Abbreviations
(a) Modern
Chapter 1: New Man in Rome
1. For Argyrip(p)a see Cairns (1995), pp. 215–216.
2. Cairns (1995), pp. 215–216. For Arpinum see Roddaz (1984), p. 23 and Reinhold (1933), p. 9f. n.37.
3. Suet., Calig. 23.1; Vell. Pat. 2.96.1.
4. Pliny, Nat. His. 7.8: ‘quinquagenisimo uno raptus anno’.
5. Dio 54.28.
6. Most scholars, like Roddaz (1984), pp. 23–24, prefer 63 BCE, as noted by Meyer (1933), p. 1, who cites Rohden-Dessau (p. 439) for 62 BCE, but I agree with Reinhold in arguing for 64 BCE, assuming Pliny means he had reached 51 in late March 12 BCE.
7. Steele (1918), p. 117, remarks Agrippa was ‘dissatisfied with his gentile name but sought to retain the color of his primeval dignity by using the praenomen’.
8. Sen., Contro. 2.4.13: ‘Vipsanius Agrippa fuerat, (at) Vipsani nomen quasi argumentum paternae humilitatis sustulerat et M. Agrippa dicebatur.’ My thanks to Bob Durrett for the translation. Syme (1958) posits that Agrippa had decided to drop Vipsanius from his name by 38 BCE in alignment with Octavius’ own name change to ‘Imperator Caesar Divi F.’ around the same time: see p.45 of this volume.
9. Sen., Contro. 2.4.12–13: ‘cum defenderet reum, fuit accusator qui diceret: ‘‘Agrippae, Marce et quod in medio est’’ (voluit Vipsanium intellegi ), [fuit qui diceret] ‘concurrite, Agrippae: malum habebi(ti)s, (nisi) responderitis (ad ) ea, Marce alterque!’.
10. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.8: ‘In pedes procidere nascentem contra naturam est, quo argumento eos appellavere Agrippas …’. This explanation is given by Aul. Gel., Noct. Att., B. xvi. c. 6. – B.).
11. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.8: ‘… ut aegri partus, qualiter et M. Agrippam ferunt genitum, unico prope felicitatis exemplo in omnibus ad hunc modum genitis.’
12. CIL VI.896 = ILS 129.1.
13. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 6.139.
14. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.6 (7.45): ‘quamquam is quoque adversa pedum valitudine, misera iuventa’.
15. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.6: ‘adversa pedum’. The reference to weak legs recalls the unlucky breech birth. Weak legs were also attributed to Germanicus Caesar who rode horses to strengthen them.
16. Suet., Calig. 23.1: ‘Agrippae … ignobilitatem’; Tac., Ann. 1.3.1: ‘M. Agrippam … ignobilem loco’.
17. Vell. Pat. 2.96.1: ‘Mors deinde Agrippae, qui novitatem suam multis rebus nobilitaverat atque in hoc perduxerat’.
18. Roddaz (1884), p. 22ff.
19. Nicolet (1984), p.98; Wells (1984), p. 8. On the changing status of the equites in the period of the late Republic through the early Principate, see Henderson (1963), pp. 61–72.
20. McCall (2002), pp. 123–136.
21. Nic. 7.6 inferred.
22. Paoli (1963), p. 167.
23. Paoli (1963), p. 169–170.
24. Livy 2.16, 2.32, and 2.33. Agrippa Menenius Lanatus was consul (503 BCE) of Rome’s early republic and a hero who was awarded a triumph for his victory over the Sabines. See Cairns (1995), p. 212, who also suggests a connection with the Furii Agrippae.
25. App., Bell. Civ. 1.0.1.
26. App., Bell. Civ. 5.2.17.
27. Florus 2.38; Plut., Mar. 23–27. For a full account of the Battle of Vercellae at Raudian Plains, see Lindsay Powell, ‘The Last Clash of the Cimbri and Romans: The Battle of Vercellae, 101 BC’, Ancient Warfare 5.1, March/April 2011, pp. 27–33; Lindsay Powell, ‘Fight in the Fog: Vercellae 101 BC’, Military Heritage, June 2012, pp. 54–59.
28. App., Bell. Civ. 1.29.
29. Plut., Mar. 28.2 records he bestowed citizenship upon as many as a thousand men of Camerinum (modern Camerino in Macerata).
30. Plut., Mar. 28.3.
31. Plut., Mar. 28.4.
32. Florus 2.6; Plut., Mar. 32.3–33.1; App., Bell. Civ. 1.34–1.53.
33. Florus 2.9; Plut., Mar. 34.1; Plut., Sulla 7–9.
34. Plut., Sulla 9.7–10.2.
35. Plut., Mar. 41.2–43.3.
36. Plut., Mar. 46.5.
37. Plut., Mar. 45.1; Plut., Sulla 31.1–2, 4–6.
38. Plut., Sulla 37.1.
39. Plut., Sulla 38; App., Bell. Civ. 1.105–106)
40. Plut., Sulla 38; Plut., Pomp. 8–9.
41. Plut., Pomp. 10–11.
42. Plut., Pomp. 12.
43. Plut., Pomp. 12.3.
44. Plut., Pomp. 13.4–5; Crass. 7.1–2.
45. Plut., Pomp. 14.1–3.
46. Plut., Pomp. 14.4–6.
47. App., Bell. Civ. 1.108–112.
48. App., Bell. Civ. 1.113.
49. Florus 2.10; App., Bell. Civ. 1.114.
50. App., Bell. Civ. 1.115.
51. Plut., Crass. 4–5.
52. Plut., Crass. 6.3, 6.6.
53. Plut., Crass. 2.3.
54. Plut., Crass. 2.4.
55. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 33.10.134.
56. Florus 2.8; App., Bell. Civ. 1.116.
57. App., Bell. Civ. 1.117.
58. Plut., Crass. 10.1.
59. Plut., Crass. 10.2.
60. Plut., Crassus 10.2–3.
61. App., Bell. Civ. 1.118.
62. App., Bell. Civ. 1.119.
63. Plut., Crass. 11.5, 11.7.
64. Plut., Crass. 11.1–7.
65. App., Bell. Civ. 1.120.
66. Plut., Crass. 11.8.
67. Plut., Crass. 12.1; Pomp. 12.1.
68. Plut., Crass. 12.4; Pomp. 6.3, 23.2. For the qualifying age limits for eligibility for magistracies, see Sumner (1971): the normal age for quaestor was 30, praetor 39 and consul 42.
69. Plut., Pomp. 24, 25.1–3.
70. Plut., Crass. 13.1.
71. Plut., Caes. 1.2.
72. Plut., Caes. 5.6.
73. Plut., Caes. 5.8–9.
74. Plut., Caes. 5.8: ‘ὠνούμενος δὲ ταῖς ἀληθείαις τὰ μέγιστα μικρῶν ’.
75. Plut., Caes. 7.1–2.
76. Plut., Pomp. 45.
77. Plut., Cic. 2.1.
78. Plut., Cic. 4.
79. Plut., Cic. 5.1, 8.6–7.
80. Plut., Cic. 10–24.
81. Cic., Oratorio In Catalinam 2.14. ‘O condicionem miseram non modo administrandae, verum etiam conservandae rei publicae!’
82. Mulroy (1988).
83. Plut., Caes. 9.2.
84. Plut., Caes. 9.3, 10.6.
85. Plut., Caes. 10.1–5.
86. Plut., Cic. 29; Plut., Caes. 10.11.
87. Plut., Pomp. 45.
88. Plut., Pomp. 45.2–3.
89. Plut., Crass. 7.6.
90. Plut., Caes. 12.
91. Plut., Caes. 13.3–6; Pomp. 47.1–3.
92. Plut., Caes. 14.7; Pomp. 47.6.
93. Plut., Caes. 14.1.
94. Plut., Caes. 14.2.95.
95. Plut., Pomp. 48.2.
96. Plut., Pomp. 46.4.
97. Lex Clodia de Civibus Romanis Interemptis.
98. Plut., Cic. 32; Plut., Caes. 14.17.
99. Plut., Cic. 33.1.
100. See Tatum (1999). Respectively the Lex Clodia de Auspiciis, Lex Clodia de Censoribus, Lex Clodia de Sodalitatibus, Lex Clodia de Libertinorum Suffragiis and Lex Clodia Frumentaria.
101. Plut., Caes. 15.1–4.
102. Caes., Bell. Gall. 1–3; Plut., Caes. 18–20.
103. Plut., Pomp. 40.5, 52.4. The design of the building was inspired by the theatre in Mytilene, Lesbos, which Pompeius visited while in the East. The site of the Theatrum Pompeium has been identified but little of it survives to view as its remains are located in cellars of the surrounding modern neighbourhood of homes, hotels and restaurants. The largest still-intact sections of the building are to be found in the Palazzo della Cancelleria.
104. Plut., Caes. 21.6.
105. Plut., Caes. 22–27.
106. Plut., Crass. 17–33; Caes. 28.1.
107. Caes., Bell. Gall. 4–8; Plut., Caes. 22–27.
108. Plut., Cic. 33.3.
109. Plut., Cic. 33.4–8.
110. Plut., Cic. 35.1; Cic., Philippics 2.21.
111. Cic., Att. 8.11.1 ‘uterque regnare vult’.
112. Plut., Caes. 28.7.
113. Plut., Caes. 30.1.
114. Caes., Bell. Civ. 1.1–7; Plut., Caes. 28.7, 30.3.
115. Caes., Bell. Civ. 1.5: ‘dent operam consules, praetores, tribuni plebis, quique pro consulibus sint ad urbem, ne quid res publica detrimenti capiat’.
116. Caes., Bell. Civ. 1.7–8; Plut., Caes. 32.1.
117. Plut., Caes. 32.5.
118. App., Bell. Civ. 3.61.
119. Suet., Div. Iul. 32–33: ‘eatur,’ inquit, ‘quo deorum ostenta et inimicorum iniquitas uocat. ‘‘iacta alea est’’ inquit’. Menander’s line: Plut., Pomp. 60.2.9: ‘Ἀνερρίφθω κύβος ’; cf. Caes. 32.8.
120. Plut., Caes. 33.1.
121. Caes., Bell. Civ. 1.11.
122. Plut., Caes. 33.2–4.
123. Caes., Bell. Civ. 1.14; Plut., Caes. 33.6–34.3.
124. Balsdon (1969), p. 120.
125. Nic. 7.6.
126. Vell. Pat. 2.59.1–2.
127. Vell. Pat. 2.59.2.
128. Suet., Div. Aug. 8.2 and 89.1; Vell. Pat. 2.59.4; Dio 45.3.1.
129. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26.
130. Plut., Caes. 3.1.
131. Cic., De Inventione 1.5: ‘Officium autem eius facultatis videtur esse dicere adposite ad persuasionem; finis persuadere dictione’; cf. De Oratore 1.137–147.
132. Cic., De Inventione 1.7: ‘partes autem eae, quas plerique dixerunt, inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria, pronuntiatio’; cf. De Oratore 1.137–147.
133. Plut., Caes. 35.3.
134. Plut., Caes. 35.4–5.
135. Plut., Caes. 36.1–2.
136. Plut., Caes. 37.2–3. The legislation included restoring civic rights to the children of parents who had suffered in the time of Sulla and reducing interest rates to relieve the burdens of the debtor-class.
137. Plut., Caes. 38.1, 39.1.
138. Plut., Caes. 39.2–3, 40.1, 40.4.
139. Plut., Caes. 35.4–47.1.
140. Plut., Caes. 46.4.
141. Plut., Pomp. 80.1; Caes. 48.2.
142. Plut., Caes. 48.2; Pomp. 80.5.
143. Plut., Caes. 48.5–49.10.
144. Plut., Caes. 50.1–4; cf. Suet., Divus Caes. 37.
145. Nic. 7.
146. Plut., Caes. 52.1.
147. Plut., Caes. 52.4–5.
148. Plut., Caes. 52.4–5 and 56.7–9; Nic. 7. The triumphs were for his victory in Africa over Iuba, winning a naval battle on the Nile in Egypt, the conquest of Gaul and defeating Pharnakes of Pontus.
149. Nic. 7.
150. Nic. 9.
151. Caes., Bell. Civ. 1.29–2.1; Plut., Caes. 56.1.
152. Nic. 6.
153. Cic., Oratio pro L. Murena 10: ‘Ac nimirum – dicendum est enim quod sentio – rei militaris virtus praestat ceteris omnibus. Haec nomen populo Romano, haec huic urbi aeternam gloriam peperit, haec orbem terrarum parere huic imperio coegit; omnes urbanae res, omnia haec nostra praeclara studia et haec forensis laus et industria latet in tutela ac praesidio bellicae virtutis’.
