CHAPTER SEVEN

CAESAR AUGUSTUS: “HOW HAPPELY HE GOVERNED”?

After the defeat of Antony at Actium in 31 bc, and a series of victories over other troublesome nations, Octavian returned to Rome in 27 bc as the tri- umphant ruler of the known world. A universal peace was established, and the Senate hailed him as “Caesar Augustus,” the title by which he was to remain known. Received wisdom tells us that this establishment of an empire which was to endure for centuries under sole monarchical rule, and this peace which ended decades of civil war, was hailed by early mod- ern readers and writers as the great example of strong monarchy, and a model for their own time.1 This theory is not always borne out by the evidence of reading which remains, nor by the histories that were composed during the Elizabethan and early Stuart period. While Augustus was indeed hailed as an ideal prince by some early modern men, this was by no means the only interpre- tation of his story. The ancient sources from which early modern readers and writers could draw knowledge of Octavian/Augustus are numerous, fragmented, and very diffferent in their presentation of events. Appian’s Civil Wars is not a useful source, since the account ends in 35 bc. Florus and Velleius Paterculus give details of the wars under Augustus, usually in a way that flatters the emperor, but make little mention of politics at Rome. Pliny’s Natural History contains some anecdotes about Augustus, largely concerning monuments erected by him or military fashions which he instigated. Tacitus’ Annals begins in ad 14, and describes very briefly Augustus’ rise to power in negative terms, before giving some account of his failings in his later years; the young Augustus “subjected to the yoke of empire a world wearied by civil war” and appointed his advisors “as sup- ports to his despotism,” so that “not a trace of the old, solid morality remained.”2

1 For example, R. P. Kalmey, ‘Shakespeare’s Octavius and Elizabethan Roman history’, Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900 vol. 18, no. 2 (Spring, 1978), pp. 275–287; Barbara L. Parker Plato’s Republic and Shakespeare’s Rome: a political study of the Roman works (Newark, 2004), pp. 109 -11. 2 Tacitus, Annals, book 1. 188 chapter seven

Another uncomplimentary account is Cassius Dio’s history of Rome from 36 bc onwards. It is unclear what his own sources were, but his work demonstrates a clear distinction between Octavian, the ruthless and aspir- ing young man, and Augustus, the ideal princeps on whom the Severan monarchy, the regime under which Cassius was writing, was modelled. At the court of Hadrian, Suetonius wrote his Life of Augustus, using Augustan documents from the imperial archives. His work supplies more anecdotal evidence than it does a clear chronology, but presents both friendly and more critical opinions of the emperor; Aurelius Victor’s Caesares, an epit- ome of Suetonius’ Lives written in the fourth century ad and published as part of the Historia Augusta, was also used by early modern readers. Another major source of evidence is the Augustan literature, including works by Horace, Ovid, and Vergil. The Aeneid has been read as a paeon to Rome’s imperial glory, while Horace’s poetry gives more concrete details about life during the civil wars and under Augustus. His Secular Hymn, for example, written for performance at Augustus’ ‘Secular Games’ in 17 bc, glorifijies contemporary Rome by linking military triumphs with mythology and the deeds of the gods. Poets seeking to align themselves with policies of Jacobean ‘monarchical pacifijism’ invoked comparisons with Horace to strengthen their cause; Horace was a strong supporter of Augustus and his peaceful policies, as James I was keen to advertise.3 It is clear from some of the commonplace books that Horace was also regarded as a valuable com- mentator on the events of the late-fijirst century bc. With such a multiplicity of sources on which to draw, it is unsurprising that the representation of Augustus was never entirely straightforward. It is true that Augustus was sometimes explicitly connected by writers with contemporary rulers; his founding of the empire, his settling of Rome’s troubled succession, and his role as chief patron of the arts were all ele- ments of the Augustan image that were harnessed by writers who sought to draw flattering parallels between the Roman empire and their own monarch.4 But the diffference between England, a monarchical state for many centuries, and Rome, where Octavian established himself as emperor of a new regime, made the question of how to interpret the life of Augustus a highly complex one for readers and writers in early modern England. Just as Julius Caesar could be used as an emblem of both virtue

3 Discussed in Adrian Streete, ‘Frances Quarles’ Early Poetry and the Discourses of Jacobean Spenserianism’, Journal of the Northern Renaissance vol. 1, no. 1 (Spring, 2009), pp. 88–108. 4 Smuts, ‘Court-Centred Politics’, pp. 38–40.