¹ The hand behind the comitia is unknown, and ancient historians disagree. Dio (55. 9) cites Augustus’ protest in a prayer that circumstances should never arise to make it necessary for anyone under the age of 20 to become consul, as had once happened to him, and his dicta, which implicitly criticized Gaius for inexperience and lack of judgement; Tacitus says Augustus was hypocritical, and passionately wanted what was granted (Ann. 1. 3. 2) — a statement not wholly incompatible with what Dio says.

² The Roman educational curriculum should not be forgotten. Boys in the toga praetexta did not participate in public life, but, on donning the toga virilis, young nobles started their apprenticeship in public life by attending their elder relatives when they were engaged in public business, whether as magistrate or acting as part of a consilium, political or judicial, formal or informal. The honour of attending the Senate proclaimed that the Senate was Augustus’ consilium.

³ Levick, B.M.Tiberius the Politician (London 1976), 38–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴ Gaius holds sword and shield, and military emblems, a legionary eagle and military’ standards, stand in the background. The obverse remains unchanged (AUGUSTUS DIVI F) from the previous IMP XII and IMP XIIII issues. Aurei, denarii and a denarius type in copper are all known, but there are no varieties in legend or type. Since the issue is an abundant one and was produced over only a short period, it is likely that it should be connected with the large-scale demobilizations of 4, 3 and 2 B.C. in which the troops’ rewards were paid in cash (at least RG 16. 2 says that this was so). For the coins, Mattingly, H.Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum (BMCRE) (London 1923–65), 1,Google Scholar Augustus 498–503. It is possible, however, that the issue should be dated earlier, to 8 B.C., to commemorate Gaius’ first participation in the exercises of the equites (presumably in the lusus Troiae), on which occasion Dio says there was a cash distribution to the soldiers (55. 6. 4). The soldiers are undefined, though the implications of Dio’s account are that they were Tiberius’ troops on the Rhine frontier. But the demobilizations of 7 and 6 B.C. are also possible.

⁵ One specimen is known, in Paris. As the obverse is CAESAR AUGUSTUS, the coin is presumably before pater patriae in 2 B.C. Is this a commemorative piece, not a coin? BMCRE 1, p. 119 for description and note by Mattingly.

⁶ Dio 55. 9. 1 (under the dateline 6 B.C.).

⁷ Much of what follows starts from SirSyme’s, Ronald paper ‘The Crisis of 2 B.C.’, Sitzungsberichte d. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Phil.-hist. Klasse) 1974 (7) 3 ff.Google Scholar (Crisis hereafter), to whom many references are due, and much guidance despite the differences in interpretation which are here presented.

⁸ RE Supp. 9 (1961). 1868– (Hanslik); Tac. Ann. 2. 34, 4. 21–2; Syme, , The Roman Revolution (Oxford 1939) (Rom. Rev. hereafter), 385Google Scholar n. 4 for her influence with Livia.

⁹ Caninius’ father was consul in 37 and a partisan of Antony (Syme, Rom. Rev. 200). He was Augustus’ colleague on 12 May (Velleius 2. 100. 2 with Simpson, C.J.JRS 67 [1977], 91 ff.),Google Scholar when the temple of Mars Ultor was opened. Syme, , History in Ovid (Oxford 1978) (History hereafter), adheres to the traditional date of late summer (p. 8), August 1 (p. 192).Google Scholar

¹⁰ The length and width of the excavation are given by Augustus (RG 23) as 1800 x 1200 square feet; he does not give the depth, but it cannot have been less than about 10’ to float the fully-manned warships; thus 2,400,000 cubic yards of soil were moved less any hollows provided by nature.

¹¹ Frontinus, Aqueducts 1. 22 suggests that the conduit was new, and built specifically to flood the naumachia, which must therefore have been finished before the conduit, and sufficiently long before 12 May for the conduit to fill the basin constructed. As the water was not potable it had no connexion with the public water-supply for the citizens’ use.

¹² Its exact dimensions are unknown, but it had been used to hold meetings of the people, RE 3. 2580 (Pollack), and gave its name to one of the regiones of the city.

¹³ Dio 55. 10. 7–8; are we to suppose these were the only animals hunted on this occasion, or were these the pièce de résistance? Gladiators are recorded, but no other animals.

¹⁴ As happened under the Republic; Milo’s games in 53 B.C. were announced in advance (for example), Cicero, ad Q.F. 3. 8. 6, 3. 9. 2; Caesar advertised his intended benefactions by putting on displays of the things he intended to put on show at his games (Suet. Julius 10).

