NOTES:

1This title at Ancyra extends over the first three pages of the Latin, that is over so much of the inscription as is on the left wall of the pronaos; the Greek title extends over seventeen of the nineteen pages of the Greek version.In its present form, the title cannot be the same as that over the original at Rome. All from “as engraved” is certainly an addition, probably made by the Galatian legate who ordered the magistrates of Ancyra to have the inscription placed on the temple of Augustus. The last two words in the Latin (placed first in the English), were probably inserted only by a blunder at Ancyra. “A copy subjoined,” doubtless stood in the legate’s letter, just as we might write “see enclosure.” But what of the remainder of the inscription, “Of the deeds ... Roman people”? It is hardly conceivable that this was the title of the inscription at Rome, because it embraces only two of the three parts into which the subject-matter falls. It covers the achievements and the expenditures of Augustus; in reverse order, however, from that of the document itself; and it omits any allusion to the subject-matter of the first fourteen chapters, which have to do with the offices and honors conferred upon Augustus.It is impossible to say what was the superscription at Rome. Possibly there was none. The name of Augustus, most likely, was conspicuous somewhere in connection with the front of the mausoleum, and this inscription may very well have been devoid of title.

In its present form, the title cannot be the same as that over the original at Rome. All from “as engraved” is certainly an addition, probably made by the Galatian legate who ordered the magistrates of Ancyra to have the inscription placed on the temple of Augustus. The last two words in the Latin (placed first in the English), were probably inserted only by a blunder at Ancyra. “A copy subjoined,” doubtless stood in the legate’s letter, just as we might write “see enclosure.” But what of the remainder of the inscription, “Of the deeds ... Roman people”? It is hardly conceivable that this was the title of the inscription at Rome, because it embraces only two of the three parts into which the subject-matter falls. It covers the achievements and the expenditures of Augustus; in reverse order, however, from that of the document itself; and it omits any allusion to the subject-matter of the first fourteen chapters, which have to do with the offices and honors conferred upon Augustus.

It is impossible to say what was the superscription at Rome. Possibly there was none. The name of Augustus, most likely, was conspicuous somewhere in connection with the front of the mausoleum, and this inscription may very well have been devoid of title.

2Augustus was nineteen years old on Sept. 23, 710.

3Cicero (Ad Att.XVI, 8, 1,) on Nov. 1, 710, writes: “I have letters from Octavian; great things are doing; he has led over to his views the veterans of Casilinum and Calatia.” Cf. Vell. II, 61. Dio XLVI, 29.

4Cf. Cic. (Phil.III, 2, 3), “The young Cæsar, without our (the senate’s) advice or consent, raised an army and poured forth his patrimony.”

5Gardthausen,Aug.1er Th. 2er Bd. p. 524, thinks that this beginning the Res Gestae with the raising of an army, is an admission of the military foundation of the principate.

6Such a statement is part of Augustus’ scheme to pose as a restorer of the old order. He makes Brutus, Cassius, Pompey and Antony public enemies.

7Cicero says (Phil.V, 17, 46), that on Jan. 1, 711, “the senate voted that Gaius Cæsar, son of Gaius, pontiff, should be a senator, and hold praetorian rank in speaking.” Dio (XLVI, 29), says that on Jan. 2 or 3, “Cæsar was made senator as a quaestor.”

8Livy (Ep.CXVIII), “he received the consular ornaments.” App. (B. C.III, 51) adds that he was given consular rank in speaking. Cf. Mommsen,Röm. St., I, pp. 442, 443.

9Cf. Cic. (Phil.ii, 8, 20), “The senate gave Gaius Cæsar the fasces.” Cf. Tac.Ann.I, 10; Livy,Ep.CXVIII.

10App.B. C.III, 51. Vell. II, 61.

11The formula by which in emergencies, extraordinary powers were given to the ordinary magistrates. This measure had since 216 B. C., entirely superseded the old custom of appointing a dictator. (Cf. note32) Chap. V. The present formula, however, had been employed long before the disuse of the dictatorship. Cf. Livy III, 4; VI, 19. This extraordinary commission was not restricted to the consuls. Cf. Cæs.B. C.I, 5.

12Hirtius was killed April 16, 711, and Pansa died of wounds received on the 15th, in the fighting against Antonius. Cæsar Octavianus and Q. Pedius were elected consuls Aug. 19, 711. Dio LVI, 30; C. I. L. I, p. 400 = x, 8375; Tac.Ann.I, 9; Suet.Aug.100. Vell. (II, 65), says the election was on Sept. 22. But Macrobius, (Sat.I, 35, 25), assigns the fact that he was made consul in the month Sextilis, as one of the reasons why the name of that month was changed to August.

13C. I. L. 1, p. 466 and App.B. C.IV, 7, fix the formal ratification of the triumvirate by the people, as having been proposed by the tribune Publius Titius and carried in a public assembly on Nov. 27, 711.

14An instance of Augustus’ avoiding the names of his enemies; here, particularly, Brutus and Cassius.

15TheLex Pedia, Sept., 711, named from Augustus’ colleague in the consulship, constituted an extraordinary tribunal for this class of offenders: the penalty was interdiction from fire and water,i. e., outlawry. Livy,Ep.CXX; Vell. II, 69; App. III, 95; Suet.Aug.10; Dio XLVI, 49.

