one. He says that in 726, when it was determined to exhibit games in
honor of Actium, Augustus replenished the empty treasury for that
purpose. And there is a coin of c. 738 with the inscription: _Senatus
populusque Romanus imperatori Cæsari quod viæ munitæ sunt ex ea pecunia
quam is ad ærarium detulit._ Eckhel VI, 105.
Up to 726 the treasury was in charge of the quæstors. Thence to 731 two
exprætors, after that year two prætors presided over it, up to the time
of Claudius. Cf. Tac. _Ann._ XIII, 29; Dio, LIII, 2 and 32; Suet.
_Aug._ 36. The sum mentioned here is $7,500,000. In the Greek τρίς
has evidently been omitted before χειλίας.
[82] This was in 759. In 741 (Dio, LIV, 25) Augustus had fixed the
term of service at twelve years for the prætorians and sixteen for
the legionaries. The gift to the former upon discharge was also
larger. In 758 the terms of service were lengthened to sixteen and
twenty years. Cf. Dio, LV, 23. In LV, 25, Dio writes of this year 759:
“Augustus contributed, in his own name and in that of Tiberius, money
for that treasury which is called the military.” The sum so given was
$8,500,000. Tributary states and kings also assisted. But income could
not keep pace with expenses. The old tax of a twentieth on bequests,
except when the heir was a very near relative, or very poor, was
revived, much to the discontent of the Roman people. Cf. Dio, LV, 25. Other
taxes were devised, such as that of one _per cent_ on sales. Cf.
Tac. _Ann._ I, 78. On sales of slaves two _per cent_ was
exacted. Cf. Dio, LV, 31.
A glance at the military establishment of Augustus may help to some
idea of its vast expense. Mommsen discusses the matter in detail (_R.
G._ pp. 68-76). Augustus seems to have left at his death a standing
army of twenty-five legions. Each legion approximated seven thousand
men, giving a total of 175,000 soldiers. His legions were numbered from
one to twenty-two. The number twenty-five is accounted for as follows:
the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth had been exterminated
under the leadership of Varus. But there were three legions, one in
Africa, one in Syria and one in Cyrenaica, bearing the title third,
and the fourth, fifth, sixth and tenth were each double. After Actium,
Augustus disbanded the legions numbered above twelve (cf. his colonies
of veterans at this time, numbering 120,000 men, c. XV). But by reason
of the repetitions above alluded to, the legions bearing the numbers
up to twelve, really amounted to eighteen. These duplications may have
risen from the absorption into Augustus' army of legions bearing the
same numbers from the forces of Lepidus and later from those of Antony.
In 759, eight new legions, the thirteenth to the twentieth, seem to
have been enrolled, in view of the German and Pannonian wars. This made
twenty six. Three were lost with Varus, and their numbers, seventeen,
eighteen and nineteen, seem never to have been restored to the list.
To offset this loss in a measure, two new legions, the twenty-first
and twenty-second were levied. Thus the twenty-five remaining at the
death of Augustus are accounted for. Such an establishment was
enormously and increasingly expensive. Pliny, _Hist. Nat._, VII,
45.
[83] This form of benefaction began in 736. It is a little remarkable
that Augustus should not mention the exact years of its continuance,
its amount, or the beneficiaries, while he does name the minimum number
of men who received aid from time to time. Perhaps he did not go into
details because these gifts concerned the provincials and would be of
slight interest to the city people for whose reading the inscription
was intended. In 742, “when Asia was in need of aid on account of
earthquakes, he paid the year’s tribute of the province out of his own
means.” Dio, LIV, 30.
His supplying grain as well as money rose from the fact that taxes
were imposed both in kind and in money. Cf. Tac. _Ann._ IV, 6;
_Agr._ XIX and XXXI; C. I. Gr. 4957, 47. These passages all speak
of taxes both in money and in produce. As to the method of levy,
Hyginus is interesting (_De Lim._ p. 205). “The tax on agriculture
is arranged in many ways. In some provinces the harvest is chargeable
with a certain proportion, here a fifth, there a seventh, elsewhere a
cash payment, and for this purpose certain values are determined for
the fields by an estimation of the soil; as in Pannonia there is arable
of the first class, of the second, meadows, mast-bearing woods, common
woods, pastures: upon all these the tax is laid by the single acre,
according to the fertility of the soil.” This was in the time of Trajan.
