© Copyright 2014 Morgan E. Palmer Inscribing Augustan Personae: Epigraphic Conventions and Memory Across Genres Morgan E. Palmer A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2014 Reading Committee: Alain M. Gowing, Chair Catherine M. Connors Stephen E. Hinds Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Classics University of Washington Abstract Inscribing Augustan Personae: Epigraphic Conventions and Memory Across Genres Morgan E. Palmer Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Alain M. Gowing Department of Classics This dissertation investigates the ways in which authors writing during the reign of the emperor Augustus, a period of increased epigraphic activity, appropriate epigraphic conventions in their work. Livy, Ovid, and Virgil furnish case studies to explore the ways in which Augustan authors create epigraphic intertexts that call upon readers to remember and synthesize literary and epigraphic sources. Investigation of Livy is foundational to my discussion of Ovid and Virgil because his selective treatment of epigraphic sources illustrates how inscriptions can be both authoritative and subjective. Augustan poets exploit the authority and subjectivity of inscriptions in accordance with their own authorial purposes and the genres in which they write, appropriating epigraphic conventions in ways that are both traditional and innovative. This blending of tradition and innovation parallels how the emperor himself used inscriptions to shape and control his own persona. The distinctive authority and influence of inscriptions, although not limited to the Augustan era, is characteristic of Augustan writing across genres. Table of Contents Acknowledgments page iii Abbreviations vi Introduction 1 Epigraphy and Memory Across Genres 2 Inscribing the Augustan Persona 7 The Epigraphic Habit in the Augustan Era 16 Epigraphy and Augustan Authors 19 Previous Scholarship 24 Methodology 30 Chapter 1: Rogo te, Lector: Livy's Epigraphic Monumenta 34 Livy's Epigraphic Monumentum 34 Death Notices 38 The Exemplary Scipios 44 Inscriptions and Authority 50 Inscriptions, Location, and Rome 58 Conclusion: Livy's Selective Imitations 70 Chapter 2: Ovid's Imitative Poetic Persona: Epigraphic Innovation 72 Reinscribing Dido: The Epigraphic and Virgilian Traditions 73 Funera Acerba: Epigraphy and the Deaths of Phaethon and Icarus 82 Breaking Epigraphic Habits: Unconventional Writing in Ovid 88 i Epigraphic Parroting: The Poetic Persona in Amores 2.6 98 Conclusion: Inscribing Ovidian Personae 107 Chapter 3: Inscribing Fate: Memory and Epigraphy in Virgil 111 Programmatic Beginnings: Inscribing Fate in Aeneid Book I 113 Coniunx Creusa 117 Infelix Dido 124 Nisus and Euryalus 130 Pallas 134 Turnus 140 Conclusion: Virgil's Epigraphic Appropriations 145 Conclusion 148 Epigraphic Habits Across Genres 148 Tradition, Innovation, and Genre 156 Epigraphic and Virgilian Mobility: Tensions of Genre and Place 160 Augustan Literary and Epigraphic Monumenta 162 Appendix: Livy's Epigraphic Evidence 164 Bibliography 181 ii Acknowledgements This dissertation is the product of many years of work on Augustan literature and epigraphy at the University of Washington and Brown University. In the course of studying and writing on these topics, I have met many friends, teachers, students, and scholars who have provided encouragement while introducing me to new ideas, and it is my pleasure to acknowledge them here. I would like to acknowledge all of the support that I have received at the University of Washington. My dissertation director, Alain Gowing, enthusiastically supported my research interests while introducing me to innovative ideas about memory and Roman culture. Catherine Connors and Stephen Hinds have both provided invaluable and thoughtful advice during the dissertation process and at the earlier stages of my graduate career, and I am delighted that they are serving as members of the dissertation reading committee. In addition, I would like to thank Ruby Blondell, Deborah Kamen, Olga Levaniouk, and Brigitte Prutti for serving as members of my doctoral supervisory committee. I would also like to thank Larry Bliquez, Jim Clauss, Daniel Harmon, Alex Hollmann, and Kate Topper. In addition, the dissertation has benefitted from discussion with participants in a series of digital humanities workshops sponsored by the Simpson Center for the Humanities at the University of Washington. My research at the University of Washington was supported by Jim Greenfield Graduate and Dissertation Fellowships, as well as travel awards in the form of Jim Greenfield Travel Bursaries, a Nesholm Family Endowed Fellowship, Phillip and Estelle DeLacy Fellowship travel awards, and a Graduate School Fund for Excellence and Innovation Travel Fund Award, and