latrones - Get a Free Blog

AVENGERS IN DYNASTIC CONFLICTS
backer really was a slave or freedman of Herod or even Alexander his actions
closely resemble those of Clemens, avenger of Agrippa Postumus.
In the same situation of uncertainty provoked by a change of ruler in
Judaea, yet another slave of the dead Herod generated political intrigue. In
his case vengeance of the sort we have seen so far cannot have been in play
since his master had not lost his life as the victim of injustice but died a
natural death. But first let us look at what happened. Following the death of
Herod, the household slave, Simon of Peraea, had a royal diadem placed
on his brow. 80 This is, at any rate, what Josephus claims, but his readiness
to brand a troublemaker as a usurper is notorious. 81 On the other hand we
know that the succession was hotly disputed and led to further unrest, 82 as
exemplified not least by the agitation caused by the false Alexander. Simon’s
actions, suggestive of a focused campaign of vengeance, indicate that the
rebel slave then gave all his attention to Herod Antipas, the son and successor
of the dead king. According to Josephus, he recruited a band of leistai,
burned down the royal palace in Jericho together with many royal country
residences, and gathered together much plunder. 83 Attacked by native troops
under Roman direction, he was killed by a Roman officer.
Whether Simon wanted to be king or not, his uprising was aimed against
the current ruler. However, his act of vengeance need not have been politically
motivated; it could have been personal. If the heir to whom a slave
passed made his life worse by depriving him of some earlier position of
privilege, he might have decided to take action on his own account. Since
Herod Antipas was Simon’s new master it may well have been that he had
made arrangements which had adversely affected the slave.
That Simon caused trouble because he had lost a privileged position is
only a guess, but one that becomes more probable when one takes into
account the following two cases. Here we encounter troublemakers who
were both avengers of their masters and avengers in their own right.
5 Aedemon, avenger of Ptolemy of Mauretania and
Anicetus, avenger of Polemon II of Pontus
Both these cases also occurred at the courts of Roman client kings and
followed our previous pattern of former royal slaves avenging the overthrow
of rulers. There is no element of impersonation, but agitation under an
assumed name was always only a means to an end and it is vengeance as a
primary motive which connects the latrones of this chapter.
In ad 40 Caligula ordered the murder of king Ptolemy of Mauretania, 84
who was probably guilty of fomenting disturbances against Romans residing
in his still nominally independent client state. Unrest then flared up at the
royal court and developed into a full-scale war which lasted for more than a
year. As a result Claudius made Mauretania a Roman province. At the head
of the uprising was Aedemon, a freedman of the murdered Ptolemy. 85 For
149