Revised THESIS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Caesar’s Contribution to Augustus’ Religious Programme Timothy Graham Charles Hamlyn BSc/BA(Hons), MPhil A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2016 The School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry Abstract Although Caesar is sometimes argued to have been the founder of the Principate, Augustus is the one typically considered by modern scholars to have been responsible for its creation. There is acknowledgement of some obvious marks of inspiration but the stress is often on what Augustus did differently to his adoptive father. A contrast is drawn between the barely concealed autocracy of the dictator Caesar and the carefully cultivated image of the princeps Augustus as first among equals within a restored Republic. Augustus’ actions in the religious sphere are characterised as focussing on tradition, whether real or invented, while practising relative restraint in the way he promoted his own position. For many historians, the underlying basis of his power was ultimately the military forces under his command and the prerogatives he acquired through the so-called settlements. In actual fact, however, Augustus’ rule was much more similar to Caesar’s than is generally recognised. Several key features of the Principate directly followed the example of the dictator and this is particularly evident with respect to religion. Augustus did not accept a public cult at Rome during his lifetime but he extensively associated himself with a number of deities, including personified virtues, much like Caesar did. He portrayed himself as a sacred father-figure in a fashion that closely emulated Caesar. The chief pontificate and title pater patriae were especially significant in this regard. Caesar’s contribution is sufficiently great that he can be considered the Principate’s true founder. Furthermore, both Caesar and Augustus were directly responsible for the important measures that helped to secure their autocracy. Contrary to what is often stated, particularly for Caesar, the senators did not have a major role in formulating the extraordinary honours that were decreed. The emphasis on Augustus’ supposed restraint and moderation within the scholarship is misleading. He could hardly have done more to strengthen his own position within the state without risking dangerous levels of discontent and resentment. He merely demonstrated the caution necessary to hold on to his power. Augustus deliberately engineered the establishment of permanent one-man rule at Rome, just as Caesar probably did after he won the civil war. Suggestions that concerns for stability were uppermost in his mind do not accord with the consistent manner in which he pursued personal supremacy. Religion was not simply important in all this but vital. It formed a pillar of both Caesar’s and Augustus’ autocracy that was no less critical than their formal political powers or their military backing. Declaration by author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my research higher degree candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis. Publications during candidature Hamlyn, T. 2014. ‘The Nature of Caesar’s Illness’. Latomus 73.2: 360-367. Publications included in this thesis No publications included. Contributions by others to the thesis No contributions by others. Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree None. Keywords religion, Rome, Caesar, Augustus, Octavian, pontifex maximus , Vestal Virgins Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC) ANZSRC code: 210306, Classical Greek and Roman History, 100% Fields of Research (FoR) Classification FoR code: 2103, Historical Studies, 100% Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Sources ............................................................................................................................................. 3 Literature ........................................................................................................................................ 12 Chapter 1: Augustus’ Divinity ........................................................................................................... 23 Divine Honours at Rome before Caesar ......................................................................................... 23 Caesar’s Dictatorship ..................................................................................................................... 32 Between Caesar’s Murder and the Battle of Actium, 44-31 BC .................................................... 60 From Actium to the Death of Augustus, 31 BC-AD 14 ................................................................. 72 Chapter 2: Augustus as a Father-Figure ............................................................................................. 96 The Chief Pontificate and the Vestal Virgins ................................................................................. 97 The Genius, the Lares and the Dioscuri ....................................................................................... 113 Pater Patriae ................................................................................................................................ 130 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 147 Bibliography..................................................................................................................................... 149 Ancient Sources ............................................................................................................................ 149 Compilations of Sources .............................................................................................................. 157 Modern Works .............................................................................................................................. 157 Appendix 1: Caesar’s Honours, 46-44 BC....................................................................................... 167 Abbreviations The abbreviations used are those given in the Oxford Classical Dictionary (revised third edition, 2003), with the additions and deviations listed below. Please note that the references to Plutarch’s Lives use the section numbers from the Loeb edition and should match those given in the editions of Sintenis and Bekker rather than the Teubner of Ziegler, although this has apparently changed in more recent printings (cf. Ramsey 2003: xiii; Pelling 2011: xi). AFA Acta Fratrum Arvalium Alc. fr. x LP Alcaeus, where x is the fragment number from the edition of Lobel and Page (also adopted in the Loeb edition) Ar. Pax Aristophanes, Peace Aristid. Or . a.b D = x.y K Aristides, Orationes , where a and x are the numbers of the oration and b and y are the section numbers in the editions of Dindorf and Keil respectively (with Behr also using the latter) Arr. Ind . Arrian, Indica Ath . Mitt . Mitteilungen des kaiserlich deutschen archäologischen Instituts, athenische Abteilung Auson. a Gr. ( b) = x P. ( y) Ausonius, where a and x are the page numbers of Green’s and Peiper’s editions respectively, and b and y are the epigram numbers Auson. Griph . Ausonius, Griphus ternarii numeri Cass. Dio ( x.y B) Cassius Dio, where x is the volume number and y the page number in Boissevain’s edition Charisius, Gramm . ( x K) Charisius, Ars grammatica , where x is the page number of Keil’s edition Cic. Ad Caes . Iun . Cicero, Ad Caesarem Iuniorem Cic. Consol . fr. x OBH Cicero, De consolatione , where x is the fragment number in the edition of Orelli, Baiter and Halm Cic. De consul . fr. x B Cicero, De consulatu suo , where x is the fragment number in the edition of Blänsdorf Cic. Parad . Cicero, Paradoxa Stoicorum Cic. Rab . perd . Cicero, Pro Rabirio perduellionis reo Cic. Vat . Cicero, In Vatinium Claud. Gig . Claudian, Gigantomachia De praenom . De praenominibus Din. Dem . Dinarchus, In Demosthenem