Sabina Tariverdieva - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Sabina Tariverdieva

Latomus, 2021

At the beginning of 62 B.C.E., Caesar was temporarily suspended from his praetorian duties. At ab... more At the beginning of 62 B.C.E., Caesar was temporarily suspended from his praetorian duties. At about the same time, he was twice named among Catiline’s accomplices. This article aims to reveal the interconnections between these two episodes, their chronology and their political context. The results allow us to see the logic of permanent confrontation between Caesar and his conservative opponents in the 60s in a new light. The denunciation made by Curius was delivered on the day after Caesar's attempt to take the task of restoring the temple of Jupiter away from Catulus. Vettius denounced Caesar at the time when he was already suspended from the administration of the state. In both cases, Caesar succeeded in escaping thanks to his popularity among the people.

Studia Historica, 2017

The article deals with the problem of the date of birth of Julia, daughter of Caesar. Only one an... more The article deals with the problem of the date of birth of Julia, daughter of Caesar. Only one ancient author, namely, Suetonius, gives us an evidence. According to him, Julia was born soon (mox) after the marriage of Caesar and Cornelia. As the marriage had in all probability taken place in 84–83 BC, that would mean that Julia was born «soon» after this date. In that case she would be more than twenty when married to Pompey, her first and only husband, in 59 B.C. No ancient author (including Suetonius himself) gives any comment on such a strange situation. And as there can be no doubts for the date of the marriage of Pompey and Julia, some scholars question the date of her birth and put it to 79–76 B.C. Other researchers still date the birth of Julia to 83–83 BC without explaining why she married for the first time in such an age. The author of the article dates Julia’s birth as 83–81 B.C. citing Suetonius, and suggests two reasons for such a late marriage. In 71(69) –59 B.C. when she had reached the age of twelve (legal age for spousal), marriage with her first fiancée Caepio was delayed both because of the financial difficulties of her father Caesar (on which we do have a lot of evidence) and due to that fact, that during this period either Caesar, or Caepio, or even both of them simultaneously were absent from Rome. And that is why the first and only marriage of Julia took place so late – in her twenties. But there is no need to ignore the evidence of Suetonius, or to argue that he had made a mistake.

Вестник Древней Истории / Journal of Ancient History, 2017

Plutarch, Cicero and the Bobbio scholiast tell us that the censor of 65 BCE, Marcus Crassus, supp... more Plutarch, Cicero and the Bobbio scholiast tell us that the censor of 65 BCE, Marcus Crassus, supported a law about the annexation of Egypt, but he failed because of the opposition of the optimates. Suetonius, however, tells us that it was Caesar who tried to get the Egyptian command с.616 that year. According to the dominant view, Crassus wanted to get the Egyptian command for himself and Caesar acted only as his junior ally, but could in no way hope to receive the command for himself. In this article the evidence is re-examined and the conclusion is drawn that it was Caesar who should have got the Egyptian command, rather than Crassus. Also more precise dating of the whole episode at the end of 65 BCE is suggested.

Исторический вестникъ. Рим: dominatio civilis. Под общей редакцией А.Л. Смышляева, 2017

The article deals with the development of the co-regency system of Augustus and Agrippa from 29 t... more The article deals with the development of the co-regency system of Augustus and Agrippa from 29 to 18 BC: from formal and actual disparity of the co-regents to their formal equality with the dominance of the princeps’ auctoritas. Particular attention is paid to the earlier stages of this development and to the crisis of 23 BC. The co-regency system created by Augustus is often regarded by modern historians as means of ensuring uninterrupted succession of power. Agrippa as his co-regent often is thought to have assumed the role of the regent who temporally replaces the princeps, just as it was in formal monarchies, or that of the tutor of the future rulers. However, the Roman system of state administration did not allow such type of regency. The princeps’ co-regent, who was his equal in formal credentials but his inferior in terms of auctoritas, in case of the princeps’ death had to become the next princeps as his immediate successor. It is unlikely that later he was expected to voluntarily give up his power in favour of younger heir and to vanish from the political life altogether. The inheritance system under Augustus was like a ladder with the princeps at the top, the co-regent who was also the immediate successor one step below, heirs of the next degree further down. In case of death of one of them, successors shifted one step up. The co-regency had one more function: geographically it allowed Augustus and Agrippa to rule jointly the empire while staying in different parts of it.

