Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T09:08:29.559Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Victories of Augustus*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

T. D. Barnes
T. D. Barnes
Affiliation:
University College, Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

‘Appellatus sum vicies et semel imperator.’ So the Res Gestae of Augustus declare (4,1), and they are echoed by two historical writers (Tacitus, Ann. i, 9, 2; Dio lii, 41, 4). The emperor received the last fourteen of these imperatorial acclamations after he acquired the title of Augustus (16 January 27 B.C.), and their dates have long been recognized to provide valuable clues towards constructing a full military narrative of his reign. In his commentary on the Res Gestae, Theodor Mommsen was able to identify the date and occasion of most of the salutations to the satisfaction of subsequent investigators. Nevertheless, both greater chronological precision and something more important may emerge from a new examination of all the evidence now available.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 64 , November 1974 , pp. 21 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © T. D. Barnes 1974. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The sixth belongs to the battle of Actium (Orosius, , Hist. adv. pag. vi, 19,Google Scholar 4, cf. ILS 79 f.), the seventh to a victory in Macedonia for which M. Licinius Crassus claimed the spolia opima (Dio li, 25, 2, cf. ILS 81; BMC, R.Emp. i, 105, nos. 647–649).

2 On the fragmentary and unsatisfactory nature of the literary sources, see especially Syme, R., HSCP lxviii (1959), 62Google Scholar ff.

3 Mommsen, T., Res Gestae Divi Augusti 2 (1883), 11 ff.Google Scholar, cf. Diz. epig. i (1895), 915Google Scholar ff.; Gardthausen, V., Augustus und seine Zeit i, 3 (1904), 1352Google Scholar ff.; PIR 2 J 215. There are some notable divergences in Mattingly's, H. table, BMC, R. Emp. i (1923), xciiGoogle Scholar f.

4 Syme, R., Roman Revolution (1939), 329Google Scholar.

5 Livy xxviii, 12, 12; Velleius ii, 38, 4; Orosius, , Hist. adv. pag. vi, 21, 21Google Scholar.

6 Suetonius, , Divus Aug. 85, 1Google Scholar. The precise conclusion was presumably the closing of Janus, cf. Blumenthal, F., Wiener Studien xxxv (1913), 113Google Scholar f.

7 On Dio's sources for the reign of Augustus, cf. Millar, F., A Study of Cassius Dio (1964), 83 ff.Google Scholar

8 For the campaigns in Spain, and an evaluation of the narrative sources, see Syme, R., AJP lv (1934), 293Google Scholar ff.; Legio VII Gemina (1970), 83 ff.

9 Gardthausen, o.c. ii, 2 (1896), 476 f.; Anderson, J. G. C., CAH x (1934), 263Google Scholar.

10 The coinage does not seem to commence till spring 19, cf. Sutherland, C. H. V., Okay, N. and Merrington, K. E., The Cistophori of Augustus (1970), 35 f.Google Scholar

11 Two recent commentators on the Annales take refuge in misleading vagueness: Tiberius and Drusus bore the title ‘wegen ihrer Verdienste um die Ausdehnung und Befestigung der römischen Macht in den Alpen und in Germanien seit dem J. 16 v. Chr.’ (E. Koestermann, i (1963), 67); ‘the exact date of the first conferment … is not known, but 9 B.C. or not much earlier seems probable’ (F. R. D Goodyear, i (1972), 109). Seager, R. simply omits the salutation by the troops of Drusus (Tiberius (1972), 26 ff.)Google Scholar.

12 On the campaign and its historical context, see now Wells, C. M., The German Policy of Augustus (1972), 59 ffGoogle Scholar. The earliest attestation of Augustus as imp. x seems to be in 13/12 (ILS 5816).

13 Hence imp. xii in his tribunician year 10/9 (ILS 91). Augustus had a plausible technical reason for disallowing the salutations of his stepsons in 12 and 11: neither yet possessed proconsular imperium (Dio liv, 33, 5; 34, 3 f.).

14 Syme, R., Tacitus (1958), 425 ffGoogle Scholar. Note Tiberius' disclosure of a letter from his brother ‘qua secum de cogendo ad restituendam libertatem Augusto agebat’ (Suetonius, Tib. 50, 1).

15 For the fragments, FGrH

16 Dessau, H., Geschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit i (1924), 385Google Scholar f.; Anderson, J. G. C., CAH x (1934), 253Google Scholar f.; 274 f.

17 Sumner, G. V., HSCP lxxiv (1970), 268Google Scholar.

18 Bowersock, G. W., JRS lxi (1971), 227Google Scholar.

19 For a text, translation and full discussion, see Zetzel, J. E. G., GRBS xi (1970), 259Google Scholar ff.

20 Zetzel, ib. 265 f. Reference to warfare against the Parthians is claimed in Schürer, E., The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ i (revised and edited by Vermes, G. and Millar, F., 1973), 259Google Scholar.

21 Bowersock, o.c. 227.

22 Mommsen, o.c. 15 f; Gardthausen, o.c. i, 3 (1904), 1144; 1353; ii, 3(1904), 754 f.; PIR 2 J 215 (P. 163).

23 Zetzel, o.c. 261. This date appears to be assumed by Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor (1950), 484 f.Google Scholar

24 Some aberrant inscriptions must, on any hypothesis, be discounted: e.g. ILS 5828 (imp. xv in 6 B.C.).

25 Mommsen confessed himself baffled (o.c. 16). The standard correlation is rightly discarded by R. Syme, Danubian Papers (1971), 39; 71.

26 For victories won by M. Vinicius (cos. 19 B.C.) in Germany, according to Kolbe, W., Germania xxiii (1939), 104Google Scholar ff.; Volkmann, H., Res Gestae Divi Augusti3 (Kleine Texte xxix/xxx (1969)), 14Google Scholar.

