Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre — edition senatus consultum de Cnaeo Pisone patre propositum Numerio Vibio Sereno proconsule. Ante diem IIII eidus Decembres in Palatio in porticu, quae est ad Apollinis. Scribendo adfuerunt Marcus Valerius Marci filius Lem(onia tribu) Messallinus, Gaius Ateius Luci filius Ani(ensi tribu) Capito, Sextus Pompeius Sexti filius Arn(ensi tribu), Marcus Pompeius Marci filius Teret(ina tribu) Priscus, Gaius Arrenus Gai filius Gal(eria tribu) Gallus, Lucius Nonius Luci filius Pom(ptina tribu) Asprenas quaestor, Marcus Vinicius Publi filius Pob(lilia tribu) quaestor. Quod Tiberius Caesar divi Augusti filius Augustus pontifex maxumus, tribunicia potestate XXII, consul III, designatus IIII ad senatum rettulit qualis causa Cnaei Pisonis patris visa esset et an merito sibi mortem conscisse videretur et qualis causa Marci Pisonis visa esset, cui relationi adiecisset, uti precum suarum pro adulescente memor is ordo esset, et qualis causa Plancinae visa esset, pro qua persona, quid petisset et quas propter causas, exposuisset antea, et quid de Visellio Karo et de Sempronio Basso, comitibus Cnaei Pisonis patris, iudicaret senatus, de iis rebus ita censuerunt. senatum populumque Romanum ante omnia dis immortalibus gratias agere, quod nefaris consilis Cnaei Pisonis patris tranquillitatem praesentis status rei publicae, quo melior optari non potest et quo beneficio principis nostri frui contigit, turbari passi non sunt, deinde Tiberio Caesari Augusto principi suo quod earum rerum omnium, quae ad explorandam veritatem necessariae fuerunt, copiam senatui fecerit, cuius aequitatem et patientiam hoc quoque nomine admirari senatum, quod, cum manufestissuma sint Cnaei Pisonis patris scelera et ipse de se supplicium sumpsisset, nihilominus causam eius cognosci voluerit filiosque eius arcessitos hortatus sit, ut patris sui causam defenderent, ita ut eum quoque, qui ordinis senatori nondum esset, ob eam rem introduci in senatum vellet et copiam utrique dicendi pro patre et pro matre ipsorum et pro Marco Pisone faceret. Itaque cum per aliquot dies acta causa sit ab accusatoribus Cnaei Pisonis patris et ab ipso Cnaeo Pisone patre, recitatae epistulae, recitata exemplaria codicillorum, quos Germanicus Caesar Cnaeo Pisoni patri scripsisset, producti testes cuiusque ordinis sint, arbitrari senatum singularem moderationem patientiamque Germanici Caesaris evictam esse feritate morum Cnaei Pisonis patris atque ob id morientem Germanicum Caesarem, cuius mortis fuisse caussam Cnaeum Pisonem patrem ipse testatus sit, non inmerito amicitiam ei renuntiasse, qui — cum deberet meminisse adiutorem se datum esse Germanico Caesari, qui a principe nostro ex auctoritate huius ordinis ad rerum transmarinarum statum componendum missus esset desiderantium praesentiam aut ipsius Tiberi Caesaris Augusti aut filiorum alterius utrius, neclecta maiestate domus Augustae, neclecto etiam iure publico, quod adlectus pro consule et ei pro consule, de quo lex ad populum lata esset, ut in quamcumque provinciam venisset, maius ei imperium quam ei, qui eam provinciam proconsule optineret, esset, dum in omni re maius imperium Tiberio Caesari Augusto quam Germanico Caesari esset, tamquam ipsius arbitri et potestatis omnia esse deberent, ita se, cum in provincia Syria fuerit, gesserit — bellum cum Armeniacum tum Parthicum, quantum in ipso fuit, moverit, quod neque ex mandatis principis nostri epistulisque frequentibus Germanici Caesaris, cum is abesset, Vononem, qui suspectus regi Parthorum erat, longius removeri voluerit, ne profugere ex custodia posset, id quod fecit, et conloqui quosdam ex numero Armeniorum malos et audaces cum Vonone passus sit, ut per eosdem tumultus in Armenia excitaretur ac Vonones vel occiso vel expulso rege Armeniae, quem Germanicus Caesar ex voluntate patris sui senatusque ei genti regem dedisset, eam occuparet, eaque magnis muneribus Vononis corruptus fecerit; bellum etiam civile excitare conatus sit, iam pridem numine divi Augusti virtutibusque Tiberi Caesaris Augusti omnibus civilis belli sepultis malis repetendo provinciam Syriam post mortem Germanici Caesaris quam vivo eo pessumo et animo et exemplo reliquerat, atque ob id milites Romani inter se concurrere coacti sunt, perspecta etiam crudelitate unica, qui incognita causa, sine consili sententia plurimos capitis supplicio adfecisset neque externos tantummodo, sed etiam centurionem civem Romanum cruci fixsisset; qui militarem disciplinam a divo Augusto institutam et servatam a Tiberio Caesare Augusto corrupisset, non solum indulgendo militibus, ne his, qui ipsis praesunt, more vetustissumo parerent, sed etiam donativa suo nomine ex fisco principis nostri dando, quo facto milites alios Pisonianos, alios Caesarianos dici laetatus sit, honorando etiam eos, qui post talis nominis usurpationem ipsi paruissent; qui post mortem Germanici Caesaris, cuius interitum non populus Romanus modo, sed exterae quoque gentes luxserunt, patri optumo et indulgentissumo libellum, quo eum accusaret, mittere ausus sit oblitus non tantum venerationis caritatisque, quae principis filio debebantur, ceterum humanitatis quoque, quae ultra mortem odia non patitur procedere, et cuius mortem gavisum esse eum his argumentis senatui apparuerit: quod nefaria sacrificia ab eo facta, quod naves, quibus vehebatur, ornatae sint, quod recluserit deorum immortalium templa, quae totius imperi Romani constantissuma pietas clauserat, eiusdemque habitus animi argumentum fuerit, quod eum dedisse congiarium ei, qui nuntiaverit sibi de morte Germanici Caesaris, probatum sit frequenterque convivia habuisse eum his ipsis diebus, quibus de morte Germanici ei nuntiatum erat; numen quoque divi Augusti violatum esse ab eo arbitrari senatum omni honore, qui aut memoriae eius aut imaginibus, quae, antequam in deorum numerum referretur, ei redditae erant, habebantur, detracto. Quas ob res arbitrari senatum non optulisse eum se debitae poenae, sed maiori et quam inminere sibi ab pietate et severitate iudicantium intellegebant subtraxsisse; itaque his poenis, quas a semet ipso exegisset, adicere: ne quis luctus mortis eius causa a feminis quibus eis more maiorum, si hoc senatus consultum factum non esset, lugendus esset, susciperetur; utique statuae et imagines Cnaei Pisonis patris, quae ubique positae essent, tollerentur; recte et ordine facturos, qui quandoque familiae Calpurniae essent, quive eam familiam cognatione adfinitateve contingerent, si dedissent operam, si quis eius gentis aut quis eorum, qui cognatus adfinisve Calpurniae familiae fuisset, mortuos esset, lugendus esset, ne inter reliquas imagines, quibus exequias eorum funerum celebrare solent, imago Cnaei Pisonis patris duceretur neve imaginibus familiae Calpurniae imago eius interponeretur; utique nomen Cnaei Pisonis patris tolleretur ex titulo statuae Germanici Caesaris, quam ei sodales Augustales in campo ad aram Providentiae posuissent; utique bona Cnaei Pisonis patris publicarentur excepto saltu, qui esset in Hillyrico; eum saltum placere Tiberio Caesari Augusto principi nostro, cuius a patre divo Augusto Cnaeo Pisoni patri donatus erat, reddi, cum is idcirco dari eum sibi desiderasset, quod gentes, quarum fines hos saltus contingerent, frequenter de iniuris Cnaei Pisonis patris libertorumque et servorum eius questae essent, atque ob id providendum putaret, ne postea iure meritoque soci populi Romani queri possent; item senatum, memorem clementiae suae iustitiaeque atque animi magnitudinis, quas virtutes quom a maioribus suis accepisset, tum praecipue ab divo Augusto et Tiberio Caesare Augusto principibus suis didicisset, ex bonis Cnaei Pisonis patris publicatis aequom humanumque censere, filio eius Pisoni maiori, de quo nihil esset dictum, qui principis nostri quaestor fuisset, quem Germanicus quoque liberalitate sua honorasset, qui complura modestiae suae posuisset pignora, ex quibus sperari posset, dissimillumum eum patri suo futurum, donari nomine principis et senatus bonorum partem dimidiam eumque, cum tanto benificio obligaretur, recte atque ordine facturum, si praenomen patris mutasset; Marco etiam Pisoni, quoi inpunitatem senatus humanitati et moderationi principis sui adsensus dandam esset arbitraretur, quo facilius inviolatum senatus benificium ad eum perveniret, alteram partem dimidiam bonorum paternorum dari, ita ut ex omnibus bonis, quae decreto senatus publicata et concessa iis essent, nummum decies centena milia dotis nomine Calpurniae Cnaei Pisonis filiae, item peculi nomine nummum quadragies centena milia daretur. item placere, uti Cnaeus Piso pater supra portam Fontinalem quae inaedificasset iungendarum domum privatarum causa, ea curatores locorum publicorum iudicandorum tollenda dimolienda curarent. Quod ad Plancinae causam pertineret, quoi pluruma et gravissuma crimina obiecta essent, quoniam confiteretur se omnem spem in misericordiam principis nostri et senatus habere, et saepe princeps noster accurateque ab eo ordine petierit, ut contentus senatus Cnaei Pisonis patris poena uxori eius sic uti Marci filio parceret, et pro Plancina rogatu matris suae deprecatus sit et, quam ob rem ea mater sua inpetrari vellet, iustissumas ab ea causas sibi expositas acceperit, senatum arbitrari et Iuliae Augustae, optume de re publica meritae non partu tantum modo principis nostri, sed etiam multis magnisque erga cuiusque ordinis homines beneficis, quae, cum iure meritoque plurumum posse in eo, quod a senatu peteret, deberet, parcissume uteretur eo, et principis nostri summae erga matrem suam pietati suffragandum indulgendumque esse remittique poenam Plancinae placere. Visellio Karo et Sempronio Basso comitibus Cnaei Pisonis patris et omnium malificiorum socis ac ministris, aqua et igne interdici oportere ab eo praetore, qui legem maiestatis quaereret, bonaque eorum ab praetoribus, qui aerario praeessent, venire et in aerarium redigi placere. item cum iudicaret senatus omnium parentium pietatem antecessisse Tiberium Caesarem Augustum principem nostrum tanti et tam aequalis doloris eius indicis totiens conspectis, quibus etiam senatus vehementer motus sit, magnopere rogare et petere, ut omnem curam, quam in duos quondam filios suos partitus erat, ad eum, quem haberet, converteret, sperareque senatum eum, qui supersit, tanto maiori curae dis immortalibus fore, quanto magis intellegerent, omnem spem futuram paternae pro re publica stationis in uno repositam, quo nomine debere eum finire dolorem ac restituere patriae suae non tantum animum, sed etiam voltum, qui publicae felicitati conveniret; item senatum laudare magnopere Iuliae Augustae Drusique Caesaris moderationem imitantium principis nostri iustitiam, quos animadverteret hunc ordinem non maiorem pietatem in Germanicum quam aequitatem in servandis integris iudicis suis, donec de causa Cnaei Pisonis patris cognosceretur, praestitisse; ceterorum quoque contingentium Germanicum Caesarem necessitudine magnopere probare: Agrippinae, quam senatui memoriam divi Augusti, quoi fuisset probatissuma, et viri Germanici, cum quo unica concordia vixsisset, et tot pignora edita partu felicissumo eorum, qui superessent, commendare; itemque Antoniae Germanici Caesaris matris, quae unum matrimonium Drusi Germanici patris experta sanctitate morum dignam se divo Augusto tam arta propinquitate exhibuerit; et Liviae sororis Germanici Caesaris, de qua optume et avia sua et socer idemque patruos, princeps noster, iudicaret, quorum iudicis, etiam si non contingerent domum eorum, merito gloriari posset, nedum tam coniunctis necessitudinibus inligata femina: quarum aeque et dolorem fidelissumum et in dolore moderationem senatum probare; item quod filiorum Germanici puerilis et praecipue in Neronem Caesarem iam etiam iuvenis dolor amisso patre tali itemque Tiberi Germanici fratris Tiberi Germanici Caesaris non excesserit modum probabilem, iudicare senatum referendum quidem esse acceptum maxume discipulinae avi eorum et patrui et Iuliae Augustae, sed tamen ipsorum quoque nomine laudandum existumaret; item equestris ordinis curam et industriam unice senatui probari, quod fideliter intellexsisset, quanta res et quam ad omnium salutem pietatemque pertinens ageretur, et quod frequentibus adclamationibus adfectum animi sui et dolorem de principis nostri filique eius iniuris ac pro rei publicae utilitate testatus sit; plebem quoque laudare senatum, quod cum equestre ordine consenserit pietatemque suam erga principem nostrum memoriamque fili eius significaverit, et cum effusissumis studis ad repraesentandam poenam Cnaei Pisonis patris ab semet ipsa accensa esset, regi tamen exemplo equestris ordinis a principe nostro se passa sit; item senatum probare eorum militum fidem, quorum animi frustra sollicitati essent scelere Cnaei Pisonis patris, omnesque, qui sub auspicis et imperio principis nostri milites essent, quam fidem pietatemque domui Augustae praestarent, eam sperare perpetuo praestaturos, cum scirent salutem imperi nostri in eius domus custodia positam esset: senatum arbitrari eorum curae atque offici esse, ut aput eos ii, qui quandoque eis praessent, plurumum auctoritatis haberent, qui fidelissuma pietate salutare huic urbi imperioque populi Romani nomen Caesarum coluissent. Et quo facilius totius actae rei ordo posterorum memoriae tradi posset atque hi scirent, quid et de singulari moderatione Germanici Caesaris et de sceleribus Cnaei Pisonis patris senatus iudicasset, placere uti oratio, quam recitasset princeps noster, itemque haec senatus consulta in haere incisa, quo loco Tiberio Caesari Augusto videretur, ponerentur, item hoc senatus consultum in cuiusque provinciae celeberrumae urbe eiusque in urbis ipsius celeberrimo loco in aere incisum figeretur, itemque hoc senatus consultum in hibernis cuiusque legionis at signa figeretur. Censuerunt. In senatu fuerunt CCCI. Hoc senatus consultum factum est per relationem solum. Tiberius Caesar Augustus tribunicia potestate XXII manu mea scripsi: velle me hoc senatus consultum, quod est factum IIII idus Decembres Cotta et Messalla consulibus referente me scriptum manu Auli quaestoris mei in tabellis XIIII, referri in tabulas publicas.

Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre — translation

Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre — commentary

The large-letter heading — “Decree of the Senate concerning the elder Cn. Piso, put up for view when N. Vibius Serenus was proconsul” — stands only on Copy A, in letters 4–4.5 cm tall against a body text of c. 5 mm. It is not part of the decree the Senate passed. An inscribed senatus consultum normally began straight away with the prescript; this descriptive title was added in the course of provincial publication — by the community of Irni, or by the proconsul — which is why Copy B, from another town, has none. (Cooley 2023, 35, 49–50, 143; Eck et al. 1996, 7, 126; Lott 2012, 257–258; Damon & Takács 1999, 2)

The heading is precious all the same. It supplies the document’s modern name. And it corrects history: the proconsul long read as “C. Vibius Serenus” is here shown to be N(umerius) — a rare praenomen a copyist of Tacitus had silently normalised away. Cooley, following Genette, reads the heading as paratext: framing matter that shapes how a reader meets the text, and that here betrays the layered process — Senate, archive, dispatch, governor’s edict, local engraver — by which a decree of Rome became a bronze plaque in a Spanish town. (Cooley 2023, 47–48, 144; Eck et al. 1996, 102; Lott 2012, 257)

— the Senate gives thanks first to the immortal gods, then to Tiberius. Lebek 1999 documents this as a Tiberian-era innovation; it does not appear in the Bacchanalibus, but becomes a fixture of the Imperial SC genre and is preserved verbatim in Tacitus's compressed account (

"An examination of the senatus consulta from the age of Augustus onward shows that a number of changes had been made in the scheme presented above. 1. The name of the magistrate who convened the senate is omitted. 2. The formula of transition is extended to

The praescriptio follows the fixed form of a senatus consultum: date, place, and the senators “present at the writing” (scribendo adfuerunt). The meeting fell on 10 December AD 20, in the portico beside the Temple of Apollo on the Palatine — a regular Senate venue, and one already hung with the earlier decrees honouring Germanicus. The setting is not neutral: the house condemned Piso in a room that commemorated his victim. (Cooley 2023, 50–51, 144–145, 146; Eck et al. 1996, 38; Lott 2012, 258, 259)

The seven named men are not witnesses in a casual sense. They are the editorial board that drafted the written text. Because Senate business was oral, the decree had to be composed after the meeting; seven was the normal size of the drafting committee in the early empire, and it always included the two urban quaestors — here Asprenas and Vinicius — who guaranteed that the draft matched the copy filed in the archive. The names are given in full, with voting tribe, in order of rank. (Cooley 2023, 145, 148–149; Eck et al. 1996, 38; Lott 2012, 32, 258, 260)

One name repays attention. The board is headed by M. Valerius Messallinus — the senior consular whose sententia Tacitus reports (Ann. 3.18). A decree never names the proposer of a motion; Messallinus appears here only because, having moved the praise of the imperial family, he then sat on the committee that wrote it up. The detail is a quiet reminder that the bronze is a drafted text, and that the men who shaped its wording are hidden inside its protocol. (Cooley 2023, 147; Eck et al. 1996, 38, 101; Lebek 1999, 184; Lott 2012, 260)

The relatio is the heart of Senate procedure: the presiding officer states the business and frames the questions. Here the presiding officer is the emperor. Tiberius is named with his full nomenclature — the decree’s only instance — and acts by virtue of his tribunician power, here in its 22nd year, the fact that dates the document to AD 20. (Cooley 2023, 45; Lott 2012, 47, 261)

Tiberius puts four matters to the house: the case of Piso, of his son Marcus, of Plancina, and of the comites Karus and Bassus. The phrasing is studied. The three cases that touch the imperial circle are framed as qualis causa… visa esset — “how the case seemed”, an invitation to an opinion. The fourth, the staff, asks quid… iudicaret senatus — what the Senate would judge. As Richardson saw, the distinction is constitutional, not stylistic: the Senate is asked to opine on the great and to judge the small (see The Senate as a court). (Cooley 2023, 149; Richardson 1997, 514–515; Lott 2012, 261, 262)

The section closes with a transition formula — but an irregular one. Where a decree normally reads d(e) e(a) r(e), “concerning that matter,” the SCPP has d(e) i(is) r(ebus), “concerning these matters,” in the plural. To Eck this helped suggest that the bronze SCPP is a composite — several distinct decrees gathered after the trial into one official summary. Lott is more cautious: the surviving form is that of a single decree. Either way the plural is a thread worth pulling. (Cooley 2023, 154; Eck et al. 1996, 109; Lott 2012, 262, 309, 310)

This is the decree’s true gratiarum actio. The Senate gives thanks first to the immortal gods — for not allowing the “wicked plans” (nefaria consilia) of Piso to disturb the tranquillitas of “the present state of the republic” — and then to Tiberius, for laying all the evidence before the house. The clause tranquillitas praesentis status rei publicae, quo melior optari non potest is pure regime language: the order of things is the best imaginable, and is enjoyed “by the favour of our princeps.” (Cooley 2023, 51, 155; Eck et al. 1996, 38; Lebek 1999, 193; Lott 2012, 263–264)

Note where the real thanks are. Lebek’s demonstration that Tacitus mislabelled the later praise of the imperial family (§IX) as a “thanks… for the avenging of Germanicus” turns on the fact that the word “thanks” occurs here, in §III, and is directed at the gods and at Tiberius — and thanks Tiberius not for vengeance but for the fairness of the trial. (Cooley 2023, 216; Lebek 1999, 193, 194)

That fairness is the section’s theme. The Senate “admires” Tiberius’ aequitas and patientia: although Piso’s crimes were “most manifest” and Piso had already killed himself, Tiberius nonetheless wanted the case fully tried, summoned the sons, urged them to defend their father, and even had the younger son — not yet a senator — brought into the house to speak. The passage advertises due process. A reader alert to the decree’s rhetoric will notice that insisting so hard on the fairness of a trial is itself a way of pre-empting the suspicion that it was not fair. (Cooley 2023, 45; Eck et al. 1996, 38; Lebek 1999, 193; Lott 2012, 264; Potter & Damon 1999, 15)