[84] The structures detailed here and in cc. 20 and 21, fall into three
classes. First, those of c. 19, being either new buildings in place of
ruined ones, or else entirely new ones, both classes on soil already
consecrated; second, those of c. 20, being repairs of public works;
third, public works upon soil given by himself, as noted in the first
part of c. 21.
Augustus does not mention structures which he erected in the name of
others, as the portico of Octavia, (different from the one below, Note
90), the portico of Livia, cf. Dio, XLIX, 43 and LIV, 23. He also omits
the temple of Concord dedicated by Tiberius in 763 (C. I. L. I. p.
384), though he paid for it.
The order of the works is chronological for the most part.
[85] This was the Curia Julia, begun in 712. Cf. Dio XLVII, 19; XLIV,
5; XLV, 17. It was dedicated in 725 after Actium. Cf. Dio LI, 22. Here
the senate met. Its location was near the forum.
[86] A shrine of Minerva Chalcidica.
[87] Begun after the Sicilian victories in 718. Cf. Dio XLIX, 15; Vell.
II, 81, dedicated Oct. 9, 726. Cf. Dio, LIII, 1; C. I. L. I, p. 403.
Suet. _Aug._ 29, says: “He reared a temple of Apollo in that part
of his estate on the Palatine which the haruspices declared was desired
by the god because it had been struck by lightning; he attached to it a
portico and a Greek and Latin library.”
[88] An altar was placed at once on the spot in the forum where the
body of Julius Cæsar was cremated. In 712 the senate decreed that a
temple should be built there.
[89] Dionysius (I, 32), observes that the ancient condition of this
place (originally a grotto near the Palatine, sacred to Pan) had
been so changed as to be hardly recognizable. This was by reason of
the changes made in his time, which nearly coincided with that of
Augustus. Cf. C. I. L. VI, 912, 6, 9, and 841. Its precise location is
undetermined.
[90] Festus, _De Verb. Sig._ L. 13, writes: “There were two
Octavian porticoes, the one built near the theatre of Marcellus by
Octavia, the sister of Augustus, the other close to the theatre of
Pompey, built by Cn. Octavius, son of Cnæus, who was curule aedile,
prætor, consul (589) decemvir for the sacred rites, and celebrated
a naval triumph for a victory over King Perseus. It was the latter
which, after its destruction by fire, Cæsar Augustus rebuilt.” Its
reconstruction was in 721. Cf. Dio, XLIX, 43, who, however, confounds
this Octavian portico with the other built some years after in the name
of Augustus’ sister, Octavia.
[91] The Pulvinar was the place of honor from which the imperial family
witnessed the games. Cf. Suet. _Aug._ 45; _Claud._ 4. This
restoration followed the burning of the Circus Maximus in 723. Cf. Dio,
L, 10.
[92] A temple attributed to Romulus, in ruins in the time of Augustus,
till restored by him on the suggestion of Atticus. Cf. Nepos,
_Atticus_, 20; Livy, IV, 20. The temple was probably restored in
723.
[93] Suetonius, _Aug._ 29, writes: “He dedicated the temple to
Jupiter the Thunderer, in acknowledgment of his escape from a great
danger in his Cantabrian expedition; when, as he was traveling by
night, his litter was struck by lightning, which killed the slave who
carried the torch before him.” This expedition was in 728-729, and the
temple was dedicated Sept. 1, 732. Cf. Dio, LIV, 4; C. I. L. I, 400.
[94] This was dedicated in 738, on the Quirinal. Cf. Dio, LIV, 19.
[95] These three temples have more than an accidental collocation.
Just as the Tarpeian mount and the Quirinal hill had their triple
divinities, so had the Aventine. Cf. Varro (_De Lin._) V, 158. The
temple of Juno is ascribed to the time of Camillus, and is said to have
been built for the Veientines. The date of the other two is unknown, as
is that of this restoration by Augustus.
