We read much about ‘fake news’ these days and of efforts to rid the internet of it. But what of media that report dodgy stories derived from ‘insiders’ and ‘government sources’ and ‘contacts’? The great Roman historian Tacitus knew what to make of such sources.
The first Roman emperor Augustus died in ad 14. It was a critical moment: who would succeed — Augustus’s grandson Postumus Agrippa, banished (by his wife Livia) or Tiberius, Livia’s son by her first marriage? Tacitus reported that Augustus and a companion, Fabius, arranged a reconciliation with Agrippa; that Fabius leaked and paid the price; and Livia at once recalled Tiberius from abroad, and then ‘saw to’ Augustus. The italicised words created the air of doubt and mystery:
‘Augustus’s health now deteriorated, and some suspected his wife Livia of foul play. For a rumour had got about that Augustus, confiding in a chosen few, had gone with a single companion, Fabius Maximus, to visit his grandson Postumus; that there were such tears and warmth all round that it seemed like a reconciliation; that Fabius had told his wife Marcia about it, and that she had told Livia; that Augustus learned of that leak and, shortly, Fabius was dead (perhaps by suicide); and that Marcia had been heard at the funeral lamenting and blaming herself for Fabius’s death.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in