¹⁵ The forum Augustum was open already (Suet. Aug. 29. 1).

¹⁶ RG 15. 1–2; in 23 B.C. the donatives had been 12 frumentationes, in 5 B.C. a congiarium of 240 sesterces per man.

¹⁷ Dio 55. 10. 10.

¹⁸ Certainly bestowed on Caesar (Dio 44. 3, Cic. Phil. 2. 31 and 13. 23); dubious for Romulus, who is called by Livy only parens patriae (1. 16), and Ogilvie, R.M.Commentary on Livy, Books 1–5 (Oxford 1965), 86Google Scholar (note on 1. 16. 3); this title echoes the ancient formula for invoking the dead ancestors at the Parentalia. Similarly Camillus (Livy 5. 49) and Cicero (in Pisonem 6) had been hailed ‘parens patriae’ — but not ‘paterpatriae’. Pater patriae is a much more significant title, containing as it does the juridical and religious overtones of pater familias, and lacking the commemorative note of the Parentalia noted by Ogilvie (above).

¹⁹ Aug. 58.

²⁰ CIL 1² , p. 133, the isolated fragment of Fasti Praenestini.

²¹ Neither the Fasti Praenestini nor the Fasti Caeritani mention LUDI at the Agonalia or the Carmentalia, which took place on 9, 11 and 15 January; their silence should be significant since they do record LUDI at the Ludi Megalenses and the Ludi Florae (for example), CIL I², pp. 212, 231–6 etc. Though it must be admitted that the Fasti Praenestini are broken on 9 and 11 January, there does not seem room for a note on ludi.

²² Fasti Praenestini, CIL 1², p. 133.

²³ Dio 55. 8. 1 and 55. 9. 6. For the political message implicit in these actions, Levick, B.M.Tiberius the Politician, 36–7 and Latomus 31 (1972), 803 ff..Google Scholar

²⁴ No ludi of any sort appear on the fasti for this date (CIL 1² , p. 223 [Fasti Maffeiani]), and Cicero’s diary of the events of early 56 B.C. (ad Q.f 2.3.1) passes over this day in total silence. But, under the Republic, February was the month for receiving embassies, not for games. And in any case the weather could not be relied on to be fine at this time of year. Rather the reverse.

²⁵ Messalla, according to Suetonius, wished blessings on the house of Augustus and in doing so added ‘For in doing so we feel that we are praying for everlasting good fortune for the res publica and joy for this city’, or perhaps ‘for this order’; there is a lacuna in the MSS. which modern editors seem to fill with urbi; ordini, however, which dates at least from Torrentius in 1578, seems at least as appropriate on a senatorial occasion.

²⁶ Not Ovid, however, who explicitly demonstrates that Augustus was greater than Romulus — Fasti 2. 133–44. For the relevance of Romulus, see below. Suetonius informs us that Augustus had tears in his eyes: they can hardly have been of surprised delight!

²⁷ British readers may compare protracted celebrations on royal occasions such as a Silver Jubilee.

²⁸ Ovid, , Fasti 3. 771–88;Google Scholar line 785 in fact suggests that the ludi that had once taken place on this day had been joined to the Cerealia on 19 April. The calendars of Philocalus and Silvius (CIL 1², pp. 260,261, 312) show ludi in the Circus Maximus on this day. Frazer, J.G.Ovid: Fasti 3 (London 1929), 140 (commentary on line 785).Google Scholar

²⁹ The moment (the Liberalia) would have been appropriate, and the time of year also suitable, since the spring was the season when food was at its most expensive.

³⁰ For the date, Simpson, C.J.JRS 67 (1977), 91 ff..Google Scholar

³¹ Syme, Crisis 15 for the point that it represented a victory of West over East, and was planned to doso; cf. OvidArs. Am. 1. 171–2, Dio54.10. 7, also Woodman, A.J. ed. of Velleius II, 94–131 (Cambridge 1977), p. 120.Google Scholar

³² Dio 5 5. 10.6–8 gives the order of the shows as the lion-hunts, a gladiatorial show in the Saepta and the naval battle, and ‘afterwards’ () the crocodile-hunt in the flooded Circus Flaminius.

³³ RG 21.1 says it was built from spoils (ex manibiis); this was actually an unfortunate claim since, if the spoils came from Philippi, they came from Romans, and we can trace no claim earlier than 2 B.C. to have won large amounts of booty from the Parthians. Syme, History 8–9 for Ovid’s stressing the Parthian motif in Ars Amatoria 1. 171–278, esp. 181.

