Beheading the Roman body politic: Decapitation as a political metaphor in early imperial Latin literature

Abstract

This thesis analyses the development of beheading as a political metaphor in Latin literature from c. 20s CE – 120s CE. It aims to explore the addition of decapitation to the range of corporeal metaphors that existed for expressing an attack against the Roman body politic. This is a cross-genre study that examines the different application of the metaphor in philosophy, tragedy, epic, and historiography. The thesis is structured around case studies from Seneca’s De Clementia, De Ira, Thyestes, and Agamemnon; Lucan’s Pharsalia; Tacitus’ Histories and Annals; and the praetexta, Octavia. It argues that beheading developed as an increasingly prevalent and dynamic metaphor during this period, and that it was used by these authors to comment on the political instability that they witnessed in their lifetimes. Each chapter draws on a combination of three key methodologies: intertextual analysis, narratology, and comparison of texts in the parallel, mythical, or historical tradition to illustrate the various metaphorical meanings of beheading in these texts. Tyranny, kingship, failed leadership, and civil war are tied closely to the use of the metaphor and feature as reoccurring themes throughout the thesis. The key claims of this thesis are that severed heads – both literal and figurative – were used by early imperial authors to signify an attack (or attempted attack) against the head-of-state, a transfer in imperial power, or a challenge to imperial authority. The metaphor was used also to describe the removal of supporters or potential heirs of the emperor, as well as rivals and threats to his power. In other words, it was used to signify the silencing and oppression of dissent against the current head-of-state. By extension, beheading became a powerful metaphor for expressing criticism of ‘bad’ sole rule under tyrannical regimes in the first – early second centuries CE.