plutarch, CG 10,4-5), whilst his enemies seized the opportunity as a means of appealing to the people (Appian, BC 1,20; cf. 19). Hence there arose the various causes of death, as related by our sources, and doubtless these were increased by contemporary speculation since Plutarch (Romulus 27,5) relates how people formed their own ideas of what happened when seeing Scipio's body.

6 STOCKTON, op. cit. pp. 93-94.



256 Miszellen

The above is suggested as a scenario for the last hours of Scipio Aemilianus' life. Given that our sources say that there was no outstanding cause or proof of how he died and then continue with diverse explanations based on probable speculation from the period we can only question the validity of such causes. This we have done during the course of this paper. Despite the opportune timing for the reformers which was afforded by the death of Scipio coincidence cannot be ruled out7. There is every likelihood that he died from natural causes, as argued above, which seems to have been the >>official view?, particularly since no autopsy was performed8.

University of New England, Armidale IAN WORTHINGTON

I Cf. a similar instance with the Athenian statesman Ephialtes, whose sudden death was at- tributed to murder by the ancient sources, but which may well have been owing to natural causes as is suggested by STOCKTON in a note on the matter: CQ2 32, 1982, 227-228. STOCKTON suggests that Ephialtes could have died >>of a heart-attack, or a cerebral occlusion, or suchlike? (p. 228).

8 See LAST, CAH ix p. 45 (with scepticism), drawing on CARCOPINO, Autour des Gracques, pp. 85-127.

Note also A. E. Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, Oxford, 1967, p. 241, and the reference to the funeral oration of Laelius which apparently implied that Scipio's death was the result of natural causes.



the death of scipio aemilianus

Documents