Scholars usually assert that Salvidienus Rufus and Marcus Agrippa, two brilliant generals of Octa... more Scholars usually assert that Salvidienus Rufus and Marcus Agrippa, two brilliant generals of Octavianus, were aspiring to the same position in his circle and that only after the execution of Salvidienus Agrippa became the first commander of the young Caesar. But the investigation of careers of these two men from 44 till 40 BC shows that they shouldn’t be seen as totally comparable equals. Already in 43 BC their ways diverged, Agrippa and Salvidienus dealt with different tasks and none of them could be seen as a block on the way of the other. A grippa rapidly ascended the successive steps of the traditional Roman cursus honorum and his military activity was conjoined with the civil one. As for Salvidienus, he played the role of an “alternate”, very valuable and important one, of course, but his participation was usually needed in unforeseen or difficult cases and his activity was for the most part the military one. After Salvidienus’ execution Agrippa had to take additional responsibilities and to deal also with Salvidienus’ tasks. The widened competence invariably leads to the extension of influence, but it is hardly possible to assert that the execution of the “alternate” opened a gate for a man already steadily following the cursus honorum for several years.

The matter at issue of this article is golden and silver coinage of Marcus Agrippa during his gov... more The matter at issue of this article is golden and silver coinage of Marcus Agrippa during his governorship in Gaul in 38 BC. Comparison of this coinage with contemporary Italian bronze coins shows that the main ideological motive was probably determined by Octavian, but its specific realization belonged to Agrippa. Caesar holds a special place on these coins and his connection with Octavian is stressed by combining the portrait of Caesar with the legend referring to his son, portraits of Caesar and Octavian face to face on the same obverse, Octavian’s beard, legend DIVI F, the title IMP, which was inherited by Octavian from Caesar. The image of the sidus Iulium above the forehead of Caesar, just as it was on his statue erected by Octavian in his honor, also appears for the first time on these very coins. A modest reverse bearing only the name of Marcus Agrippa and his title as COS DESIG serves as a foil to the importance of the obverse. This coinage had to remind the legionaries serving in Gaul that this province had been conquered by Caesar and that Octavian was his true heir. Besides, this coinage also served as a counterbalance to the coinage of Sextus Pompeius. Also coins of Agrippa would help to restore Octavian’s renown as a military leader, which had suffered damage in the war with Sextus Pompeius

Studia Historica. Вып. XIV. 2015. С. 66-97.

The authors challenge the view of A.V. Korolenkov according to which the story of Sulla ordering ... more The authors challenge the view of A.V. Korolenkov according to which the story of Sulla ordering to put Caesar to death was invented by Caesarian and anti-Caesarian propaganda only in 60s BC and in reality Caesar just waited for the decision of dictator outside Rome and the task of Cornelius Fagita was not to arrest Caesar but to tell him Sulla’s favorable verdict. The authors argue that despite minor differences and inaccuracies the evidences of sources on this episode agree quite well with each other and with the general logic of events, so we have no reasons to dismiss them as propaganda or fantasy. Additionally the authors propose some considerations on the reasons and circumstances on Caesar’s marriage to Cornelia and his destination, creation and abortive inauguration as flamen Dialis.

В тени Мнемозины: коммеморативные практики в обществах прошлого. Сборник научных трудов / Под ред. А.Н. Маслова, А.В. Махлаюка. – Нижний Новгород: Изд-во ННГУ им. Н.И. Лобачевского, 2015. С. 160-172.