[96] Also of unknown origin, location and restoration, other than as
mentioned here.
[97] Dionysius, I, 68, describes the old temple, not the restoration by
Augustus of which we have only this statement.
[98] The original temple was dedicated in 563, in the Circus Maximus.
Cf. Livy, XXXVI, 36. Burned in 738. Cf. Dio, LIV, 19.
[99] The original temple was burned in 756. Cf. Val. Max. I, 8, 11;
Dio, LV, 12; Suet. _Aug._ 57.
[100] The Capitol means the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus.
[101] Frontinus, _De Aq._ c. 125, speaks of a decree of the Senate
in the year 743 “concerning the putting in order of the streams,
conduits and arches of the Julian, Marcian, Appian, Tepulan and Aniene
waters, which Augustus has promised the Senate that he will repair at
his own expense.” Aqueducts were repaired in 749-750. Cf. C. I. L.
VI, 1244. C. I. L. VI, 1249, gives _Iul. Tep. Mar.; imp. Cæsar divi
f. Augustus ex s. c.; XXV; ped. CCXL_. C. I. L. VI, 1243, records
the repairs of the Marcian aqueduct. Frontinus, _op. cit._, 12,
gives some details of the doubled supply of this source, and says the
new spring had to be conducted eight hundred feet to join the older
fountain.
[102] Julius Cæsar dedicated this forum Sept. 24 or 25, 708. Cf. Dio,
XLIII, 22; App. _B. C._, III, 28; C. I. L. I, p. 402 and 397.
Pliny, _Hist. Nat._, XXXV, 12, 156, mentions its completion by
Augustus.
Augustus uses the word _profligata_ here for “unfinished,” a use
which was common enough but not elegant, and is severely criticised by
Gellius, XV, 5. The word really means wretched rather than unfinished.
That Augustus was not a purist this inscription testifies, and
Suetonius also tells us, _Aug._, 87 and 88, how peculiar he was in
diction and orthography.
The basilica which was unfinished at the death of Augustus he refrains
from naming while it was not yet dedicated. But we know from Suetonius,
_Aug._ 29, and Dio, LVI, 27, that it was built in honor of his
grandchildren, Gaius and Lucius.
[103] There is abundant testimony to this architectural activity. Cf.
Suet. _Aug._ 29 and 30; Dio, LIII, 2; LVI, 40; Livy IV, 20; Ovid,
_Fasti_, II, 59; Hor. _Carm._, III, 6. Nor was this the zeal
of a mere archæologist and architect. The emperor was anxious for a
revival of religious observance, as a conservative force in his new
organization of the state.
[104] It is remarkable that Augustus should say he “_constructed_”
the Flaminian Way, etc., for it was made nearly two hundred years
before this date, 727. Moreover, the whole chapter is given up to
an account of reconstructions, and of course it is meant that he
_repaired_ the road and the bridges in question. The Latin
verb is wanting and is restored from the Greek, ἐπόησα, which is
unmistakable,—“I made.” Mommsen does not comment on the incorrectness
of this statement, but Wölfflin regards the Greek verb as a blunder
of the stone-cutter at Ancyra, and thinks there was no verb at all at
the end of this chapter, but that the mason by mistake took the last
word of the preceding chapter which is ἐπόησα. A substitution of ἐπόησα
for the proper verb seems more likely, as it seems improbable that the
sentence would end without a verb.
These repairs are attested by an inscription on an arch at Ariminum,
thus restored by Bormann: Cf. C. I. L. XI, 365.
SENATUS POPULUS_Q ue romanus_
_imp. cæsari divi f. augusto imp. sept._
COS. SEPT. DESIGNAT. OCTAVOM _Via flamin_ IA _et reliquei_S
CELEBERRIMEIS ITALIÆ VIEIS CONSILIO _et sumptib_ US _eius mu_NITEIS.
Cf. also Suet. _Aug._ 30; Dio, LIII, 22. Other roads of Italy were
repaired by those who obtained triumphs; of which more were celebrated
from 726 to 728 than at any other epoch.
