On the domestic front, Claudius exhibited a liberal citizenship policy, expanding trends begun under Augustus. 1) He gave Latin citizenship to whole tribes in the Alps and Gaul. 2) He accorded Roman citizenship to growing numbers of native chiefs. Some chiefs in Gaul already had gained Roman citizenship, and now proposed to run for the office of quaestor, a senatorial- level position of usually financial investigative powers. This was legal given their newly acquired citizen status, but bound to incur senatorial ire. During an address to the Senate, however, Claudius indicated that the greatness of Rome lay in its acceptance of foreign elements. This forced the Senate to open the way to Gallic chief candidacy for quaestor and the senatorial position that would follow it, and Claudius used his control over the censors to assure their election.

In foreign policy, Claudius reverted to Augustus' policy of military expansion. He was served well by highly competent generals, such as Corbulo, Vespasianus, Plautinus, and Paulinus. He began with Mauretania in North Africa. Caligula had invited the native king to Rome, and when he arrived, ordered him to commit suicide. When the king did so, Mauretania revolted, and Claudius inherited the disturbance. In 41-42, Paulinus was sent there. Crossing the Sahara, he repressed the revolt, and Claudius annexed the region as an imperial province. Britain was next. It was a Celtic land, ruled by kings, one being Cunobelinus. He had a large kingdom in the west with his capital at Camuldunom. The region was not totally Barbarian, as it had a coin- based economy and trade relations with Gaul. Still, Claudius wanted it, and so sent Plautinus to ready the troops on the coast in 43. In 44, Roman troops crossed into Britain, defeating the two sons and heirs of Cunobelinus. Plautinus then waited at the Thames until Claudoius arrived, at which point Roman arms captured the capital. Claudius received a triumph, renamed the area Britannia, and named his son Britannicus. Plautinus then proceeded to reduce southern, central, and eastern England to submission.

Claudius' demise was unfortunate. His final two wives were the reason. He had Messelina killed after she publicly married her lover, who probably had plans to kill him in preparation for a joint usurpation. Pallas then suggested he marry Agrippina the Younger, daughter of Germanicus. He did this, and proceeded to adopt her ambitious son Nero. She then proceeded to kill several relatives that could prevent Nero's (and her) assent to power. Finally in 54 CE, Claudius sat down to a meal of mushrooms prepared by his new wife, and was dead the next day. Murder is quite likely. Upon this, the Praetorian Prefect named Nero as Princeps, and the Senate agreed.

Commentary

Augustus was probably the most important figure in Rome's history from 30 BCE to 100 CE. In essence he solved the problem of how to govern Rome, and the Principate gave the Empire a lasting place in history. As well, the army was professionalized, and the solid beginnings of a professional civil service emerged by the 20s CE. Militarily, though the Teutoburgian Forest Massacre had been a disaster and Augustus forsook the notion of conquest to the Elbe, it is difficult to fault him for shortsightedness or strategic mistakes. There appeared in Roman terms nothing to be gained from conquest there. Also, the German lands were so politically and socially disorganized as well as backwards that they did not yet threaten Gaul. Police actions seemed to suffice in this regard, whereas full-scale conquest was quite difficult. Pushing back the frontier to the Danube, though, gave the urban civilization of the Mediterranean basin—the core of the Empire—a new security, while cultural changes began in the older tribal areas along the two rivers—the Balkans at least were to become Latinized, in some areas thoroughly. Finally, Augustus is attractive because he got better as he went along, and progressed from a bloody triumvir to a responsible governor, becoming the pater patria—father of the country.

Still, succession proved problematic, in that while Augustus could maintain in his person an ad hoc collection of supreme powers based on his Auctoritas, no one who followed him would possess his social power and esteem—he was peerless. In theory, though, Tiberius' accession could have been flawless. He was an able general and administrator, with years of experience of seeing Augustus make the Principate work. He was also not without reputation. From the start though, problems emerged. Perhaps he was less than gracious in his relations with the Senate, etc. due to his advanced age. Augustus lived so long that Tiberius waited in the wings for decades, at one time passed over as favored heir. Most importantly, though, there was simply no way to live up to Augustus' image. He developed a terrible reputation in Senate histories, mostly related to his use of murder. In comparison to later rulers though, he was undistinguished in this regard. Something that his Principate did begin to demonstrate, however, was the degree that the Senate and administration as a whole was in thrall to the Emperor. Still considering their state a republic, senators grew to resent the domination of the polity exercised by Tiberius in a way less subtle than his predecessor. As well, the vicissitudes of Tiberius' rule and reputation show that a problem with the new system was that Emperors stayed in power until they died, unlike traditional consuls, or even Sulla-style dictators.

Caligula manifests the latent difficulties of the Principate clearly. Indeed, as a whole, while the Julio-Claudians have been criticized by both contemporary as well as modern historians, they are pedagogically useful in that they make a simple point: the Principate was an advance to be sure, and Rome was politically stable with unchallenged external power. Still, a problem persisted in that the Princeps was too powerful and unchecked. Any change was therefore to be violent, and/or costly. There are no convincing reasons for Caligula's descent into depravity, cruelty, and lust. Perhaps it was because his life had been miserable until his ascent to power. His father may have been killed by Tiberius, and his older brothers were assassinated for political reasons, just as was his mother. In any event, he took Tiberius' cool attitude to the Senate to its logical conclusion, completely alienating them. And whereas the Principate possessed a collection of powers elevating the Emperor beyond the level of primus inter pares, at this stage, the state could not function effectively without good Emperor-Senate relations. Finally, Caligula's demise illustrates three key points. 1) Just as the Emperor now controlled the entire army in one person, without army support, the Princeps was nothing, and would fall precipitously; 2) A Roman-Greek cultural animosity continued. Just as Rome was coopting aspects of Greek Hellenistic civilization, a strident assertion of superiority over the erstwhile Mediterranean power made it perilous for a high roman official to be to devoted to a Hellenistic renaissance; 3) The Praetorian Guard had been established as a small, elite personal guard for the Princeps. However, Caligula's fall and Claudius' rise indicates that it, especially in the person of the Praetorian Prefect, could become a political player in its own right. As a sort of king maker, the Praetorian Guard would expand and abuse this role in the future, leading to it's disbanding in the late third century.

Popular pages: The Roman Empire (60 BCE-160 CE)