154. Nic. 9–10: when he was called on to fight, his constitution often failed him, as Agrippa would come to learn.
155. Manlius, Astronomicon 1.797–798: ‘… matrisque sub armis miles Agrippa suae’; Nic. 11 alludes to it.
156. Keppie (1984), p. 98, notes the role of tribunes at this time was not well defined; cf. Le Bohec (1994), p. 39.
157. Caes., Bell. Hisp. 27–32. Caesar specifically mentions in Chapter 31 the day of battle was the Liberalia, the feast day of Liber or Bacchus; Plut., Caes., 56.5.
158. Plut., Caes. 56.2; Caes., De Bello Hispaniensi 30: Caesar refers to eighty cohorts, equivalent to eight legions, four of battle-hardened veteran (Legiones III, V, VI and X) and four of raw recruits; the cavalry included a detachment of Numidians led by Bogud.
159. Caes., Bell. Hisp. 27: ‘Ita cum clamor esset intermixtus gemitu gladiorumque crepitus auribus oblatus, inperitorum mentes timore praepediebat. Hic, ut ait Ennius, pes pede premitur, armis teruntur arma, adversariosque vehementissime pugnantes nostri agere coeperunt.’
160. Caes., Bell. Hisp. 41.
161. Caes., Bell. Hisp. 32: ‘Ex hostium armis pro caespite cadavera conlocabantur, scuta et pila pro vallo. Insuper occisorum in gladiorum mucronibus capita hominum ordinata ad oppidum conversa. Universa hostium timorem … virtutisque insignia proposita viderent, et vallo circumcluderentur adversarii.’
162. Caes., Bell. Hisp. 41; Plut., Caes. 56.3, says 30,000 of the enemy were slain to Caesar’s 1,000.
163. Caes., Bell. Hisp. 32–39.
164. Dio 45.10.1–6; Plut., Caes. 56.6.
165. Nic. 10–11; Vell. Pat. 2.59.3.
166. Nic. 11.
167. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 10.154; cf. Vell. Pat. 2.59.3.
168. Nic. 11.
169. Nic. 11.
170. The different arrival times might be explained if Agrippa went by road and Octavius went by sea.
171. App., Bell. Civ. 3.9: for magister equitum see Appendix.
172. Plut., Caes., 56.7.
173. Nic. 7.
174. Nic. 11.
175. Vell. Pat. 2.59.5. For Salvidienus see Dio 48.33.2; Ségolène (1992), p. 30.
176. Nic. 15.
177. Nic. 16.
178. Dio 45.3.1.
179. App., Bell. Civ. 3.9; Dio 45.1.7–8; Vell. Pat. 2.59.4.
180. Strab., Geog. 7.8.316.
181. Nic. 16. On Illyrian-Roman relations see Wilkes (1995), p. 209.
182. App., Bell. Civ. 3.9: ‘καὶ αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ Ἀπολλωνίᾳ ἱππέων ἶλαι παραλλὰξ ἐκ Μακεδονίας ἐπιοῦσαι συνεγύμναζον καὶ τῶν ἡγεμόνων τοῦ στρατοῦ τινες ὡς συγγενεῖ Καίσαρος θαμινὰ ἐπεφοίτων ’.
183. Nic. 16. Glabrio was consul in 67 BCE.
184. App., Bell. Civ. 3.9: ‘γνῶσίς τε ἐκ τούτων αὐτῷ καὶ εὔνοια παρὰ τοῦ στρατοῦ τις ἐνεγίγνετο, σὺν χάριτι δεξιουμένῳ πάντας ’.
185. Suet., Div. Aug. 8.2 and 89.1; Vell. Pat. 2.59.4; Dio 45.3.1.
186. Suet., Div. Aug. 94.12: ‘cum Agrippae, qui prior consulebat, magna et paene incredibilia praedicerentur’.
187. Suet., Div. Aug. 94.12: ‘metu ac pudore ne minor inveniretur’.
188. E.g. Dio 49.43.5.
189. Four months: Nic. 16; cf. six months: App., Bell. Civ. 3.9.
190. Nic. 16.
191. App., Bell. Civ. 3.9; Nic. 16.
Chapter 2: Champion of the New Caesar
1. Dio 45.3.1.
2. Caes., Bell. Gall. 2.2, 2.11.
3. Caes., Bell. Hisp. 2.12, 3.22.
4. Nic. 8.
5. Nic. 16.
6. Paterculus 2.59.5; App., Bell. Civ. 3.10; Suet., Div. Aug. 8.2; Nic. 17.
7. Nic. 16.
8. Nic. 16, 18–20; App., Bell. Civ. 3.10.
9. Nic. 17.
10. App., Bell. Civ. 3.10–11.
11. Nic. 17.
12. Nic. 17.
13. Nic. 17.
14. Vell. Pat. 2.60.1–2.
15. App., Bell. Civ. 3.11: ‘ὁ δὲ καὶ ταῦτά οἱ καὶ τὸ μὴ τιμωρεῖν αὐτὸν Καίσαρι αἰσχρὸν ἡγούμενος ἐς τὸ Βρεντέσιον ᾔει, προπέμψας καὶ διερευνησάμενο ’.
16. Nic. 17.
17. App., Bell. Civ. 3.18.
18. Nic. 27.
19. Plut., Ant. 13.2.
20. Plut., Brut. 18.8.
21. Plut., Ant. 13.2; Brut. 18.7.
22. Plut., Brut. 18.10–13.
23. Plut., Cic. 42.1, 42.3; Brut. 19.1.
24. Plut., Brut. 19.2.
25. Plut., Brut. 19.3.
26. Plut., Brut. 19.5; cf. App., Bell. Civ. 3.12 who notes Brutus and Cassius had been granted Macedonia and Syria respectively, but the Senate denied them these and awarded them the lesser territories.
27. App., Bell. Civ. 3.12.
28. Plut., Ant. 15.1.
29. Plut., Ant. 15.2.
30. Dio 45.9.1; Plut., Ant. 15.3.
31. Plut., Ant. 13.3–4; Brut. 20.4.
32. Plut., Brut. 20.4; Cic., 42.4.
33. Plut., Brut. 20.6–7.
34. Plut., Brut. 21.1; Cic., 42.5.
35. Livy, Per. 117.2; Nic. 17.
36. App., Bell. Civ. 3.10; Cic., Att. 14.10: ‘Octavius arrived at Neapolis on the 14th Kalends. There Balbus saw him on the morning of the following day and on the same day came to me at Cumae to tell me that he was going to claim his inheritance; but, as you say, he will have a lively time with Antonius.’
37. Cic., Att. 14.12: ‘Octavius treats me with the greatest distinction and friendship. Some call him Caesar. Philippus does not; therefore I do not. I am sure that he cannot be a good citizen, so many of those around him threaten death to our friends and say that these things cannot be borne. What think you when this boy shall come to Rome where our liberators cannot live in safety? They will always be famous, and happy also in the consciousness of what they have done. But, unless I am deceived, we shall be flat on our backs.’
38. Nic. 17.
39. App., Bell. Civ. 3.11; cf. 3.94.
40. App., Bell. Civ. 3.11.
41. App., Bell. Civ. 3.14.
42. Dio 45.5.3–4.
43. Plut., Ant. 9.1–10.1.
44. Dio 45.9.1; Cic., Philippicae 2.42.109.
45. Plut., Ant. 21.2; cf. 10.2. Presumably the Domus Rostrata, the house whose exterior walls were decorated with captured ships’ beaks.
46. Plut., Ant. 21.1.
47. Huzar (1978), pp. 88–89, 94.
48. Vell. Pat. 2.59.6: ‘Cui adventanti Romam inmanis amicorum occurrit frequentia, et cum intraret urbem, solis orbis super caput eius curvatus aequaliter rotundatusque in colorem arcus velut coronam tanti mox viri capiti imponens conspectus est.’
49. App., Bell. Civ. 3.12.
50. Cic., Ad Att. 14.14.5; 16.14.4; Philippicae 1.17; 2.35, 93; 8.26; Vell. Pat. 2.60.4; cf. Obsequens 68. Plut., Cic. 43.8 states Antonius was withholding 25,000,000 drachmai from the estate.
51. Plut., Ant. 16.1–2. Appian dramatizes the frank exchange of views in Bell. Civ. 3.15–21.
52. Plut., Cic. 45.1.
53. Plut., Cic. 43.3.
54. Many modern historians insist on calling him Octavianus, or worse Octavian. I use the name Caesar, the name he chose for himself, for the same reasons as Dio 46.47.7–8: ‘I shall call him, not Octavianus, but Caesar, inasmuch as the latter name has prevailed among all who have held sway over the Romans. For although he acquired another name also – that of Augustus – and the emperors who succeeded him consequently assumed it also, that one will be described when it comes up in the history, and until then the title Caesar will be sufficient to show that Octavianus is indicated.’
55. App., Bell. Civ. 3.94.
56. App., Bell. Civ. 3.94; Nic. 27; Dio 45.5.4. Many modern scholars argue the games were in honour of Caesar’s victories – ludi Victoriae Caesaris – but a compelling case is made for the games being held in honour of Venus Genetrix in Ramsey (1997), pp. 1–6 which contests the interpretation and proposes the games were to Venus Genetrix.
57. Dio 45.7.1 refers to a star; Suet., Div. Iul. 88 says the comet appeared for seven days at the eleventh hour each day. Caesar’s Comet is believed to be comet C/-43 K1 which Ramsey, Licht and Marsden (1997), pp. 3–4 deduced from astronomical calculations to have appeared over Rome 23–25 July 44 BCE.
58. For a full discussion see Kenneth Scott, ‘The Sidus Iulium and the Apotheosis of Caesar’ in Classical Philology, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Jul., 1941), pp. 257–272 and Robert A. Gurval, ‘Caesar’s Comet: The Politics and Poetics of an Augustan Myth’ in Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, Vol. 42 (1997), pp. 39–71.
59. Dio 45.7.2.
60. Dio 45.7.2: ‘καὶ διὰ ταῦτα καὶ οἱ στρατιῶται ἑτοίμως, ἄλλως τε καὶ χρήμασι θεραπευθέντων τινῶν, συνίσταντο πρὸς τὸν Καίσαρα.’
61. For a discussion see Ramage (1985), pp. 223–241.
62. Dio 45.7.1; cf. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 2.94. Later a denarius was minted showing the comet of eight rays and upward pointing tail: BMCRE I 323, RIC 1 37b, RSC 98.
63. E.g. Crawford 490.2.
64. Crawford 497.2a-d
65. Plut., Cic. 43.4–5.
66. Plut., Cic. 43.6–7.
67. Huzar (1978), pp. 97–98.
68. Nic. 28.
69. Nic., 29.115–119; Plut., Ant. 16.3; App., Bell. Civ. 2.111–115; Dio 45.8.1–2.
70. Cic., Philippicae 1.12–13, 2.110.
71. Nic. 28.
72. Nic. 30.
73. Dio 45.7.2, 45.11.1–4.
74. Dio 45.12.1; App., Bell. Civ. 3.49.
75. Dio 45.13.1.
76. Dio 45.13.2.
77. Nic. 30.
78. Vell. Pat. 2.88.2; Tac., Ann. 6.11.1. See Ségolène (1992), pp. 86–87.
79. Livy, Per. 117.3; Dio 45.12.2.
80. Nic. 30.
81. Dio 45.12.1.
82. Dio 45.12.1–3; Nic. 30.
83. Dio 45.12.3.
84. Nic. 30.
85. App., Bell. Civ. 3.93; Dio 45.12.3; Livy, Per. 117.4.
86. App., Bell. Civ. 3.44; Nic. 30.
87. App., Bell. Civ. 3.45; Dio 45.12.4.
88. App., Bell. Civ. 3.44, 3.46; Dio 45.12.5.
89. Dio 45.14.1; Nic. 28.
90. Dio 45.14.1; Nic. 28; App., Bell. Civ. 3.49, 3.97.
91. Dio 45.14.3.
92. App., Bell. Civ. 3.61.
93. App., Bell. Civ. 3.45.
94. App., Bell. Civ. 3.46, 3.49; Florus 2.15; Livy, Per. 117.4.
95. App., Bell. Civ. 3.49.
96. App., Bell. Civ. 3.50.
97. App., Bell. Civ. 3.47
98. App., Bell. Civ. 3.48.
99. App., Bell. Civ. 3.47.
100. App., Bell. Civ. 3.51, 3.64; Livy, Per. 118.2.
101. App., Bell. Civ. 3.61.
102. App., Bell. Civ. 3.64; cf. 3.75.
103. App., Bell. Civ. 3.65.
104. App., Bell. Civ. 3.65.
105. App., Bell. Civ. 3.66.
106. App., Bell. Civ. 3.68.
107. App., Bell. Civ. 3.69.
108. App., Bell. Civ. 3.70.
109. Cic., Ad Fam. 10.30, letter dated 20 April 43 BCE.
110. App., Bell. Civ. 3.65.
111. Nic. 28.
112. Ad Lucan, 1.41: ‘Mutina … Augustus Antonio victo per Agrippam (Decimum) Brutum liberavit’ cited by Roddaz (1984), p. 41; cf. Livy, Per. 119.6.