16The only instance in the Res Gestae of a palpable distortion of fact. The battles at Philippi, in November, 712, are referred to. For the date see Gardthausen,Aug.2er Th. 1er Halbband, p. 80. In the first fight, Suetonius says (Aug.13), that Cæsar hardly escaped, ill and naked, from his camp to the wing of Antony’s army. He was ill, and had to be carried in a litter, according to Plutarch,Brut.p. 41. InAntony, 22, Plutarch says: “In the first battle, Cæsar was completely routed by Brutus, his camp taken, he himself very narrowly escaping by flight.” The decisive defeat of the Republicans was twenty days later.

17The text here is conjectural. Mommsen is almost alone in holding to “surviving,” Zumpt, in his edition of 1869, had read “suppliant” (supplicibus), Bergk, in 1873, “asking pardon” (deprecantibus). Hirschfeld, the same sense, (veniam petentibus). Seeck insists on the latter reading, in spite of Mommsen’s arguments for his own choice. Augustus did not spare all surviving citizens either after Philippi or Actium, cf. Dio LI, 2: After Actium “of the senators and knights, and other leading men, who in any way had helped Antony, he fined some, many he killed, some he spared.” For his conduct after Philippi, cf. Suet.Aug.13. But a coin of 727 (Eckhel VI, 88, Cohen I, p. 66, No. 30), hasCæsar cos vii Civibus Servateis, “Cæsar for the seventh time consul, the citizens having been preserved.” It commemorates the civic crown given to Augustus, cf. c. XXXIV. There are other coins withOb Cives Servatos, “On account of the preservation of the citizens.”

18This fact is one of the few which the latest text, based on Humann’s work, alone establishes. Merivale’s comment on the relation of Augustus to the army is noteworthy: “Their hero (Julius Cæsar) discarded the defence of the legions, and a few months witnessed his assassination. Augustus learned circumspection from the failure of his predecessor’s enterprise. He organized a military establishment of which he made himself the permanent head; to him every legionary swore personal fidelity; every officer depended upon his direct appointment.” (C. XXXII.)

19C. 15 states the number colonized at 120,000. The 200,000 over and above the 300,000 here named, are accounted for in the twenty-five legions, 150,000 men in service at his death, leaving only 50,000 as the number who died in service or were dishonorably discharged during the long rule of Augustus. For a study of the strength and disposition of the Roman army at the death of Augustus, cf. Mommsen’s R. G., pp. 67-76.

20The term of service in 741, was twelve years for praetorian soldiers and sixteen for legionaries, raised in 758 to sixteen and twenty years respectively. Cf. c. 17, N. 2.

21The reading of Wölfflin and others (see textual note) would give instead of “lands purchased by me,” “I have assigned lands,” and instead of “money for farms, out of my own means” “money for reward of service.” Bormann,Schr. Nachl.p. 18-20, does not think that Augustus meant to state that he paid these charges from private sources, but believes that such a statement would be irrelevant in this section, if true, and an anticipation of cc. 15 and 16.

22Sextus Pompeius lost thirty ships at Mylae, and at Naulochus, out of three hundred which he had, eighteen were sunk and the rest, with the exception of seventeen, burned or captured. Cf. App.B. C.V, 108, 118, 121. Plut.Ant.68, says that Augustus took 300 ships at Actium. These captures give, in round numbers, 600 vessels.

23The ovation was the lesser triumph. The general entered the city clad as an ordinary magistrate, and on foot, or as here, (see the Greek), on horseback, decked with myrtle. Suet.Aug.22, says, these ovations were after Philippi, and the Sicilian war; the former in 714, the latter, Nov. 13, 718. Cf. Dio XLVIII, 31, XLIX, 15; C. I. L. I, p. 461.

24In the curule triumph, for important victories, the general was vested in purple, and rode in a four-horse chariot, preceded by the fasces. These three triumphs were celebrated on the 13th, 14th and 15th of August, 725, for the Dalmatian successes, the victory of Actium and the capture of Alexandria. Cf. C. I. L. 1, p. 328 and 478. Prop. II, 1, 31, ff, gives an eye-witness’ account of the second day. Cf. Livy,Ep.CXXXIII; Suet.Aug.22; Verg.Aen.VIII; 714, Dio LI, 21.