According to widespread opinion, Augustus pushed the initial sense of the Temple of Mars Ultor (i... more According to widespread opinion, Augustus pushed the initial sense of the Temple of Mars Ultor (i. e. vengeance for Caesar’s murder) to the background but attached to it his achievement in the sphere of foreign policy —the returning of Roman standards from Parthians. Author is trying to prove that the situation was quite the opposite — the returning of the standards suggested to Augustus an idea to attach an additional sense to the temple decreed for this achievement and to make it a symbol of the vengeance for Caesar’s murder.

Античный мир и археология. Вып. 17. Саратов, 2015. С. 127-150.

The article deals with the activity of Marcus Agrippa in 44-42 B.C.E., between the murder of Caes... more The article deals with the activity of Marcus Agrippa in 44-42 B.C.E., between the murder of Caesar and the battle of Philippi. In 44 he constantly stayed in contact with Octavian but did not stand out against the background of his retinue which was very hostile to the murderers of Caesar. Agrippa carried on the agitation for Octavian among veterans or soldiers, possibly in the Macedonian legions which subsequently deserted Antony. There are evidences in the sources about the participation of Agrippa in the war of Mutina, though he evidently did not took a position of command but was a member of Octavian’s stuff. In 43 Agrippa accused Cassius under the lex Pedia and so came out of the shadow and began the independent political activity. The traditional view that Agrippa held tribunate in 43 is unsupported by sources; his tribunate more probably should be dated 43 B.C.E. It was a sign of a great faith on the part of Octavian since Agrippa was to protect the young Caesar’s interests in Rome while the latter departed to the war of Philippi. So in 43-42 B.C.E. Agrippa is active in political, not military sphere.

The author explores the problem of Tiberius’ place in Augustus’ plans at the beginning of the 20-... more The author explores the problem of Tiberius’ place in Augustus’ plans at the beginning of the 20-ies B.C. This period is usually ignored both in the biographies of Tiberius and in special research dealing with the dynastic policy of Augustus. The article also analyzes the position of Tiberius in comparison with that of his coeval Marcellus and of his brother Drusus at the same age, the betrothal of Tiberius with one-year-old Vipsania and the actual position of Agrippa between 26 and 24 B.C., when the general had no formal powers. The author concludes that during the 20s BC Augustus was planning that in the future his elder stepson would take the place near Marcellus similar to that of Marcus Agrippa near Augustus, the place of the second most powerful man in the state, the closest acolyte of the ruling princeps. Apparantly, according to Augustus’ project, the pair Marcellus – Tiberius was eventually to replace his union with Agrippa in the state.

Вестник Древней Истории. 2015. № 1. C. 145-159

The author of the article contests two main interpretations of Agrippa’s advice to his associates... more The author of the article contests two main interpretations of Agrippa’s advice to his associates reported by Cassius Dio (49. 4). The followers of the fi rst view believe that Dio’s information is just a product of his own fantasy and has nothing to do with Agrippa. The supporters of the second interpretation believe that Dio’s account is quite reliable and therefore proves that Agrippa bewared of Augustus and that he really had such a bad opinion about rulers. It is argued in the article that the advice entirely corresponds to the common policies of Augustus and Agrippa in terms of strengthening the power of the princeps. A new interpretation of the advice is suggested: Agrippa recommended his associates to show modesty and leave their fame to the Emperor in order to secure as much as possible honour and authority for Augustus. It is very likely that Agrippa’s advice to his associates was the result of his common planning with Augustus.

Studia Historica, Вып. 13, 2013 г. С. 158-177, 2013

The article deals with the events of 23 B.C. connected with the succession policy of Augustus. An... more The article deals with the events of 23 B.C. connected with the succession policy of Augustus. Ancient sources don't explain unanimously why during the twenties B.C. Augustus prepared to make Marcellus his heir but at the time of the crisis, when the problem of successor became actual, Marcellus vanished from sight and Agrippa came to the foreground. Modern researchers have offered different answers to this quesion and some of them have even argued that Augustus never planned to make Marcellus his successor. In the article this view is contested and a different explanation is proposed. The contradiction between Marcellus' honours during the twenties B.C. and Augustus' preference to Agrippa in 23 B.C. can be removed if Agrippa is viewed as a heir for the current moment and Marcellus as a heir in prospect. The article also deals with the problem how much the succession policy of Augustus was determined by blood relationship.