113. App., Bell. Civ. 3.71.
114. Livy, Per. 119.5.
115. Cic., Ad Fam. 11.14; Ad Brutum 4.
116. Livy, Per. 119.6; Cic., Ad Fam. 11.10 – May 5.
117. App., Bell. Civ. 3.72, 3.97.
118. App., Bell. Civ. 3.74.
119. App., Bell. Civ. 3.75.
120. Cic., Ad Fam. 11.10.
121. App., Bell. Civ. 3.80.
122. Livy, Per. 119.6.
123. Cic., Ad Fam. 11.20: ‘laudandum, adulescentem, ornandum, tollendum’.
124. App., Bell. Civ. 3.96.
125. App., Bell. Civ. 3.81.
126. Livy, Per. 119.7.
127. App., Bell. Civ. 3.82.
128. Suet., Div. Aug. 26.1: ‘Hic faciet, si vos non feceritis’; Dio 46.43.4: ‘ἂν ὑμεῖς τὴν ὑπατείαν μὴ δῶτε τῷ Καίσαρι, τοῦτο δώσει ’.
129. App., Bell. Civ. 3.94; Dio 46.45.3, 46.44.2; Livy, Per. 119.7. Iulius Caesar was 43 when he first assumed the consulship in 60 BCE.
130. Dio 46.45.5, 46.47.1.
131. App., Bell. Civ. 3.94.
132. Dio 46.47.1.
133. App., Bell. Civ. 3.94; Dio 46.46.1; Vell. Pat. 2.65; Suet., Div. Aug. 32.
134. App., Bell. Civ. 3.94.
135. RG 2; Suet., Div. Aug. 10.1, Ner. 3.2; Livy, Per. 120; App., Bell. Civ. 3.95, 3.27; Dio 46.48–49.
136. Plut., Brut. 27; cf. Vell. Pat. 2.69.5.
137. App., Bell. Civ. 4.1.
138. Dio 46.49.3. If Agrippa had indeed been born plebeian, it may have been at this time and through this process that he achieved the property qualification to officially become a member of the ordo equester. See Reinhold (1933), p. 21 n. 2.
139. Servius, Ad. Aen. 8.682: ‘… nam et tribunus plebi quietissimus fuit …’.
140. App., Bell. Civ. 4.1.
141. App., Bell. Civ. 3.96.
142. App., Bell. Civ. 3.98; cf. Vell. Pat. 2.64; Livy, Per. 120.2.
143. App., Bell. Civ.3.98.
144. App., Bell. Civ. 4.2.
145. App., Bell. Civ. 4.3.
146. Plut., Ant. 19.1; cf. the later division 30.4; App., Bell. Civ. 4.53.
147. App., Bell. Civ. 4.3 lists among them Capua, Rhegium, Venusia, Beneventum, Nuceria, Ariminum, and Vibo.
148. Cf. App., Bell. Civ. 4.8 ‘Marcus Lepidus, Marcus Antonius and Octavius Caesar, chosen by the people to set in order and regulate the res publica’. Some historians suggest the day the act was passed marked the end of the Roman Republic.
149. Our sources tell us lamentably little on the subject. Appian’s statement that the triumvirs had powers equal to the consuls (Bell. Civ. 4.7) probably justifies us in concluding that under the Lex Titia they held imperium consulare, as did proconsuls until the imperial period. A recently discovered inscription probably shows that they were regarded as promagistrates rather than magistrates (J. Reynolds, Aphrodisias and Rome (London, 1982), no. 9, line 12; cf. no. 8, line 80. However, we have no means of knowing how and to what extent their powers were spelled out in detail under the Lex Titia.’ – The Second Triumvirate Zwischen Republik und Prinzipat: zum Charakter des Zweiten Triumvirats by Jochen Bleicken Review by J.W. Rich The Classical Review, New Series, Vol. 42, No. 1 (1992), pp. 112–114).
150. Plut., Ant. 20.1.
151. App., Bell. Civ. 4.1, 4.3.
152. App., Bell. Civ. 4.5.
153. Plut., Ant. 19.1–3; App., Bell. Civ. 4.12.
154. Plut., Ant. 19.3, 20.1; App., Bell. Civ. 4.5; Livy, Per. 120.4 says 130 senators were listed.
155. Plut., Cic. 48.1, 48.6; App., Bell. Civ. 4.6; 4.19 reports Cicero’s brother Quintus and son Marcus were also proscribed.
156. Plut., Cic. 48.2–3; Livy, Per. 120.5 describes Popilius as a legionary soldier.
157. Plut., Cic. 48.6. App., Bell. Civ. 4.20. Livy, Per. 120.5 says Popilius slew him.
158. Plut., Cic. 49.2; App., Bell. Civ. 4.20; Dio 47.8.3. Livy, Per. 120.5 says his head and right hand were displayed on the Rostra.
159. App., Bell. Civ. 4.6.
160. Dio 47.3.4.
161. App., Bell. Civ. 4.5; Vell. Pat. 2.66; Suet., Div. Aug. 27; Livy, Per. 120.4.
162. Dio 47.3.1–3.
163. Dio 47.4–6.
164. App., Bell. Civ. 4.49.
165. App., Bell. Civ. 4.31.
166. App., Bell. Civ. 4.31; Dio 47.17.2–3.
167. App., Bell. Civ. 4.32.
168. App., Bell. Civ. 4.34.
169. App., Bell. Civ. 4.34; Dio 47.16.2–5.
170. Dio 47.16.1.
171. Dio 47.19.1.
172. Dio 47.19.2.
173. Dio 47.20.1.
174. App., Bell. Civ. 4.52.
175. App., Bell. Civ. 4.36. Among them was M. Acilius – App., Bell. Civ. 4.39.
176. App., Bell. Civ. 4.82.
177. App., Bell. Civ. 4.85.
178. Dio 47.21.2.
179. Dio 47.21.6.
180. Dio 47.21.7, 47.23.1–4. Holed up in Apollonia, C. Antonius became the subject of several rescue attempts.
181. App., Bell. Civ. 4.58–59; Dio 47.26.2, 47.28.1.
182. App., Bell. Civ. 4.58–62, 4.65; Dio 47.32.1; Livy, Per. 122.1.
183. App., Bell. Civ. 4.64, 4.74.
184. App., Bell. Civ. 4.63, 4.74.
185. App., Bell. Civ. 4.63; Dio 47.33.4.
186. App., Bell. Civ. 4.65–74; Dio 47.33.3.
187. App., Bell. Civ. 4.75–81; Dio 47.34.1–6; Plut., Brut. 30, 31.
188. App., Bell. Civ. 4.88.
189. App., Bell. Civ. 4.87: his brother Rhascus (Rhaskos) fought on the side of M. Antonius.
190. App., Bell. Civ. 4.105–106.
191. App., Bell. Civ. 4.107.
192. Dio 47.37.2.
193. App., Bell. Civ. 4.108; Plut., Brut. 41.2, 41.8.
194. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.148: ‘Philippensi proelio morbi, fuga et triduo in palude aegroti et (ut fatentur Agrippa ac Maecenas) aqua subter cutem fusa turgidi latebra.’
195. App., Bell. Civ. 4.108: 13,000 to 20,000, with Thracians on both sides.
196. Dio 47.37.5.
197. App., Bell. Civ. 4.109.
198. Plut., Brut. 41.1.
199. App., Bell. Civ. 4.110–111.
200. Dio 47.37.3, 47.46.2; Plut., Brut. 41.4–8, 42.6.
201. App., Bell. Civ. 4.112; Plut., Brut. 42.4–5.
202. Plut., Brut. 42.1.
203. Plut., Brut. 42.5, 43.1–3.
204. Plut., Brut. 42.4–5.
205. Plut., Brut. 42.7–9.
206. Plut., Brut. 44, 45.
207. App., Bell. Civ. 4.112; Plut., Brut. 45.1.
208. Plut., Brut. 47.1–3.
209. Plut., Brut. 47.4–6; App., Bell. Civ. 4.122.
210. App., Bell. Civ. 4.126–127.
211. Plut., Brut. 49.4; App., Bell. Civ. 4.128: Appian cites preparations lasted until the ninth hour.
212. App., Bell. Civ. 4.129.
213. App., Bell. Civ. 4.129; Plut., Brut. 50–51.
214. App., Bell. Civ. 4.131; Plut., Brut. 52.6–7; Dio 47.49.1.
215. App., Bell. Civ. 4.135; Plut., Brut. 53.1–4. Strato took part at Actium on Caesar’s side. Dio 47.49.2 reports that the body was buried but the head was shipped to Rome. During a storm at sea the head was lost overboard.
216. Suet., Vita Horati. See Mario Citroni, ‘The Memory of Philippi in Horace and the Interpretation of Epistle 1.20.23’, The Classical Journal 96.1 (Oct.–Nov., 2000), pp. 27–56; E.G. Sihler, ‘Horace at Philippi and After’, The Classical Weekly 4.19 (11 Mar. 1911), pp. 146–148.
217. Dio 47.49.4.
218. App., Bell. Civ. 4.132.
219. App., Bell. Civ. 4.115.
220. App., Bell. Civ. 4.116.
221. App., Bell. Civ. 5.3; Dio 48.1.2.
222. Dio 48.1.3.
223. Dio 48.2.4; App., Bell. Civ. 5.1.
224. App., Bell. Civ. 5.3: ‘They dismissed from the military service the soldiers who had served their full time, except 8,000 who had asked to remain. These they took back and divided between themselves and formed them in praetorian cohorts. There remained to them, including those who had come over from Brutus, eleven legions of infantry and 14,000 horse. Of these Antony took, for his foreign expedition, six legions and 10,000 horse. Octavius [Caesar] had five legions and 4,000 horse, but of these he gave two legions to Antony in exchange for others that Antony had left in Italy under the command of Calenus.’ App., Bell. Civ. 5.6: ‘Antonius spoke thus of providing a donative for twenty-eight legions of infantry, whereas I think that they had forty-three legions when they came to their agreement at Mutina and made these promises, but the war had probably reduced them to this number.’ Cf. App., Bell. Civ. 5.22. For a survey of ‘Civil War’ Legions see Keppie (1984), Appendix 1 pp. 200–202.
225. App., Bell. Civ. 4.85, 5.20, 5.31.
226. AE 1924, 55 records a veteran of Legio XXVIII settling there.
227. Dio 48.5.1. Keppie (1984), p. 121, says these were Legiones VII, VIII (maybe now called Macedonica) and one of the units defecting to him from Antonius.
228. App., Bell. Civ. 5.12; Dio 48.3.1.
229. Dio 48.3.2.
230. Cf. App., Bell. Civ. 4.3.
231. App., Bell. Civ. 5.12–13; Dio 48.6.3. Among those made homeless were the poets Horace, Propertius, Tibullus and Vergil. Caesar was able to later boast ‘I founded colonies of soldiers in Africa, Sicily, Macedonia, each Spain, Greece, Asia, Syria, Narbonian Gaul, and Pisidia, and furthermore had twenty-eight coloniae founded in Italy under my authority, which were very populous and crowded while I lived’ – RG 28.
232. App., Bell. Civ. 5.15–16; Suet., Div. Aug. 14.
232. Dio 48 Index.
234. Dio 48.4.1, 48.5.4.
235. Dio 47.5.3.
236. App., Bell. Civ. 5.14; Dio 48.2, 48.1–2; cf. 5.20.
237. Dio 48.5.4, 5.3.19.
238. App., Bell. Civ. 5.14. The ancient historians blame Fulvia for the war: Vell. Pat. 2.74; Plut., Ant. 30; Dio 47.4–10.
239. App., Bell. Civ. 5.20.
240. App., Bell. Civ. 5.18; Dio 48.7.4.
241. App., Bell. Civ. 5.19.
242. App., Bell. Civ. 5.23–24.
243. App., Bell. Civ. 5.24.
244. App., Bell. Civ. 5.26.
245. App., Bell. Civ. 5.27.
246. App., Bell. Civ. 5.29.
247. App., Bell. Civ. 5.30. Dio 48.13.2 refers to Nursia (Norcia), not Alba.
248. App., Bell. Civ. 5.30. In 295 BCE, during the Third Samnite War, the Romans had beaten a coalition of Samnites, Etruscans, Umbrians and their Gallic allies at Sentinum.