25The acclamation asimperator, on account of success in war, must be carefully distinguished from the title used as a prefix to the name and as a mark of perpetual authority. The title imperator was regularly and permanently assumed at the beginning of each reign, after that of Augustus. To him it was formally assigned by the senate, in Jan., 725. C. I. L., V, 1873:Senatus populusque Romanus imp. Cæsari, divi. Juli. f. cos. quinct. cos. design. sext. imp. sept. republica conservata.The term thus had a double usage and meaning in such cases.It soon came about that only theprincepscould assume the special designation for military successes, no matter whether won by him in person or not. Tacitus says,Ann.III, 74: “Tiberius allowed Blaesus to be saluted as imperator by the legions. Augustus conceded the title to some, but Tiberius’ allowing it to Blaesus was the last instance.” For a discussion ofImperatoras permanent title, see Gardthausen, p. 527, and Merivale,History of the Romans, c. XXXI.Most of the acclamations of Augustus as imperator can be traced. No Greek inscription records them. A list follows. In the later instances Tiberius was associated.I. April 15 (?) 711. After battles about Mutina. C. I. L. X, 8375 and Dio XLVI, 38.II. Not traced.III. Before 717. Cohen,Vipsan.3, gives a coin with the wordsimp. divi Juli f. ter.iiiVir v. p. c. M. Agrippa cos. desig.Agrippa entered his consulship Jan. 1, 717.IV. Probably connected with the Sicilian victory and ovation of 718.V. 720 or 721. Probably connected with Dalmatian victories of one of those years. Cf. C. I. L. V, 526.VI. From Sept. 2, 723, to 725. On account of Actium. Cf. Oros. VI, 19, 14. C. I. L. X, 3826.Imp. Cæsari divi f. imp. vi, cos. iii(723). C. I. L. X, 4830,imp. Cæsari divi f. cos. v(725)imp. vi.VII. From 725 to 729. C. I. L. VI, 873:senatus populusque Romanus imp. Cæsari divi Juli f. cos. quinct.(725)cos. desig. sex. imp. sept. republica conservata. On account of Thracian and Dacian victory of M. Licinius Crassus. Dio LI, 25, says: “Sacrifices and festivals were decreed to Cæsar and to Crassus. He did not, however, as some say, take the name imperator. Cæsar alone assumed that.”VIII. From 729 to 734. Two inscriptions at Nismes (Donat. 96, 6) read:imp. Cæsari divi f. Augusto cos. nonum(729)designato decimum, imp. octavum. Dio LIII, 26, says it was for a Celtic victory of Marcus Vinicius.IX. From 734 to 739 (?) Coins have the inscriptionAugustus Cæsar div. f. Armen. capt. imp. viii. These commemorate the Armenian expedition of Tiberius in 734. Possibly Augustus took the title on account of the return of the captured standards from Parthia, which he accounted a greater triumph than many a victory in open warfare.X. 739 (?) to 742. C. I. L. V, 8088 and others:Augustus imp. x, tribunicia potestate xi. The latter falls in the years 742, 743. Probably referable to successes in Rhætian war of 739.XI. 742. Coins (Cohen, n. 147-150) give:imp. xi. The causes were the successes of Tiberius in Pannonia in 742. Dio LIV, 31.XII. 743 to 744. C. I. L., III, 3117:imp. xii tr. pot. xiiiand VI, 701, 702:pontifex maximus, imp. xii cos. xi trib. pot. xiv. Referable to Germanic victory of Drusus. Dio LIV, 33.XIII. Tiberius Imp. 745. Suet.,Tib.9, says that Tiberius received the oration for Pannonian and Dalmatian victories. Cf. Val. 5, 5, 3. Dio LV, 2.XIV. Tiberius Imp. II. 746-755. Dio LV, 6, refers this acclamation to the Germanic victories of 746. Many coins, milestones and other inscriptions of the period indicated mention this fourteenth acclamation. Cf. C. I. L., II, 3827; 4931; V, 7243; 7817; VI, 1244.XV. 755. For the Armenian victory of C. Cæsar. Dio Cass. LV, 11. C. I. L. X, 3827;pont. max., cos. iii (xiii) imp. xv, tr. p. xxv, p. p.XVI. Untraced.XVII. Tiberius Imp. III. 759. Dio LV, 28, referring to the German expedition of Tiberius in 759, says, “Nothing great was accomplished. Yet both Augustus and Tiberius received the acclamation as imperators.” Cf. C. I. L. V. 6416.XVIII. Tiberius Imp. IV. Probably for successes in Illyricum.XIX. Tiberius Imp. V, 762. Dio LVI, 17, refers to the Dalmatian war. A coin of 763-4 (Cohen n. 27) gives:Ti. Cæsar August. f, imperat. v. pontifex, tribun. potestate xii.XX. Tiberius Imp. VI. 765. The cause is not clear, probably for slight successes of Tiberius and Germanicus against the Germans in 763, 764. Dio LVI, 25. A Spanish milestone, C. I. L. II, 4868, gives the data.XXI. Tiberius Imp. VII. Tac.Ann.I, 9, says Augustus was twenty-one times Imperator. A coin of Lyons (Cohen n. 35-38) has:Ti. Cæsar Augusti f. imperator VII. This dates from the lifetime of Augustus. Tiberius did not receive a further acclamation.

It soon came about that only theprincepscould assume the special designation for military successes, no matter whether won by him in person or not. Tacitus says,Ann.III, 74: “Tiberius allowed Blaesus to be saluted as imperator by the legions. Augustus conceded the title to some, but Tiberius’ allowing it to Blaesus was the last instance.” For a discussion ofImperatoras permanent title, see Gardthausen, p. 527, and Merivale,History of the Romans, c. XXXI.

Most of the acclamations of Augustus as imperator can be traced. No Greek inscription records them. A list follows. In the later instances Tiberius was associated.

I. April 15 (?) 711. After battles about Mutina. C. I. L. X, 8375 and Dio XLVI, 38.

II. Not traced.

III. Before 717. Cohen,Vipsan.3, gives a coin with the wordsimp. divi Juli f. ter.iiiVir v. p. c. M. Agrippa cos. desig.Agrippa entered his consulship Jan. 1, 717.

IV. Probably connected with the Sicilian victory and ovation of 718.

V. 720 or 721. Probably connected with Dalmatian victories of one of those years. Cf. C. I. L. V, 526.

VI. From Sept. 2, 723, to 725. On account of Actium. Cf. Oros. VI, 19, 14. C. I. L. X, 3826.Imp. Cæsari divi f. imp. vi, cos. iii(723). C. I. L. X, 4830,imp. Cæsari divi f. cos. v(725)imp. vi.

VII. From 725 to 729. C. I. L. VI, 873:senatus populusque Romanus imp. Cæsari divi Juli f. cos. quinct.(725)cos. desig. sex. imp. sept. republica conservata. On account of Thracian and Dacian victory of M. Licinius Crassus. Dio LI, 25, says: “Sacrifices and festivals were decreed to Cæsar and to Crassus. He did not, however, as some say, take the name imperator. Cæsar alone assumed that.”

