Abstract
This essay focuses on the literary portrayals of female protagonists and the transgression of boundaries attributed to them in the annals of Cornelius Tacitus. The women portrayed individually – and not as part of nameless masses – turn out to be focal points of Taciteian social criticism. In addition to Roman women of the aristocratic elite such as Messalina, Poppea and Agrippina the Younger, non-Roman actors who become protagonists relevant to Rome in the course of Roman imperialism, such as Cartimandua and Boudicca, are also marked out as opportunists of gender-specific virtues. In this article, the transgression processes of Agrippina the Younger, which take place mainly on the gender level, will be compared with the leader of the British revolt, Boudicca. Are the expected norms and values similar in both cases or are they subject to different evaluation standards? The main focus of interest is on literary tools and the associated evaluation of non-normative actions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
‘This bias is a result of an era of increased anxiety that Roman society experienced during the rise of the Empire’, writes Hébert 2013, 10.
- 5.
To be found for example in relation to Agrippina the Younger: Tac. ann. XII.57.3: nec ille reticet, impotentiam muliebrem nimiasque spes eius arguens. Also, in Tac. ann. I.4.5; III.33.4; IV.57.3; V.1.3.
- 6.
Cf. Dixon 2001, 16–17: ‘[A]ll such references [to women] amount to male-centred fantasies and moral statements of what women should or should not be, whether they are nominally attached to individuals, to fictitious characters or to groups of women. What has been labelled women’s history is largely history of male-female relations or of men’s musings about women, usually in terms of women’s sexual and reproductive roles and with more moralising than observation […].’
- 7.
Foubert 2010, 345.
- 8.
- 9.
Cf. Stepper 2000, 62.
- 10.
Kunst 2007, 253.
- 11.
Tac. Ann. I.1.3.
- 12.
Tac. Ann. XII.1.1; XII.5.3.
- 13.
Tac. Ann. XII.3.1.
- 14.
- 15.
Tac. Ann. XII.7.3: Adductum et quasi virile servitium; palam severitas ac saepius superbia; nihil domi inpudicum, nisi omination expediret; cupido auri inmensa obtentum habebat, quasi subsidium regno pararetur.
- 16.
Cf. Ginsburg 2006, 19–20.
- 17.
On this ambivalence and other apparent contradictions in the Tacitean Annals, see Späth 2000, 128–30.
- 18.
Cf. Späth 2000, 120.
- 19.
Tac. Ann. XII.37.5–6: Atque illi vinclis absoluti Agrippinam quoque […] isdem quibus principem laudibus gratibusque venerati sunt, novum sane et moribus veterum insolitum, feminam signis Romanis praesidere: ipsa semet parti a maioribus suis imperii sociam ferebat.
- 20.
Cf. Santoro L’Hoir 2006, 112–113. For more detail on the origin and use of this topos, also in connection with the stereotype of muliebris impotentia, see ibid., 112–157.
- 21.
Verg. Aen. I.364. Cf. also Santoro L’Hoir 2006, 132.
- 22.
Cf. Späth 2000, 130: ‘Die Fähigkeit zur rationale Beherrschung ihrer Maßlosigkeit beschränkt sich nach dieser Aussage auf ein gleichsam taktisches Mittel zur Erreichung bestimmter Ziele; die impotenta an sich ist damit noch nicht aus der Welt geschafft, denn sie gehört zum Wesen des sexus natura invalidus.’
- 23.
Tac. Ann. XIII.5.
- 24.
Tac. Ann. XII.42.2: Suum quoque fastigium Agrippina extollere altius: carpento Capitolium ingredi, qui honos sacerdotibus et sacris antiquitus concessus venerationem augebat feminae, quam imperatore genitam, sororem eius, qui rerum potitus sit, et coniugem et matrem fuisse unicum ad hunc diem exemplum est.
- 25.
Thomas Wiedemann, for example, makes it clear that Claudius lacked legitimating resources for his rule, which would have been secured by marrying Agrippina as a relative of Augustus. Wiedemann 2002, 51.
- 26.
Tac. Ann. XII.1.1: Caelibis vitae intoleranti et coniugum imperiis obnoxio.
- 27.