I am grateful for all of this generous support. iii I would also like to thank my teachers and mentors from Brown University who, like the faculty at the University of Washington, introduced me to many of the ideas and methodologies that are in this dissertation, and did so with warm enthusiasm and encouragement. Joseph Pucci taught me about allusion in Latin literature while serving as a kind and dedicated advisor. John Bodel introduced me to Latin epigraphy, and has been a warm and enthusiastic mentor. Pura Nieto-Hernandez provided kind support and encouragement inside and outside of the classroom. Michael Putnam introduced me to many ideas that have shaped my teaching and research on Virgil, and I am grateful to him for his warm encouragement. I would also like to thank the other members of the faculty, including Deborah Boedeker, David Konstan, and Kurt Raaflaub. My research at Brown was supported by Karen T. Romer Undergraduate Teaching and Research Assistantship awards, and I am grateful for the opportunities that this program helped to make possible. I am delighted to have been a part of two institutions and departments that work hard to foster a welcoming environment for students and colleagues. This project has also benefitted from insightful comments and kind support from friends and colleagues in Seattle and farther afield. For thoughtful questions and comments from colleagues at the University of Washington I thank Matthew Gorey, Josh Hartman, Brandon Jones, Eunice Kim, Bridget Langley, Megan O'Donald, and Adriana Vazquez. For helpful questions and comments at the 2014 APA meeting in Chicago I thank Richard Thomas, Christina Perkell, Leo Landrey, and Elena Giusti. I also thank Jocelyne Nelis-Clément and Damien Nelis for sharing with me their chapter "Furor Epigraphicus: Augustus, the Poets, and the Inscriptions" before publication. I also thank Peter Barrios-Lech, Bryan Brinkman, Liz Dollins, Martin Halprin, Colin Shelton, Janice So, and my high school Latin teacher Maria Cherry, as well as many other helpful friends, colleagues, teachers, and classmates for their encouragement, iv knowledge, and enthusiasm over the years. I would also like to thank my students for their hard work and enthusiasm. Last but not least I would like to thank my family and my friends. Of course, I am responsible for the content of this dissertation, and any oversights or errors are my own. v Abbreviations Here follows a list of abbreviations for epigraphic corpora used in this dissertation. Abbreviations for Classical authors and works follow the Oxford Classical Dictionary, and abbreviations for journals follow the American Journal of Archaeology. AE L'Année Épigraphique (Paris 1888–) CCA Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque, M. J. Vermaseren (Leiden 1977) CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Theodor Mommsen et al. (Berlin 1863–) CLE Carmina Latina Epigraphica, Buecheler (Stuttgart 1894–) CLENuovo Per un nuovo Corpus dei Carmina Latina Epigraphica. Materiali e discussioni, P. Cugusi (Rome 2007) CSE Carmina Saturnia Epigraphica, P. Kruschwitz (Stuttgart 2002) EAOR Epigrafia anfiteatrale dell'Occidente Romano, vol. 1, Roma, P. Sabbatini Tumolesi (Rome 1988) EDCS Epigraphik-Datenbank Clauss-Slaby <http://www.manfredclauss.de/> EE Ephemeris Epigraphica, W. Henzen (Rome and Berlin 1872–1913) GLIStone Greek and Latin Inscriptions on Stone in the Collection of Charles University, V. Marek (Prague 1977) ILLRP Inscriptiones Latinae Liberae Rei Publicae, A. Degrassi (Florence 1957–1963) ILS Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, H. Dessau (Berlin 1892–1916) InscrIt Inscriptiones Italiae (Rome 1931–) MNR Museo Nazionale Romano (Rome 1983) vi Introduction spectat et Augusto praetextum nomine templum, et visum lecto Caesare maius opus. (Ov. Fast. 5.567–68) And he looks at the temple bordered with the name Augustus, and the work seems greater with Caesar having been read. Ovid illustrates the visual power of Augustus' inscriptions in the lines above, describing the presence of the emperor's name on the temple of Mars Ultor in the Augustan forum, as viewed by Mars himself. Alföldy begins his seminal study on Augustan epigraphy with this passage, noting that it indicates the importance that contemporaries of Augustus placed on his inscriptions (1991: 290).1 Mars' reaction mirrors the reaction that Augustus or those writing in his service presumably intended to elicit from viewers, who would have seen the inscription and considered the added authority that Augustus' name gave to the temple.2 The inscription would have served as a signal of the emperor's integration of his own persona into this and other Roman monuments.3 By mentioning this inscription and Mars' reaction to it explicitly, Ovid