[105] Cf. Suet. _Aug._ 29. Its construction was vowed in 712 and
it was dedicated in 752. Cf. C. I. L. I, p. 393, May 12. In c. 35,
Augustus mentions the quadriga dedicated to him in this forum.
[106] This theatre was begun by Julius Cæsar. Augustus completed it
in honor of Marcellus, who died in 731. It was dedicated May 4, 743.
Cf. Pliny, _Hist. Nat._, VIII, 17, 65. Dio, LIV, 36, assigns its
dedication to 741.
[107] Suetonius, _Aug._, 30, says that on one occasion Augustus
deposited in the _cella_ of Jupiter Capitolinus sixteen thousand
pounds of gold (= $3,200,000) and gems and pearls of the value of fifty
million sesterces (= $2,500,000). But such statements are fabulous, in
view of Augustus’ own statement that the total of his gifts of this
kind was only one hundred million sesterces (= $5,000,000).
[108] In earlier times it had been customary for cities affected by a
victory to give crowns of gold to the triumphing _imperator_. This
grew into an abuse and was forbidden by law, unless the gift preceded
the decree for the triumph. Later, the value of the crown was commuted
for cash, and it came to be a frequent means of extortion on the part
of provincial governors. To L. Antonius crowns of gold were given by
each of the thirty-five Roman tribes in 713. Cf. Dio, XLVIII, 4. The
amount named here, thirty-five thousand pounds of gold, would appear to
have been from the thirty-five tribes. On the general subject, _aurum
coronarium_, cf. Marquardt, _Staatsverwaltung_, II, p. 285.
[109] The sons of Augustus were Gaius, adopted in 737, died in 757;
Lucius, adopted at the same time, died in 755; Agrippa Postumus,
adopted in 757, exiled in 760. These were the sons of Agrippa and
Julia. On the death of Gaius in 757, Augustus adopted Tiberius. With
him Germanicus, nephew and adopted son of Tiberius, and Drusus,
Tiberius’ own son, became the legal grandchildren of Augustus. None of
these could celebrate games in his own name after adoption, as they had
no property rights, but were absolutely dependent on the head of their
house, according to the _patria potestas_ of the Roman law. See
this very plainly set forth in Suetonius, _Tib._ 15: “After his
(Tiberius’) adoption he never again acted as master of a family, nor
exercised in the smallest degree the rights which he had lost by it.
For he neither disposed of anything in the way of gift, nor manumitted
a slave; nor so much as received an estate left him by will, or any
legacy, without reckoning it as a part of his _peculium_, or
property held under his father.” Tiberius was forty-six years old when
he was adopted.
Seven of these exhibitions can be traced. 1. In 725, on the dedication
of the temple of the Divine Julius. Dio, LI, 22. 2. In 726, in honor
of the victory of Actium. Dio, LIII, 1. 3. In 738, in accordance with
a decree of the senate. This was in the name of Tiberius and Drusus.
Dio, LIV, 19. 4. In 742, at the Quinquatria held March 19-23, in honor
of Minerva. This was in the name of Gaius and Lucius. Dio, LIV, 28, 29.
5. In 747; funeral games in honor of Agrippa. Dio, LV, 8. 6. In 752,
at the dedication of the temple of Mars. Vell. II, 100. 7. In 759, in
honor of Drusus, in the name of his sons Germanicus and Claudius. Dio,
LV, 27; Pliny, _Hist. Nat._, II, 26, 96; VIII, 2, 4. Possibly the
eighth occasion may be found in Suetonius, _Aug._, 43.
[110] Cf. Dio, LIII, 1; Suet. _Aug._, 43. Wooden seats were
erected in the Campus Martius for gymnastic contests in 726. Whether
Germanicus or Drusus is the grandson mentioned here is unknown.
[111] These were the lesser games of the circus and theatres, given
ordinarily by magistrates holding the lower offices, which Augustus
never filled. He took upon himself the care and expense where the
proper magistrates were absent or too poor. Cf. Dio, XLV, 6; C. I. L.,
I, p. 397.
[112] The charge of the Secular Games, celebrated supposedly once in
a century, though in reality oftener, fell to the quindecemvirs. Cf.