Claudius’ lack of determination is found in several places. Strikingly, among others, in Tac. Ann. XII.25.1–2, in which he not only allows himself to be persuaded to place his stepson above his natural son, but repeats the words of the freedman Pallas, who supports Agrippina, to justify this before the Senate.
- 28.
Späth 2000, 125.
- 29.
Späth 2000, 127.
- 30.
Cf. Ginsburg 2006, 20.
- 31.
Cf. Holmes 2010, 161.
- 32.
Cf. Kehne 2004, 26 and 34.
- 33.
Adler 2011, 124–126, incl. note 30.
- 34.
To be understood as ‚Reflexive Zivilisationskritik, an eine römische Öffentlichkeit gerichtet‘, Timpe 2006, 184. Cf. also Syme 1958, 126: ‘Idealization of the savage (like that of the peasant), nourished on the discontents of the urban existence, lent colour and conviction to fancy pictures of primitive virtue and primitive felicity, with inevitable censure, loud or subtle, directed against luxury, complexity, and corruption.’
- 35.
Zernack 1997, 215.
- 36.
Elke Hartmann describes pudicitia as one of the most important female virtues of the Roman Empire, which demanded modesty, restraint of desires and sexual fidelity and was to be observed above all by Roman matrons in order to maintain the orderly polity. Cf. Hartmann 2007, 171.
- 37.
Cf. Braund 1996, 135: ‘The physical abuse of slaves by those of high status usually lay within the bounds of toleration of Roman morality, depending upon cause and context, but the reverse was revolution, the destruction of society itself, and particularly where the high-status victims have behaved with complete propriety.’
- 38.
Here it is the soldiers who again seem to behave almost with muliebris impotentia. Cf. Späth 2012, 444–445: ‘[…] a thirst for booty and a greed for money are topoi hardly ever absent from Tacitus’ references to soldiers. However, this lack of restraint, in contrast to muliebris impotentia, is nowhere accounted for in terms of a soldierly nature.’
- 39.
Tac. Ann. XIV.33.1–2: Si quos imbellis sexus aut fessa aetas vel loci dulcedo attinuerat, ab hoste oppressi sunt. So also in Tac. Ann. XIV.36.1.
- 40.
Tac. ann. XIV.35.1: Boudicca curru filias prae se vehens, ut quamque nationem accesserat, solitum quidem Britannis feminarum ductu bellare testabatur, sed tunc non ut tantis maioribus ortam regnum et opes, verum ut unam e vulgo libertatem amissam, confectum verberibus corpus, contrectatam filiarum pudicitiam ulcisci.
- 41.
Cf. Doblhofer 1994, 52.
- 42.
- 43.
Kunst 2007, 253.
- 44.
- 45.
Tac. Agr. 31.4.
- 46.
Cf. Macdonald 1987, 43.
- 47.
Similarly also in Tac. Agr. 16.1 to find: Boudicca generis regii femina duce (neque enim sexum in imperiis discernunt) sumpsere universi [Britanni] bellum.
- 48.
‘Unwarlike and unarmed, they would immediately give way as soon as they recognized the sword and the valor of those accustomed to victory […]’ Tac. ann. XIV.36.1: imbelles, inermes cessuros statim, ubi ferrum virtutemque vincentium totiens fusi agnovissent.
- 49.
Cf. Shumate 2012, 491.
- 50.
However, it should not go unmentioned that Tacitus not infrequently depicts the physical appearance of protagonists and thereby also uses physiognomic elements. In addition to the typological descriptions of Teutons, protagonists of Roman society are also described with bodily/mental states. Cf. Evans 1969, 48–49.
- 51.
Cass. Dio LXII.2.3–4: […] ἦν δὲ καὶ τὸ σῶμα μεγίστη καὶ τὸ εἶδος βλοσυρωτάτη τό τε βλέμμα δριμυτάτη, [4] καὶ τὸ φθέγμα τραχὺ εἶχε, τήν τε κόμην πλείστην τε καὶ ξανθοτάτην οὖσαν μέχρι τῶν γλουτῶν καθεῖτο, καὶ στρεπτὸν μέγαν χρυσοῦν ἐφόρει, χιτῶνά τε παμποίκιλον ἐνεκεκόλπωτο, καὶ χλαμύδα ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ παχεῖαν ἐνεπεπόρπητο. οὕτω μὲν ἀεὶ ἐνεσκευάζετο: τότε δὲ καὶ λόγχην λαβοῦσα, ὥστε καὶ ἐκ τούτου πάντας ἐκπλήττειν, ἔλεξεν ὧδε.