249. Dio 48.13.3–4.
250. Dio 48.13.4; App., Bell. Civ. 5.30.
251. App., Bell. Civ. 5.31; Dio 48.13.4.
252. Dio 48.13.6 reports ‘however, after burying those who had fallen in the battle they had had with Caesar, they inscribed on their tombs that they had died contending for their liberty, they were punished by an enormous fine, so that they abandoned their city and at the same time all their territory’.
253. App., Bell. Civ. 5.31.
254. The route of the Via Cassia is the modern SR143.
255. App., Bell. Civ. 5.31.
256. App., Bell. Civ. 5.31: ‘καὶ τάδε μέν, ὡς προσεδόκησεν ὁ Ἀγρίππας, ἐγίγνετο ἅπαντα.’
257. App., Bell. Civ. 5.31. Reinhold argues that the two proconsuls would not have left Gaul (1933), p. 18 n. 40.
258. App., Bell. Civ. 5.31: ‘ἐνοχλούντων αὐτὸν ἑκατέρωθεν Σαλουιδιηνοῦ τε καὶ Ἀγρίππου καὶ φυλασσόντων, ὅτε μάλιστα περιλάβοιεν ἐν τοῖς στενοῖς.’
259. App., Bell. Civ. 5.31; Dio 5.14.1; Vell. Pat. 2.74.3.
260. App., Bell. Civ. 5.32.
261. Florus 2.26.
262. App., Bell. Civ. 5.32; Dio 48.14.1.
263. App., Bell. Civ. 5.49.
264. App., Bell. Civ. 5.33.
265. Eph. Epig. 6.52–78: e.g. no. 60. OCTAVI FELAS, probably made by Lucius’ troops; nos 63. CAESAR IMP and 68. RVFVS IMP, likely made by Caesar’s troops. App., Bell. Civ. 5.36 refers to μολυβδαίναις, ‘leaden balls’, among the types of weaponry used.
266. App., Bell. Civ. 5.33.
267. App., Bell. Civ. 5.37 refers to use of μηχάνημα, ‘machines’.
268. App., Bell. Civ. 5.34.
269. App., Bell. Civ. 5.34.
270. App., Bell. Civ. 5.35.
271. App., Bell. Civ. 5.35: ‘ἔνθα αὐτοὺς τῶν ἀμφὶ τὸν Ἀγρίππαν περικαθημένων πυρὰ πολλὰ ἤγειραν, σύμβολα τῷ Λευκίῳ. καὶ γνώμην ἐποιοῦντο Οὐεντίδιος μὲν καὶ Ἀσίνιος βαδίζειν καὶ ὣς μαχούμενοι, Πλάγκος δὲ ἔσεσθαι μέσους Καίσαρός τε καὶ Ἀγρίππου, χρῆναι δ᾽ ἔτι καραδοκεῖν τὰ γιγνόμενα: καὶ ἐκράτει λέγων ὁ Πλάγκος. οἱ δ᾽ ἐν τῇ Περυσίᾳ τὰ μὲν πυρὰ ἰδόντες ἥδοντο, τῶν δ᾽ ἀνδρῶν βραδυνόντων εἴκασαν καὶ τούσδε ἐνοχλεῖσθαι καὶ παυσαμένου τοῦ πυρὸς διεφθάρθαι.’
272. App., Bell. Civ. 5.35: ‘καὶ τὰς ὑπολοίπους συλλογισάμενος τροφὰς ἀπεῖπε δίδοσθαι τοῖς θεράπουσι καὶ ἐφύλασσεν αὐτοὺς μηδ᾽ ἐκφυγεῖν, ἵνα μὴ γνωριμώτερον γένοιτο τοῖς πολεμίοις τὸ δεινόν. ἠλῶντο οὖν οἱ θεράποντες κατὰ πλῆθος καὶ κατέπιπτον ἔν τε αὐτῇ τῇ πόλει καὶ μέχρι τοῦ σφετέρου διατειχίσματος, πόαν εἴ τινα εὕροιεν ἢ φυλλάδα χλωράν, νεμόμενοι. καὶ τοὺς ἀποψύχοντας ὁ Λεύκιος ἐς τάφρους ἐπιμήκεις κατώρυσσεν, ἵνα μήτε καιομένων ἐπίδηλον τοῖς ἐχθροῖς γένοιτο, μήτε σηπομένων ἀτμὸς καὶ νόσος.’
273. App., Bell. Civ. 5.36; Dio 48.14.3.
274. App., Bell. Civ. 5.37.
275. App., Bell. Civ. 5.38.
276. App., Bell. Civ. 5.46.
277. App., Bell. Civ. 5.47.
278. App., Bell. Civ. 5.48.
279. App., Bell. Civ. 5.49.
280. App., Bell. Civ. 5.50.
281. App., Bell. Civ. 5.51.
282. App., Bell. Civ. 5.66.
283. Dio 48.20.2. For a discussion of the argument, pro and contra, see Reinhold (1933), p. 21 n. 2.
284. Justinian, Digest 1 tit. 2 s23.
285. It became Caesar’s modus operandi to bend the rules to accommodate his adopted sons and stepsons.
286. Dio 48.20.2.
287. Livy 26.23.3.
288. William M. Green, ‘Appropriations for the Games at Rome in 51 A.D.’ The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 51, No. 3. (1930), pp. 249–250.
289. Dio 48.20.2: ‘καὶ τὴν ἱπποδρομίαν ἐπὶ δύο ἡμέρας ἐποίησε, τῇ τε Τροίᾳ καλουμένῃ διὰ τῶν εὐγενῶν παίδων ἐγαυρώθη.’ For the Ludus Troiae, see Ver., Aen. 5.545–576.
290. Dio 48.20.2: ‘καὶ ἄλλα τε πολλά, ἅτε καὶ πάνυ φίλος ὢν τῷ Καίσαρι .’
291. Dio 48.20.1.
292. Dio 48.20.1; cf. App., Bell. Civ. 5.18.
293. Dio 48.20.2.
294. Dio 48.20.2: ‘ταῦτ᾽ οὖν αὐτοῦ πράττοντος ἐπεραιώθη τε ἐς τὴν Ἰταλίαν καὶ ἐνέμεινεν ἐν αὐτῇ λεηλατῶν, μέχρις οὗ ἐκεῖνος ἀφίκετο: τότε γὰρ φρουρὰν ἐν χωρίοις τισὶ καταλιπὼν ἀνέπλευσεν.’
295. App., Bell. Civ. 5.53.
296. App., Bell. Civ. 5.55.
297. App., Bell. Civ. 5.53; Dio 48.20.4.
298. Dio 48.27.1–3; App., Bell. Civ. 5.55.
299. Dio 48.27.5.
300. App., Bell. Civ. 5.56, 5.58.
301. App., Bell. Civ. 5.56.
302. Dio 48.28.1.
303. Dio 48.28.1; App., Bell. Civ. 5.56–57. Servilius Rullus was tribune in 63 BCE and had proposed far-reaching reforms of the agrarian laws.
304. App., Bell. Civ. 5.57.
305. App., Bell. Civ. 5.58; Dio 48.28.1.
306. App., Bell. Civ. 5.55, 5.59; Dio 48.28.2. Plut., Ant. 30.3.
307. Livy, Per. 127.2; Dio 48.28.3. Plut., Ant. 30.3.
308. Livy, Per. 127.2; App., Bell. Civ. 5.64. Octavia’s husband Marcellus had recently died.
309. App., Bell. Civ. 5.65. Reinhold (1933), p. 23 n. 22, cites the scholiasts Porphyrio, Acron and the commentator of Cruquius on Horace, Sermones 1.5.27.
310. App., Bell. Civ. 5.65; Dio 48.28.4. Cf. Plut., Ant. 30.4.
311. App., Bell. Civ. 5.63.
312. Dio 48.29.1.
313. App., Bell. Civ. 5.65.
314. Dio 48.29.2.
315. Plut., Ant. 30.4: ‘… and arranged that, when they did not wish for the office themselves, the friends of each should have the consulship by turns.’
316. Livy, Per. 127.3.
317. App., Bell. Civ. 5.66.
318. Dio 48.33.1–3.
319. App., Bell. Civ. 5.66.
Chapter 3: Fighter on Land and Sea
1. Rüpke (2008), p. 8. Suet., Div. Aug. 31; Tac., Ann. 6.12.
2. William Smith, A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (John Murray, London, 1875).
3. Cic., de Div. 1.43; Livy 22.57.
4. The other members of the committee of 39 BCE were Caesar, L. Marcius Censorinus, Q. Aemilius Lepidus, Potitus Valerius Messalla, Cn. Pompeius, C. Licinius Calvus Stolo, C. Mucius Scaevola, C. Sosius, C. Norbanus Flaccus and M. Cocceius Nerva – Rüpke (2008), p. 132.
5. App., Bell. Civ. 5.25.
6. Plut., Ant. 32.2.
7. App., Bell. Civ. 5.72–733.
8. Plut., Ant. 32.2.
9. Plut., Ant. 32.3.
10. Dio 48.49.2: ‘καὶ τόν γε ἐνιαυτὸν τοῦτόν τε καὶ τὸν ὕστερον ἔς τε τὴν ναυπηγίαν τῶν νεῶν καὶ ἐς τὴν ἄθροισιν τήν τε ἄσκησιν τῶν ἐρετῶν κατανάλωσε, αὐτὸς μὲν ἐφορῶν καὶ διατάττων ταῦτά τε καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τά τε ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ καὶ τὰ ἐν τῇ Γαλατίᾳ ῾κίνησις γάρ τις παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἐγένετὀ, τῷ δ᾽ Ἀγρίππᾳ.’
11. Agrippa’s presence in Gaul is not explicitly stated in the surviving sources but it is highly likely based on the circumstances.
12. Caes., Bell. Gall. 1.1: ‘Aquitania a Garumna flumine ad Pyrenaeos montes et eam partem Oceani quae est ad Hispaniam pertinet; spectat inter occasum solis et septentriones.’
13. Strab., Geog. 4.2.1: ‘῾εξῆς δὲ περὶ τῶν Ἀκυιτανῶν λεκτέον καὶ τῶν προσωρισμένων αὐτοῖς ἐθνῶν τετταρεσκαίδεκα Γαλατικῶν τῶν μεταξὺ τοῦ Γαρούνα κατοικούντων καὶ τοῦ Λίγηρος, ὧν ἔνια ἐπιλαμβάνει καὶ τῆς τοῦ Ῥοδανοῦ ποταμίας καὶ τῶν πεδίων τῶν κατὰ τὴν Ναρβωνῖτιν. ἁπλῶς γὰρ εἰπεῖν, οἱ Ἀκυιτανοὶ διαφέρουσι τοῦ Γαλατικοῦ φύλου κατά τε τὰς τῶν σωμάτων κατασκευὰς καὶ κατὰ τὴν γλῶτταν, ἐοίκασι δὲ μᾶλλον Ἴβηρσιν. ὁρίζονται δὲ τῷ Γαρούνᾳ ποταμῷ ἐντὸς τούτου καὶ τῆς Πυρήνης οἰκοῦντες. ἔστι δὲ ἔθνη τῶν Ἀκυιτανῶν πλείω μὲν τῶν εἴκοσι, μικρὰ δὲ καὶ ἄδοξα τὰ πολλά, τὰ μὲν παρωκεανιτικὰ τὰ δὲ εἰς τὴν μεσόγαιαν καὶ τὰ ἄκρα τῶν Κεμμένων ὀρῶν μέχρι Τεκτοσάγων ἀνέχοντα. ἐπειδὴ δὲ μικρὰ μερὶς ἦν ἡ τοσαύτη, προσέθεσαν καὶ τὴν μεταξὺ τοῦ Γαρούνα καὶ τοῦ Λίγηρος.’
14. Roads: Strab., Geog. 3.4.18.
15. App., Bell. Civ. 5.92: ‘καὶ νίκη κατὰ Κελτῶν τῶν Ἀκυιτανῶν ἐπιφανής, ἣν Ἀγρίππας ἄγων ἐφάνη’; cf. Dio 48.49.3 and Eutrop. 7.5.
