Apocolocyntosis Reflect Popular Attitudes To The Emperor Claudius Among His Contemporaries

To what extent does Seneca’s Apocolocyntosis reflect popular attitudes to the
Emperor Claudius among his contemporaries?

Emperor Claudius is a figure of largely mixed popularity and opinions, and Seneca’s satire, the Apocolocyntosis (herein abbreviated to Apoc.) poorly reflects the multifaceted character of Claudius (Fagan, 1998). The opinions of his many contemporaries which are not limited to nobles, but to a wider range, included those within Rome and without, which in turn reflects the people: from plebeian to senator. As is often the case, only the opinion of the nobility was seen, because the lower classes were most often unable to write (find supporting evidence) and therefore their opinions of the matter are non-existent. The
We know that following the death of Caligula, there was a time of confusion and conflict between the Praetorian Guard and the senate. The praetorians were aware that if the role of emperor ceased to be, then they would no longer have a dominant role in Rome (Levick, 1978). It was the intent of the Senate to return to the ways of the Republic following the assassination of Gaius and his wife and child. The unexpected return of libertas was motivation enough to re-establish the Roman Republic as there was no clear heir to take control of the Empire. So when faced with extinction the Guard acted fast, and proclaimed Claudius emperor (Levick, 1978). In response the people of Rome approved, demanding, “unum rectorem iam et nominatim" (Suet. 10.4), calling for one ruler of roman. The masses of Rome wanted the monarchy to continue, and cried out for it as they had Julius Caesar (Yavetz, 1925). In Claudius’ early years, before his Principate, the people loved him. Claudius was the people’s Emperor as none before had been (Levick, 1978). Including Augustus and Gaius, he was loved more. In the years before his ascendance he picnicked with the people, exchanged jokes with them and, “they could mob him, be familiar, insolent,” (Levick, 1978). Resultantly we can see why after a short period of time, (two days to an unknown period, depending on Josephus’
What successes did he bring about to ensure the welfare of the people, and ensure popularity among most of the empire. Claudius was known for the success and improvement he brought for the empire, but for the failures of his personal life and of the cruelties he directed toward the Senate and the equites. Claudius was a successful conqueror. Following in Caesar’s footsteps, he initiated a conflict with Britain, but he began an all-out conflict with resulted in the annexation of Britain as a province. He took a personal part in the invasion of Britain in AD 43, (Goodman, 1997). This achievement, combined with the lands he took and those who surrendered to him make for an achievement worthy of a triumph (Fagan, 1998). Claudius gave citizen status to many of the provincial peoples, and particularly the Gauls (Goodman, 1997). This expansion and recognition of people among the Empire must in turn reflect the love the people would have for him. He made the greatest military expansion in the empire since Augustus and offered more rights to the people of the whole Empire. Claudius is vilified by noble historians, as most of those, as with the Apoc., are written by those who suffered at Claudius’ hands. There were at least six alleged attempts made on his life in his fourteen years as emperor, (Levick, 1978). His harsh treatment of the senators and allowing the power of Rome to be diluted through recognising non-senator