- 52.
Cf. Günnewig 1998, here in the context of the ancient Germanic image in Plutarch (32–34), who in turn refers to Poseidonius, as well as Caesar, Florus and Appian (45–46).
- 53.
Cf. Shumate 2013, 86: ‘The savage is imagined to live in a state of perfect freedom, construed as freedom from any crippling social constraint that would distort his naturally good character. […] A basic common denominator unifying disparate Noble Savage narratives is the idea that civilisation, by which is meant the writer’s civilisation. Carries within itself the potential to be a debilitating and corrupt force, along with corresponding elevation of ‚nature‘ and the natural, whatever that might mean.’
- 54.
Cass. Dio LXII.3.1; Cass. Dio LXII.3.4–5.
- 55.
Cass. Dio LXII.5.5.
- 56.
Cass. Dio LXII.4.3.
- 57.
Cf. Adler 2011, 150.
- 58.
Cass. Dio LXII.7.2: Δεινοτάτων ἔστιν ὅ τι οὐκ ἐγίνετο. καὶ ὃ δὴ δεινότατον καὶ θηριωδέστατον ἔπραξαν: τὰς γὰρ γυναῖκας τὰς εὐγενεστάτας καὶ εὐπρεπεστάτας γυμνὰς ἐκρέμασαν, καὶ τοὺς τε μαστοὺς αὐτῶν περιέτεμον καὶ τοῖς στόμασί σφων προσέρραπτον, ὅπως ὡς καὶ ἐσθίουσαι αὐτοὺς ὁρῷντο, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο πασσάλοις ὀξέσι διὰ παντὸς ποῦ σώματος.
- 59.
Cf. Macdonald 1987, 45.
- 60.
Cass. Dio LXII.2.2: Βουδουῖκα ἦν, γυνὴ Βρεττανὶς γένους τοῦ βασιλείου, μεῖζον ἢ κατὰ γυναῖκα φρόνημα ἔχουσα.
- 61.
Cass. Dio LXII.6.2–5: Καὶ προσεπικαλοῦμαί σε γυνὴ γυναῖκα, οὐκ Αἰγυπτίων ἀχθοφόρων ἄρχουσα ὡς Νίτωκρις, οὐδ´ Ἀσσυρίων τῶν ἐμπόρων ὡς Σεμίραμις (καὶ γὰρ ταῦτ´ ἤδη παρὰ τῶν Ῥωμαίων μεμαθήκαμεν), οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ Ῥωμαίων αὐτῶν ὡς πρότερον μὲν Μεσσαλῖνα ἔπειτ´ Ἀγριππῖνα νῦν δὲ καὶ Νέρων (ὄνομα μὲν γὰρ ἀνδρὸς ἔχει, ἔργῳ δὲ γυνή ἐστι· σημεῖον δέ, ᾄδει καὶ κιθαρίζει καὶ καλλωπίζεται) […] εἴ γε καὶ ἄνδρας χρὴ καλεῖν ἀνθρώπους ὕδατι θερμῷ λουμένους, ὄψα σκευαστὰ ἐσθίοντας, οἶνον ἄκρατον πίνοντας, μύρῳ ἀλειφομένους, μαλθακῶς κοιμωμένους, μετὰ μειρακίων, καὶ τούτων ἐξώρων, καθεύδοντας, κιθαρῳδῷ, καὶ τούτῳ κακῷ, δουλεύοντας. Μὴ γάρ τοι μήτ´ ἐμοῦ μήθ´ ὑμῶν ἔτι βασιλεύσειεν ἡ Νερωνὶς ἡ Δομιτία, ἀλλ´ ἐκείνη μὲν Ῥωμαίων ᾄδουσα δεσποζέτω (καὶ γὰρ ἄξιοι τοιαύτῃ γυναικὶ δουλεύειν, ἧς τοσοῦτον ἤδη χρόνον ἀνέχονται τυραννούσης), ἡμῶν δὲ σὺ ὦ δέσποινα ἀεὶ μόνη προστατοίης.
