k in the
energy of Agrippina. The state finances and the fortune of the
imperial house were reorganized, for Agrippina, like Livia and like all
the ladies of the great Roman nobility, was an excellent administrator,
frugal, and ever watchful of her slaves and freedmen, and careful of
all items of income and expense. The Roman aristocracy, like all other
aristocracies, hated the parvenus, the men of sudden riches,
traffickers who had too quickly become wealthy, and all persons whose
only aim was to amass money. We know that Agrippina sought to prevent
as far as possible the malversations of public funds by which the
powerful freedmen of Claudius had been enriching themselves. After she
became empress we hear accounts of numerous suits instituted against
personages who had been guilty of wasting public treasure, while under
Messalina no such cases were brought forward. We know, furthermore,
that she reestablished the fortune of the imperial family, which in all
probability had been seriously compromised by the reckless expenditures
of Messalina. This is what Tacitus refers to in one of his sentences,
which, as usual, is colored by his malignity: _Cupido auri immensa
obtentum habebat quasi subsidium regno pararetur_ (She sought to enrich
the family under the pretext of providing for the needs of the empire).
What Tacitus calls a "pretext" was, on the contrary, the ancient
aristocratic conception of wealth, which in the eyes of the great
families was destined to be a means of government and an instrument of
power: the family possessed it in order to use it for the benefit of
the state.

In short, Agrippina attempted to revive the aristocratic traditions of
government which had inspired the policies of Augustus and Tiberius.
Not only did she attempt to do this, but, strange as it may seem, she
succeeded almost without a struggle. The government of Agrippina was
from the first a great success. From the moment when she became
empress there is discernible in the entire administration a greater
firmness and consistency of policy. Claudius no longer seems, as
formerly, to be at the mercy of his freedmen and the fleeting impulses
of the moment, and even the dark shadows of the time are lighted up for
some years. A certain concord and tranquillity returned to the
imperial house, to the aristocracy, to the senate, and to the state.
Although Tacitus accuses Agrippina of having made Claudius commit all
sorts of cruelties, i