the Children of Sejanus

[spittle]

When Sejanus was executed his children were also killed. His daughter was, infamously, raped first as it was forbidden to execute a virgin.

 

My question is:

Was a similar instance of a convicted persons offspring (maybe an adult) also being executed recorded during the Republic?

 

If not, at what point did it become acceptable to kill innocents because of their parents actions?

 

No Executing Virgins. this seems to me a compassionate caveat that was corrupted under a weak Senate afraid (and misreading) Emperor Tiberius.

Discuss.

[Ursus]

I don't believe under the Republic proper there were such instances (but Augustus famously had Caesarion murdered).

 

I believe Tiberius was simply scared to death of the Sejanus conspiracy and wanted to ensure there were no offspring left to avenge their father. During the incidents, Tiberius was hiding on Capri, ready to flee to Asia if things got dicey. That gives you a look into his mindset - he was taking no chances whatsoever.

[Octavia]

I apsolutely don't agree with Tiberius's orders to kill Sajanus's children. When I heard about that on the movie, I Claudius, I was deeply sadened and disgussed!

[caldrail]

Quite, but your perspective is modern and caring. For the romans, they were less concerned with the value of life and indeed since people did well to survive into their twenties, there was a background of acceptance that life was short. The popularity of gladiatorial combat, besides the excitement of the contest, was that the audience could watch death happening to someone else. Tiberius was well aware of his vulnerability as emperor, that at any moment an envious rival might attempt to push him aside, and that in roman societies family bonds were very strong. Children traumatised by the execution of their parents often become embittered adults, and Tiberius was not about to allow enemies to flourish under his nose. For him, the execution of the children was a politcal and personal necessity. To have the children assume a brutalised form of adulthood beforehand was to conform to roman custom, and prevent bad luck from the gods disfavour as well as causing an even worse outrage amongst the public for flouting these customs.

[Ursus]

I apsolutely don't agree with Tiberius's orders to kill Sajanus's children. When I heard about that on the movie, I Claudius, I was deeply sadened and disgussed!

 

Tiberius probably had recent history in mind. Pompeius Magnus's son had given Augustus a major headache. And Caesar's famous clemency did not profit him on the Ides of March.

[Gaius Octavius]

Quite, but your perspective is modern and caring. For the romans, they were less concerned with the value of life and indeed since people did well to survive into their twenties, there was a background of acceptance that life was short. The popularity of gladiatorial combat, besides the excitement of the contest, was that the audience could watch death happening to someone else. Tiberius was well aware of his vulnerability as emperor, that at any moment an envious rival might attempt to push him aside, and that in roman societies family bonds were very strong. Children traumatised by the execution of their parents often become embittered adults, and Tiberius was not about to allow enemies to flourish under his nose. For him, the execution of the children was a politcal and personal necessity. To have the children assume a brutalised form of adulthood beforehand was to conform to roman custom, and prevent bad luck from the gods disfavour as well as causing an even worse outrage amongst the public for flouting these customs.

 

Won't you let this post count for Augustus?

 

Don't you think that Ursus' conclusions make a lot of sense?

[spittle]

Brutus sided with Pompey despite the fact that Pompey had had Brutus Snr killed.

 

Is this the exception that prooved the rule?

[The Augusta]

I don't believe under the Republic proper there were such instances (but Augustus famously had Caesarion murdered).

 

He also executed Antyllus - Antony's eldest son by Fulvia, although he would have been of age at the time. It's a great pity he didn't have the foresight to finish off young Iulus Antony too - it would have saved him an awful lot of heartache in 2BC.

 

Yes - whatever we may think of the killing of young children, given the mindset of the ancient ruling classes, leaving political opponents' children alive was only to invite later troubles. It's cold and it's brutal, but it is, alas, expedient. And remember - Cicero and his party in the Senate were even toying with the idea of removing Octavian, no doubt for similar reasons.

[Octavia]

Okay. Here's my point. Octavian also killed Caesarion, which I feel would have been more of a threat to Antony's children, sincer he was the son of Julius Caesar. And to the point of Octavian killing Antony's son and Caesarion, and if they felt they had to distroy all the children who they felt were a threat, why didn't they kill the other three children of Antony and Cleopatra? Does this make any since?

[Ingsoc]

Okay. Here's my point. Octavian also killed Caesarion, which I feel would have been more of a threat to Antony's children, sincer he was the son of Julius Caesar. And to the point of Octavian killing Antony's son and Caesarion, and if they felt they had to distroy all the children who they felt were a threat, why didn't they kill the other three children of Antony and Cleopatra? Does this make any since?

 

Cesarion was the son Julius Caesar and as such a was a threat to Octavian, whose entire political career was base on the fact who was adopted by his great uncle. Antyllus was put to death beacause he grew up with Antonius and groomed as his heir while Iulius was brought up by Octavia most of his life and as such might be consider as her son.

 

Cleopatra and Antonius children probably weren't consider Romans and as such they could be spared, it's also importand to remember that the civil war against Antonius was allways presented as a war against Egypt and Cleopatra and it's may be another factor in Octavian decision to spare some of Antonius children.

[Octavia]

You have a good point there. I don't know too much about Antony's children.

[CiceroD]

According to Anthony Everitt's Augustus Antyllus and Caesarion were killed because their parents had them perform their coming of age ceremonies. This made them adults and ergo carnifex fodder. One however sees a completely different outcome with the official "children" Alexander Helios, Cleopatra Selene, and Ptolemy.

 

To these Augustus shows mercy he puts them up with Octavia. The boys dissappear (though Everitt attributes this to their unimportance) and Cleopatra Selene is married to the King of Mauretania. It shows that one's child may escape your death sentence even in the Roman World.

 

In the book version of I Claudius there is a reference to executing a boy in his toga virilis (which Graves translates as "Manly Gown" haha)as a mock coming-of-age ceremony.

 

This was done after "A Civil War Precedent" does anyone understand the Reference?

Edited February 4, 2008 by CiceroD

[Octavia]

I'm sorry if I didn't understand the part you are talking about in I, Claudius, but my idea of it is this: The boy was exicuted in his manly gown which means he became a man. I guess they have a cerimony for that sort of thing.

[CiceroD]

I'm sorry if I didn't understand the part you are talking about in I, Claudius, but my idea of it is this: The boy was exicuted in his manly gown which means he became a man. I guess they have a cerimony for that sort of thing.

 

Yes Roman boys had a coming-of-age at an age which the paterfamilias saw fit but usually in mid to late teens. Apparently the boy would dedicate his childhood clothes at the lararium. Then he would put on his toga virilis (toga of manhood) and would go with his family to be registered as a citizen.

[Octavia]

That sounds very interesting. So I guess the girls when they were married, they became a woman?