The indictment is the longest part of the decree, and the most rhetorically charged. It is cast as a finding of fact — the Senate sets out what, after several days of evidence, witnesses “of every order” and the reading of Germanicus’ own letters, it has “deemed.” Across nearly fifty lines Piso is built into a systematic anti-exemplum: every charge is the negative of a virtue the rest of the decree will praise. (Cooley 2023, 18; Lott 2012, 262)

(IV.a) Piso and Germanicus. Germanicus’ “remarkable restraint” (singularis moderatio) is “overborne by the savagery of Piso’s character.” The dying prince is allowed to testify against his own killer (l. 28). Then comes a datum of the first importance: Piso ignored “the majesty of the house of Augustus” — neglecta maiestate domus Augustae (ll. 32–33), the earliest attested occurrence of the phrase. The protection once owed to the state is here owed to the imperial family; the section also spells out the threefold hierarchy of imperium — Tiberius above Germanicus above ordinary proconsuls — that Piso is said to have flouted. (Cooley 2023, 26, 169–170; Champlin 1999, 118; Lott 2012, 263, 266)

(IV.b) Vonones. Bribed by the “great gifts” of the deposed king Vonones, Piso obstructed his removal and let dangerous men intrigue with him, “insofar as it lay in him” stirring war with Armenia and Parthia. (Cooley 2023, 18)

(IV.c) Civil war. The gravest charge. After Germanicus’ death Piso tried to retake Syria by force, and “Roman soldiers were forced to fight Roman soldiers.” His crudelitas unica executed men untried and crucified a Roman centurion — a citizen. He corrupted military discipline: indulging the troops, and paying donatives “in his own name” from the fiscus of the princeps, so that soldiers split into Pisoniani and Caesariani. (Cooley 2023, 12, 17, 55, 67; Champlin 1999, 118, 121; Lott 2012, 323)

(IV.d) Rejoicing. Finally Piso’s response to the death: the accusatory libellus sent to Tiberius; the impious sacrifices, the ships dressed with colours, the reopened temples, the banquets, the tip paid to the messenger — and, above all, the violation of the numen of the deified Augustus. The catalogue is forensic in form and devastating in effect: by its end Piso is not a defeated politician but the enemy of gods, army, and dynasty alike. (Cooley 2023, 18, 26, 190)

The verdict is stated as a paradox. By killing himself Piso “did not subject himself to the punishment he deserved, but withdrew himself from a greater one.” Suicide, the customary device for protecting one’s will and heirs, is recast as a further offence — an escape from justice. So the Senate adds penalties to the death Piso exacted from himself. (Cooley 2023, 191; Lott 2012, 340)

The penalties are a precisely chosen set of memory sanctions. The women of his house may not mourn him. His statues and portrait-masks are to be taken down “wherever displayed.” His imago — the wax ancestral mask carried in family funerals — may never again be carried in a Calpurnian procession nor stand among the Calpurnian masks. His name is to be cut from the inscription on the statue of Germanicus by the Altar of Providentia. His property is confiscated. (Cooley 2023, 88, 192, 193; Champlin 1999, 121; Richardson 1997, 515)

Modern scholarship resists the loose label damnatio memoriae. As H. Flower and Cooley stress, this is not blanket erasure but calibrated dishonour. The sanctions are designed to cut Piso out of two things at once — his own family line, and the domus Augusta he had offended. He is not forgotten: §XI will order his condemnation broadcast across the empire. He is made memorable in exactly one way — as a warning. Even the one exception, the Illyrian saltus withheld from confiscation, is ideological: it reverts to Tiberius, on the stated ground that allied peoples had complained of Piso’s abuses there, so that they “could not rightly complain” again. (Cooley 2023, 15, 83, 93, 94; Richardson 1997, 515)

Having punished the dead man, the decree turns to mercy for the living — and frames the mercy as virtue. The Senate acts “mindful of its own clemency, justice and magnanimity,” virtues it has learned “especially from the deified Augustus and Tiberius.” Clementia is made an inherited, dynastic possession. (Cooley 2023, 83)

The confiscated estate is therefore returned, in halves, to Piso’s two sons. The elder son — who had stayed loyally in Rome as Tiberius’ quaestor, and “about whom nothing had been said” — receives his half on one striking condition: that he change his first name, the praenomen he shared with his father. He duly became Lucius Calpurnius Piso, and reached the consulship in AD 27. The name Gnaeus is itself treated as a contaminated object. (Cooley 2023, 83, 91–92, 95; Champlin 1999, 119, 121; Lebek 1999, 199; Lott 2012, 258)

The younger son, Marcus — who had been in Syria — is granted “impunity” and the other half, on the implicit plea that he had merely obeyed his father. Provision is also made for a woman, Calpurnia: a dowry of one million and a peculium of four million sesterces. Whether she is Piso’s daughter or granddaughter is a genuine crux — Eck argued for granddaughter, Champlin for daughter — and the bundle’s apparatus (toggle it in the text) flags it. Finally, the structures Piso had built over the Fontinal Gate to join his private houses are to be demolished: his physical footprint on the city is pared back, even as his family’s wealth and rank are deliberately preserved. (Cooley 2023, 46, 83, 89–90; Eck et al. 1996, 83, 84–85; Champlin 1999, 119; Lebek 1999, 201)

Plancina faced, the decree concedes, “very many extremely serious charges” (pluruma et gravissuma crimina). She was nonetheless pardoned outright. The section that records this is, by general agreement, the most tortured sentence in the document — a single period folding clause within clause through five levels of subordination. The syntax is not incompetence. It is the visible strain of saying something awkward. (Cooley 2023, 56, 209–210; Champlin 1999, 121; Lebek 1999, 199; Damon & Takács 1999, 8)

For the decree states the reason for the pardon with unusual nakedness. The Senate yields — not to the evidence, but to two people. Tiberius “has often and with marked attention” asked the house to spare his mother’s friend; and he did so “at his mother’s request.” The pardon is granted, in the decree’s own words, to support “the very great devotion of our princeps toward his mother” — and to honour Iulia Augusta herself. (Cooley 2023, 57, 210–211; Lott 2012, 261)

The praise of Livia here is remarkable. She is optime de re publica merita — “most deserving of the republic” — a formula belonging to the language of male public service; her claim rests on having borne the princeps and on “many and great kindnesses to men of every order.” The decree even adds, defensively, that although she could have demanded much she “used her influence most sparingly.” The protest itself reveals the difficulty: everyone could see that a guilty woman had been acquitted because the emperor’s mother wished it. Tacitus would make this acquittal a centrepiece of his portrait of the reign. The bronze, in its strangled syntax, half-concedes the point. (Cooley 2023, 57, 209, 214; Lebek 1999, 199)

Four lines dispose of Piso’s equestrian comites, Visellius Karus and Sempronius Bassus — “partners and agents in all his crimes.” They are to be banned from fire and water by “the praetor who hears cases under the law of treason,” and their property sold to the treasury. (Cooley 2023, 215, 216; Richardson 1997, 515; Lott 2012, 261)

Small as it is, this is the decree’s most important procedural passage. It is the one place where the SCPP stops stating what shall happen and instead instructs a magistrate of the Roman people. As Richardson showed, that shift exposes the constitutional reality: the Senate has decided these men are guilty, but it cannot pronounce the verdict, because it has no standing under the lex. The verdict belongs, de iure, to the praetor’s court — which still exists. So the Senate decides, and the praetor pronounces. The interdiction is the standard treason penalty; the case is decided under the treason law; and yet the old court is left formally intact. (See The Senate as a court.) (Cooley 2023, 215, 216; Richardson 1997, 515, 516–517; Lott 2012, 262)

One further fact: Karus and Bassus are the only living persons the SCPP condemns. And they are entirely absent from Tacitus. The imbalance — the great manipulators untouched in the narrative, the two obscure equestrians punished on the bronze — is exactly the irony Tacitus loved; that he does not use it is one of Lebek’s signs that he never read the decree. (Cooley 2023, 214–215; Lebek 1999, 202)

With the verdicts complete, the decree turns to its long sequence of praise for the domus Augusta. Tacitus calls this a “thanks… for the avenging of Germanicus” — and, as Lebek showed, mislabels it twice over: the word “thanks” does not occur here, and vengeance is precisely what the passage does not demand. The Senate speaks throughout as a judging body — its verbs are iudicare, laudare, probare, commendare — and what it praises is restraint. (Cooley 2023, 216; Lebek 1999, 193; Lott 2012, 263)

(IX.a) Tiberius. He has “exceeded the devotion of all parents.” The Senate “earnestly asks” him to end his grief, turn to his one surviving son Drusus all the care he had divided between two, and restore to the state “not only a frame of mind but also a countenance” (vultus) befitting public happiness. The hope of “the paternal post over the state” now rests “in one man.” The address is half-consolation, half-admonition: the emperor is reminded of a political duty to be seen to be well. (Cooley 2023, 55, 218–219)

(IX.b–c) The women, and Drusus. Iulia Augusta and Drusus are praised for moderatio and for the aequitas of reserving judgement “until the case was tried.” Agrippina, Antonia and the younger Livia are commended for “loyal grief and restraint in grief.” Each is defined by a controlled emotion — the decree builds the imperial family into a corporate exhibit of disciplined virtue. (Cooley 2023, 60, 219–220)

(IX.d) The sons of Germanicus — and Claudius. The children’s grief “did not exceed a commendable limit.” Here the apparatus catches the regime in the act: the words naming Claudius — “Ti. Germanicus, the brother” — sit in the line as a visible, ungrammatical insertion. Tacitus (Ann. 3.18.3) reports that Messallinus’ motion omitted Claudius until Asprenas asked whether the omission was deliberate, “and only then was the name of Claudius added.” The bronze confirms the story — and, because a decree could never have told that story itself, also shows that Tacitus’ narrative of how it happened came from somewhere other than this document. (Cooley 2023, 149; Champlin 1999, 119; Lebek 1999, 187, 188–189, 196–197; Lott 2012, 320, 321)

The decree now praises, in turn, the three constituencies below the senatorial elite — completing a descending address that began with the gods and the emperor and runs down through the imperial family to the equestrians, the plebs, and the soldiers. The SCPP is, among other things, a map of the Tiberian social order, each order assigned its proper relation to the domus Augusta. (Cooley 2023, 60; Lott 2012, 304–307)

The equestrians are praised for their “care and exertions” and their loyal acclamations. The plebs are praised, pointedly, for self-control: though “roused with a wild outpouring of enthusiasm” to lynch Piso themselves, they “allowed themselves… to be governed by our princeps.” Popular fury is acknowledged — and then folded into the ideology of order. (Cooley 2023, 55; Lott 2012, 321, 322)