27 By a serious aberration, A. Stein dated Tiberius' seventh salutation to 15 (PIR 2 C 941). In disproof, cf. Gesche, H., Chiron ii (1972), 341Google Scholar f. Coins minted at Lugdunum have ‘Ti. Caesar Augusti f. imperator vii’ (BMC, R. Emp. i, 95/96 nos. 579–588).

28 On the war, and Velleius' account, see the full discussion of Koestermann, E., Hermes lxxxvii (1953), 345Google Scholar ff.

29 PIR 2 J 215 (p. 163) enters 11 and 14 with no sign of dubitation.

30 The precise day on which Augustus and Tiberius received and renewed their tribunicia potestas is nowhere directly attested, but seems to fall between the 26 and 30 June, cf. Degrassi, A., Inscr. It. xiii, 1 (1947), 157;Google Scholar 218.

31 So Bormann, E., commenting on the inscription (CIL xi, 367)Google Scholar.

32 Drusus' presence in May is also implied by the Acta fratrum Arvalium, fr. xxix/xxx Henzen = p. 107, fr. 2 Pasoli.

33 For a select bibliography, see Goodyear, o.c. 171 f. This editor of Tacitus (it may be observed) correctly begins a new paragraph with Ann. i, 10, 8, but stating ‘I follow the suggestion of F. Klingner’ (169). In fact, he is unwittingly following G. H. Walther, in his edition, i (Halle, 1831), 27.

34 Note the large size of the issue of the Lugdunum mint with the legend ‘Ti. Caesar Augusti f. imperator vii’ (BMC, R. Emp. i, 95 f.).

35 Schwartz, J., Rev. phil. 3 xix (1945), 21Google Scholar ff., assigned Augustus' last salutation to a victory of Tiberius in 13, in virtue of dating Varus’ disaster to 10 and Tiberius' Ulyrian triumph to 13. The chronology is impossible, cf. E. Hohl, ‘Die Siegesfeiern des Tiberius und das Datum der Schlacht im Teutoburger Wald’, Sb. Berlin 1952, Nr. 1, 8 ff.

36 Under 3 August, the Fasti Antiates ministrorum domus Augustae enter ‘Ti. Aug. Inlyrico vic.’ (Inscr. It. xiii, 1, p. 328). The notice might well belong to the preceding year, cf. Koestermann, E., Hermes lxxxi (1953), 367;Google ScholarDegrassi, A., Inscr. It. xiii, 2 (1963), 491Google Scholar.

37 On the entry in th e Fasti Praenestini, see esp. Hohl. o.c. 7 f.; 17; 24; Degrassi, o.c. 399 f.; Kraft, K., ‘Zur Münzprägung des Augustus’, Sb. Frankfurt vii, Nr. 5 (1968, publ. 1969), 248Google Scholar f.

38 Velleius implies that Varus did not come to grief before the autumn (ii, 117, 4: ‘trahebat aestiva’, cf. Hohl, o.c. 12 f.).

39 On the date, cf. U. P. Boissevain's edition of Dio, ii (1898), 536.

40 On Tiberius' movements, cf. Sumner, G. V., HSCP lxxiv (1970), 274Google Scholar. Tiberius once claimed that Augustus sent him to Germany nine times (Tacitus, Ann. ii, 26, 4): since eight missions are easily identified (9, 8, 7 B.C. and A.D. 4, 5, 6, 10, 11), the ninth must be either late in 9 or in 12. Th e former is excluded by Tiberius' presence in Rome on 16 January 10, cf. Inscr. It. xiii, 2, p. 115.

41 CIL ii, 2703, republished and expounded by Syme, R., Epigraphische Studien viii (1969), 125Google Scholar ff., combines ‘imp. xx’ with ‘trib. pot. xxxii’. It will have to be discounted as evidence for a salutation in the official series.

42 The coinage of Lugdunum might appear to indicate that Tiberius' seventh acclamation closely followed his sixth, cf. Mattingly, H., BMC, R. Emp. i (1923), cxivGoogle Scholar.

43 Gow, A. S. F. and Page, D. L., The Greek Anthology. The Garland of Philip and some contemporary epigrams i (1968), 214Google Scholar. In favour of composition by Bassus, see Cichorius, C., Römische Studien (1922), 307 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

44 Gow and Page, ox. ii (1968), 234 ff. (with discussion of other interpretations of the poem).

45 Velleius ii, 121, 1; Suetonius, Tib. 21, 1. The literary sources clearly imply that Tiberius remained in Italy during 13 (esp. Velleius ii, 123, 1). His presence in Dalmatia has been inferred from CIL iii, 3198 ff.; 8512, cf. Wells, C. M., The German Policy of Augustus (1972), 240.Google Scholar

46 Professor Bowersock has pointed out to me that the photograph (Plate 73) clearly shows a space after ‘Augustus’ in line 7. The published text makes no allusion to the phenomenon, nor does the editor's commentary discuss its possible significance—which is not here relevant.

47 For a full discussion of the inscription, see Brunt, P. A., ZPE xiii (1974), 161Google Scholar ff. Professor Brunt very kindly allowed me to read his article in typescript.

48 Germanicus was imp. ii when he died (ILS 176–178; IRT 334), and one of the salutations belongs to 15 (Tacitus, , Ann. i, 58, 5)Google Scholar. For the date of the other, various dates had been proposed, cf. PIR 2 J 221. G. E. Bean assumes without discussion that the salutation of 15 was Germanicus' first (J. M. Cook, The Troad (1973), 412).

49 On Tiberius' eighth and last salutation (in 16, cf. Tacitus, , Ann. ii, 18, 2)Google Scholar, see the exemplary discussion of Gesche, H., Chiron ii (1972), 339Google Scholar ff.