A.
From A.A. Barret, Agrippina, Mother of Nero, 1996
The Death of Claudius
The popular image of Agrippina the murderer is based almost entirely on her supposed role in one incident:
• The death of Claudius, allegedly by poisoned mushroom
• The evidence for murder here is very slender
The sources vary in constructing a motive
• Tacitus suggests that the murder was a remark of Claudius that he was ‘fated to endure the sine of his wives, then to punish them’
• Narcissus is supposed to have alerted Claudius to Agrippina's crimes (as he had with Messalina)
• This seems implausible, another attempt to depict Claudius' ‘passive’ role
• Cassius Dio claims that by 54 Claudius had become aware of Agrippina's ‘actions’ and angered by them
• What the ‘actions’ were is not specified
• Suetonius says that near the end of his life Claudius began to repent his marriage to Agrippina and the adoption of Nero
An opportunity for murder is supposed to have occurred in October 54 when the protective Narcissus went off to the hot springs at Sinuessa
• Yet this seems unlikely if he was as Tacitus claims concerned for Claudius' safety
The ancient sources agree that Agrippina was guilty of murder
• She is supposed to have used the services of Locusta, a professional poisoner
• Claudius is supposed to have been poisoned while banqueting by poison in a dish of mushrooms on the night of October 12th
• Tacitus and Suetonius agree that the physician Xenophon helped with the murder
But the fact that a murder charge is made is not in itself significant
• Such accusations followed the deaths of most members of the Julio-Claudian family
• Claudius had suffered ill-health since childhood
• He ate and drank to excess
• It is not surprising that he died at the age of 64
The report of Claudius' death was supposedly kept secret for a while
• Britannicus, and Claudius’ daughters Antonia and Octavia were detained
• Agrippina refused admission to the palace and issued regular bulletins hoping for Claudius' recovery
• The reason for the delay according to Tacitus and Suetonius was to keep the main body of praetorians in the dark until the preparations for Nero's succession were completed
• This is plausible, but does not fit well with the idea that Claudius was the victim of a premeditated murder
Finally all was ready and the death was made public
• Before the news had time to sink in the succession of Nero was fait accompli
B.
G. Ferrero, Women of the Caesars, 1911:
1. Tacitus' story of Agrippina poisoning Claudius is ridiculous. Even Tacitus merely says that 'many believe' the story to be true.
2. Tacitus says that Agrippina poisoned Claudius because he was favouring Britannicus. But there was no certainty that the senate would choose either on Claudius' death: Nero was only 17 and Britannicus only 13.
3. The charge of poisoning, like all the others brought against the Augustan family, seems unlikely. From the point of view of the interests of the Julio-Claudians, Claudius died much too soon. Tacitus tells us that Agrippina kept the death of Claudius secret for many hours and pretended that doctors were trying to save him when in reality he was already dead, dum res firmando Neronis imperio componuntur (while matters were being arranged to assure the empire to Nero). If everything had to be hurried through at the last moment, Agrippina herself must have been taken by surprise by the sudden death of Claudius. She therefore cannot be held responsible for having caused it.
4. When Claudius died, Agrippina must have understood that since the family of Augustus had no full-grown man as candidate for the principate, there was grave danger that the senate might refuse to confer supreme power on either Nero or Britannicus.
5. The only answer to this would be to present one of the two youths to the Praetorian Guards and have him proclaimed head of the armies. This would force the senate to proclaim him head of the empire, as in the case of Claudius.
6. Nero was chosen by Agrippina because he was older. It was a bold move to ask the senate to make a seventeen-year-old emperor; it would have been folly to ask them to accept a thirteen-year-old.