The soldiers receive the fullest and most revealing treatment. The Senate praises the fides of troops whom Piso’s crime had “solicited in vain,” and “hopes” the army will forever keep its loyalty and pietas to the house of Augustus — “since they knew the safety of our empire had been placed in the custody of that house.” It then goes further, declaring it the soldiers’ “concern and duty” that the most authority should rest with commanders “who with the most loyal devotion had cherished the name of the Caesars.” As Lott observes, this quietly builds an informal obligation: soldiers should give loyalty to commanders who show pietas to the imperial house — and withhold it from men like Piso. The omission is as eloquent as the statement: the troops who did follow Piso, the Pisoniani of §IV, are tactfully left unmentioned and unpunished. (Cooley 2023, 61, 233; Lott 2012, 323)

The publication clause states the decree’s purpose in its own words: that “the sequence of the entire affair could more easily be handed down to the memory of future generations” (posterorum memoriae tradi posset), and that those generations “might know” what the Senate had thought of Germanicus’ restraint and Piso’s crimes. This is a document that openly addresses posterity — and, implicitly, its historians. (Cooley 2023, 234–235; Lebek 1999, 209–210; Lott 2012, 308; Potter & Damon 1999, 40–41)

Three things are ordered set up in bronze: Tiberius’ speech together with “these decrees” (haec senatus consulta, plural again — see §II) at Rome, wherever Tiberius chooses; this decree in the most frequented place of the most frequented city of every province; and this decree at the standards in the winter camp of every legion. (Cooley 2023, 234, 235; Lott 2012, 308, 309)

This is what makes the SCPP exceptional. Permanent bronze publication was rare, costly and deliberate — not a routine of “open government,” which the Romans did not value, but a commemorative and ideological act. No other senatus consultum is known to have ordered empire-wide display. The choice of the legions as a target audience is the decisive tell: Piso’s crime had been the corruption of soldiers’ loyalty, and the decree is posted “at the standards” — the sacral centre of the camp — to teach the army its lesson. There is also a sharp irony, which Lebek noted: Tacitus reports Tiberius saying that “the family’s griefs should be veiled” — yet this clause orders the maximum possible publicity. Had Tacitus read it, he could not have let the emperor’s remark stand unchallenged. (Cooley 2023, 49, 58, 237; Eck et al. 1996, 255, 280; Lebek 1999, 201; Lott 2012, 33, 34, 310)

Two short lines record the vote: Censuerunt — “they decreed” — and the attendance, “in the Senate were 301.” The number is worth a pause. The Tiberian Senate numbered roughly six hundred; a quorum was around two hundred. Just over half the house attended the session that closed the gravest political trial of the reign. The bronze, which elsewhere works hard to project consensus, here records, flatly, a thin room. (Cooley 2023, 53, 237–238; Champlin 1999, 122; Lebek 1999, 184; Lott 2012, 310)

The final clause — hoc senatus consultum factum est per relationem solum — is among the decree’s most debated. It states that the decree was passed “on the motion alone” / “by a single relatio”: an archival notation about how the measure carried. To some it is further evidence of the composite character of the SCPP; to others a routine procedural note. Its presence is a reminder that the bronze preserves not only the Senate’s words but the bookkeeping of its procedure. (Cooley 2023, 154, 238–239; Lott 2012, 310; Damon & Takács 1999, 6)

The decree ends in the emperor’s own voice. After 173 lines of the Senate’s impersonal third person, the bronze shifts abruptly to the first person singular: Ti. Caesar Augustus… manu mea scripsi — “I, Tiberius Caesar Augustus… have written in my own hand.” Tiberius states his wish that the decree — passed on his motion, copied out by his quaestor Aulus on fourteen tablets — be entered into the public archives. (Cooley 2023, 239, 240; Eck et al. 1996, 103; Lott 2012, 311; Potter & Damon 1999, 41)

No other surviving senatus consultum carries anything like it. As relator, Tiberius had the right to certify that the archived text was correct; the subscriptio is, in form, that certification. But its effect goes further. Cooley, reading the decree through Genette’s idea of paratext, argues that this closing note — like the heading and the protocol that frame the document — “throws doubt upon the integrity of the Senate’s central message.” For 173 lines the decree presents the free judgement of the Senate of Rome. Then the princeps signs it, in his own hand, and files it. The frame quietly reveals where authority lay. It is a fitting close to a document that is, throughout, the official version of events — and knows it. (Cooley 2023, 48, 53, 239; Lott 2012, 311)