³⁴ There was no forum Augustum in 42 B.C., and it is hardly likely that Octavian had a forum of his own in mind at that date; even in 19/18, it seems that it had been planned to put Mars Ultor on the Capitol (Dio 54. 8. 3). It is thus apparent that no work at all had been done for over 20 years after the temple was first vowed; the decision to act at last had clearly some deeper motivation than is superficially apparent.

³⁵ Ovid, , Fasti 5. 545–98,Google Scholar esp. 563–6, Ars Am. 1. 177–278.

³⁶ Where it is implied by Dio (54.8.2) they had previously been housed. Hor. Odes 4.15. 6–8 and Prop. 3.4.6 also imply a temple of Jupiter. Simpson, , JRS 67 (1977), 93Google Scholar n. 25, suggests it was Jupiter Tonans, but that was a large temple, according to Suetonius (Aug. 29). Dio 55. 10. 2 for the transfer of the standards.

³⁷ Roman traditionalism did not omit the fact that the object of the census was originally, and primarily, to assess the state’s military resources in men and materials. Dio also relates that the temple was to be elevated to the same status of honour as those of Jupiter Capitolinus and Apollo in that senators were to be permitted to contract to be responsible for its care and to supply horses for chariot-races (presumably at the ludi Martiales).

³⁸ Zanker, P.Forum Augustum (Tübingen 1968),Google Scholar which is the source of most of this account, supplemented by personal observation.

³⁹ Mars Ultor was usually bearded, Zanker 18 and plates 46, 47, 49; , J.Gagé, ed. of Res Gestae (Paris 1977), 115–6.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ The child is an Eros and carries a toy sword. The cult statues in this temple are thought to be represented in the group from Malga in the Algiers museum. Zanker, Gagé, q. v. for references to earlier studies.

⁴¹ Ovid, , Fasti 5. 561–2.Google Scholar

⁴² RG 21. 2, 29. 2, etc..

⁴³ Even the huge Mars in the shrine has a corona civica on his shield (Zanker, plate 47).

⁴⁴ Cagiano de Azvedo, M.Le Antichità di villa Medici (Rome 1951),Google Scholar inv. no. 3, pictures in Zanker, plates 45,46.1 was unable to find this sculpture on a visit to the Villa Medici which was at the time decorated with scaffolding in parts.

⁴⁵ For Caesar’s connexions with shrines to Fortuna, the goddess of successful generals, Weinstock, S.Divus Iulius (Oxford 1971), 112 ff..Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Pliny, , AW 35. 93–4,Google Scholar which might be the picture Servius had in mind in his comment on Virg. Aen. 1. 294.

⁴⁷ Zanker, 23–4, q.v. for sources. There must have been a Vulcan too, Ov. Trist. 2. 296. Traces of the presence of bronze statues have also been discovered. Perhaps all the Di Consentes were represented.

⁴⁸ Frazer, J.G.Fasti of Ovid 4 (London 1929), 63.Google Scholar Cf. Augustus’ own attitude to the spectacle of the triumphatores (Suet. Aug. 31).

⁴⁹ Zanker, 21 and Klapptafel.

⁵⁰ Romulus was, for Augustus, the only winner of spolia opima. For the deprivation of Cornelius Cossus, Livy 4. 20.

⁵¹ CIL l2. 186 ff. Cf. Notizie degli scavi ser. 6, 9 (1936), 455 ff. For Ovid’s, description, Fasti 5. 563–6;Google Scholar Cf. Suet. Aug. 31, Tac. Ann. 4.9 for the Alban Kings.

⁵² Ovid, , Ars Am. 1. 171 ff.,Google Scholaresp. 194; the whole passage presages a new campaign against the east (Syme, Crisis 15–16); Syme also suggests that the poem was reissued at this date with the new passage in it rather than now published for the first time. This suggestion seems most attractive, since the republication of an offensive poem with new material — even if laudatory — on the principes iuventutis might aggravate the offence in the light of the Julia affair that followed.

⁵³ The dedication to Gaius Caesar was by the Senate and People and declares that Gaius was PR[I]MUS OM|NIUM] to have been elected consul at the age of 14.

⁵⁴ Corini, G.Annali del istituto italiano di numismatica 15 (1968), 49 ff.Google Scholar for the controversy as to its genuineness. Mr T.R. Volk, of the Fitzwilliam Museum, who has handled it and the undoubtedly genuine medallion of A.D. 2, found in Pompeii, agrees that he can see no reason why it should not be genuine. The coins of this type are far the most numerous of all Augustan issues found in the West, and the numerous varieties indicate a long period of issue.