Известия Уральского федерального университета. Серия 2. Гуманитарные науки. 2014, №1, с.6-25 , 2014

The article deals with the ideological significance of public buildings of Marcus Agrippa in Rome... more The article deals with the ideological significance of public buildings of Marcus Agrippa in Rome. Agrippa repaired Roman aqueducts and also built new ones, on Campus Martius he erected a large complex of various buildings which totally transformed the Campus. The main ideological aim of this building program was the glorification of the princeps and his family; later – the glorification of the Principate as whole, which is most clearly illustrated by the Pantheon. But as compared to the buildings of Augustus those of Agrippa were of more common and practical character or were destined for amusement and recreation of plebs. This allowed to attract sympathies of the plebs to the new regime, while Augustus’ target was the upper class. In the building policy of the Principate Agrippa ranked the honorable second place after Augustus, but there was no place for somebody third in this sphere.

Вестник Древней Истории. 2014. № 1. C. 88-101, 2014

The article deals with the problem of the origin of Decimus Haterius Agrippa, cos.AD 22, and his... more The article deals with the problem of the origin of Decimus Haterius Agrippa, cos.AD 22, and his of kinship with the emperor’s family. Usually researchers suppose that his mother was the daughter of Marcus Agrippa from his first wife Caecilia Attica or from his second wife Marcella Maior. But these versions do not agree with Tacitus’ evidence about the relatives of Haterius Agrippa and create many chronological problems. In this article the author suggests another version: the mother of Decimus Haterius was not the daughter of Marcus Agrippa but his sister Vipsania Polla. This theory doesn’t evoke any chronological problems with the age of mother of cos. 22 AD, solves the problem of social inequality of Haterius’ parents and also explains why Tacitus does know of kinship of Decimus Haterius with Germanicus, but doesn’t know of his kinship with Drusus Minor

Античный мир и археология. Вып. 16. Саратов, 2013. С. 132-140., 2013

The author examines the circumstances of the early youth of Octavian and Agrippa and the beginnin... more The author examines the circumstances of the early youth of Octavian and Agrippa and the beginning of their friendship. Agrippa’s family was probably wealthy but its origin was quite humble, and Octavian’s lineage was not much higher; his ancestors, except his grandmother Julia, belonged to Italian municipal families. It appears that Agrippa met Octavian in the house of the latter’s stepfather Philippus, and in the same house Agrippa’s brother made acquaintance with Cato, the son-in-law of Phillipus. Agrippa was educated together with Octavian and by 46 B.C. became his best friend. Probably they were going to participate together in Spanish war under Caesar but Agrippa had to go to Spain alone due to the illness of Octavian (and this might be his first military service) and his friend joined him later. Also Caesar planned to take both youths with him to his Parthian campain. So by 44 B.C. Octavian and Agrippa were united by close friendship, common experience and common plans for the future.

Military and political activity of Agrippa during his governorship in Gaul in 40-38 BC, 2012

The subject of the article is the first governorship of Marcus Agrippa in Gaul. It is suggested t... more The subject of the article is the first governorship of Marcus Agrippa in Gaul. It is suggested to date the beginning of the governorship to the end of 40 BC. At this time Gaul played an especially important role for the power of Octavian, but the previous governor Salvidienus Rufus was accused of treason and put to death. His army was passed to Antonius. Agrippa was granted a triumph for the victory over the Aquitanians in 38 BC but he refused to celebrate it. The analysis of the political situation shows that the reason of his refusal is correctly stated in the sources: Agrippa didn’t want to celebrate a triumph when Octavian failed. It is also suggested to date Agrippa’s campaign in Germany to the winter of 38—37 BC and, possibly, at that time Agrippa settled the Ubii at the western bank of the Rhine.