16. Dio 48.49.3.
17. Dio 48.49.3: ‘τὴν τοῦ ναυτικοῦ παρασκευὴν ἐγχειρίσας. τοὺς γὰρ Γαλάτας αὐτὸν τοὺς νεωτερίσαντας προσπολεμούμενον, ὅτεπερ καὶ τὸν Ῥῆνον δεύτερος δὴ Ῥωμαίων ἐπὶ πολέμῳ διέβη, μετεπέμψατο.’
18. Dio 48.49.3: ‘καὶ τῇ τε δόσει τῶν νικητηρίων ἐτίμησε καὶ ἐκπονῆσαι’; cf. Augustus, RG 11.
19. See Sources 2.(a); cf. to coins issued in 38 BCE to announce the designate consulship of M. Antonius, e.g. aureus C.533.3b, S.1201 with obverse inscription IMP TERT COS DESIGN ITER ET TERT IIIVIR R P C, and denarius C.533.2, S.1199 with obverse IIIVIR R P C COS DESIG ITER ET TERT; and by Caesar minted 37 BCE e.g. denarius Sydenham 1334, Sear Imperators 312, Crawford 538/1, Cohen 91 with obverse inscription COS ITER ET TER DESIG.
20. CIL 12.28, 65, 158–159; Dio 48 Index, 48.49.4 and 49.23.5; Joseph., Ant. Iud. 14.16.4.
21. Tresviri monetales: Ironically in 12 BCE, the year of Agrippa’s death.
22. CIL IV.2437 (Pompeii): IV NON DEC USCE AD VI EID DEC M AGRIP T STAT COS referring to 2–8 December.
23. Dio 48.49.3: ‘καὶ τῇ τε δόσει τῶν νικητηρίων ἐτίμησε καὶ ἐκπονῆσαι ἐξασκῆσαί τε τὸ ναυτικὸν ἐκέλευσε.’ Scholars have debated Agrippa’s reasoning for declining the honour of the triumph, for example, see Reinhold (1933), p. 28 n. 2–3 and p. 29 n. 4.
24. App., Bell. Civ. 5.25–26: ‘ἀλλὰ Πομπηίῳ μὲν ὑπὸ ἀφροσύνης οὐκ ἐπιχειρεῖν, ἀλλὰ ἀμύνεσθαι μόνον ἐδόκει, μέχρι καὶ τοῦδε ἥσσων ἐγένετο.’
25. Dio 48.45.5.
26. Dio 48.46.1.
27. Dio 48.46.2–3.
28. Dio 48.46.4.
29. Dio 48.46.5.
30. Dio 48.47.1–2.
31. Dio 48.47.3–4.
32. Dio 48.47.5.
33. Dio 48.48.1.
34. Dio 48.48.2–5.
35. Florus 2.18 calls this ‘bellum cum Sexto Pompeio’, but some modern historians refer to this as The Sicilian War, e.g. Reinhold (1933), chapter 4, pp. 28–44; Stone, S.C. (2002), ‘Sextus Pompeius, Octavianus and Sicily’ in Powell and Welch (2002), pp. 135–65.
36. Dio 49.49.2–3.
37. Vell. Pat. 2.79.1: ‘Aedificandis navibus contrahendoque militi ac remigi navalibusque adsuescendo certaminibus atque exercitationibus praefectus est M. Agrippa, virtutis nobilissimae, labore, vigilia, periculo invictus parendique, sed uni, scientissimus, aliis sane imperandi cupidus et per omnia extra dilationes positus consultisque facta coniungens.’
38. Dio 48.49.4: ‘τὸ δὲ δὴ ναυτικὸν πάνυ προθύμως ἐξειργάσατο.’
39. The rostrum or ram of a warship was found in 2008 offshore from Acqualadrone in northeastern Sicily still attached to a wooden stump. Analysis of the acids and other substances in the wooden remains of the warship, which likely fought in the First Punic War, show that the strutwork is pine (Pinus salius), waterproofed with pine tar. The rostrum is cast bronze, with a wooden core that was preserved by burial beneath the seafloor. Carbon-14 analysis gave a date of 277t83 BC. The ship may have been damaged during the Battle of Tyndaris (257 BC) or of Mylae (260 BC) fought between the navies of Rome and Carthage.
40. Pitassi (2011), p.123; cf. W.L. Roger’s reconstruction which shows a bireme at 33.5m (110 feet) in length and a beam of 5m (16.5 feet) in Starr (1941), plate 5: the crew would likely comprise 25 seamen, 108 rowers and 80 marines.
41. Rogers (2008), pp. 199–226.
42. Pitassi (2011), pp.125–126.
43. App., Bell. Civ. 5.106.
44. App., Bell. Civ. 5.106; Dio 49.3.4. An earlier versions of this device is recorded in Thucydides 7.62 where Nikias advises the Athenians ‘we have provided iron grapnels, which will prevent any ship striking us from getting off if the marines are quick and do their duty’.
45. Servius, Aeneid 8.693: ‘nam Agrippa primus hoc genus turrium invenit, ut de tabulatis subito erigerentur, simul ac ventum esset in proelium, turres hostibus inprovisae, in navigando essent occultae’. See App., Bell. Civ. 4.72 for the later use of these collapsible turrets by Cassius in his siege of the Rhodians at Myndos.
46. For a full description of the device see Polybios 1.22–23.
47. Dio 48.49.4: ‘ἐγίγνετο μὲν γὰρ ἐν πάσῃ τῇ παραθαλασσίῳ Ἰταλίᾳ τὰ σκάφη.’
48. Dio 48.49.4–5: ‘ἐγίγνετο μὲν γὰρ ἐν πάσῃ τῇ παραθαλασσίῳ Ἰταλίᾳ τὰ σκάφη. ὡς δ᾽ οὐδεὶς αἰγιαλὸς ἐγκαθορμίσασθαι αὐτοῖς ἀσφαλὴς εὑρίσκετο ῾ἀλίμενα γὰρ ἔτι καὶ τότε τὰ πλείω τῆς ἠπείρου ταύτης ἦν᾽, ἔργον μεγαλοπρεπὲς καὶ ἐνενόησε καὶ ἐξεποίησεν, ὃ ἐγὼ διὰ πλειόνων ἐξηγησάμενος ἐκεῖνό τε ἐπιδείξω τῷ λόγῳ καὶ τἆλλα τὰ κατ᾽ αὐτὸ νῦν ὄντα.’
49. Dio 48.50.1–3: ‘ἐν τῇ Κύμῃ τῇ Καμπανίδι χωρίον τι μεταξὺ Μισηνοῦ καὶ Πουτεόλων μηνοειδές ἐστιν: ὄρεσί τε γὰρ σμικροῖς καὶ ψιλοῖς, πλὴν βραχέων, περιείληπται, καὶ θάλασσαν τριπλῆν κολπώδη ἔχει. ἡ μὲν γὰρ ἔξω τε καὶ πρὸς ταῖς πόλεσίν ἐστιν, ἡ δ᾽ ὀλίγῃ διαφυῇ ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς διείργεται, ἄλλη ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ μυχῷ λιμνώδης ὁρᾶται. καὶ καλεῖται αὕτη μὲν Ἀουερνίς, ἡ δὲ μέση Λουκρινίς: ἡ γὰρ ἔξω, τοῦ Τυρσηνικοῦ οὖσα, ἐς ἐκεῖνο καὶ τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν τελεῖ. ἐν ταύτῃ δὴ τῇ θαλάσσῃ τῇ ἐντὸς ἑκατέρας στενοῖς τότε ἔσπλοις τὸ διεῖργον τὴν Λουκρινίδα ἀπὸ τοῦ πελάγους ἐπ᾽ ἀμφότερα παρ᾽ αὐτὴν τὴν ἤπειρον ὁ Ἀγρίππας συντρήσας λιμένας ναυλοχωτάτους ἀπέδειξεν.’
50. Brandon, Hohlfelder and Oleson (2008), pp. 374–379.
51. Vergil, Georgicon 2.161–164: ‘an memorem portus Lucrinoque addita claustra | atque indignatum magnis stridoribus aequor, | Iulia qua ponto longe sonat unda refuso | Tyrrhenusque fretis immittitur aestus Auernis?’
52. Pliny, Nat. His. 36.125: ‘nam … praetereo … mare Tyrrhenum a Lucrino molibus seclusum.’
53. Suet., Div. Aug. 16.1.
54. Dio 48.51.5: ‘καὶ ἐς αὐτὰς τότε ὁ Ἀγρίππας, ἐπειδὴ τάχιστα τοὺς ἔσπλους ἐξεποίησε, τάς τε ναῦς καὶ τοὺς ἐρέτας ἤθροισε, καὶ τὰς μὲν κατέφραττε, τοὺς δὲ ἐπ᾽ ἰκρίων ἐρέττειν ἤσκει .’
55. Florus 2.18.6; Suet., Div. Aug. 16.1. Vell. Pat. 2.79.1–2.
56. Suet., Div. Aug. 16.1. Dio 48.49.1.
57. Velleius 2.79.1–2: ‘Hic in Averno ac Lucrino lacu speciosissima classe fabricata cotidianis exercitationibus militem remigemque ad summam et militaris et maritimae rei perduxit scientiam.’
58. App., Bell. Civ. 5.93.
59. Plut., Ant. 35.
60. App., Bell. Civ. 5.93.
61. Plut., Ant. 35; App., Bell. Civ. 5.94–95; Dio 48.54.1–6.
62. Cic., Att. 6.2.10, 4.3.
63. Cic., Att. 13.21.7; Ad Brutum 1.17.7. She was born between May and September 51 BCE according to Cicero, Ad Atticum 5.19.2.
64. Nepos, Atticus 12.1–2. Antonius regularly corresponded with Atticus – Nepos, Atticus 20.4.
65. Cic., Ad Atticum 6.2.10, 4.3.
66. Nepos, Atticus 21.4–5, 22.2.
67. Suet., Tib. 7.2; CIL V.6359, VI.9901a.
68. Powell (2011), pp. 1–3.
69. App., Bell. Civ. 5.96.
70. App., Bell. Civ. 5.96: ‘οἱ μὲν βωμοὶ ψαύουσι τῆς θαλάσσης, καὶ ἡ πληθὺς αὐτοὺς περιέστηκε κατὰ ναῦν μετὰ σιωπῆς βαθυτάτης: οἱ δὲ ἱερουργοὶ θύουσι μὲν ἑστῶτες ἐπὶ τῇ θαλάσσῃ καὶ τρὶς ἐπὶ σκαφῶν περιφέρουσιν ἀνὰ τὸν στόλον τὰ καθάρσια, συμπεριπλεόντων αὐτοῖς τῶν στρατηγῶν καὶ ἐπαρωμένων ἐς τάδε τὰ καθάρσια, ἀντὶ τοῦ στόλου, τὰ ἀπαίσια τραπῆναι. νείμαντες δὲ αὐτά, μέρος ἐς τὴν θάλασσαν ἀπορρίπτουσι καὶ μέρος ἐς τοὺς βωμοὺς ἐπιθέντες ἅπτουσι, καὶ ὁ λεὼς ἐπευφημεῖ .’
71. App., Bell. Civ. 5.97. Dio 49.1.1 says the fleets sailed in the spring.
72. App., Bell. Civ. 5.97–98.
73. App., Bell. Civ. 5.98: ‘οὕτω μὲν ἑκάτεροι παρασκευῆς εἶχον, γενομένης δὲ τῆς νουμηνίας ἀνήγοντο πάντες ἅμα ἠοῖ, Λέπιδος μὲν ἐκ Λιβύης χιλίαις ὁλκάσι καὶ μακραῖς ἑβδομήκοντα καὶ τέλεσι στρατοῦ δυώδεκα καὶ ἱππεῦσι Νομάσι πεντακισχιλίοις καὶ ἑτέρᾳ παρασκευῇ πολλῇ.’
74. App., Bell. Civ. 5.98: ‘Πλένιον ἐν Λιλυβαίῳ πολιορκῶν, τινὰς τῶν πόλεων ὑπήγετο καὶ ἑτέρας ἐβιάζετο.’
75. App., Bell. Civ. 5.98: Appian notes Taurus brought with him ‘only 102 of the 130 ships that Antony had left, since the oarsmen of the remainder had perished during the winter’.
76. App., Bell. Civ. 5.98.
77. App., Bell. Civ. 5.99.
78. App., Bell. Civ. 5.100.
79. App., Bell. Civ. 5.99.
80. App., Bell. Civ. 5.101.
81. App., Bell. Civ. 5.100.
82. App., Bell. Civ. 5.101. App., Bell. Civ. 5.113 writes, ‘This was the same Messala whom the triumvirs proscribed at Rome, and for the killing of whom money and freedom were offered as rewards. He had fled to Cassius and Brutus, and after their death had delivered his fleet to Antony, in pursuance of an agreement made between them. It seems fitting to recall this fact in honour of Roman magnanimity, inasmuch as Messala, when he had in his power, overwhelmed with misfortune, the man who had proscribed him, saved him and cared for him as his commander.’