Critical apparatus Titulus … proco(n)s(ule) — Heading present in Copy A only; Copy B omits it ("omisit B", Potter & Damon). The abbreviation *proco(n)s(ule)* may also be expanded *pro co(n)s(uli)* (dative), as suggested by A. M. Canto, *Hispania Epigraphica* 6 (1996) no. 881, p. 307. quae — Copy A engraves *quae* (A1); Copy B engraves *qua* = *qua‹e›* (B1). New paragraph marked in both copies by shifting the line to the left. Valerius — Copy A engraves *Valerius* (A2); Copy B abbreviates *Valer(ius)* (B2). Messallinus — Copy A engraves *Messallinus* (A2); Copy B engraves *Messalinus* = *Messal‹l›inus* (B2). Pompeius — Copy A engraves *Pompeius* (A3); Copy B abbreviates *Pomp(eius)* (B3). f(ilius) — Copy A writes *f(ilius)* (A3); Copy B writes the single letter *E* (B3) = *‹f›(ilius)*. Teret(ina tribu) — Copy A abbreviates *Teret(ina)* (A3); Copy B abbreviates *Ter(etina tribu)* (B3). Asprenas — Copy A engraves *Asprenas* (A4); Copy B engraves *A‹sp›re[nas]* (B3), following CIL II rather than the *ARN* with underdotted N read by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 23 (Cooley). Vinicius — So Copy B (*Vinicius*, B4); Copy A engraves *Vinucius* (A4). Caesar divi Aug(usti) f(ilius) — Copy A engraves *Ti Caesar divi Aug f* (A4); Copy B omits *divi*, engraving *Ti Caesar Aug f* = *Caesar ‹divi› Aug(usti) f(ilius)* (B4). tribunicia potestate — Copy A writes out *tribunicia potestate* (A5); Copy B abbreviates *tribunic(ia) potest(ate)* (B4). maxumus — *maxumus* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *maximus*). Cn(aei) Pisonis patris — Copy A engraves *Cn Pisonis patris visa* (A6); Copy B omits *patris*, engraving *Cn Pisonis visa* = *Cn(aei) Pisonis ‹patris› visa* (B5). relationi — So Copy B (*relationi*, B6); Copy A engraves *rellationi* = *rel{l}ationi* (A7). ⟨et⟩ qualis causa Plancinae — *⟨et⟩* is a necessary supplement supplied by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 57, to both Copy A (A8) and Copy B (B7); omitted by both copies. visa esset — Copy A engraves *visa esset* (A9); Copy B engraves *visa e‹s›set* with a blank space where the first S should stand (B7). exposuisset — Copy A engraves *exposuisset* (A10) — clearly visible, contra Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 11, who erroneously report *exposuiset* (single s); Copy B preserves only *[ex]posuisset* (B8). senatum populumq(ue) Romanum — Copy A engraves *senatum populumq Romanum* (A12); Copy B engraves *senatus populusq R* = *senatu‹m› populu‹m›q(ue)* (B9). New paragraph marked in Copy A by a taller S shifted to the left. nefaris consilis — *nefaris* and *consilis* are Copy A's spellings (= *nefariis*, *consiliis*). pote‹st e›t — Copy A engraves *pote ut* (A14); Copy B engraves *pote ut* (B10–11). The reading text follows the emendation *non pote‹st e›t* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, pp. 57–58; Griffin); Hinz and Lebek would retain an archaic form (*pote ‹et›* or *pote‹s›t*). optari — Copy A engraves *optari* (A14); Copy B omits the word, *‹optari›* (B10). quo beneficio — Copy A engraves *quo beneficio* (A14); Copy B engraves *quod benificio* = *quo{d} ben‹e›ficio* (B11). turbar‹i› — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *turbare* (A15, B11) — an error shared by both copies; emended to *turbar‹i›* by Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 38). passi non sunt — Copy A engraves *sunt*; Lebek and Salomies suggest correction to *s‹i›nt* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 58). principi suo — Copy A engraves *principi suo* (A15; so Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 38); Copy B engraves *principi nostro* (B12), the reading preferred by González 2002, pp. 360, 382. Ti(berio) Caesari Augusto — Copy A engraves *Caesare* = *Caesar‹i›* (A15); Copy B engraves *Caesari* (B12). necessariae fuerunt — Reading-text wording shared by both copies; no variant of substance. senatui fecerit — Copy A engraves *senatui* (A17); Copy B engraves *senatus* = *senatu‹i›* (B13). admirari senatum — Copy A engraves *admirari senatum* (A18); Copy B engraves *admirari se | senatum* (B13–14), the engraver apparently duplicating *se* after beginning *senatum* and restarting on the next line. cum manufestissuma — Copy A engraves *quod cum manufestissuma* (A18); Copy B engraves *quod manufestissum* = *quod ‹cum› manufestissum‹a› (vacat)* (B14), leaving a blank space where the final A should stand. *manufestissuma* is the archaic spelling (= *manifestissima*). causam eius — Copy A engraves *causam* (A19); Copy B engraves *causa* = *causa‹m›* (B15). filiosque — So Copy B (*filiosque*, B15); Copy A abbreviates *filiosq* (A20). hortatus — Copy A engraves *hortatus* (A20); Copy B engraves *ortatus* = *‹h›ortatus* (B15). defenderent — Copy A engraves *defenderent* (A20); Copy B engraves *defenderet* = *defendere‹n›t* (B16), several Es incompletely engraved (Cooley). qui ordinis senatori nondum esset, ob eam rem introduci — So Copy B (*nondum esset ob eam rem introduci*, B16); Copy A engraves *nondum esse introduci*, omitting *ob eam rem* (A21). The bronze of Copy A is damaged at this point, so the T of *esse[t]* may originally have been engraved. utriq(ue) — Copy A abbreviates *utriq* (A22); Copy B engraves *utrq* = *utr‹i›q(ue)* (B17). M(arco) Pisone — Copy A engraves *Pisone* (A22); Copy B engraves *Pisonim* = *Pison‹e›* (B17). Itaque — So Copy B (*itaque*, B18); Copy A abbreviates *itaq* (A23). New paragraph marked in Copy A by shifting the line to the left. aliquot dies — Copy A engraves *aliquot* (A23); Copy B engraves *aliquod* = *aliquo‹t›* (B18). accusatoribus — So Copy B (*accusatoribus*, B18); Copy A engraves *accussatoribus* = *accus{s}atoribus* (A23). Cn(aeo) Pisone patre — Copy A engraves *Pisone patre* (A24); Copy B omits *patre*, *‹patre›* (B18). exemplaria codicillorum — Copy A engraves *exemplaria* (A24); Copy B engraves *exempularia* = *exemp{u}laria* (B19). For *codicillorum* Copy A engraves *codicilloru‹m›* (final M perhaps with faint traces); Copy B engraves *codiclllorum* = *codic‹i›llorum* (B19). cuiusq(ue) ordinis — Copy A engraves *cuiusq(ue) ordinis* (A25); Copy B engraves *quoiusque ii ordinis* (B20), the two uprights perhaps being LL rather than II, an error caused by the overhanging LLOR of *codicillorum* above. ‹arb›i⟨t⟩rari ⟨senatum⟩ — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *admirari* (A26, B20). The reading text follows the emendation *arbitrari* with *⟨senatum⟩* supplied: Jones and Lebek print *‹arb›i⟨t⟩rari ⟨senatum⟩*, Eck prints *⟨senatum⟩ ‹arb›i⟨t⟩rari*; CIL II² 900 prints *⟨senatum?⟩ ‹arbit›rari*; Reeve proposes *⟨senatui⟩ ‹app›ar‹ere›*; González 2002, pp. 360, 384, and Gil 1999, p. 218, retain *admirari*. evictam esse — Copy A engraves *evic-|tam* (A26–27); Copy B engraves *evicta* = *evicta‹m›* (B21). cuius mortis — Copy A engraves *cuius* (A28); Copy B engraves *quoius* (B22). caussam Cn(aeum) Pisonem — Copy A engraves *caussam Cn Pisonem* (A28), confirmed after the recovery of the lines 25–29 fragment (Gradel 2014); the earlier *editio princeps* read *c[ausam Cn]* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 12). Copy B engraves *caussam Cn Pisonem* (B22). *caussam* is the archaic spelling (= *causam*). renuntiasse — Copy A engraves *renuntiasse* (A29); the letters are damaged and only partially legible (Cooley). componendum — So Copy B (*componendum*, B25); Copy A engraves *conponendum* (A31), the archaic assimilated spelling. neclecta — *neclecta* is Copy A's spelling (= *neglecta*); González 2002, p. 384, would print *ne‹g›lecta*. Copy B engraves *neclecta (vacat) maiestate{m}* (B26). neclecto — *neclecto* is Copy A's spelling (= *neglecto*); González 2002, p. 384, would print *ne‹g›lecto*. maiestate — Copy A engraves *maiestate* (A33); Copy B engraves *maiestatem* = *maiestate{m}* (B26). quod adle‹c›t(us) pro co(n)s(ule) — Copy A engraves *quo adleg pro cos* (A33); Copy B engraves *quod adlegt (vacat) pro cos* (B27), the T having an additional lower stroke like a crossbar-less E. The reading text prints *quo‹d› adle‹c›t(us) pro co(n)s(ule)*. Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 40 n. 41, argue the two instances of *pro co(n)s(ule)* should be understood as datives; Caballos, Eck & Fernández 1996, p. 123, and González 2002, p. 385, print *pro co(n)s(uli) … ei proco(n)s(uli)*. quamcumq(ue) provinciam — Copy A engraves *quamcumq(ue) provinciam* (A34); Copy B engraves *qua‹mcum›q(ue) [—3?—] provinciam* (B27–28). maius ei imperium — Copy A engraves *maius ei imperium* (A34–35); Copy B engraves *minus ei imperium* = *m‹ai›us ei imperium* (B28). quam ei — Copy A engraves *quam ei* (A35); Copy B engraves *quam sibi* = *quam ‹ei›* (B28). proco(n)s(ule) — Both copies engrave *procos* (A35, B28); Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 40, expand *proco(n)s(ule)*, González 2002, p. 385, *proco(n)s(ul)*. maius imperium — Copy A engraves *maius* (A35); Copy B engraves *minus* = *m‹ai›us* (B29). Ti(berio) Caesari Aug(usto) — Copy A engraves *Ti Caesari quam* (A36), omitting *Augusto*; Copy B engraves *Ti Cae‹s›are Aug quam* (B29), with a blank space for the missing S in CAE␣ARE and *Caesare* = *Caesar‹i›*. Germanico Caesari — Copy A engraves *Germ Caesar* (A36); Copy B engraves *Germanico Caesari* (B29). potestatis omnia esse deberent — Copy A engraves *potestatis omnia | esse* (A36–37); Copy B engraves *potestatis esse* = *potestatis ‹omnia› esse* (B30). cum in provincia Syria fuerit — Copy A engraves *cum in provincia Syria fuerit* (A37) — *fuerit* in their reconstructed text, though Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 59, prefer *fuit*; Copy B engraves *in provincia‹m› Syria‹m› fuerit* = *‹cum› in provinciam Syriam fuerit* (B30), omitting *cum*. gesserit — Copy A engraves *cesserit* = *‹g›esserit* (A37); Copy B engraves *gesserit* (B30). bellum cum Armeniacum ‹tum› Parthicum — Copy A engraves *bellum cum Armeniacum et Parthicum* (A37–38); Copy B engraves *[bell]um Armeniacum et Part‹h›icum* (B31), without *cum*. The reading-text *‹tum›* for the second conjunction is Lebek's emendation (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 59; Gil 1999, p. 218); Eck deletes *cum* and prints *bellum {cum} Armeniacum et Parthicum* (so Cooley); González 2002, p. 361, supplies *‹ut› bellum {cum} Armeniacum*. in ipso fuit — Copy A engraves *i[p]so* (A38), the bronze slightly damaged. Parthicum — Copy A engraves *Parthicum* (A38); Copy B engraves *Particum* = *Part‹h›icum* (B31). epistulisq(ue) — Copy A engraves *epistuli[s]q(ue)* (A39), the S supplied; *epistulisq(ue)* is editorially restored. Germanici Caesaris — Copy A abbreviates *Germ Caesar* = *Germ(anici) Caesar(is)* (A39); Copy B engraves *Germanici Caesaris* (B32). Parthorum — Copy A engraves *Pahrtorum* (A40); Copy B engraves *Partorum* = *Part(h)orum* (B33). Emended to *Parthorum* by Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 40). Copy E (frag.) overlaps lines 39–42. quod — Copy A engraves *quod* (A41), beginning of column 2; Copy B engraves *qu‹od›* (B33), the engraver running out of space at line-end. Copy E (frag.) overlaps lines 39–42. in Armenia — Copy A engraves *Armenia* (A42); Copy B engraves *Armenia{m}* (B35). Copy E (frag.) overlaps lines 39–42. Vonone‹s› — Copy A engraves *Vonone* = *Vonone‹s›* (A43); Copy