Eckhel, VI. 102, for a coin with _imp. Cæsar Augustus lud. saec. XV
S. F._ This was in 737. Cf. also C. I. L., I, p. 442. The college
evidently gave the presidency to Augustus and Agrippa, since it was
very convenient that these two members of the sacred body also held the
tribunitial power, and so the games came into the charge of the two
greatest men of the state in a perfectly natural way. Cf. C. I. L., IX,
p. 29, No. 262, for confirmation of Agrippa’s membership in the college
of quindecemvirs.
[113] These games were celebrated on August 1. Dio, LX, 5, and LVI, 46,
tells of their being annual, and in charge of the consuls after the
death of Augustus. They began in 752. This passage is one of the few
where both the Latin and Greek are incapable of restoration.
[114] Cf. Suet. _Aug._ 43. Some of these occasions were: in 743 in
connection with the dedication of the theatre of Marcellus. Cf. Dio,
LIV, 26. Here six hundred beasts were killed, and the tiger was shown
for the first time. Cf. Pliny, _Hist. Nat._, VIII, 17, 65. In 752,
two hundred and sixty lions and thirty-six crocodiles were killed. Cf.
Dio, LV, 10. In 765, in the games given by Germanicus, two hundred
lions were killed. Cf. Dio, LVI, 27.
Augustus says “amphitheatres,” though there was but one such structure.
He may have regarded it as being two theatres joined at their straight
side and facing each other.
[115] Velleius II, 100, writes: “The divine Augustus in the year when
he was consul with Gallus Caninius (752) sated the minds and the eyes
of the Roman people at the dedication of the temple of Mars with the
most magnificent gladiatorial shows and naval battles.” Dio, LV, 10,
says that traces of the excavation could be seen in his time (c. 200 A.
D.), and that the fight represented a battle of Athenians and Persians,
in which the former were victorious. Cf. Suet. _Aug._ 43; Ovid,
_Ars Am._ I, 171.
Claudius gave a similar exhibition on the Fucine Lake, but with a
hundred triremes and quadriremes, and a force of nineteen thousand
men, “as once Augustus did in a pond by the Tiber, but with lighter
vessels and a smaller force.” Cf. Tac. _Ann._ XII, 56; Suet.
_Claud._, 21; Dio, LX, 33.
[116] Another instance of avoidance of the name of an enemy while
distinctly referring to him. Antony had stripped various temples at
Samos, Ephesus, Pergamos, and Rhœteum, all in the province of Asia,
and had given the spoils to Cleopatra. Dio, LI, 17, says that great
numbers of such things were found in her palace when Alexandria was
captured. Pliny, _Hist. Nat._, XXXIV, 8, 58, says: “He (Myro) made
an Apollo, which was taken away by the triumvir Antony, but restored
to the Ephesians by the divine Augustus.” Strabo, XIII, 1, 30, writes
of Rhœteum: “Cæsar Augustus gave back to the Rhœtians the shrine and
statue of Ajax which Antony had taken away and given to Egypt. He did
the like for other cities. For Antony took away the finest votive
offerings from the most famous shrines for the gratification of the
Egyptian woman, but Augustus restored them.” Ib. XIV, 1, 14, writes of
the temple of Hera, at Samos: “Antony took away three colossal sitting
statues on one base, but Augustus Cæsar restored two of them, Athene
and Heracles, to the same base; the Zeus, however, he placed upon the
Capitol.”
[117] Suetonius, _Aug._, 52, says these gifts took the form of
tripods. Cf. Dio, LIII, 22; LII, 35; LIV, 35.
[118] The allusion is to Sextus Pompeius, whose fleets, manned largely
by slaves, cut off the grain ships on their way to Rome. Again Augustus
avoids the name of an opponent. Cf. Vell., II, 73, who thinks it
remarkable that a son of the great Pompey, who had freed the sea from
pirates, should himself defile it with piratical crimes. Florus, IV, 8,
reflects the same sentiment. App. _B. C._, V, 77, 80, says that
captured pirates under torture confessed that Sextus Pompeius was the
instigator of their crimes. When the peace of Misenum was made, Sextus
Pompeius stipulated for the freedom of the slaves who had fought under
him. It was after the overthrow of Pompey, in 718, that the slaves were
returned. Dio, XLIX, 12, adds that slaves whose masters did not claim
them were returned to their several cities, there to be crucified. Cf.