⁵⁵ Velleius 2. 100. 3 certainly implies that the Julia affair was later in the year than the celebrations. Dio (here Xiphilinus) implies the same, 55. 10. 12; cf. RE 1(1917), 902 (Fitzler).

⁵⁶ Pandateria, Tac. Ann. 1.53; Velleius 2.100. 3–4 alleges that she committed every sort of offence against the moral code in the belief that her position put her above the law.

⁵⁷ See the stories in Dio 55.9; Syme,History 195 forthe view that it was Julia’s plain duty to organize a council of regency.

⁵⁸ Syme, Crisis 26: ‘the recorded names do not quite add up to a comprehensive faction’; contra, History 195: ‘the five nobiles are a faction, not a society coterie.’

⁵⁹ Crisis Le; cf. History 195, to whom he adds Fabius Maximus who either had governed Tarraconensis or was still doing so, and L. Aemilius Paullus who was Julia’s nephew, and about to marry the younger Julia, his first cousin.

⁶⁰ Syme, Crisis 24, and despite the fact that the suggestion was known to the Elder Pliny (NH 7. 149). Though some people may have wanted to assassinate Augustus these cannot have included Julia, whose whole position depended on his being alive. As a parricide, how could she or any new husband she took hope to win the loyalty of the legions? The consequences of Caesar’s murder cannot have been completely forgotten, especially in the year of the opening of the temple of Mars Ultor.

⁶¹ E. Groag and Syme for example. Nor will the view hold water that it was Livia’s machinations in Tiberius’ interests that brought Julia down, since, as Syme (e.g.) has pointed out, Julia’s fall led to no improvement in Tiberius’ position in Rhodes. It actually produced a deterioration in it, since Julia’s exile automatically extinguished her marriage to him, and thus broke his connexion with the Julian family (Suet. Tib. 11–13; Levick, Tiberius the Politician, 44–5 and refs.), which had been the subject of so much glorification this very year. While Gaius and Lucius Caesar were in the togapraetexta Tiberius might have been designated their guardian, but after they had put on the toga virilis Tiberius had no chance of withstanding their claims to Augustus’ heritage as sui heredes except as Julia’s guardian (or tutor), or as coheres instituted on an equal plane with them. Drusus, Tiberius’ brother, had been a named coheres with Gaius and Lucius Caesar (Suet. Claud. 1.5); Suetonius’ silence here suggests that Tiberius had not. Nor could he have been adopted, since siblings — even by adoption — could not marry (Gaius, , Inst. 1. 61;Google ScholarLevick, , Latomus 31 [1972], 782Google Scholar n. 2). Anyway, it was only the known estrangement between Augustus and Tiberius which made it possible for Julia to complain to Augustus about him (Tac. Ann. 1. 53), and ask for a new husband.

⁶² Tacitus explicitly names Sempronius Gracchus in this context, uses a rare and striking word (tenteraverat,Ann. 1. 53.3), and comments on his long period of favour — he was pervicax adulter (ibid.) and still inciting her against Tiberius. Nowhere does Tacitus mention political plots (so Syme, History 197).

⁶³ Pliny, , NH 21. 9;Google Scholar Dio 55. 10. 12.

⁶⁴ Macrobius, sat. 2. 5. 5 ff..

⁶⁵ NH 21.9: ‘filia divi Augusti cuius luxuria noctibus coronatum Marsuam litterae illius dei gemunt’.

⁶⁶ The notion that Julia was denounced privately by Livia, or anyone else, is rightly discounted by Syme, History 194.

⁶⁷ These should certainly be accepted with great caution. It might be suggested that those who loved watching pantomimi might be prompted to try imitating them when in their cups, and to use the Rostra as their stage. Sexual acts certainly appear to have been part of the repertoire of the pantomimi, and some sort of play-acting of a shocking sort on the Rostra could easily be blown up into a full-scale orgy such as Seneca describes (loc.cit)

⁶⁸ But not necessarily there; there are many other ways in which it could have been revealed to Augustus that the rumours about Julia were public property.

⁶⁹ The title of the law is in fact dubious: Biondi, B.Acta divi Augusti, ed. Riccobono, S.et al. (Rome 1945), 1. 112.Google Scholar Velleius 2. 100, and cf. for the normal nature of the punishment of relegation to an island, Paul. Sent. 2. 26. 14 = FIRA 2. 352; Acta divi Augusti 126, q.v. for the capital penalty of the Institutes (4. 18. 4) and earlier rulings to this effect.