B engraves *Vonone‹s›* (B35). *Vonones* (nom. subject of *occuparet*) restored by Eck. occiso vel expulso — Copy A engraves *occiso vel expulso* (A43); Copy B engraves *ociso vel inpulso* = *oc‹c›iso vel ‹ex›pulso* (B35). senatusq(ue) ei genti regem dedisset — Copy A engraves *senatusq(ue) ei genti regem dedisset* (A44); Copy B engraves *senatus‹q(ue)› regem ei genti dedisset* (B36), with a different word order. ⟨eam⟩ occuparet — The direct object of *occuparet* is omitted by both Copy A and Copy B (A44, B36). *⟨eam⟩* is supplied by Reeve; *⟨eam⟩* or *⟨regnum⟩* proposed by Reeve, Heinrichs and Jones (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 59; Gil 1999, p. 218). corruptus — Copy A engraves *corruptus* (A45); Copy B engraves *corruptis* = *corrupt‹u›s* (B37). bellum etiam civile — Copy A engraves *bellum etiam civilem* = *bellum etiam civile{m}* (A45); Copy B engraves *bellum etiam civile* (B37). numine divi Aug(usti) — Copy A engraves *numine* (A46); Copy B engraves *numini* = *numin‹e›* (B38). Ti(beri) Caesaris Aug(usti) — Copy A engraves *Caesaris Auc* = *Caesaris Au‹g›* (A46); Copy B engraves *Caesaris Aug* (B38). civilis belli — Copy A engraves *civilis belli* (A47); Copy B engraves *civibus bellis* = *civi‹li›s belli{s}* (B38). provinciam Syriam — Copy A engraves *provinciam Syriam post* (A47); Copy B engraves *provinciam post* = *provinciam ‹Syriam› post* (B39). pessumo et animo et exemplo — *pessumo* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *pessimo*); reading-text wording otherwise shared by both copies. milites Romani inter se concurrere coacti sunt — Copy A engraves *milites R inter se concurrere coacti sint* (A49); Copy B engraves *militem Romani inter se concucurre conati sunt* = *milite‹s› Romani inter se con{cu}curre‹re› co‹ac›ti s‹i›nt* (B40). The reading-text *coacti sunt* is Damon's correction (Potter & Damon 1999, p. 20); Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 60, print *coacti s‹i›nt* (so Copy A); Copy B's verb is *conati sunt*. crudelitate unica — Copy A engraves *crudelitate* (A50); Copy B engraves *crudelitate{m}* (B41). incognita causa — Copy A engraves *causa* (A50); Copy B engraves *caussa* (B41). sine consili sententia plurimos — Copy A engraves *sententia plurimos* (A50); Copy B engraves *sententia‹m› plurumos* = *sententia{m} plurumos* (B41). *consili* is Copy A's spelling (= *consilii*). tantummodo — Copy A engraves *tantumodo* = *tantum‹m›odo* (A51); Copy B engraves *tantummodo* (B42). fixsisset — *fixsisset* is Copy A's spelling (= *fixisset*); so engraved A52. Copy B preserves only *fixi-|[sset]* (B42–43). militarem disciplinam — Copy A engraves *discipulinam a divo* (A52); Copy B engraves *disciplinam ab divo* (B43). *discipulinam* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *disciplinam*). a Ti(berio) Caesare Aug(usto) — Copy A engraves *a Ti Caesar* = *a Ti(berio) Caesar(e)* (A53); Copy B engraves *ab Ti Caesare* (B43). indulgendo militibus, ⟨ne⟩ — *⟨ne⟩* supplied by Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 60); omitted by Copy A at line-end (A53–54) although blank space was available; Copy B preserves *militibus ‹ne h›is* (B44). his, qui ipsis praesunt — Copy A engraves *is* = *‹h›is* (A54); Copy B engraves *his* (B44). *more vetustissumo* is Copy A's archaic spelling of *vetustissimo*. parerent — Copy A engraves *pareret* = *parere‹n›t* (A54); Copy B engraves *parerent* (B44). quo facto — Copy A engraves *facto* (A55); Copy B engraves *facti* = *fact‹o›* (B45). honorando etiam eos, qui — Copy A engraves *eos qui* (A56); Copy B engraves *eo qui* = *eo‹s› qui* (B46). post talis nominis — Copy A engraves *post talis* (A56); Copy B engraves *post alis* = *post ‹t›alis* (B46). paruisse⟨n⟩t — Copy A engraves *paruisset ut qui* = *paruisse‹n›t {ut} qui* (A57); Copy B engraves *paruisset qui* = *paruisse‹n›t qui* (B47). Emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 60. cuius interitum — Copy A engraves *cuius* (A57); Copy B engraves *quoius* (B47). interitum non p(opulus) R(omanus) — Copy A engraves *interitum non p R* (A57–58); Copy B engraves *interiium p R* = *interi‹t›um ‹non› p R* (B47), the second T lacking its crossbar, *non* omitted. luxserunt — *luxserunt* is Copy A's spelling (= *luxerunt*); but Copy A actually engraves *luxerint* (A58) — the reading-text follows Copy B's *luxserunt* (B48; Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 60). patri optumo — *optumo* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *optimo*). indulgentissumo … ausus sit — Copy A engraves *ausus est* (A59); Copy B engraves *ausus sit* (B49); reading-text follows B. *indulgentissumo* is Copy A's archaic spelling. debebantur — Copy A engraves *debebatur* = *debeba‹n›tur* (A60); Copy B engraves *[debe]bantur* (B50). mortem odia non patitur procedere — Copy A engraves *mortem odia non patitur* (A61); Copy B engraves *mortem non patiuntur* = *‹odia› non pati{un}tur* (B50). his argumentis senatui apparuerit — Copy A engraves *his argumentis senatui apparuerit* (A62); Copy B engraves *is argumentis senatus apparaverit* = *‹h›is argumentis senatu‹i› appar{a}uerit* (B51). naves, quibus vehebatur, ornatae sint — Copy A engraves *vehebatur ornatae sint* (A63); Copy B engraves *vehebantur sint* = *veheba{n}tur ‹ornatae› sint* (B52). recluserit — Copy A engraves *reclu-|serit* (A63–64); Copy B engraves *recluserunt* = *recluser‹i›t* (B52). totius imperi Romani — Copy A engraves *imperi R* = *imperi R(omani)* (A64); Copy B engraves *imperii Romani* = *imperi{i} Romani* (B53). *imperi* is Copy A's spelling (= *imperii*); *constantissuma* is Copy A's archaic spelling. eiusdemque habitus animi — Copy A originally omitted *que habitus*, then squeezed the letters in between lines 64–65 above *eiusdem animi* (A65); Copy B engraves *e‹iu›sdemq(ue)* (B53). quod ⟨eum⟩ dedisse congiarium — Copy A engraves *quod dedisset* (A65); Copy B engraves *quod dedisse* = *quod dedisse‹t›* (B54). The reading-text *quod ⟨eum⟩ dedisse* is the emendation of Jones and Lebek (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 60; González 2002, pp. 387–88); Eck retains *quod dedisset*. Germanici Caesaris — Copy A engraves *Germanici* alone = *Germanici ‹Caesaris›* (A66); Copy B engraves *Germanici Caesaris* (B54). probatum sit frequenterq(ue) — Copy A engraves *probatum sit frequenterq(ue)* (A66–67); both copies emended *probatum‹q(ue)› sit frequenter{q(ue)}* by Reeve and Salomies (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 60); González 2002, pp. 387–88, retains *probatum sit frequenterq(ue)* (so Potter & Damon). Eck reads *probatum‹q(ue)›* and *frequenter{q(ue)}*. his ipsis diebus — Copy A engraves *iiis* = *‹h›is* (A67), the H lacking its crossbar; Copy B engraves *iis* (B55). de morte Germanici ei — Copy A engraves *Germanici ei* (A67); Copy B preserves *Germanici e[...]* (B55); Eck supplies *Germanici Caesaris ei* (= *Germanici ‹Caesaris› ei*). aut imaginibus — Copy A engraves *aut imaginibus* (A69), the T lacking its crossbar; Copy B engraves *aut imagines* = *imagin‹ibu›s* (B57). ei r[eddi]tae erant, habeba{n}tur, detracto — Copy A engraves *referrentur habebantur* (A70), garbling the passage; Copy B preserves *referretur ei r[eddi]-|tae erant habeba{n}tur* (B57–58). The reading-text *referre{n}tur, ei r[eddi]tae erant, habeba{n}tur* follows Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 61; for the lacuna *r[....]tae* Eck (p. 186) considers also *r[ecep]tae* and *r[ela]tae*. non optulisse eum se — Copy A engraves *optulissi* (A71), the final E lacking its crossbar; Copy B engraves *optulisse* (B58). New paragraph marked in Copy A by shifting the Q to the left. de[b]itae poenae — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *deditae* = *de‹b›itae* (A71, B59); emended to *de[b]itae* by Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 61). inmin‹e›re — Copy A engraves *in minore* (A72); Copy B engraves *in minorem* (B59). Emended to *inmin‹e›re* by Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 42), who notes the error presumably arose in the shared exemplar from which both copies derive. intellegeba{n}t — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *intellegebant* = *intellegeba{n}t* (A72, B60); emended by Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 42). subtraxsisse — *subtraxsisse* is Copy A's spelling (A73, = *subtraxisse*); Copy B engraves *subtraxisse* (B60). his poenis — Copy A engraves *his* (A73); Copy B engraves *iis* (B60). a feminis quibus {e}is more maiorum — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *eis* = *{e}is* (A74, B61). The reading text deletes the e; Reeve reads *is*; Jones proposes *e‹x› more maiorum*; Gil 1999, p. 218, also reads *e‹x›s*. Copy B abbreviates *more ‹maiorum›* (B61). luctus … causa — Copy A engraves *causa* (A74); Copy B engraves *caussa* (B61). hoc senatus consultum — Copy A engraves *s c* (A74); Copy B writes out *senatus consultum* (B61). familiam cognatione — Copy A engraves *cognationem* = *cognatione{m}* (A77); Copy B engraves *cognatione* (B64). si quis eius gentis — Copy A engraves *gentis* (A78); Copy B engraves *genti* = *genti‹s›* (B64). qui cognatus adfinisve … fuisset — Copy A engraves *cognatus adfinisve … fuisset* (A78–79); Haensch proposes the plurals *cognati adfinesve … fuissent* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 61). mortuos esset, lugendus esset — Copy A engraves *mortuos esset lugen-|dus esset ne* (A79–80); Copy B engraves *mortuos esse ne* = *mortuos esse‹t› ne* (B65). Reeve and Lebek would delete the second *{esset}* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 62); Suerbaum 1999, p. 215, supplies *mortuos esset, ‹et› lugendus esset*. (column division, Copy B) — Column 2 of Copy B begins at B65; a large number of letters is missing from the start of each line down to B76 (Cooley). inter reliquas imagines, ⟨quibus⟩ — Copy A engraves *imagines exequias* (A80); Copy B engraves *imagines ex-|[equias]* (B65–66). The connective is supplied: Eck supplies *⟨quae⟩* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 62); Griffin and Jones supply *⟨quibus⟩* (so Potter & Damon; cf. Potter 1998, p. 440). imaginibus familiae Calpurniae — Copy A engraves *imaginibus familiae Calpurniae* (A81); Copy B engraves *imaginibus Calpurnia* = *imaginibus ‹familiae› Calpurnia‹e›* (B66–67), omitting *familiae* and the final E for want of space. nomen Cn(aei) Pisonis patris — Copy A engraves *nomen on Pisonis patris tolleretur* (A82), the engraver cutting O for the C of *Cn* = *nomen ‹C›n(aei)*; emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 15. Copy B engraves *[uti(que) Cn(aei) Pisonis p]atris nomen* (B67), in a different word order. (Copy C, D overlap) — Copy C (fragment) overlaps Copy A lines 78–82; Copy D (fragment) overlaps lines 81–84. Both are distinct, separately-cast bronze copies. statuae Germanici Caesaris — Copy A engraves *Caesaris* (A83); Copy B engraves *Caesari‹s›* (B67–68), the final S omitted at line-end for want of space. eum saltum placere Ti(berio) Caesari Augusto — Copy A engraves *eum saltum placeret Caesari Augusto* (A85), beginning of column 3, omitting *Ti(berio)* and engraving *placeret*; Copy B engraves *[---]e saltum placere Ti(berio) Caesari Aug(usto)* (B69). The reading-text follows Copy