A PISO-PER TANULSÁGAI
The Lesson of the Piso-Lawsuit

Summary/Abstract: The resolution, passed by the senate at the end of year 20 in the action of Cn. Piso Sen., accused after the death of Germanicus (Senatusconsultum de Pisone patre) and representing one of the most important source-growths, helps to reconstruct not only the chronology of Tacitus’ Annales (Book II), but it positively contributes also to have the sometimes debated impartiality of the historian recognized. It became namely clear that the SC in question fixed not that what really happened, but the regime interpreted the happenings under the pretext of official “information”. Therefore, it does not represent an objective report about the near-eastern complications of the years 18—19, but it is the expression of an opinion, intended to be official and at the same time a manipulation of the public opinion. We learn more from the communications of Tacitus: the historian could also communicate the facts, cleared up by the defence or at least he could suggest them. Thus, it was not only the former political interest which could be expressed but even the truth or the tragic mistake of the defeated party. The striving of the historian after impartiality proved to be more effective than the political intention of the administration functioning in the Tiberian Age. Thus, after all, the deception of the public opinion did not meet with success even after 2000 years have been passed.

• Details
• Contents