- 62.
Cf. Stickler 2007, 277–293.
- 63.
Thus for Roman society cf. Kunst 2007, 251–252: ‘Gesellschaftliche Unordnung wurde spätestens im 1. Jahrhundert v. Chr. neu chiffriert und nun vorrangig als Sittenverfall gedeutet, bei dem der gesellschaftlichen Transgression von Frauen eine bedeutende Rolle zukam. […] Der Körper der Frauen wird geradezu zur Metapher für das intakte Gemeinwesen. […] Die Virilität ihres [Agrippina maior] Verhaltens wird mit dem potenziellen Verlust an Männlichkeit des Tiberius und Germanicus kontrastiert.’
- 64.
For more on the Batavian Revolt, see, among others, Timpe 2005.
- 65.
Tacitus, in fact, labels Cartimandua with voluptuousness. Tac. hist. III.45.2: pro marito studia civitatis, pro adultero libido reginae et saevitia.
- 66.
Tac. Germ. 7.1: Reges ex nobilitate, duces ex virtute sumunt. nec regibus infinita ac libera potestas, et duces exemplo potius quam imperio, si prompti, si conspicui, si ante aciem agant, admiratione praesunt.
- 67.
Tac. Hist. IV.61.2: ea virgo [sc. Veleda] nationis Bructerae late imperitabat, vetere apud Germanos more, quo plerasque feminarum fatidicas et augescente superstitione arbitrantur deas, tuncque Veledae auctoritas adolevit; nam prosperas Germanis res et excidium legionum praedixerat.
- 68.
Baltrusch 2012, 85, comes to a similar conclusion.
- 69.
Cf. Santoro L’Hoir 1994, 5. Besides auctoritas and imperium or imperare, dominatio and servitium are further designations of this category.
- 70.
Tac. hist. III.45.1: Cartimandua Brigantibus imperitabat, pollens nobilitate; et auxerat potentiam, postquam capto per dolum rege Carataco instruxisse triumphum Claudii Caesaris videbatur. inde opes et rerum secundarum luxus.
- 71.
Cf. inter alia Kehne 2004, 23–24.
- 72.
Tac. Germ. 8.3: Nec solum in sua gente cuique, sed apud finitimas quoque civitates id nomen, ea gloria est, si numero ac virtute comitatus emineat; expetuntur enim legationibus et muneribus ornantur et ipsa plerumisque fama bella profligant.
- 73.
Baltrusch 2012, 86 n. 118.
- 74.
Tac. Germ. 7.1: nec regibus infinita ac libera potestas, as well as Germ. 11.5: mox rex vel princeps, prout aetas cuique, prout nobilitas, prout decus bellorum, prout facundia est, audiuntur auctoritate suadendi magis quam iubendi potestate.
- 75.
Similarly Schmal 2006, 224.
- 76.
Tac. Hist. V.25.2: et si dominorum electio sit, honestius principes Romanorum quam Germanorum feminas tolerari.
- 77.
Tac. Ann. XII.40.3: Inde accensi hostes, stimulante ignominia, ne feminae imperio subderentur, valida et lecta armis iuventus regiam eius invadunt. In Agr. 31.4 Tacitus has the Caledonian Calgacus report: Brigantes femina duce exurere coloniam […]. Although a brigante, i.e. Cartimandua, is called dux femina here, the events Calgacus describes rather indicate that Boudicca is meant.
- 78.
Tac. Germ. 45: in tantum non modo a libertate sed etiam a servitute degenerant.
- 79.
Cf. Alexandridis 2000, 62.
- 80.
Cf. Späth: ‘Tacitus suggests that women, ‘because of their nature’, are perceived as a threat to the prevailing order. In line with the conceptual appropriateness of this gender discourse, such femininity in turn affirms the importance of male self-control both as the guarantor of order and as a means of maintaining control over women (who are subordinate to male legal authority).’ Späth 2012, 442.
- 81.