83. App., Bell. Civ. 5.101.
84. App., Bell. Civ. 5.102.
85. App., Bell. Civ. 5.103.
86. App., Bell. Civ. 5.104.
87. App., Bell. Civ. 5.105.
88. The First Punic War ended here in 241 BCE: C. Lutatius Catulus defeated the Carthaginian fleet and a treaty was signed between them which saw Sicily handed over to the Romans.
89. Dio 49.2.3.
90. App., Bell. Civ. 5.105.
91. This may be a copyist’s mistake for Demochares. The preceding section states that Demochares was in Agrippa’s front, and Dio 49.2.1–4 informs us that the battle that took place here was between Agrippa and Demochares. Suet., Div. Aug. 16 adds the name of Apollophanes.
92. App., Bell. Civ. 5.106: ‘Ἀγρίππας δ᾽ ἔτι νυκτὸς ἐξ Ἱερᾶς ἀνήγετο ταῖς ἡμίσεσι τῶν νεῶν ὡς Παπίᾳ μόνῳ ναυμαχήσων. ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ τὰς Ἀπολλοφάνους εἶδε καὶ τὰς ἑβδομήκοντα ἑτέρωθι, Καίσαρι μὲν αὐτίκα ἐδήλου Πομπήιον ἐπὶ τῶν Μυλῶν εἶναι σὺν τῷ πλέονι ναυτικῷ, τὰς δὲ βαρείας αὐτὸς ἦγε κατὰ μέσον καὶ τὸν ἄλλον στόλον ἐξ Ἱερᾶς ἐκάλει κατὰ σπουδήν: ἐσκεύαστο δ᾽ ἀμφοτέροις πάντα λαμπρῶς, καὶ πύργους ἐπὶ τῶν νεῶν εἶχον κατά τε πρῷραν καὶ κατὰ πρύμναν. ὡς δὲ αὐτοῖς αἵ τε παρακελεύσεις, οἵας εἰκὸς ἦν, ἐγεγένηντο καὶ τὰ σημεῖα κατὰ ναῦν ἦρτο, ἐξώρμων ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλους, οἱ μὲν κατὰ μέτωπον, οἱ δ᾽ ἐς περικύκλωσιν, σύν τε βοῇ καὶ ῥοθίῳ νεῶν καὶ καταπλήξει ποικίλῃ. ἦν δὲ καὶ τὰ σκάφη Πομπηίῳ μὲν βραχύτερα καὶ κοῦφα καὶ ὀξέα ἐς τὰς ἐφορμήσεις τε καὶ περίπλους, καίσαρι δὲ μείζω καὶ βαρύτερα καὶ παρ᾽ αὐτὸ καὶ βραδύτερα, βιαιότερα δὲ ὅμως ἐμπεσεῖν καὶ τρωθῆναι δυσπαθέστερα. τῶν τε ἀνδρῶν οἱ μὲν ναυτικώτεροι τῶν Καίσαρος ἦσαν, οἱ δὲ σθεναρώτεροι: καὶ κατὰ λόγον οἱ μὲν οὐκ ἐμβολαῖς, ἀλλὰ μόναις περιόδοις ἐπλεονέκτουν, καὶ ταρσοὺς τῶν μειζόνων ἢ πηδάλια ἀνέκλων ἢ κώπας ἀνέκοπτον ἢ ἀπεχώριζον ὅλως τὰ σκάφη καὶ ἔβλαπτον ἐμβολῆς οὐχ ἥσσονα: οἱ δὲ τοῦ Καίσαρος αὐτὰς ἐμβολαῖς ὡς βραχυτέρας ἀνέκοπτον ἢ κατέσειον ἢ διερρήγνυον καί, ὅτε συμπλακεῖεν, ἔβαλλόν τε ὡς ταπεινοτέρας ἀφ᾽ ὑψηλοῦ καὶ κόρακας ἢ χεῖρας σιδηρᾶς εὐκολώτερον ἐπερρίπτουν. οἱ δὲ ὅτε βιασθεῖεν, ἐξήλλοντο ἐς τὸ πέλαγος. καὶ τούσδε μὲν τὰ ὑπηρετικὰ τοῦ Πομπηίου περιπλέοντα ἀνελάμβανεν.’ Cf. Dio 49.3.1–3.
93. App., Bell. Civ. 5.107: ‘ὁ δὲ Ἀγρίππας ἵετο μάλιστα εὐθὺ τοῦ Παπίου καὶ αὐτῷ κατὰ τὴν ἐπωτίδα ἐμπεσὼν κατέσεισε τὴν ναῦν καὶ ἐς τὰ κοῖλα ἀνέρρηξεν: ἡ δὲ τούς τε ἐν τοῖς πύργοις ἀπεσείσατο καὶ τὴν θάλασσαν ἀθρόως ἐδέχετο, καὶ τῶν ἐρετῶν οἱ μὲν θαλαμίαι πάντες ἀπελήφθησαν, οἱ δ᾽ ἕτεροι τὸ κατάστρωμα ἀναρρήξαντες ἐξενήχοντο. Παπίας δὲ ἐς τὴν παρορμοῦσαν ἀναληφθεὶς αὖθις ἐπῄει τοῖς πολεμίοις.’
94. App., Bell. Civ. 5.107: ‘καὶ ὁ Πομπήιος ἐξ ὄρους ἐφορῶν τὰς μὲν ἰδίας μικρὰ ἐπωφελούσας καὶ ψιλουμένας τῶν ἐπιβατῶν, ὅτε συμπλακεῖεν, Ἀγρίππᾳ δὲ τὸν ἕτερον στόλον ἐξ Ἱερᾶς προσπλέοντα, ἀναχωρεῖν ἐσήμηνε σὺν κόσμῳ. καὶ ἀνεχώρουν ἐπιόντες τε καὶ ἀναστρέφοντες ἀεὶ κατ᾽ ὀλίγον. Ἀγρίππα δ᾽ ἐπιβαρήσαντος αὐτοῖς ἔφευγον, οὐκ ἐς τοὺς αἰγιαλούς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσα τῆς θαλάσσης οἱ ποταμοὶ τεναγώδη πεποιήκεσαν.’
95. App., Bell. Civ. 5.108: ‘καὶ Ἀγριππας, κωλυόντων αὐτὸν τῶν κυβερνητῶν μεγάλαις ναυσὶν ἐς ὀλίγον ὕδωρ ἐπιπλεῖν, πελάγιος ἐπ᾽ ἀγκυρῶν ἐσάλευεν ὡς ἐφορμιούμενος τοῖς πολεμίοις καὶ νυκτομαχήσων, εἰ δέοι. τῶν φίλων δ᾽ αὐτῷ παραινούντων μὴ ἀλόγῳ θυμῷ συμφέρεσθαι μηδὲ τὸν στρατὸν ἐκτρύχειν ἀγρυπνίᾳ καὶ πόνῳ μηδὲ πιστεύειν πολυχείμωνι θαλάσσῃ, μόλις ἑσπέρας ἀνεζεύγνυε. καὶ οἱ Πομπηιανοὶ ἐς τοὺς λιμένας παρέπλεον, τριάκοντα μὲν τῶν σφετέρων νεῶν ἀποβαλόντες, πέντε δὲ καταδύσαντες τῶν πολεμίων καὶ βλάψαντες ἄλλα ἱκανὰ καὶ βλαβέντες ὅμοια. καὶ αὐτοὺς ὁ Πομπήιος ἐπαινῶν, ὅτι τηλικαύταις ναυσὶν ἀντέσχον, τειχομαχῆσαι μᾶλλον ἔφασκεν ἢ ναυμαχῆσαι καὶ ὡς νενικηκότας ἐδωρεῖτο, καὶ ἐπήλπιζεν ἐν τῷ πορθμῷ διὰ τὸν ῥοῦν κουφοτέρους ὄντας περιέσεσθαι καὶ αὐτὸς ἔφη τι προσθήσειν ἐς τὸ τῶν νεῶν ὕψος.’
96. Suet., Div. Aug. 16.2: ‘ne rectis quidem oculis eum aspicere potuisse instructam aciem, verum supinum, caelum intuentem, stupidum cubuisse, nec prius surrexisse ac militibus in conspectum venisse quam a M. Agrippa fugatae sint hostium naves.’
97. App., Bell. Civ. 5.109: ‘τὸν δὲ Καίσαρα ὁ Πομπήιος, ὥσπερ ἦν, ὑπολαβὼν ἐς τὸ Ταύρου στρατόπεδον οἴχεσθαι καὶ ἐπιχειρήσειν τῷ Ταυρομενίῳ, μετὰ δεῖπνον εὐθὺς ἐς Μεσσήνην περιέπλει, μέρος ἐν ταῖς Μύλαις ὑπολιπών, ἵνα αὐτὸν ὁ Ἀγρίππας ἔτι παρεῖναι νομίζοι. Ἀγρίππας μὲν δὴ διαναπαύσας τὸν στρατόν, ἐς ὅσον ἤπειγεν, ἐς Τυνδαρίδα ἐνδιδομένην ἔπλει: καὶ παρῆλθε μὲν εἴσω, μαχομένων δὲ λαμπρῶς τῶν φρουρῶν ἐξεώσθη. προσεχώρησαν δ᾽ ἕτεραι πόλεις αὐτῷ καὶ φρουρὰς ἐδέξαντο: καὶ αὐτὸς ἐπανῆλθεν ἐς Ἱεράν. ὁ δὲ Καῖσαρ ἤδη μὲν ἐς Λευκόπετραν ἐκ τοῦ Σκυλακίου διεπεπλεύκει, μαθὼν ἔτι ἀκριβέστερον, ὅτι ὁ Πομπήιος ἐκ Μεσσήνης ἐς Μύλας οἴχοιτο δι᾽ Ἀγρίππαν: ἐκ δὲ Λευκοπέτρας ἔμελλε νυκτὸς περᾶν ὑπὲρ τὸν πορθμὸν ἐς τὸ Ταυρομένιον. πυθόμενος δὲ περὶ τῆς ναυμαχίας μετέγνω μὴ κλέπτειν ἔτι τὸν διάπλουν νενικηκώς, ἀλλὰ κατὰ φῶς θαρροῦντι τῷ στρατῷ περαιοῦσθαι: καὶ γὰρ ἔτι πάντως ἡγεῖτο Πομπήιον Ἀγρίππᾳ παραμένειν. κατασκεψάμενος οὖν ἡμέρας τὸ πέλαγος ἐκ τῶν ὀρῶν, ἐπεὶ καθαρὸν ἔγνω πολεμίων, ἔπλει στρατὸν ἔχων, ὅσον αἱ νῆες ἐδέχοντο, Μεσσάλαν ἐπὶ τοῦ λοιποῦ καταλιπών, ἕως ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν αἱ νῆες ἐπανέλθοιεν. ἐλθὼν δ᾽ ἐπὶ τὸ Ταυρομένιον προσέπεμψε μὲν ὡς ὑπαξόμενος αὐτό, οὐ δεξαμένων δὲ τῶν φρουρῶν παρέπλει τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν Ὀνοβάλαν καὶ τὸ ἱερὸν τὸ Ἀφροδίσιον καὶ ὡρμίσατο ἐς τὸν Ἀρχηγέτην, Ναξίων τὸν θεόν, ὡς χάρακα θησόμενος ἐνταῦθα καὶ ἀποπειράσων τοῦ Ταυρομενίου’. Appian adds the final comment to explain that ‘‘the Archegetes is a small statue of Apollo, erected by the Naxians when they first migrated to Sicily.’
98. App., Bell. Civ. 5.110: ‘τέλη δ᾽ ἦν αὐτῷ τρία καὶ ἱππέες χωρὶς ἵππων πεντακόσιοι καὶ κοῦφοι χίλιοι καὶ κληροῦχοι σύμμαχοι χωρὶς καταλόγου δισχίλιοι καὶ ναυτικὴ δύναμις ἐπὶ τούτοις.’
99. App., Bell. Civ. 5.111: ‘τὰ μὲν οὖν πεζὰ πάντα Κορνιφικίῳ παραδοὺς ὁ Καῖσαρ ἐκέλευσε τοὺς κατὰ τὴν γῆν πολεμίους ἀπομάχεσθαι καὶ πράσσειν, ὅ τι ἐπείγοι.’
