THE IULIA SCANDAL OF 2 BC

Author: * Paullus Fabius - 13 Posts on this thread out of 1,155 Posts sitewide.
Date: Oct 25, 2003 - 15:10

In 2 BC a scandal ruined Iulia, the Princeps´ daughter. Iulia was accused by Augustus in the Senate for immoral conduct and summarily banished to an island. Her father provided the Senate a full account of her misbehaviour; the names of her paramours, who are said to be numerous in every order of society. Five nobiles were among them;

Iullus Antonius M. f. cos. 10, the triumvirs´s younger son, born in 43. His praenomen “Iullus” emphacized Antonius´ descent from the Iulii and his loyalty to Divus Iulius. He was the husband of the Princep´s niece Marcella –she had been given to him after Agrippa married Iulia. He was consul suo anno and a proconsul of Asia. He is not known to have had a military command –no surprise for the Antonius son. He alone is executed or forced to commit suicide, his son Lucius was sent to voluntary exile (like Ovid) to Massilia.

T. Quinctius T. f. Crispinus Sulpicianus cos. 9, of whom nothing else than Velleius´ label “unique deprativity disguised behind forbidding eyebrows” (Velleius II, C) is really known. He isn´t mentioned as holding a provincial appointment. He was the only other consular that fell in the Iulia scandal.

Sempronius Gracchus, who is called by Tacitus as a “pervicax adulter” (Tac. 1, 53), guilty long past with Iulia while she was still married to Agrippa, and that he composed the complaining letter on Claudius Nero by Iulia to Augustus. Gracchus was noted as a writer of tragedies. He was executed in 14 AD –maybe on the independent initiative of Nonius Asprenas, proconsul of Africa.

Appius Claudius, the only known thing is that he was a monetalis. He probably is a son or nephew of the consul of 38 –or maybe a stray descendant of P. Clodius. Presumably, the last of the Claudii Pulchri –if we don´t count Messalla Appianus.

Cornelius Scipio, he is taken to be the son of P. Scipio cos.16, he shared a common mother with Iulia: namely “Scribonia Caesaris”.

Iulia´s transgression was probably tried as an offence agaist the lex Iulia de adulteriis coercendis but his paramours were –fairly surely- tried for treason on the lex Iulia maiestatis. (Tac. 1, 53) Dio supports this thesis by; “Iullus Antonius died together witl other prominent men – on the ground that his action was part of plot against a monarchy –while the rest were banished” (Dio 55, 10)

There were more men, a tribune was involved too (Dio 55, 10). These men present a powerful factio, Iulia was clearly a great political lady. Augustus wouldn´t have disgraced himself because of Iulia´s adultery .the reasons must have been political. Under the pretext of adultery a powerful factio was removed –the evidence points to treason, real or not. But: cui bono? Livia Drusilla´s hand has been suspected but no ancient author names any rumores of her involment – Iulia´s disgrace didn´t improve her sons position. The answer must be Augustus. He was a man who would do anything for his aim –the succession of his grandsons. Iulia´s treason may have been meditating marriage with Iullus, the pair would have formed the council of regency. Its not likely that the conspirators aim would have been to eliminate Augustus. By divorcing Claudius Nero and Iulia forcibly, he lessened Nero´s tenuous influence –he was no longer the Princeps´ son-in-law.

Nothing definite will never be known of the Iulia scandal of 2 BC –only a free license for the novelist.

Sources;

Cassius Dio, Roman History

Velleius Peterculus, Compendium of Roman History

Syme, Roman Revolution

Syme, Augustan Aristocracy

PS This is in no way a scholarly article –I haven´t consulted some important books (cf. History in Ovid)