VIII. From 729 to 734. Two inscriptions at Nismes (Donat. 96, 6) read:imp. Cæsari divi f. Augusto cos. nonum(729)designato decimum, imp. octavum. Dio LIII, 26, says it was for a Celtic victory of Marcus Vinicius.

IX. From 734 to 739 (?) Coins have the inscriptionAugustus Cæsar div. f. Armen. capt. imp. viii. These commemorate the Armenian expedition of Tiberius in 734. Possibly Augustus took the title on account of the return of the captured standards from Parthia, which he accounted a greater triumph than many a victory in open warfare.

X. 739 (?) to 742. C. I. L. V, 8088 and others:Augustus imp. x, tribunicia potestate xi. The latter falls in the years 742, 743. Probably referable to successes in Rhætian war of 739.

XI. 742. Coins (Cohen, n. 147-150) give:imp. xi. The causes were the successes of Tiberius in Pannonia in 742. Dio LIV, 31.

XII. 743 to 744. C. I. L., III, 3117:imp. xii tr. pot. xiiiand VI, 701, 702:pontifex maximus, imp. xii cos. xi trib. pot. xiv. Referable to Germanic victory of Drusus. Dio LIV, 33.

XIII. Tiberius Imp. 745. Suet.,Tib.9, says that Tiberius received the oration for Pannonian and Dalmatian victories. Cf. Val. 5, 5, 3. Dio LV, 2.

XIV. Tiberius Imp. II. 746-755. Dio LV, 6, refers this acclamation to the Germanic victories of 746. Many coins, milestones and other inscriptions of the period indicated mention this fourteenth acclamation. Cf. C. I. L., II, 3827; 4931; V, 7243; 7817; VI, 1244.

XV. 755. For the Armenian victory of C. Cæsar. Dio Cass. LV, 11. C. I. L. X, 3827;pont. max., cos. iii (xiii) imp. xv, tr. p. xxv, p. p.

XVI. Untraced.

XVII. Tiberius Imp. III. 759. Dio LV, 28, referring to the German expedition of Tiberius in 759, says, “Nothing great was accomplished. Yet both Augustus and Tiberius received the acclamation as imperators.” Cf. C. I. L. V. 6416.

XVIII. Tiberius Imp. IV. Probably for successes in Illyricum.

XIX. Tiberius Imp. V, 762. Dio LVI, 17, refers to the Dalmatian war. A coin of 763-4 (Cohen n. 27) gives:Ti. Cæsar August. f, imperat. v. pontifex, tribun. potestate xii.

XX. Tiberius Imp. VI. 765. The cause is not clear, probably for slight successes of Tiberius and Germanicus against the Germans in 763, 764. Dio LVI, 25. A Spanish milestone, C. I. L. II, 4868, gives the data.

XXI. Tiberius Imp. VII. Tac.Ann.I, 9, says Augustus was twenty-one times Imperator. A coin of Lyons (Cohen n. 35-38) has:Ti. Cæsar Augusti f. imperator VII. This dates from the lifetime of Augustus. Tiberius did not receive a further acclamation.

26ᵃ After his own victory over the Cantabri, that of Varro over the Salassi and that of M. Vinicius over the Germans, in 729. Cf. Florus, IV, 12, 53.ᵇ After the restoration of the standards by the Parthians in 734. Cf. Borghesi II, 100 ff.ᶜ After the victories of Tiberius in Germany in 746. Dio LV, 6.ᵈ After the victories of Tiberius in Pannonia? Dio LVI, 17.

26ᵃ After his own victory over the Cantabri, that of Varro over the Salassi and that of M. Vinicius over the Germans, in 729. Cf. Florus, IV, 12, 53.

ᵇ After the restoration of the standards by the Parthians in 734. Cf. Borghesi II, 100 ff.

ᶜ After the victories of Tiberius in Germany in 746. Dio LV, 6.

ᵈ After the victories of Tiberius in Pannonia? Dio LVI, 17.

27A part of the ordinary ceremonial of the triumph. Cf. Mommsen,Röm. St.I, p. 61, 95, Marquardt,Staatsverwaltung, II, p. 582.

28For a thanksgiving after the expedition of Tiberius into Armenia cf. Dio LIV, 9. Cf. also Cic.Phil.XIV, 11, 29. For two other instances, cf. Mommsen,R. G., appendix, pp. 161-178.

29Not an incredible number. Thanksgivings were offered in Julius Cæsar’s time of fifteen, twenty, forty and fifty days. Cf. Drumann III, 609, No. 84. Fifty days were decreed for the victories of Hirtius, Pansa and Octavian in 711.

30The only names traceable are those of Alexander and Cleopatra, the children of Cleopatra and Alexander brother of Jamblichus, King of the Emesenes. Cf. Dio LI, 2, 21. Prop. 2, 1, 33, tells of “Kings with their necks surrounded with golden chains,” in the triumph of Aug. 14, 725.

31The emperors assumed the consulship only irregularly and for short periods. Their taking of the “tribunitial power” was not through a regular election to the tribuneship, as was the case with the consulship, for Augustus as a patrician was ineligible; but it was the assumption of a power equal to that of the tribunes. This made the emperors sacrosanct, gave them the initiative and the veto, and well subserved the fiction of their being the representatives and champions of the people. For discussions of this power cf. Merivale,Hist. of Rom.C. XXXI; Mommsen,Röm. St.II, p. 759, 771-777, 833-845.Succeeding emperors, down to 268 A. D., dated their accession from the day of assuming the tribunitial power. The wording is peculiar in this sentence. May it not have been that Augustus expected his heir or executors to fill in the exact dates at the time of his death, as suggested in the introduction?