Cf. Schmal 2006, 254: ‘Weiblichkeit und Barbarentum [liegen] für Tacitus ziemlich eng nebeneinander’.
- 82.
Cf. Timpe 2006, 318.
- 83.
Tac. Hist. II.69.1: Batavorum cohortes, ne quid truculentius auderent, in Germaniam remissae, principium interno simul externoque bello parantibus fatis.
Bibliography
Adler, E.: Valorizing the Barbarians. Enemy Speeches in Roman Historiography. Austin 2011.
Alexandridis, A.: Exklusiv oder Bürgernah? Die Frauen des römischen Kaiserhauses im Bild, in C. Kunst/U. Riemer (ed.): Grenzen der Macht. Zur Rolle der römischen Kaiserfrauen. Stuttgart 2000, 9–28.
Baltrusch, D.: Und was sagt Thusnelda? Zu Macht und Einfluss germanischer Frauen. In: E. Baltrusch et al. (ed.): 2000 Jahre Varusschlacht. Geschichte – Archäologie – Legenden. Berlin 2012, 71–94.
Barrett, A. A.: Agrippina. Mother of Nero. London 1996.
Barrett, A. A.: Agrippina. Sex, Power and Politics in the Early Empire. London 1999.
Braund, D.: Ruling Roman Britain. Kings, Queens, Governors and Emperors from Julius Caesar to Agricola. London 1996.
Bruder, R.: Die germanische Frau im Lichte der Runeninschriften und der antiken Historiographie. Berlin 1974.
Cary, E. (ed.): Dio’s Roman History in Nine Volumes VIII. London/New York 1925.
Classen, C. J.: Tacitus – Historian between Republic and Principate. In: Mnemosyne 41. 1988, 93–116.
Dixon, S.: Reading Roman Women. Sources, Genres, and Real Life, London 2001.
Doblhofer, G.: Vergewaltigung in der Antike. Berlin/Boston 1994.
Evans, E. C.: Physiognomics in the Ancient World. Philadelphia 1969.
Foubert, L.: Literary Constructions of Female Identities: The Parallel Lives of Julio-Claudian Women in Tacitus’ Annals. In: C. Deroux (ed.): Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History XV. Brussels 2010, 344–365.
Ginsburg, J.: Representing Agrippina. Construction of Female Power in the Early Roman Empire. Oxford/New York 2006.
Günnewig, B.: Das Bild der Germanen und Britannier. Untersuchungen zur Sichtweise von fremden Völkern in antiker Literatur und moderner wissenschaftlicher Forschung. Frankfurt a. M. 1998.
Hartmann, E.: Frauen in der Antike. Weibliche Lebenswelten von Sappho bis Theodora. Munich 2007.
Hébert, K. M.: Looking the Part: Examining the Transcendence of Gender in the Portraits of Agrippina the Younger. Diss. Tulane 2013.
Holmes, B.: Marked Bodies. Gender, Race, Class, Age, Disability, and Disease. In: D. H. Garrison/L. Kalof/W. Bynum (ed.): A Cultural History of the Human Body in Antiquity. Oxford 2010, 159–183.
Jackson, J. (ed.): Tacitus. The Annals IV-XII. London/Cambridge 1963.
Jackson, J. (ed.): Tacitus. The Annals XIII-XVI. London/Cambridge 1962.
Keegan, P.: Boudica, Cartimandua, Messalina and Agrippina the Younger. Independent Women of Power and the Gendered Rhetoric of Roman History. In: AH 34. 2004, 99–148.
Kehne, P.: Königin – Kriegerin – Priesterin. Antagonistinnen des Imperium Romanum in Britannien aus römischer Sicht. In: K. H. Schneider (ed.): Geschlechterrollen in der Geschichte aus polnischer und deutscher Sicht. Münster 2004, 19–43.
Kolb, A. (ed.): Augustae. Machtbewusste Frauen am römischen Kaiserhof. Herrschaftsstrukturen und Herrschaftspraxis II. Akten der Tagung in Zürich 18.–20.09.2008. Berlin 2010.
Kunst, C.: Die Rolle der römischen Kaiserfrau. Eine Einleitung. In: C. Kunst/U. Riemer (ed.): Grenzen der Macht. Zur Rolle der römischen Kaiserfrauen. Stuttgart 2000, 1–8.