B. Hillyrico — *Hillyrico* is Copy A's spelling (= *Illyrico*). is idcirco dari eum sibi desiderasset — Copy A engraves *pari eum* = *‹d›ari eum* (A87); Copy B engraves *dari eum* (B70). Copy A engraves *desiderasset* (A87); Copy B engraves *desideraset* = *desideras‹s›et* (B70). quod ⟨gentes⟩, quarum fines — Copy A engraves *quod quarum fines hos* (A87), omitting the subject noun; Copy B engraves *quod quarum hos* = *quod ‹quarum fines› hos* (B70). The noun is supplied: Eck supplies *⟨civitates⟩* (or *⟨gentes⟩*); Reeve and Jones prefer *⟨gentes⟩* (so Potter & Damon; Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 62; Gil 1999, p. 218). libertorumq(ue) et servorum — Copy A engraves *servorum* with the final M incompletely cut, like an A lacking its crossbar (A88); Copy B engraves *servorum* (B71). eius questae essent, atq(ue) — Copy A engraves *questae essent atq(ue)* (A89); Copy B engraves *quae sita esset adq(ue)* = *qu{a}es{i}ta‹e› esse‹n›t a‹t›q(ue)* (B71). soci p(opuli) R(omani) queri possent — Copy A engraves *possent* (A90); Copy B preserves *[po]sse‹nt›* (B72). iustitiaeq(ue) ⟨atq(ue)⟩ animi magnitudinis — Copy A engraves *ius-|titiaeq (vacat) animi magnitudinis* (A90–91), leaving a blank between the words; Copy B preserves *iustitiae‹q›ue* (B72–73), the engraver running out of space at line-end. The connective *⟨atq(ue)⟩* before *animi magnitudinis* is supplied by Jones and Lebek; Correa and Ferrary supply *⟨et⟩* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 62). quas virtutes qu‹om› — Copy A engraves *quas virtutes quas a maioribus* (A91), duplicating *quas*; Copy B engraves *virtutes qu[as] ab maioribus* (B73). Jones reads *qu‹om›* (or *qu‹um›*), balancing *tum* in the next clause (followed by Potter & Damon and Lott 2012, pp. 148, 290); Reeve deletes the second *{quas}*; Ferrary and Lebek delete it as well. a maioribus suis — Copy A engraves *a maioribus* (A91); Copy B engraves *ab maioribus* (B73). aequom humanumq(ue) censere — *aequom* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *aequum*). Copy A engraves *humanumq(ue) censere* (A93); Copy B engraves *humanumq(ue) censep* = *cense‹r›[e]* (B74), the R incompletely cut as a P. q(uaestor) fuisset, quem — Copy A engraves *fuisset quem* (A94); Copy B engraves *fuisset et quem* (B75); González 2002, p. 365, prioritises Copy B's reading here. Germanicus ⟨Caesar⟩ … honorasset — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *Germanicus* without *Caesar* (A95, B75); Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 62, note that *Caesar* must have dropped out of the shared exemplar. *modestiae*: Lott 2012, p. 290, corrects an apparent *modest{est}iae*, though its source is unclear (Cooley). complura modestiae suae posuisset pignora — Copy A erroneously repeats a phrase: *pignora {quem Germanicus quoq(ue) liberalitate sua honorasset} ex quibus* (A96–97); Copy B engraves correctly *pignora ex quibus* (B76). dissimillumum eum patri suo — Copy A engraves *dissimillumum* (A97); Copy B engraves *dissimillum* = *dissimillum‹um›* (B76). *dissimillumum* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *dissimillimum*). bonorum partem dimidiam eumq(ue) — Copy A engraves *bonorum partem dimidiam eumq(ue)* (A98); Copy B engraves *[part]em dimidiam bonorum eumq(ue)* (B77), in a different word order. tanto benificio — *benificio* is Copy A's spelling (= *beneficio*). mutasset — Copy A engraves *mutaset* = *mutas‹s›et* (A100); Copy B engraves *mutasset* (B78). M(arco) … Pisoni, qu(o)i inpunitatem senatus — Copy A engraves *qui inpunitatem senatus* (A100); Copy B engraves *qui inpunitate(m) (vacat) senatus* = *qu‹o›i inpunitate‹m› senatus* (B78). *qu(o)i* emended by Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 62); Mackay 2003, p. 348 n. 91, would retain *qui* as equivalent to *cui*. *inpunitatem* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *impunitatem*). dandam esse{t} — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *esset* = *esse{t}* (A101, B79); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 44. pervenire‹t› — Copy A engraves *pervenire* = *pervenire‹t›* (A102); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 44. Copy B does not preserve this passage (*B deest*). n(ummum) ⟨decies centena milia⟩ — The sum (one million sesterces, dowry) is written *n(ummum)* + numeral signs on the bronze; *⟨decies centena milia⟩* is the editorial expansion. Cn(aei) Pisonis filiae — Copy A engraves *Pisonis filiae* (A105); Copy B abbreviates *Pisonis f(iliae)* (B81). peculi nomine n(ummum) ⟨quadragies centena milia⟩ — The sum (four million sesterces, personal property) is written *n(ummum)* + numeral signs on the bronze; *⟨quadragies centena milia⟩* is the editorial expansion. *peculi* is Copy A's spelling (= *peculii*). quae inaedificasset — Copy A engraves *quam* = *qua‹e›* (A106); Copy B engraves *quae* (B82). iungendarum domum privatarum — *domum* (gen. pl. = *domuum*) and reading-text wording shared by both copies. qu(o)i pluruma et gravissuma crimina — Copy A engraves *qui* = *qu‹o›i* (A109); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63; Mackay 2003, p. 348 n. 91, would retain *qui* as equivalent to *cui*. Copy B does not preserve this passage. New paragraph marked in both copies by shifting the Q to the left. *pluruma*, *gravissuma* are Copy A's archaic spellings. misericordia{m} — Copy A engraves *misericordiam* = *misericordia{m}* (A110); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 46. Copy B does not preserve this passage. et saepe princeps noster — Copy A engraves *haberet* = *habere{t}* (A111) for *habere*; Copy B engraves *habere* (B85). uxori ‹e›ius — Copy A engraves *pius* (A112) — the reading is unclear, the first letter not appearing to be P but two superimposed letters, perhaps an incomplete E and D = *‹e›ius*; Copy B preserves *[ei]us* (B86). Emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63. uti M(arci) filio — Copy A engraves *uti M filio* (A113); Copy B abbreviates *uti M f(ilio)* (B86). depreca‹tus sit› — Copy A engraves *suae deprecari se et* (A113); Copy B engraves *sua‹e› deprecasetq[---]* (B86–87) = *suae depreca‹tus› s‹it›q(ue)*. The reading-text *depreca‹tus sit›* is the emendation of Hinz and Jones; Reeve proposes *deprecari se ‹veniam testatus sit›*, Lebek *deprecari se ‹testatus sit›*, Correa *deprecari se ‹dixerit› et* (all in Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63). quam ob rem ea mater sua — Copy A engraves *et mater* (A114) — Eck reads thus, but Cooley notes it looks more like a crossbar-less E followed by P = *‹id›* (so Eck's emendation, Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63); the reading-text *ea* is the emendation of Lebek and Salomies (followed by Potter & Damon 1999, p. 32). Copy B does not preserve this passage. iustissumas ab ea causas sibi — Copy A engraves *iustissumas ab ea causas sibi* (A114); Copy B preserves *[iustis]suma‹s› a‹b› ea sibi causas* (B87), in a different word order, the B of *ab* incompletely cut. *iustissumas* is Copy A's archaic spelling. acceperit — Copy A engraves *acceperit* (A115); Salomies suggests correction to *adiecerit* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63). plurumum posse in eo — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *posse* (A117, B89), governed by *deberet*; Eck emends to *posse‹t›* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63). *plurumum* is Copy A's archaic spelling. a senatu petere‹t› — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *petere* = *petere‹t›* (A118, B89); emended by Jones, Lebek and Salomies (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63; cf. Potter 1998, p. 440; Gil 1999, p. 218). summa⟨e⟩ — Copy A engraves *summa* = *summa⟨e⟩* (A118); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 46. Copy B does not preserve this passage. omnium malificiorum socis ac ministris — Copy A engraves *omnium malificiorum aqua* (A121), omitting *socis ac ministris*; Copy B engraves *malificiorum socis ac minis-|tris aqua* (B91–92). *malificiorum* is Copy A's spelling (= *maleficiorum*); *socis* (= *sociis*). ab eo pr(aetore), qui lege{m} maiestatis — Copy A engraves *qul legem* = *qu‹i› lege{m}* (A122); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 18. Copy B does not preserve this clause. ab pr(aetoribus), qui aerario — Copy A engraves *pr qui* = *pr(aetoribus) qui* (A122); Copy B engraves *pr oui* = *pr(aetoribus) ‹q›ui* (B92), the Q lacking its tail. praeesse‹n›t — Copy A engraves *praesset* = *prae‹e›sse‹n›t* (A123); Copy B engraves *praeesset* = *praeesse‹n›t* (B92). Both emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 63; Mackay 2003, p. 352 n. 97, retains *praeesset* (supplying *pr(aetore)* rather than *pr(aetoribus)* at line 122). cum iudic⟨ar⟩et senatus — Copy A engraves *iudicet* = *iudic‹ar›et* (A123); emended by Jones (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 64). Copy B does not preserve this passage. omnium par⟨en⟩tium pietatem — Copy A engraves *partium* = *par‹en›tium* (A124); emended by Jones and Reeve (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 64); Gil 1999, p. 219, reads *pa{r}t‹r›um*. Copy B preserves *[par]tium* (B93). antecessisse — Copy A engraves *antecessise* = *antecessis‹s›e* (A124); Copy B engraves *antecesse* = *antecess‹iss›e* (B93). Ti(berium) Caesarem Aug(ustum) principem — Copy A engraves *Ti Caesar* = *Ti(berium) Caesar(em)* (A124); Copy B engraves *Ti Caesarem* (B93). Copy A engraves *principem* (A124); Copy B engraves *principim* = *princip‹e›m* (B93). tanti et ‹t›am aequali‹s› dolor‹is› ⟨eius indicis⟩ totiens conspectis — Copy A engraves *tantum et iam aequali dolore totiens conspectis* (A125); Copy B preserves only *t[---]* (B94). The heavily damaged passage is variously restored: *tant‹i› et ‹t›am aequali‹s› dolor‹is eius indicis› totiens conspectis* Eck (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 64, followed by Potter & Damon); *...dolor‹is indiciis›...* Jones; *‹tantis lacrimis civium non patienter› tantum ‹sed› et iam aequali dolore...* Lebek (later *tantum ‹per tempus oculis eius umentibus perpetuo› et iam aequali*, Lebek 1999, pp. 189); *tanto et tam aequali dolore, totiens conspectis ‹et fletibus›* Bodel (in Potter & Damon 1999, p. 32). magnopere rogare et petere — Copy A engraves *magnopere* (A126); Copy B engraves *magnopepe* = *magnope‹r›e* (B94), the R incompletely cut. eum, qui supersit — Copy A engraves *qui supersit* (A128) — the bronze is damaged but the traces look like QVI rather than QVPI (so the diplomatic text of Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 18; Lebek 1999, pp. 189–90; González 2002, p. 367); the composite text of Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 46, prints *qu{p}i [su]persit*. Copy B does not preserve this passage. ‹t›anto maior‹i› curae — Copy A engraves *quanto maiore curae* = *‹t›anto maior‹i› curae* (A128); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 46. Copy B does not preserve this passage. omnem spem futuram — Copy A engraves *futuram* (A129); Lebek 1999, p. 189, would read *futura‹e›*. repos[i]ta(m) — Copy A engraves *repos[i]ta* (A130), the I supplied within a small lacuna and a final M wanting = *repos[i]ta(m)*; supplied by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 46. Copy B does not preserve this passage. voltum — *voltum* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *vultum*); beginning of column 4 in Copy A. Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 18, note Copy A might appear to read VOTTVM, the engraver having cut an extended lower bar on the L and an extended crossbar on the T. senatum laudare magnopere — Copy A engraves *senatum laudare magnopere* (A132); Copy B engraves *senatum magnopere laudare* (B98), in a different word order. animadvertere{t} — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *animadverteret* = *animadvertere{t}* (A134, B99); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 64. hunc ordinem — Copy A engraves *hunc* (A134); Copy B engraves *iiunc* = *‹h›unc* (B99), the H lacking its crossbar. integris iudicis suis — *iudicis* is Copy A's spelling (= *iudiciis*); reading-text wording otherwise shared. Germanicum Caesarem — Copy A abbreviates *Germanic Caesar* = *Germanic(um) Caesar(em)* (A136–37); Copy B engraves *[Germ]anicum Caesarem* (B101). quam senatui memoriam — Copy A engraves *quam senatui memoriam* (A137; so González 2002, p. 368); Salomies would delete the final m, *memoria{m}* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 64); Reeve proposes *probare ‹animum› Agrippinae* (Caballos, Eck & Fernández 1996, p. 119). memoriam divi Aug(usti), qu(o)i fuisset probatissuma — Copy A engraves *qui fuisset probatissum* = *qu‹o›i fuisset probatissum(a)* (A138); Copy B preserves *[prob]atissuma* (B102). Emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 64. Lebek 1999, p. 190, would supply *‹aui› divi Augusti*. *probatissuma* is Copy A's archaic spelling. vixsisset — *vixsisset* is Copy A's spelling (A138, = *vixisset*); reading-text wording shared. commendare — Copy A engraves *comendare* = *com‹m›endare* (A139); Copy B engraves *commendare* (B103). Salomies would read *commendare‹nt›* (with *memoria{m}* at line 137; Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 64); González 2002, p. 368, reads *commendare‹t›*. socer idemq(ue) patruos — Copy A engraves *idem* = *idem‹q›(ue)* (A143); Copy B engraves *idemq(ue)* (B105). *patruos* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *patruus*). iudicaret — Copy A engraves *iudicaret* (A143); Lebek 1999, p. 190, would read the plural *iudicare‹n›t*. contingere{n}t domum eorum — Copy A engraves *contingerent* = *contingere{n}t* (A143–44); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 48. Copy B does not preserve this passage. dolor‹e›m fidelissumum — Copy A engraves *dolorum* = *dolor‹e›m* (A145; so González 2002, p. 368); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 48. Copy B does not preserve this passage. *fidelissumum* is Copy A's archaic spelling. moderatione(m) — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *moderatione* = *moderatione(m)* (A146, B107); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 48. in Nerone{m} Caesare{m} — Copy A and Copy B both engrave the accusatives *in Neronem Caesarem* = *in Nerone{m} Caesare{m}* (A147, B108); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 48. iu⟨v⟩enis — Copy A engraves *iuenis* = *iu‹v›enis* (A147); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 48, who note *iu‹ven(il)›is* is also possible (cf. Lebek 1999, p. 190). Copy B does not preserve this word. itemq(ue) ⟨Ti(beri) Germanici⟩ fratris {Ti(beri)} Germ(anici) Caesar(is) — Copy A engraves *itemq(ue) fratris Ti Germ Caesar* (A148) — the diplomatic text in Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 19, prints FRATRIS with underdotted I, while Caballos, Eck & Fernández 1996, p. 31, prints FRATRES (confirmed by autopsy, so *fratr‹i›s*); Copy B preserves *[---e]xcusserit* (B109). The reading-text *itemq(ue) ⟨Ti(beri) Germanici⟩ fratris {Ti(beri)} Germ(anici) Caesar(is)* is Eck's emendation (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 65); Lebek 1999, p. 190, reads *fratris Ti(beri) Germ(anici) {Caesar}*. exc‹e›sserit — Copy A engraves *excusserit* = *exc‹e›sserit* (A148); Copy B preserves *[e]xcusserit* (B109). Emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 65. discipulinae avi ‹e›orum — Copy A engraves *avi morum* = *avi ‹e›orum* (A149); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, pp. 19, 65. Copy B does not preserve this passage. *discipulinae* is Copy A's archaic spelling (= *disciplinae*). sed tamen ipsorum — Copy A engraves *tamen* (A150); Copy B engraves *tam* = *tam‹en›* (B110). nomin‹e› laudandum existumare{t} — Copy A engraves *nominum laudandum existumaret* (A150–51) = *nomin‹e› laudandum existumare{t}*; emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 65. Copy B preserves only *no[---]* (B110). *existumare* is Copy A's archaic spelling. unic‹e› — Copy A and Copy B both engrave *unici* = *unic‹e›* (A151, B111), the crossbar missing from the E; emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 65. quod fideliter intellexsisset — Copy A engraves *quod* (A152); Copy B engraves *ouod* = *‹q›uod* (B111), the Q lacking its tail. *intellexsisset* is Copy A's spelling (= *intellexisset*). cum equestre ordine — Copy A engraves *equestre* (A155); cf. ILS 2130; Eck emends to *equestr‹i›* (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 65); Potter & Damon retain *equestre*. Copy B does not preserve this passage. New paragraph marked in Copy A by shifting the P to the left. ad repraesentandam poenam — Copy A engraves *repraesentandam poenam* (A157); Copy B engraves *[re] (vacat) praesentandam* = *‹re›praesentandam ‹poenam›* (B115). *effusissumis* (line 157) is Copy A's archaic spelling. se passa sit — Copy A engraves *nostro se passa sit* (A158); Copy B engraves *nostro sit* = *nostro ‹se passa› sit* (B116). (new paragraph) — New paragraph marked in Copy A by shifting the I (*item*) to the left (Cooley). qui sub auspicis et imperio — Copy A engraves *qui sub auspicis* (A160); Copy B engraves *qui auspicis* = *qui ‹sub› auspicis* (B117). *auspicis* is Copy A's spelling (= *auspiciis*). p‹raest›arent — Copy A engraves *parerent* = *p‹raest›arent* (A161); emended by Jones and Lebek (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 66); Bodel reads *par‹a›rent* (Potter & Damon 1999, p. 38). Copy B does not preserve this passage. in eius dom‹u›(s) custodia posita(m) esse{t} — Copy A engraves *in eius domo custodia posita esset* = *in eius dom‹u›‹s› custodia posita(m) esse{t}* (A162–63); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 48. Copy B does not preserve this passage. *imperi* (line 162) is Copy A's spelling (= *imperii*). ut aput eos ii — *aput* is Copy A's spelling (= *apud*); *offici* (= *officii*); reading-text wording otherwise shared. qui quandoq(ue) e‹i›s praessent, plurumum auctoritatis ⟨haberent⟩ — Copy A engraves *et praessent plurumum auctoritatis qui* (A164) = *e‹i›‹s› praessent plurumum auctoritatis ‹haberent› qui*; *e‹i›s* and the supplement *⟨haberent⟩* are by Griffin and Jones (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 66). Copy B does not preserve this passage. *plurumum* is Copy A's archaic spelling. Et quo facilius — Copy A engraves *facelius* = *fac‹i›lius* (A165); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 20. Copy F (fragment) overlaps Copy A lines 165–168. atque hi scire⟨n⟩t — Copy A engraves *atque hi scire* = *atque hi scire‹nt›* (A166); Copy B engraves *ato ii{s} sci-|[rent]* = *at‹q›(ue) ii sci-|[rent]* (B121–22), the Q lacking its tail. Emended by Jones, Lebek and Vollmer (Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 66). Copy F (fragment) overlaps lines 165–168. (Copy F overlap) — Copy F (fragment) overlaps Copy A lines 165–168; reading-text wording of line 167 shared, no variant of substance. in {h}aere incisa — Copy A engraves *in haere* = *in {h}aere* (A169, = *in aere*); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 50. Copy B does not preserve this passage. ponere⟨n⟩tur, item hoc s(enatus) c(onsultum) — Copy A engraves *poneretur item hoc s(enatus) c(onsultum) hic n* (A170); Copy B engraves *poneretur utiq(ue) hoc s(enatus) c(onsultum) in* (B123). The reading-text *ponere‹n›tur item hoc s(enatus) c(onsultum) {hic} in* follows Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 50; González 2002, p. 370, retains *poneretur*. celeberruma{e} — Copy A engraves *celeberrumae* = *celeberruma{e}* (A170); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 50. *celeberruma* is Copy A's archaic spelling. eiusque i⟨n⟩ urbis ipsius — Copy A engraves *i* = *i‹n›* (A171); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 50. in aere incisum figeretur itemq(ue) — Copy A engraves *figere-|tur item hoc* (A171–72); Copy B engraves *[figere]{n}tur itemq(ue)* (B124). The reading-text *figeretur itemq(ue) hoc* follows Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 50. in hibernis cuiusq(ue) legionis at signa — *at signa* is Copy A's spelling (= *ad signa*); reading-text wording shared. Copy B preserves *in hiber-|[---]* (B124). In senatu fuerunt CCCI — The quorum figure (301 senators present) is written as the Roman numeral CCCI on the bronze; reading-text shared. velle me h(oc) s(enatus) c(onsultum) — Copy A engraves *velle mei sc* (A174); the diplomatic text reads VELLE MEI SC. Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, pp. 21, 66, emend the final I of MEI to H and supply OC, printing *velle me ‹h›(oc) s(enatus) c(onsultum)* (or *vellem h(oc)*); Potter & Damon print *velle me h‹oc› s(enatus) c(onsultum)*. New paragraph marked in Copy A by shifting the T to the left. Copy B does not preserve the *subscriptio*. e⟨s⟩t factum — Copy A engraves *et factum* = *e‹s›t factum* (A175); emended by Eck. There is a *vacat* between *Decem(bres)* and *Cotta* on the bronze of Copy A. Copy B preserves *[M]essa‹l›la* (B126) — its final extant reading. pub⟨l⟩icas — Copy A engraves *pubicas* = *pub‹l›icas* (A176); emended by Eck, Caballos & Fernández 1996, p. 21. Copy B does not preserve this passage.

Editions and commentary W. Eck, A. Caballos & F. Fernández, Das senatus consultum de Cn. Pisone patre (Vestigia 48; Munich: Beck, 1996) — the editio princeps; cf. the parallel Spanish edition, Seville 1996. = AE 1996, 885. D. S. Potter (ed.) & C. Damon (trans.), “The Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre,” American Journal of Philology 120 (1999) 13–42 — the Latin text and translation followed here. C. Damon & S. Takács (edd.), The Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre: AJP 120.1 (1999), special issue — introduction and studies. A. E. Cooley, The Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre: Text, Translation, and Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023). E. Champlin, “The First (1996) Edition of the Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre: A Review,” AJP 120 (1999) 117–122. J. S. Richardson, “The Senate, the Courts, and the SC de Cn. Pisone patre,” Classical Quarterly 47 (1997) 510–518. W. D. Lebek, “Das Senatus consultum de Cn. Pisone patre und Tacitus,” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 128 (1999) 183–211. J. G. Lott, Death and Dynasty in Early Imperial Rome: Key Sources, with Text, Translation, and Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). H. Galsterer, “Senatus consultum de Cn. Pisone patre,” Brill’s New Pauly.