102 



a day of public theatrical representations, Lepida, accompanied by a 

 number of noble ladies, entered the theatre, and with mouniful lamen- 

 tations invoking her ancestors, and especially Pompey, whose statues 

 adorned the building, which was itself a monument of his name, she 

 roused the spectators to such sympathy, that with tears in their eyes 

 they shouted savage imprecations against Quirinus, " to whose sterile 

 old age and obscure family a woman was to be sacrificed, once the 

 destined spouse of L. Cfesar, and the step-daughter of Augustus." 



But Tiberius was not the man to be iulluenced by the clamour of the 

 populace. The trial came on in due time. To give perfect liberty to 

 the judges Tiberius requested, that his son Drusus, who as consul 

 elect ought to have been the first to give his vote, should be exempted 

 from this duty. But there could be no hesitation in the senate, no 

 doubt of Lepida's guilt. The only question was as to the measure of 

 punishment. Some were for a mild sentence, but the majority voted 

 for exile, without confiscation of property. 



In the whole of the proceedings, Tiberius appears to have acted as a 

 generous ruler, forgiving all offences against himself, and as a firm, 

 impartial, and incorruptible judge ; yet strange to say, Suetonius 

 mentions this trial as an instance of rapacity, a vice from which we 

 know Tiberius to have been free as long as he lived ; he has not a word 

 to say of the vices of Lepida, but hints, that this " most noble " 

 (geuersissima) lady was condemned to gratify the rich Quirinus. 



Tacitus is less unjust to Tiberius. He allows, that Lepida was 

 " infamous and guilty " (infamis ac nocens) ; he does not say, that she 

 was condemned unjustly or to please Quirinus ; but he is nevertheless 

 somehow dissatisfied with Tiberius, though he can make no direct 

 charge. He says the Emperor confoimded hostility and clemency, and 

 did not show his real sentiments. Could the great historian not 

 understand, that clemency and justice can be united together? that a 

 judge can generously waive offences of a personal Iciud against himself, 

 and yet strictly punish those, which affect society ? It seems almost, 

 that the aristoci-alic republican had more sympathy with Lepida on 

 account of her nobility, than disgust for her proHigaey and her crimes. 



The unfairness of Tacitus and his rhetorical colouring become 

 equally apparent, when he is compelled to relate facts creditable to the 

 object of his aversion. The pardon granted to C. Cominius (Tac. Ann. 

 iv. 31), who had been proved guilty of a pasquil on Tiberius, is 

 introduced by a remark, which qualifies it as an exceptional act of 

 generosity, and followed by an expression of regret, that Tiberius, 

 though not destitute of the knowledge of right, persevered in his dark 

 course. This reflection is evidently intended to take away all credit 



I 