Succeeding emperors, down to 268 A. D., dated their accession from the day of assuming the tribunitial power. The wording is peculiar in this sentence. May it not have been that Augustus expected his heir or executors to fill in the exact dates at the time of his death, as suggested in the introduction?

32Dio, LIV, 1, writes: “In the following year (732) the Tiber again overflowed; statues in the Pantheon were struck by lightning, so that the spear was knocked out of the hand of Augustus. Pestilence was so violent in all Italy that year that there was no one to till the fields; and I think the same was the case in foreign lands. The Romans thought that this plague and famine had come upon them, because they had not made Augustus consul that year; they wished to name him dictator, and with great show of violence compelled the senate, shut up in the curia, to decree this; threatening to burn them unless they did it. So the senate approached Augustus with the twenty-four fasces (insignia of dictatorship, the consul having only twelve), and begged him to accept the dictatorship and the administration of the food supply. He did indeed undertake the latter charge, and ordered that duumvirs, who had held the praetorship five years before, should be yearly appointed to have charge of the distribution of grain, but would by no means accept the dictatorship. When neither by words nor prayers he could move the people, he tore his garments. For he justly wished to avoid the jealousy and hatred of that name, since moreover, he already held a dignity and power superior to that of the dictatorship.” Vell. II, 89, 5, says: “The dictatorship which the people persistently thrust upon him, he as constantly repelled.”The dictatorship had fallen into disuse after 552, and was revived, irregularly, by Sulla in 672. Cæsar made it the basis of his power, being made perpetual dictator shortly before his death. After that event, on motion of Antony, the office was abolished.

The dictatorship had fallen into disuse after 552, and was revived, irregularly, by Sulla in 672. Cæsar made it the basis of his power, being made perpetual dictator shortly before his death. After that event, on motion of Antony, the office was abolished.

33In Chap. 15, Augustus states that in 731 he twelve times distributed grain at his own expense. This assumption of the grain administration in 732 was not strictly a charity. The extract from Dio under Note69, gives some of the details. It is probable that from this time the tribute in kind was turned into thefiscus, or imperial treasury, instead of into theærarium, or treasury of the senate, as heretofore. This new task of the imperial government involved not merely the gratuitous distribution of grain to the ordinary Roman citizens (after 752 even to senators and knights), but also the providing of a sufficient supply of grain for all purchasers at a minimum price, often below the market value. It appears that grain tickets “tessaræ frumentariæ” were distributed to the citizens entitled to free grain, and then, to assist the vast multitude of strangers, freedmen, andattachésof the great houses, money tickets, “tessaræ nummariæ” were given out. Cf. Mommsen,Röm. St., II, 992.

34Vell. II, 89; Suet.Aug.26; Dio, LIV, 10. Dio’s statement that Augustus in 735 accepted the consular power (differing from the consulship as the tribunitial power from the tribuneship. Cf. Note31, Chap. 4.) for life, cannot be correct in face of the other two authorities cited, who corroborate Augustus here. Chapter 8 tells of two special assumptions of the consular power for the taking of the second and third census.

35Before the restoration of the text of this inscription, in this case depending entirely upon the remains at Apollonia, it used to be taught that Augustus accepted the formal superintendence of laws and morals. And there seemed to be good ground for such belief. Horace, c., 740 inCarm. IV, 5, v. 22, says, “Morality and law have subdued foul wrong;” and inEp., II, 1, v. 1, “Since thou hast protected Italy with arms, adorned her with morality, and improved her with laws.” Ovid wrote,Tristia, II, 233: “The city wearies thee with the care of laws and morals, which thou desirest should be like thy own.” Suet.Aug.27, says: “He accepted the control of laws and morals for life, as he had the tribunitial power; and in the exercise of this control, altho’ without the honor of the censorship, he yet thrice took the census of the people, the first and third times with a colleague, the second time alone.” Dio, LIV, 10, 30, says that in 735 and 742 Augustus accepted this office for periods of five years. But the inscription shows that Suetonius and Dio were wrong, and that a natural but incorrect inference had been drawn from the poets.This power was offered to Augustus three times; in 735, 736 and 743, and as often refused. Why was it offered, and why refused? Cf. Dio, LIV, 10; Vell. II, 91, 92; Suet.Aug.19. While Augustus was in Asia in 735 M. Egnatius Rufus, who is painted as a sort of Catiline, tried to obtain the consulship, and even to supplant Augustus, and stirred up sedition in the attempt. This so alarmed the senate and people that they offered Augustus the plenary power of legislation and coercion. The repetition of the offer in 736 was from a similar cause. The reason for that of 743 is unknown. The power thus offered was analogous to the decemvirate, or the Sullan dictatorship. Cf. Mommsen,Röm., St., II, 686.

This power was offered to Augustus three times; in 735, 736 and 743, and as often refused. Why was it offered, and why refused? Cf. Dio, LIV, 10; Vell. II, 91, 92; Suet.Aug.19. While Augustus was in Asia in 735 M. Egnatius Rufus, who is painted as a sort of Catiline, tried to obtain the consulship, and even to supplant Augustus, and stirred up sedition in the attempt. This so alarmed the senate and people that they offered Augustus the plenary power of legislation and coercion. The repetition of the offer in 736 was from a similar cause. The reason for that of 743 is unknown. The power thus offered was analogous to the decemvirate, or the Sullan dictatorship. Cf. Mommsen,Röm., St., II, 686.