Motives and Results of Octavian’s Illyrian Campaigns., 2012

The author deals with the outcome of Octavian’s Illyrian campaigns of 35-33 B.C. for Roman foreig... more The author deals with the outcome of Octavian’s Illyrian campaigns of 35-33 B.C. for Roman foreign and domestis politics. The conclusion is that Octavian had not aimed to conquer the whole Illyria but his campaigns created the prerequisites for such a conquest. Octavian returned the lost standarts of Gabinius and for the first time left a garrison in Illyria. He pacified the tribes which had been threatening Italy from the time of the civil war of Caesar and Pompey and eliminated the local piracy. His achievements showed that now Illyria was subordinate to Rome and they ought to make a good impression in Rome and Italy. Octavian’s Illyrian policy in general can be regarded as the continuation of that of Caesar.

Translations by Sabina Tariverdieva

Кембриджская история древнего мира. Том IX : Последний век Римской республики, 146-43 гг. до н.э.... more Кембриджская история древнего мира. Том IX : Последний век Римской республики, 146-43 гг. до н.э. / Под ред. Э. Линтотта, Э. Роусон, Р. Сигера, Дж. Крука / Пер. с англ. О. Любимовой и С. Таривердиевой. – М.: Ладомир, 2020. – 1150 с. – (В двух полутомах).

Кембриджская история древнего мира. Том X : Империя Августа. 43 г. до н. э. – 69 г. н. э. / Под р... more Кембриджская история древнего мира. Том X : Империя Августа. 43 г. до н. э. – 69 г. н. э. / Под ред. А.К. Боумэна, Э. Чэмплина, Э. Линтотта. Пер. с англ. О. Любимовой и С. Таривердиевой. – М.: Ладомир, 2017. – 1440 с. – (В двух полутомах).

Conference Presentations by Sabina Tariverdieva

Conference: THE ROMAN CIVIL WARS OF 49-30 BCE: ANALYSING THE BREAKDOWN OF MODELS, 2019

In the Civil War between Caesar and Pompey two members of an ignoble family of Vipsanii found the... more In the Civil War between Caesar and Pompey two members of an ignoble family of Vipsanii found themselves in the inner circles of the leaders of antagonistic parties. Young Marcus Agrippa was the closest friend of Caesar’s grand-nephew Octavius (Nic. Dam. FGrH 127. 16) and probably took part in the war against Pompey’s sons in 45 B.C.E. But his brother (probably, the elder and named Lucius) supported Cato out of friendship and followed him to Africa (Nic. Dam. FGrH 127. 16). This seems very strange as Vipsanii were neither famous, nor noble and obviously hadn’t been the members of Roman political elite before the civil war of Caesar and Pompey. So how and why the two brothers entered the immediate circles of Caesar and Cato?
Agrippa’s family was probably wealthy but its origin was quite humble (Vell. Pat. II. 96; Sen. Controv. II. 4. 12; Tac. Ann. I. 3. 1; Suet. Calig. 23.1). Reinhold’s theory that Agrippa had served under Caesar in the beginning of the civil war and impressed the dictator so much that the latter introduced him to Octavian seems improbable. The theory according to which Octavian and Agrippa became friends in a rhetoric school doesn’t explain the friendship of Agrippa’s brother with Cato. Other existing theories about the acquaintance of Agrippa and Octavian also disregard the evidence on Agrippa’s brother.
According to my hypothesis the family of Vipsanii had a noble patron closely connected with both Caesar and Cato. It’s not so difficult to find such a person and notably he was Octavians’ stepfather – Lucius Marcius Philippus. He was the husband of Caesar’s niece and the father-in-law of Cato. If he was at the same time the patron of Vipsanii, it is in his house the two ignoble brothers could meet such people as Cato and Caesar. So it appears that Agrippa made friends with Octavian in the house of the latter’s stepfather Philippus, and in the same house Agrippa’s brother made acquaintance with Cato.