⁷⁰ Sen. De ben. 6. 32. 2; Dio 55. 10. 12 and 14; Syme, History 193.

⁷¹ ‘Numquam enim nisi nave plena tollo vectorem.’ The remarks, as reported, can only have been made at a party, and Julia’s circle at least must have been very frank about her sexual activities. What is interesting about Julia’s reply though is the present tense — tollo; she had not been pregnant for eight years at least. It might be thought that the nasty letters about Tiberius, said to have been written by Gracchus, and her requests to Augustus for a new husband, were in fact prompted by sexual frustration. There is no record of her having become pregnant at any time after her separation from Tiberius, and she was not old enough to have reached her menopause.

⁷² For such children, Gaius,Inst. 1.64, Ulpian 4.2; they were known as spurii, were never in patria potestas and had succession-rights only to their mother, RE 3 A (1929), 1889, s.v. spurius (E. Weiss); Buckland, W.W.Textbook of Roman Lavr³ (Cambridge 1963), 105Google Scholar n. 2; the question of spurii being adopted, e.g. by their mother’s father, and becoming sui heredes to an adoptive father seems never to have been considered by the lawyers, but, as spurii were always sui iuris, the full ceremony of adrogatio would be needed. Consequently, if Gaius and Lucius Caesar were indeed spurii, they would not have been legally adopted by Augustus under the formula of adoptio, which is the one he would surely have used.

⁷³ Stressed by Suetonius (Aug. 65), whose version of the causes of her banishment is comparatively colourless, but, like the others, it contains no hint of political intrigue. He reports that there were a number of petitions to restore her — to which Augustus did not accede (ibid.).

⁷⁴ Macrobius, Sat. 2. 5. 3.

⁷⁵ Velleius’ story is of course not coherent. He speaks of Augustus’ clementia towards Iullus Antonius; this may be purely literary, through modelling Augustus on Caesar (Woodman, op. cit. 120, and other modern commentators have agreed). Augustus was indeed clement if Julia’s circle had been plotting a coup d’État, and he put to death only Iullus, but if their actual offences were no more than laughing at Augustus’ claims, revelling, and (possibly) adultery with Julia, and the official line was that Augustus was punishing a clique of adulterers, then he merely enforced the normal provisions of the adultery law, except in Iullus’ case. Woodman, however, thinks (123) that Augustus’ clementia lay in his allowing Iullus a distinguished public career. If he is right then Tacitus’ irony (Ann. 3. 24. 2) takes additional point.

⁷⁶ Annals 1. 53. 3, with the use of the striking word temeraverat, and the description pervieax adulter. Cf. Syme, History 196.

⁷⁷ 50. 10. 15; Syme, History 194 n. 7, who points out that Xiphilinus states that others besides Iullus were put to death.

⁷⁸ He had literary talents too, as Syme points out (History 196), which might make him a congenial husband.

⁷⁹ Gaius’ career included a new campaign against Parthia, for which the Temple of Janus was solemnly opened in 1 B.C. (Syme, History 10); his journey to it, which took him through the Danube lands to Pontus, Asia and the Aegean Islands on the way to Syria, enabled him to avoid the embarrassment of holding his consulate in person in A.D. 1 (so Syme, loc. cit.). Certainly his progress reveals a lack of urgency for the campaign.

⁸⁰ It has been remarked (by Mr Volk to the author) that this issue marks the end of the inventive period of the Augustan coinage. After 2 B.C. the types become standardized and stereotyped, the only new idea being the introduction of Tiberius into the few issues made after his return from Rhodes. It can be compared with the coinages of the Hellenistic kingdoms when compared with the rich variety of the Roman Republic with its annually changing colleges of moneyers each with their own ideas and themes.

⁸¹ It is true that their adoption by Augustus (if it was legal, see note 72 above) had made them members of the Julian house, and that their facial resemblance to Agrippa was an answer to allegations about their paternity, but considerations of that sort have never prevented the mockery of tongues no sharper than those of the Romans.

⁸² I have to thank Mr T.R. Volk, and Dr Barbara Levick for comments on an earlier draft of this paper, also Mr Nicholas Purcell for his perceptive observations in discussions in the British School at Rome on the forum of Augustus. This paper was presented at AULLA 20 (Newcastle Univ., N. S.W. Feb. 1980), at which I have to thank Dr R. Beare and Mrs M. Beattie for criticisms which I have tried to take into account in this final version. The surviving errors remain my own.