36This sentence answers the second question asked in the above Note. It was part of Augustus’ policy to seem to keep wholly within the lines of the constitution. Hence his refusal to accept any extraordinary office. Yet his tribunitial power was new and extraordinary. Tacitus’ comment is caustic,Ann., III, 56: “That specious title (the tribunitial power) importing nothing less than sovereign power, was invented by Augustus at a time when the name of king or dictator was not only unconstitutional but universally detested. And yet a new name was wanted to overtop the magistrates and the forms of the constitution.”

37Dio, LIV, 16, names three laws promulgated by Augustus in 736: one took cognizance of bribery by candidates for office; a second dealt with extravagance; and a third was for the encouragement of matrimony.

38ᵃ in 736 Agrippa was associated with Augustus for five years. Cf. Dio, LIV, 12; Vell. II, 90; Tac.Ann.III, 56.ᵇ in 741 Agrippa again for five years. Cf. Dio, LIV, 12, 28.ᶜ in 748 Tiberius for five years. Cf. Dio, LV, 9; Vell. II, 99; Suet.Tib.9, 10, 11.ᵈ in 757 Tiberius for ten years. Cf. Dio, LV, 13; Vell. II, 103; Tac.Ann., I, 3, 10.ᵉ in 766 Tiberius for an indefinite time. Cf. Dio, LVI, 28.

38ᵃ in 736 Agrippa was associated with Augustus for five years. Cf. Dio, LIV, 12; Vell. II, 90; Tac.Ann.III, 56.

ᵇ in 741 Agrippa again for five years. Cf. Dio, LIV, 12, 28.

ᶜ in 748 Tiberius for five years. Cf. Dio, LV, 9; Vell. II, 99; Suet.Tib.9, 10, 11.

ᵈ in 757 Tiberius for ten years. Cf. Dio, LV, 13; Vell. II, 103; Tac.Ann., I, 3, 10.

ᵉ in 766 Tiberius for an indefinite time. Cf. Dio, LVI, 28.

39Suet.Aug.27: “He administered the triumvirate for organizing the commonwealth through ten years.” Cf. C. I. L. I, p. 461 and p. 466. The first triumvirate lasted from Nov. 27, 711, to Dec. 31, 716; the second from Jan. 1, 717, to Dec. 31, 721. But cf. c. 34, N. 1.

40Cf. Dio, LIII, 1. This title had been conferred upon the senior senator who had served as censor. Its only privilege was the right of speaking first in debate. The honor had fallen into abeyance with the death of Catulus in 694. It is readily seen how the revival of such a title and of the right to express his views before any other senator, gave Augustus a quasi-constitutional initiative in the senate. Gradually the title dropped its second part, and “prince” began to have something of its modern significance. Cf. Tacitus,Ann.III, 53, for Tiberius’ view of its meaning.Augustus’ notation of time here, “through forty years,” is similar to the “thirty-seventh year of the tribunitial power” in Chap. IV, or “the seventy-sixth year” of Chap. 36.

Augustus’ notation of time here, “through forty years,” is similar to the “thirty-seventh year of the tribunitial power” in Chap. IV, or “the seventy-sixth year” of Chap. 36.

41He was madepontifexin 706 by Julius Cæsar. Cf. Cic.Phil.V, 17, 46; Vell. II, 59. For his taking the office ofpontifex maximuscf. c. 10, N. 3.

42The date of Augustus’ assumption of the augurate is discussed by Drumann, IV, 250. Coins are the chief witnesses, and their testimony is confused. The date probably was 713 or 714.

43A coin of Augustus (Cohen,Jul.60;Aug.88) hasimp. Cæsar divi f. III vir iter. r. p. c. cos. iter. et tert desig., which fixes the time as between 717 and 720; it has also the tripod, the symbol of the quindecemvirate.

44We can say only that Augustus received this dignity before 738; for there is a coin of that year showing thesimpulum, thelituusand the tripod, the symbols respectively of the three foregoing offices, and thepatera, or bowl, that of the septemviral office. The four colleges thus associated are the chief ones. Cf. Chap. 9.

45The name of Augustus is twice found in theActa Fratrum Arvalium, once in May, 767, in recording a vote, and in Dec., 767, in the record of the nomination of his successor.

46Tacitus says the Titian Sodality was instituted by Titus Tatius for keeping up the Sabine ritual. Cf.Ann.I, 54. The record here is all that is known of Augustus’ connection with it.

47The fetials had charge of the formalities in declaring war and peace. Dio L, 4, says that Augustus went through the old-fashioned ceremonies in declaring war against Cleopatra.These three colleges had fallen into abeyance in the time of Cicero. Augustus undoubtedly revived them. Cf. Suet.Aug.31. Such restoration, and religious conservatism in general, as even in the case of Domitian, marks the policy of the emperors for two hundred years, and was one of their favorite methods of posing simply as restorers of the good old times.

47The fetials had charge of the formalities in declaring war and peace. Dio L, 4, says that Augustus went through the old-fashioned ceremonies in declaring war against Cleopatra.

These three colleges had fallen into abeyance in the time of Cicero. Augustus undoubtedly revived them. Cf. Suet.Aug.31. Such restoration, and religious conservatism in general, as even in the case of Domitian, marks the policy of the emperors for two hundred years, and was one of their favorite methods of posing simply as restorers of the good old times.