App. _B. C._, V, 131; Oros. VI, 18.
[119] This was in 722, just before the breaking out of hostilities
between Antony and Octavian. Cf. Dio, L, 6; Suet., _Aug._ 17.
[120] Cf. c. 8, Note 49. There were a thousand senators at this time.
Augustus, in his statement, probably means that seven hundred of the
thousand then in the senate were on his side, not merely seven hundred
who then or later were senators.
The number of consulars, eighty-three, is quite consistent with the
facts, as is shown in a careful analysis of the _Fasti Consulares_
for the period by Mommsen. _R. G._, p. 100.
The priests referred to were probably members of the four great
colleges and the Arval brotherhood. Cf. c. 7, notes 40-45.
[121] This statement is borne out by what we otherwise know. Taking
the provinces in order we find: First, the German frontier is pushed
forward from the Rhine to the Elbe. Cf. Suet. _Aug._ 21. Second,
in Illyricum and Macedonia he had erected the new provinces of Pannonia
and Moesia. Third, in Asia Minor he did not extend the older limits of
Bithynia, but out of the kingdom of Amyntas, he made the new province
of Galatia and later added Paphlagonia to it. Fourth, in Africa,
Augustus rather narrowed than extended the empire by his partition with
Juba in 729. But a number of Roman proconsuls won laurels there.
[122] Here the record is of commotions quelled within the recognized
limits of the empire. In Spain there was the Cantabrian war from 727 to
735. In Gaul, G. Carrinas had subdued the Morini, and triumphed, July
14, 726; and M. Messala had suppressed the Aquitani, triumphing Sept.
25, 727. Cf. Suet. _Aug._, 20, 21.
The German campaigns extending at intervals over the years from 742
to the very end of Augustus’ reign it is needless to detail. This
reference to the pacification of Germany has been the subject of
much dispute. Mommsen in two places (_R. G._, p. VI, and 48),
uses the word “crafty” (_callidus_) of Augustus, referring to
his alleged glozing over of unsatisfactory events. Hirschfeld goes
further, and in connection with the present passage accuses Augustus
(_Wiener Studien_, V, 117) of a “masterly concealment and
whitewashing (übertünchung) of all that could hurt his reputation.”
This charge is made because Augustus omits all mention of the disaster
under Varus. Against this charge Johannes Schmidt defends Augustus,
(_Philologus_, XLV, p. 394, ff.). The contest between Schmidt and
Hirschfeld is based really upon opposing views of the purpose of the
_Res Gestae_. Schmidt believed it to be an epitaph. In this there
would be no place for anything save the fortunate events of a life.
If _nil de mortuis nisi bonum_ be wise, Augustus might well have
adapted the adage to his own case and said, _nil de me morituro nisi
bonum_. But Hirschfeld insists that the _Res Gestae_ constitute
not an epitaph, but “an account of his administration,” and therefore
contends that the omission of the German disaster was not in good
faith. To this, Schmidt answers that Augustus had nothing to gain by
such concealment—indeed that concealment of so notorious a disaster
would be absurd. And in the text itself he finds a recognition of the
real state of affairs, inasmuch as Augustus expressly distinguishes
Germany from the provinces, Gallic and Spanish, and while claiming
it for Rome, does not assert that it belongs to her as do organized
provinces. Schmidt also says that _pacavi_, “I pacified” does
not necessarily imply that Germany continued in a state of peace. It
may well enough cover the fact that there was temporary success. But
this is hair-splitting. The character of the _Res Gestae_ must
be always had in mind. Cf. Introduction. Its deliverances were _ad
populum_ and they constituted an epitaph.
[123] Suetonius, _Aug._ 21, says: “He waged war upon no people without
just and necessary causes.” The present Torbia near Monaco, derives its
name from a _Tropæa Augusti_, “Trophy of Augustus,” some fragments of
which still exist.