100. Lipara was one of the Aeolian islands located north of Hiera, where Agrippa was stationed.
101. App., Bell. Civ. 5.113.
102. App., Bell. Civ. 5.114.
103. App., Bell. Civ. 5.115; Dio 49.6–7.
104. App., Bell. Civ. 5.116: ‘Τυνδαρίδα ... τροφῶν μεστὸν χωρίον καὶ εὐφυῶς ἐς πόλεμον ἐκ τῆς θαλάσσης ἔχον ’.
105. Cic., In Verrem 3.43.
106. App., Bell. Civ. 5.115.
107. App., Bell. Civ. 5.116.
108. App., Bell. Civ. 5.116: ‘αἳ φόβῳ μάλιστα Ἀγρίππου πῦρ διηνεκὲς ἔκαιον ὡς ἐμπρήσοντες τοὺς ἐπιπλέοντας ’.
109. App., Bell. Civ. 5.116–117.
110. Dio 49.8.5.
111. App., Bell. Civ. 5.117.
112. App., Bell. Civ. 5.118.
113. App., Bell. Civ. 5.119: ‘ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς ἡμέρας πρῶτα μὲν ἦν ἐρετῶν ἅμιλλα καὶ βοή, καὶ βέλη τὰ μὲν ἐκ μηχανῆς, τὰ δ᾽ ἀπὸ χειρῶν, ὅσα λίθοι καὶ πυρφόρα καὶ τοξεύματα. μετὰ δὲ αἱ νῆες αὐταὶ συνερρήγνυντο ἀλλήλαις, αἱ μὲν εἰς τὰ πλάγια, αἱ δὲ κατ᾽ ἐπωτίδας, αἱ δὲ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐμβόλους, ἔνθα μάλιστά εἰσιν αἱ πληγαὶ βίαιοι τινάξαι τε τοὺς ἐπιβάτας καὶ τὴν ναῦν ἀργοτέραν ἐργάσασθαι. ἄλλαι δὲ ἀλλήλας διεξέπλεον βάλλουσαί τε καὶ ἀκοντίζουσαι: καὶ τὰ ὑπηρετικὰ τοὺς ἐκπίπτοντας ἀνελάμβανεν. ἔργα τε χειρῶν ἦν καὶ βία ναυτῶν καὶ τέχνη κυβερνητῶν καὶ βοαὶ καὶ στρατηγῶν παρακελεύσεις καὶ μηχανήματα πάντα. εὐδοκίμει δὲ μάλιστα ὁ ἅρπαξ, ἔκ τε πολλοῦ ταῖς ναυσὶ διὰ κουφότητα ἐμπίπτων καὶ ἐμπηγνύμενος, ὅτε μάλιστα ὑπὸ τῶν καλῳδίων ἐφέλκοιτο ὀπίσω: κοπῆναί τε ὑπὸ τῶν βλαπτομένων οὐκ ἦν εὔπορος διὰ σίδηρον τὸν περιέχοντα, καὶ τὸ μῆκος αὐτοῦ δυσεφικτότατα τοῖς κόπτουσι τὰ καλῴδια ἐποίει: οὐδὲ τὸ μηχάνημά πω προέγνωστο, ὡς δρέπανα δόρασι περιθέσθαι: ἓν δ᾽ ἐπενόουν ὡς ἐν ἀδοκήτῳ, τὴν ναῦν κρούοντες ἐπὶ πρύμναν ἀντισπᾶν. τὸ δ᾽ αὐτὸ ποιούντων καὶ τῶν πολεμίων ἴση μὲν ἦν ἡ βία τῶν ἀνδρῶν, ὁ δὲ ἅρπαξ ἐποίει τὸ ἴδιον.’
114. App., Bell. Civ. 5.120: ‘ὅτε μὲν οὖν προσπελάσειαν αἱ νῆες, ἐμάχοντο παντοίως καὶ ἐς ἀλλήλους μεθήλλοντο. καὶ διαγνῶναι τὸν πολέμιον οὐκ ἦν ἔτι ὁμοίως εὔπορον: ὅπλοις τε γὰρ ὡς τὰ πολλὰ τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἐχρῶντο καὶ φωνῇ σχεδὸν ἅπαντες Ἰταλῇ, τά τε συνθήματα μιγνυμένων ἐς ἀμφοτέρους ἐξενήνεκτο, καὶ ἐκ τοῦδε μάλιστα ἐνέδραι πολλαὶ καὶ ποικίλαι παρὰ ἀμφοῖν, καὶ ἀπιστία πρὸς τοὺς λέγοντας αὐτὰ ἐπεγίγνετο, ἀγνωσία τε πάντας ἀλλήλων ἐπεῖχεν ὡς ἐν πολέμῳ καὶ θαλάσσῃ γεμούσῃ φόνων τε καὶ ὅπλων καὶ ναυαγίων. οὐ γάρ τινα πεῖραν ἔλιπον, ὅτι μὴ μόνον τὸ πῦρ: τούτου δὲ μετὰ τοὺς πρώτους ἐπίπλους ἐφείσαντο διὰ τὰς συμπλοκάς. ὁ δὲ πεζὸς ἑκατέρων στρατὸς ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς μετὰ φόβου καὶ σπουδῆς ἐς τὴν θάλασσαν ἀφεώρων, ὡς ἐν τῇδε καὶ αὐτοὶ περὶ τῆς σφῶν σωτηρίας τὴν ἐλπίδα ἔχοντες. διέκρινόν γε μὴν οὐδέν, οὐδ᾽ ἐδύναντο, καὶ μάλιστα περισκοποῦντες, οἷα νεῶν ἑξακοσίων ἐπὶ μήκιστον ἐκτεταγμένων καὶ τῆς οἰμωγῆς ἐναλλασσομένης ἀνὰ μέρος ἑκατέρωθεν.’
115. App., Bell. Civ. 5.121: ‘μόλις δέ ποτε ταῖς χροιαῖς τῶν πύργων, αἷς δὴ μόναις διέφερον ἀλλήλων, ὁ Ἀγρίππας συνεὶς πλέονας ἀπολωλέναι τοῦ Πομπηίου ναῦς ἐθάρρυνε τοὺς συνόντας ὡς ἤδη κατορθοῦντας: καὶ τοῖς πολεμίοις αὖθις ἐμπεσὼν ἐπέκειτο ἀπαύστως, μέχρι βιασθέντες, ὅσοι μάλιστα κατ᾽ αὐτὸν ἦσαν, τούς τε πύργους κατέρριψαν καὶ τὰς ναῦς ἐπιστρέψαντες ἐς τὸν πορθμὸν ἔφευγον. καὶ ἔφθασαν ἐσδραμεῖν ἑπτακαίδεκα νῆες. αἱ δὲ λοιπαί, διακλείσαντος αὐτὰς τοῦ Ἀγρίππου, αἱ μὲν ἐξώκελλον ἐς τὴν γῆν διωκόμεναι, καὶ συνεξώκελλον αὐταῖς ὑπὸ ὁρμῆς οἱ διώκοντες ἢ ὁρμιζομένας ἀπέσπων ἢ ἐνεπίμπρασαν: ὅσαι δὲ ἔτι κατὰ τὸ πέλαγος ἐμάχοντο, τὰ περὶ αὐτὰς γιγνόμενα κατιδοῦσαι παρεδίδοσαν ἑαυτὰς τοῖς πολεμίοις. καὶ ὁ τοῦ Καίσαρος στρατὸς ἐπινίκιον ἠλάλαξεν ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ, καὶ ὁ πεζὸς ἀντεβόησεν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. οἱ Πομπηίου δ᾽ ἀνῴμωξαν, καὶ αὐτὸς ἐκ τῶν Ναυλόχων ἀναθορὼν ἐς τὴν Μεσσήνην ἠπείγετο, οὐδὲν ὑπὸ ἐκπλήξεως περὶ τῶν πεζῶν οὐδ᾽ ἐπισκήψας: ὅθεν καὶ τούσδε ὁ Καῖσαρ Τισιηνοῦ παραδιδόντος ὑποσπόνδους ἐδέχετο καὶ τοὺς ἱππέας ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς, τῶν ἱππάρχων παραδιδόντων. κατέδυσαν δὲ ἐν τῷ πόνῳ νῆες Καίσαρος μὲν τρεῖς, Πομπηίου δὲ ὀκτὼ καὶ εἴκοσι, καὶ αἱ λοιπαὶ κατεφλέχθησαν ἢ ἐλήφθησαν ἢ ἐς τὴν γῆν ὀκέλλουσαι συνετρίβησαν: αἱ δὲ ἑπτακαίδεκα μόναι διέφυγον.’
116. App., Bell. Civ. 5.122; Dio 49.11.1.
117. App., Bell. Civ. 5.127.
118. App., Bell. Civ. 5.123.
119. App., Bell. Civ. 5.124–125.
120. App., Bell. Civ. 5.126; Dio 49.11.2–12.4; Velleius 2.80; Livy, Per. 129; Orosius 6.18.30–32.
121. App., Bell. Civ. 5.127.
122. App., Bell. Civ. 5.128.
123. Horace, Epistulae 1.12.1. Reinhold (1933), p. 42, note 100 notes the example of Iccius, an estate manager – procurator Agrippae in Sicilia – is called a friend of Horace by the scholiasts of the poet, as well as the presence of several ‘Vipsanii’, likely all freedmen from inscriptions found at Catania.
124. Livy, Per. 129. Maxfield (1981), pp. 74-76 points out that Pliny the Elder Nat. Hist. 22.4 claims the corona navalis was awarded to M. Varro by Pompeius Magnus for success over the pirates in 67 BCE and concluded that ‘Varro must be regarded as a serious candidate for the distinction’ as well as Agrippa.
125. Ver., Aen. 8.683–684: ‘arduus agmen agens, cui, belli insigne superbum, | tempora nauali fulgent rostrata corona.’
126. Dio 49.14.3; Livy Per. 129; Seneca De Beneficiis 3.32.4; Vel. Pat. 2.81.3; Ver., Aen. 8.683–684; Ov., Ars Amoratia 3.392; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 16.7–8: ‘itemque M. Agrippa tribuente Caesare e Siculis, quae et ipsa piratica fuere … dedit hanc Augustus coronam Agrippae, sed civicam a genere humano accepit ipse.’
127. See Sources: 2. Coins. E.g. BMCRE I 110, I 103, I 121.
128. Dio 49.36.1: ‘ἐπὶ Παννονίους ἐπεστράτευσεν, ἔγκλημα μὲν οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς ἐπιφέρων ῾οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδ᾽ ἠδίκητό τι ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν᾽, ἵνα δὲ δὴ τοὺς στρατιώτας ἀσκῇ τε ἅμα καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων τρέφῃ, πᾶν τὸ τῷ κρείττονι τοῖς ὅπλοις ἀρέσκον δίκαιον ἐς τοὺς ἀσθενεστέρους ποιούμενος.’ This contradicts Suet., Div. Aug. 21.2 who writes that he would not make war ‘sine iustis et necessariis causis bellum’, without just cause.
129. App., Ill. 22: ‘διὸ καὶ μάλιστα αὐτῆς ἔχρῃζεν ὁ Καῖσαρ, ὡς ταμιείῳ χρησόμενος ἐς τὸν Δακῶν καὶ Βαστερνῶν πόλεμον, οἳ πέραν εἰσὶ τοῦ Ἴστρου, λεγομένου μὲν ἐνταῦθα Δανουβίου, γιγνομένου δὲ μετ᾽ ὀλίγον Ἴστρου.’
130. Iulius Caesar’s army took this sea crossing in 48 BCE; his impatience at the speed of its progress, leading to a rare example of his humbling by the ferocious waves of the Adriatic Sea, is recorded by Valerius Maximus, 9.8.2. Aquileia had been subject to attacks by the Pannnoni over the previous two decades prior to 35 BCE according to App., Ill. 18.
131. Florus 2. 23. App., Ill. 16. During the Illyrian Wars of 229 BC, 219 BC and 168 BC, the Romans attacked the coastal bases and eradicated the pirates.
132. App., Ill. 6. Later Roman writers, Dio among them, differentiate between Dalmatia and Pannonia, which were the names given to the two provinces created out of the larger when it was split. For a discussion, see Dzino (2008).
133. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.26; Florus 2.25. In modern terms, it would cover parts of Albania, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro.
134. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.28; Florus 2.24. In today’s terms, it would cover parts of Austria, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Slovakia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.