48In 725. The Saenian law, passed by the people in 724, authorized this proceeding, and the senate’s decree followed. Hence the order, “people and senate.” Cf. Tac.Ann.XI, 25; Dio, LII, 42. An earlier creation of patricians is assigned by Dio to the year 721. But he is probably mistaken, as Tacitus, in the passage just noted, says that Claudius was obliged to create more patricians, “because the number had declined even after being recruited by the dictator Cæsar under the Cassian law, and by Augustus theprincepsunder the Saenian law.” Such a creation was not a right of the principate. Cæsar and Augustus did it by special authorization of people and senate. Claudius did it in virtue of his censorship, and this status continued till Domitian absorbed the censorship in the principate, and assumed the right as a permanent one.

49During most of the republican history the senate numbered, ideally, three hundred. In Cicero’s time it had over four hundred members. Julius Cæsar raised it to about nine hundred. Suet.Aug., 35, says: “By two separate scrutinies he (Augustus) reduced to their former number and splendor the senate, which had been swamped by a disorderly crowd; for they were now more than a thousand, and some of them very mean persons, who, after Cæsar’s death, had been chosen by dint of interest and bribery, so that they had the name of Orcini among the people.” They were also called Charonites, because they owed their elevation to the last will of Cæsar, who had gone into Orcus to Charon. Dio, XL, 48, 63, tells of freedmen in the senate and, XLIII, 22, of a private soldier; Gell., XV, 4, of a muleteer, cf. Juvenal,Sat.VII, 199.Dio, LII, 42, cf. LIII, 1, tells of the first scrutiny, in 725-6. A hint from Augustus was enough to cause the withdrawal first of sixty, then of one hundred and forty senators. He also tells, LIV, 13, 14, of a further revision in 736, by which the number was brought down to six hundred. He assigns a third sifting to 743 (LIV, 35), and a fourth to 757 (LV, 13). Mommsen, however, is inclined to connect the three revisions of Augustus with the censuses of 726, 746 and 767, and to regard those of 736 and 757 as extraordinary, and therefore not named by Augustus, in his desire to appear entirely within constitutional lines. Cf. Mommsen,R. G., p. 35.

Dio, LII, 42, cf. LIII, 1, tells of the first scrutiny, in 725-6. A hint from Augustus was enough to cause the withdrawal first of sixty, then of one hundred and forty senators. He also tells, LIV, 13, 14, of a further revision in 736, by which the number was brought down to six hundred. He assigns a third sifting to 743 (LIV, 35), and a fourth to 757 (LV, 13). Mommsen, however, is inclined to connect the three revisions of Augustus with the censuses of 726, 746 and 767, and to regard those of 736 and 757 as extraordinary, and therefore not named by Augustus, in his desire to appear entirely within constitutional lines. Cf. Mommsen,R. G., p. 35.

50Suetonius evidently depends on this inscription when he says,Aug.27: “Three times he took the census of the Roman people, the first and third times with a colleague, the second time alone.” This first census was in 725-6. Cf. Dio, LII, 42; LIII, 1; C. I. L. IX, 422,imp. Cæsar VI, M. Agrippa II cos.; idem censoria potestate lustrum fecerunt.The lustrum was strictly the expiatory offering made at the close of the census. The census had not been taken for forty-one years. The number of Roman citizens of military age in 684 had been given as but 450,000. This census of 726 reported 4,063,000. Probably the vast apparent increase rose from the fact of the earlier enumeration counting only such as presented themselves before the censors in the city, while at the later time the citizens throughout the empire were counted. Clinton,Fasti Hellenici, III, 461, estimates a total free citizenship of more than 17,000,000. The total population of the empire at this time, including citizens, allies, slaves and freedmen, has been estimated at 85,000,000. Cf. Merivale,Rom.cc. XXX, XXXIX.The Greek of the inscription here reads erroneously 4,603,000.

The lustrum was strictly the expiatory offering made at the close of the census. The census had not been taken for forty-one years. The number of Roman citizens of military age in 684 had been given as but 450,000. This census of 726 reported 4,063,000. Probably the vast apparent increase rose from the fact of the earlier enumeration counting only such as presented themselves before the censors in the city, while at the later time the citizens throughout the empire were counted. Clinton,Fasti Hellenici, III, 461, estimates a total free citizenship of more than 17,000,000. The total population of the empire at this time, including citizens, allies, slaves and freedmen, has been estimated at 85,000,000. Cf. Merivale,Rom.cc. XXX, XXXIX.

The Greek of the inscription here reads erroneously 4,603,000.

51In 746. The result, 4,233,000, shows a gain of 170,000.

52In 767. Just before the death of Augustus. Result, 4,937,000; gain since 746, 704,000.

53Suetonius,Aug.34, relates his endeavors to compel matrimony. In Chap. 89, Suetonius writes: “In reading Greek or Latin authors he paid particular attention to precepts and examples which might be useful in public or private life. These he used to extract verbatim, and give to his domestics, or send to the commanders of the armies, the governors of the provinces, or the magistrates of the city, when any of them seemed to stand in need of admonition. He likewise read whole books to the senate, and frequently made them known to the people by his edicts; such as the orations of Quintus Metellus ‘For the Encouragement of Marriage,’ and those of Rutilius ‘On the Style of Building;’ to show the people that he was not the first who had promoted those objects, but that the ancients likewise had thought them worthy of their attention.” Cf. Livy,Ep.LIX; Gell., I, 6.

