<b> <i>Nondum tecum in gratiam redii</i> </b> (Suet. <b> <i>Tib</i> </b>. 61.5): Reconciliation and Compromise in the Tiberian Reign of Terror

Abstract In an anecdote written by Suetonius to emphasize Tiberius’ extreme cruelty, the emperor is said to have been so vindictive as to not only inflict death upon multitudes of people, but also keep death from others wishing to die. These people were imprisoned and sustained by the smallest rations of food, just enough to keep them alive and suffering. When one such victim begged to be put to death, the emperor replied that he had not yet made his peace with him. Unbelievable as this anecdote may be, it raises the question of whether, and on what terms, reconciliation with this seemingly unforgiving emperor would have been possible. Most ancient authors presented Tiberius as a cruel tyrant. This is especially so in their depiction of his so-called “reign of terror” following the death of his all-powerful praetorian prefect Sejanus in 31 CE, which saw the persecution of many of the latter’s followers. Nonetheless, some notable individuals escaped the fate of their comrades. Did Tiberius simply forgive the likes of Lentulus Gaetulicus and M. Terentius for their support of Sejanus, or did he rather compromise and come to terms with them, and if so, how, and why? In this article, I argue that despite Tiberius’ traditional image and the reality of his “reign of terror”, he was perfectly capable of making pragmatic and reasonable compromises to maintain relative peace with some of Sejanus’ most powerful adherents. I will also suggest that these compromises were hardly perceived as such, not just because of the prejudice of the sources against Tiberius, but perhaps also due to a semantic and conceptual gap, which made it difficult for the ancient Romans to accept compromise as a fact.