62 The Imperial Government
ertyofothersandnotofthehusbandswhoreceivedthem,thedeifiedAugus-
tushasordered—asalsotheprefects—thattheyshallbepaidfromthefiscusto
thewomen.’’^110 ThereferencetoAugustusmakescontinuitywithPtolemaic
practiceprobable,but,aswithbona caduca,doeslittletosolvetheproblemof
howtheprinciplecametobeappliedoutsideEgypt.
ThefirstclearcasefromRomeitselfcomesfromthereignofTiberius,the
condemnationofC.Siliusin24:‘‘[T]heemperor’sgiftsweredeductedand
theclaimsofthefiscusweremetonebyone.’’^111 Butpartialprecedentsmight
havebeenaffordedbythecasesofCorneliusGallusin26b.c.—theSenate
votedthatheshouldbecondemnedandthathispropertyshouldbeconfis-
catedandgiventoAugustus^112 —orofArchelausofJudaea;whenthelatter
wascondemnedina.d.6,hispropertywasconfiscatedforthebenefitofthe
emperor.^113 ThewordsTacitus uses in the case of Silius, however, seem to
implythattheFiscus’claimsmightarisefromrealorallegedbenefitsonthe
partoftheemperor;thesameprinciplewasperhapsappliedwhen,asitseems,
the entire propertyof Seianus was taken for thefiscus—‘‘Seianus’ property
wastobewithdrawnfromtheaerariumandabsorbedbythefiscus.’’^114 Tacitus
clearly regards this as improper, as he does in the case of Sextus Marius—
‘‘hiscopper-andgold-mines,althoughconfiscatedbythestate,wereappro-
priatedbyTiberius.’’^115 Nonetheless,hecouldreferwithoutcommenttwo
chaptersearliertothefactthatthegoodsofthecondemnedweretakeneither
by the Aerarium or the Fiscus,^116 and the division between them is stated
clearlybyPlinyinapassageofthePanegyricquotedabove(textton.86)—
itwaschieflythechargeofmaiestas(treason)whichenrichedbothAerarium
andFiscus.
Onceagainthelegalbasis,ifany,oftheFiscus’claimsatthisperiodisen-
- L. 25. Dittenberger (OGIS669, commentary) takes it that the reference is to
the condemned persons (damnati). It is possible thatdebtorsto the Fiscus are meant—so
W.Schubart,Archiv f. Papyrusforschung14(1941):37–38. - Tac.,Ann.4,20.
- Dio53,23,7.
- Jos.,BJ2,7,3(111),cf.AJ17,13,2(344).AtthedeathofHerodin4b.c.thepro-
curatorofSyriahadcometoJerusalem‘‘totakechargeofHerod’sestate’’;seeJos.,BJ2,2,
2(16–19),3,1–2(41–54),AJ17,9,36(221–23). - Tac.,Ann.6,2.
- Tac.,Ann.6,19.Seetextton.36above.ItisworthnotingthatDio58,22,2states
that Marius was a friend of Tiberius and hadthusbecome rich.This might therefore be
anothercaseinwhichimperialgiftswerebeingrecovered. - Tac.,Ann.6,17,‘‘assomanyhadbeencondemnedandtheirestatessoldthatcoined
moneywasretainedbythefiscusortheaerarium.’’