54These games were first held in 726, and every fourth year thereafter. The expression “every fifth year” counts the year of the games as the fifth of the old series and also the first of the new. The consuls, or rather the consul Agrippa, Augustus not holding games in his own honor, celebrated the games of 726, the pontifices those of 730, the augurs those of 734, the quindecemvirs those of 738, and the septemvirs those of 742. Cf. c. 7, N. 6. These games are mentioned by Dio, LIII, 1, 2; LIV, 19; Pliny,Hist. Nat.VII, 48, 158; Suet.Aug.44. They came to a close with the life of Augustus. We do not hear of them in connection with any subsequent emperor. Vows for his good health had a special fitness, for according to Suetonius,Aug.LXXXI, he was almost an invalid. “During his whole course of life he suffered at times dangerous fits of sickness. He was subject to fits of sickness at stated times every year, for about his birthday he was commonly indisposed. In the beginning of spring he was attacked with an inflammation of the midriff; and when the wind was southerly, with a cold in his head. By all these complaints his constitution was so shattered that he could not readily bear heat or cold.”

55Cf. Suet.Aug.59 and 98; Hor.Carm.IV, 5, 33; Dio, LI, 19.

56Dio writes of the year 725, LI, 20: “When letters were brought about Parthian affairs it was decreed that he should be named in the hymns exactly as were the gods.” Tiridates, a Parthian pretender, sought the aid of Augustus. Cf. Chap. 32, and Dio, LI, 18. Augustus balanced Tiridates against Phraates, the legitimate monarch, who sent an embassy, and gave his son to Rome as a hostage.

57In 718, when Lepidus had been overthrown, the tribunitial power had been given to Octavian, as formerly to Julius, for life. Inviolability of person was one of the privileges of the tribunate. Cf. Oros. VI, 18, 34; Dio, XLIX, 15; LI, 18; LIII, 32. These two later statements relating to the years 724 and 731, Mommsen thinks have to do, the former with the extension of the tribunitial power beyond the city, and the latter to the making it annual, as well as perpetual, so that the years of the principate could be reckoned by it. Cf. Chap. 4, note31. Cf. also App.B. C.V, 132, and for a discussion of the tribunitial power as an expression of the principate, cf. Mommsen,Röm. St.II, 833, ff.Wölfflin, cf. textual note, suggests, to fill the gap confessedly left by Mommsen’s emendation, a reading which would be translated “that my person should be sacrosanct.”

Wölfflin, cf. textual note, suggests, to fill the gap confessedly left by Mommsen’s emendation, a reading which would be translated “that my person should be sacrosanct.”

58Augustus here characteristically avoids the name of Lepidus. The latter “in the confusion and tumult had seized the supreme pontificate,” cf. Livy,Ep.CXVII, “by craft,” cf. Velleius II, 63; “Antony transferred the election of the pontifex maximus from the people to the priests again, and through them initiated Lepidus, almost entirely neglecting the customs of the fathers.” Cf. Dio, XLIV, 53. Lepidus dying in 741, cf. Dio, LIV, 27, Augustus entered upon the office Mar. 6, 742. Cf. C. I. L., I. p. 387. It was unlawful to deprive a living man of this office, cf. App.,B. C., V, 131.

59October 12, 735. In C. I. L. I. p. 404, is found an inscription of that date:Feriae ex senatus consulto, quod eo die imp. Cæsar Augustus ex transmarinis provincis urbem intravit araq(ue) Fortunae reduci constituta.There are also gold and silver coins (Eckhel VI, 100; Cohen,Aug.nos. 102-108) with the inscription,Fortunae reduci, Cæsari Augusto senatus populusque Romanus, Dio, LIV, 10, tells that Augustus after having arranged matters in Sicily, Greece, Asia and Syria, returned to Rome, and that many honors were decreed to him, but that he would accept none of them, “but that an altar should be consecrated to Fortune the Restorer, that the day should be accounted a feast day, and that it should be called the Augustalia.”The location near the Porta Capena was chosen, because it was through that gate Augustus would enter the city, coming by the Appian Way from Brundisium. The altar was dedicated on Dec. 15, C. I. L. X, 8375. Cf. Dio, LI, 19; App.B. C.II, 106.

The location near the Porta Capena was chosen, because it was through that gate Augustus would enter the city, coming by the Appian Way from Brundisium. The altar was dedicated on Dec. 15, C. I. L. X, 8375. Cf. Dio, LI, 19; App.B. C.II, 106.

60Dio, LIV, 10, relates that in this year there were great tumults in connection with the consular comitia, and no election was possible. In consequence of this the senate sent messengers to Augustus urging him to deal with the trouble. Q. Lucretius, one of the delegates, was named consul by Augustus on the spot where they met. It is Mommsen’s idea (R. G., p. 48) that the story of Dio, and the statement of Augustus relate to the same event, and that Augustus was not willing to admit that so late in his reign, such disturbances could be, and that he therefore conveys the impression that what was really an appeal for aid was rather an embassy of honor. This Mommsen thinks quite in keeping with the general character and method of Augustus. Bormann, on the other hand (Schr. Nach., p. 29), sees no conflict in the two accounts. He believes that Dio narrates truthfully enough an earlier deputation sent to Augustus, possibly at Athens, some time before his return, and that Lucretius was named consul there by Augustus. Then, some time later, the deputation of honor, as recorded in the inscription, was sent into Campania.

Back to Index Next