Kunst, C.: Wenn Frauen Bärte haben. Geschlechtertransgression in Rom. In: E. Hartmann/U. Hartmann/K. Pietzner (ed.): Geschlechterdefinitionen und Geschlechtergrenzen in der Antike. Stuttgart 2007, 247–261.
Macdonald, S. (ed.): Images of Women in Peace and War. Cross-Cultural and Historical Perspectives. Basingstoke 1987.
Moore, C. H./Jackson, J. (eds.): Tacitus. The Histories IV-V. The Annals I-III. London/Cambridge 1962.
Parks, E. A.: The Portrayal of Women in the Annals of Tacitus. Diss. Boston 2008.
Peterson, W./Hutton, M. (eds.): Tacitus., Dialogus. Agricola. Germania. London/Cambridge 1963.
Santoro L’Hoir, F.: Tacitus and Women’s Usurpation of Power. In: CW 88. 1994, 5–25.
Santoro L’Hoir, F.: Tragedy, Rhetoric, and the Historiography of Tacitus’ Annales. Ann Arbor 2006.
Schmal, S.: Frauen für die Freiheit? Zur Funktion „barbarischer Weiblichkeit” im Werke des Tacitus. In: C. Ulf/R. Rollinger (ed.): Frauen und Geschlechter. Bilder, Rollen, Realitäten in den Texten antiker Autoren der römischen Kaiserzeit, Bd. 1. Unter Mitarbeit von Kordula Schnegg. Vienna/Cologne/Weimar 2006, 221–256.
Shumate, N.: Nation, Empire, Decline. Studies in Rhetorical Continuity from the Romans to the Modern Era. London 2013.
Shumate, N.: Postcolonial Approaches to Tacitus. In: V. E. Pagán, (ed.): A Companion to Tacitus. New York 2012, 476–503.
Späth, T.: Agrippina minor. Frauen als Diskurskonzept. In: C. Kunst/U. Riemer (ed.): Grenzen der Macht. Zur Rolle der römischen Kaiserfrau. Stuttgart 2000, 115–134.
Späth, T.: Masculinity and Gender Performance in Tacitus. In: V. E. Pagán (ed.): A Companion to Tacitus. New York 2012, 431–457.
Stepper, R.: Zur Rolle römischer Kaiserfrauen im Kultleben. In: C. Kunst/U. Riemer (ed.): Grenzen der Macht. Zur Rolle der römischen Kaiserfrau. Stuttgart 2000, 61–74.
Stickler, T.: Der Vorwurf der Effemination als politisches Kampfinstrument in der Spätantike. In: E. Hartmann/U. Hartmann/K. Pietzner (ed.): Geschlechterdefinitionen und Geschlechtergrenzen in der Antike. Stuttgart 2007, 277–293.
Syme, R.: Tacitus. Oxford 1958.
Timpe, D.: Römisch-germanische Begegnung in der späten Republik und frühen Kaiserzeit. Voraussetzungen – Konfrontationen – Wirkungen. Gesammelte Studien. Berlin/Boston 2006.
Timpe, D.: Tacitus und der Bataveraufstand. In: T. Schmitt/W. Schmitz/A. Winterling (ed.): Gegenwärtige Antike – antike Gegenwarten. Kolloquium zum 60. Geburtstag von Rolf Rilinger. Munich 2005, 151–187.
Wiedemann, T.: The Julio-Claudian Emperors: AD 14–70. London 2002.
Zernack, J.: Germanin im Hauskleid. Bemerkungen zu einem Frauenbild deutscher Gelehrter. In: R. Faber (ed.): Kybele – Prophetin – Hexe. Religiöse Frauenbilder und Weiblichkeitskonzeptionen. Würzburg 1997, 213–232.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Düsenberg, M.J. (2022). Dux femina: Transgressive Women in Tacitus. In: Gilhaus, L., Dorn, A., Herrad, I., Meurer, M. (eds) Transgression and Deviance in the Ancient World. Palgrave Macmillan, Stuttgart. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05873-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05873-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Stuttgart
Print ISBN: 978-3-476-05872-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-476-05873-7
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)