135. Mallory (1989), pp. 73–76; Wilkes (1992), pp. 203–5.
136. For a discussion of the scope of the war, see Vulić (1934).
137. App., Ill. 16; Dio 49.35.1.
138. App., Ill. 18; Strab., Geog. 7.5.4.
139. Dio 49.35.1, 49.38.3–4.
140. App., Ill. 16.
141. Dio 49.35.1.
142. App., Ill. 18.
143. App., Ill. 19.
144. Dio 49.35.2 mentions many siege engines were destroyed.
145. App., Ill. 20.
146. App., Ill. 20.
147. App., Ill. 20: ‘συνέθεον δ᾽ αὐτῷ τῶν ἡγεμόνων Ἀγρίππας τε καὶ Ἱέρων καὶ ὁ σωματοφύλαξ Λοῦτος καὶ Οὐόλας, τέσσαρες οἵδε μόνοι, καὶ τῶν ὑπασπιστῶν ὀλίγοι. ἤδη δ᾽ αὐτοῦ τὴν γέφυραν περῶντος, ἐν αἰδοῖ γενόμενος ὁ στρατὸς ἀνεπήδησεν ἄθρους. καὶ πάλιν ἡ γέφυρα βαρηθεῖσα καταπίπτει, καὶ οἱ ἄνδρες ὑπ᾽ αὐτῆς ἀθρόοι κατεχώννυντο, καὶ οἱ μὲν ἀπέθανον αὐτῶν, οἱ δὲ συντριβέντες ἐφέροντο. ὁ δὲ Καῖσαρ ἐπλήγη μὲν τὸ σκέλος τὸ δεξιὸν καὶ τοὺς βραχίονας ἄμφω.’
148. App., Ill. 21.
149. App., Ill. 21; Dio 49.37.1–4.
150. Dio 49.38.3.
151. App., Ill. 22: ‘οὔπω Ῥωμαίοις οὐδὲ τῆσδε ὑπηκόου γενομένης. ὑλώδης δ᾽ ἐστὶν ἡ Παιόνων, καὶ ἐπιμήκης ἐξ Ἰαπόδων ἐπὶ Δαρδάνους. καὶ οὐ πόλεις ᾤκουν οἱ Παίονες οἵδε, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγροὺς ἢ κώμας κατὰ συγγένειαν: οὐδ᾽ ἐς βουλευτήρια κοινὰ συνῄεσαν, οὐδ᾽ ἄρχοντες αὐτοῖς ἦσαν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν.’
152. App., Ill. 22.
153. Dio 49.37.1.
154. Dio 49.37.2.
155. Dio 49.37.3–4; Strab., 4.6.10, 7.5.2; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.148.
156. Dio 49.37.5.
157. The theory is advanced by Dušcanić (2008).
158. Dio 49.38.1.
159. Dio 49.38.2.
160. Dio 49.38.3–4.
161. Dio 49.38.1.
162. Dio 49.38.3: ‘ἐπὶ δὲ δὴ τοὺς Δελμάτας πρότερος μὲν ὁ Ἀγρίππας, ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ ὁ Καῖσαρ ἐπεστράτευσε.’
163. App., Ill. 25.
164. App., Ill. 25: ‘καὶ ἦσαν οἱ μαχιμώτατοι μυρίων καὶ δισχιλίων πλείους, ὧν στρατηγὸν Οὐέρσον αἱροῦνται. ὁ δὲ Πρωμόναν αὖθις, τὴν τῶν Λιβυρνῶν πόλιν, καταλαβὼν ὠχύρου, καὶ τἆλλα οὖσαν ἐκφυῶς ὀχυρωτάτην: ὄρειον γάρ ἐστι τὸ χωρίον, καὶ αὐτῷ περίκεινται λόφοι πάντοθεν ὀξεῖς οἷα πρίονες. ἐν μὲν δὴ τῇ πόλει τὸ πλέον ἦν, ἐν δὲ τοῖς λόφοις διέθηκεν Οὐέρσος φρούρια: καὶ πάντες ἐφεώρων τὰ Ῥωμαίων ἀφ᾽ ὑψηλοῦ. ὁ δὲ Καῖσαρ ἐς μὲν τὸ φανερὸν πάντας ἀπετείχιζε, λάθρᾳ δὲ τοὺς εὐτολμοτάτους ἔπεμπε ζητεῖν ἄνοδον ἐς τὸν ἀκρότατον τῶν λόφων. καὶ οἱ μέν, τῆς ὕλης αὐτοὺς ἐπικαλυπτούσης, νυκτὸς ἐμπίπτουσι τοῖς φύλαξιν εὐναζομένοις, καὶ κτείνουσιν αὐτούς, καὶ τῷ Καίσαρι κατέσεισαν ὑπὸ λύγῃ: ὁ δὲ τῆς τε πόλεως ἐς πεῖραν ᾔει τῷ πλέονι στρατῷ, καὶ ἐς τὸ εἰλημμένον ἄκρον ἑτέρους ἐφ᾽ ἑτέροις ἔπεμπεν, οἳ τοῖς ἄλλοις λόφοις ἐπικατῄεσαν. φόβος τε καὶ θόρυβος ἦν τοῖς βαρβάροις ὁμοῦ πᾶσιν ἐπιχειρουμένοις πάντοθεν: μάλιστα δὲ οἱ ἐν τοῖς λόφοις ἔδεισαν διὰ τὸ ἄνυδρον, μὴ τῶν διόδων ἀφαιρεθῶσιν. καὶ συμφεύγουσιν ἐς τὴν Πρωμόναν.’
165. App., Ill. 26.
166. App., Ill. 26; Dio 49.38.4.
167. App., Ill. 27.
168. Dio 49.38.4.
169. App., Ill. 29.
170. App., Ill. 28: ‘οὕτω πᾶσαν ὁ Καῖσαρ τὴν Ἰλλυρίδα γῆν, ὅση τε ἀφειστήκει Ῥωμαίων, καὶ τὴν οὐ πρότερον ὑπακούσασαν αὐτοῖς, ἐκρατύνατο.’
171. Dio 54.32.1.
172. Favro (1992).
173. Z. Yavetz, ‘The Living Conditions of the Urban Plebs in Republican Rome’, Latomus 17 (1958), pp. 500–517.
174. Cic., Leg. 3.3.7.
175. Dio 49.42.2.
176. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.121.
177. Frontin., 1.9: ‘paene dilapsos’.
178. Dio 49.42.2; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 31.41; Frontin., 1.9.
179. Frontin., 1.9.
180. Frontin., 104: ‘Quod Q. Aelius Tubero Paulus Fabius Maximus cos. V.F. de numero publicorum salientium qui in urbe essent intraque aedificia urbi coniuncta, quos M. Agrippa fecisset, Q. F. P. D. E. R. I. C. neque augeri placere nec minui numerum publicorum salientium, quos nunc esse rettulerunt ei, quibus negotium a senatu est imperatum ut inspicerent aquas publicas inirentque numerum salientium publicorum. Itemque placere curatores aquarum, quos Caesar Augustus ex senatus auctoritate nominavit, dare operam uti salientes publici quam adsiduissime interdiu et noctu aquam in usum populi funderent.’ The Acqua Felice dating from 1586, which still carries water, runs along stretches of the ancient Aqua Marcia.
181. Frontin., 1.9–10; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.121.
182. Frontin., 1.9: ‘Post ***Agrippa aedilis post primum consulatum imperatore Caesare Augusto II L. Volcatio cos., anno post urbem conditam septingentesimo nono decimo ad miliarium ab urbe duodecimum Via Latina deverticulo euntibus ab Roma dextrorsus milium passuum duum alterius aquae proprias vires collegit et Tepulae rivum intercepit. Adquisitae aquae ab inventore nomen Iuliae datum est, ita tamen divisa erogatione, ut maneret Tepulae appellatio.’
183. Dio 48.32.3; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.121; Frontin., 1.9–10.
184. Frontin., 1.9: ‘Ductus Iuliae efficit longitudinem passuum quindecim milium quadringentorum viginti sex S.: opere supra terram passuum septem milium: ex eo in proximis urbem locis a septimo miliario substructione passuum quingentorum viginti octo, reliquo opere arcuato passuum sex milium quadringentorum septuaginta duum.’
185. Frontin., 1.9: ‘Praeter caput Iuliae transfluit aqua quae vocatur Crabra. Hanc Agrippa omisit, seu quia improbaverat, sive quia Tusculanis possessoribus relinquendam credebat; ea namque est quam omnes villae tractus eius per vicem in dies modulosque certos dispensatam accipiunt.’
186. Frontin., 1.9: ‘Sed non eadem moderatione aquarii nostri partem eius semper in supplementum Iuliae vindicaverunt, nec ut Iuliam augerent, quam hauriebant largiendo compendi sui gratia. Exclusi ergo Crabram et totam iussu imperatoris reddidi Tusculanis, qui nunc, forsitan non sine admratione, eam sumunt ignari cui causae insolitam abundantiam debeant. Iulia autem revocatis derivationibus, per quas surripiebatur, modum suum quamvis notabili siccitate servavit.’
187. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.24. Pliny the Elder often refers to the Commentarii of M. Agrippa, by which it is supposed he is referring to official lists drawn up by him recording measurements of the Roman world under Augustus, e.g. Nat. Hist. 3.30. On the evidence for bathing in the late Republic see Fagan (1993), pp. 98–142 (http://hdl.handle.net/11375/6921). Fagan translates the statement et gratuita praebita balnea CLXX as ‘and offered 170 free baths’, arguing that the reference does not explain how Agrippa administered the benefaction and that ‘they were not necessarily provided in 170 separate buildings’. Further he states ‘the phrase gratuitum balneum is a synonym for gratuita lavatio, or ‘free bathing’ a benefaction which might be restricted to a single building’ (pp. 102–103). I highly doubt this is what Pliny meant since the number 170 makes no sense in this interpretation.
188. Cic., Fam. 14.20.1: labrum si in balneo non est, ut sit; item cetera quae sunt ad victum et ad valetudinem necessaria; also Fam 9.22.4.
189. Dio 49.43.2.
190. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.24.
191. Dio 49.43.1: ‘ἐς τὸν Τίβεριν δι᾽ αὐτῶν ὑπέπλευσε, τούς τε ὑπονόμους ἐξεκάθηρε’; cf. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.24, where he states it is ‘a work more stupendous than any; as mountains had to be pierced for their construction … and navigation had to be carried on beneath Rome; an event which happened in the aedileship of M. Agrippa, after he had filled the office of consul.’
192. Dio 49.43.1: ‘τῷ δ᾽ ὑστέρῳ ἔτει ἀγορανόμος ὁ Ἀγρίππας ἑκὼν ἐγένετο, καὶ πάντα μὲν τὰ οἰκοδομήματα τὰ κοινὰ πάσας δὲ τὰς ὁδούς, μηδὲν ἐκ τοῦ δημοσίου λαβών, ἐπεσκεύασε, τούς τε ὑπονόμους ἐξεκάθηρε …’.
193. Livy, AUC 1.56.
194. Pliny, Nat. Hist., 36.24: ‘emendatis lacus dcc fecit, praeterea salientes d, castella cxxx, complura et cultu magnifica, operibus iis signa ccc aerea aut marmorea inposuit, columnas e marmore cccc, eaque omnia annuo spatio.’
195. Dio 49.42.2.
196. Frontin., 1.98: ‘Primus M. Agrippa post aedilitatem, quam gessit consularis, operum suorum et munerum velut perpetuus curator fuit. Qui iam copia permittente discripsit, quid aquarum publicis operibus, quid lacibus, quid privatis daretur. Habuit et familiam propriam aquarum, quae tueretur ductus atque castella et lacus.’
197. Cic., Leg. 3.3.7: ‘aediles curatores urbis.’
198. Astrologers: Dio 49.43.5; olive oil: 49.43.2; barbers: 49.43.3.
199. CIL VI.9972, 10026: excavations conducted periodically since 1904 have revealed the remains of the largest warehouse. Its identification is confirmed by the discovery of an altar still in situ bearing an inscription recording the erection of the statue of the Genius Horreorum Agrippianorum. The part so far uncovered by archaeologists comprises a convex quadrilateral-shaped courtyard surrounded by rectangular rooms constructed of opus quadratum and decorated with engaged Corinthian columns, dating to the Augustan period.
200. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.24.
201. Balsdon (1969), pp. 314–324; Paoli (1963), pp. 251–252.
202. Dio 49.43.2: ‘κἀν τῷ ἱπποδρόμῳ σφαλλομένους τοὺς ἀνθρώπους περὶ τὸν τῶν διαύλων ἀριθμὸν ὁρῶν τούς τε δελφῖνας καὶ τὰ ᾠοειδῆ δημιουργήματα κατεστήσατο, ὅπως δἰ αὐτῶν αἱ περίοδοι τῶν περιδρόμων ἀναδεικνύωνται .’
203. Agrippa’s games: Dio 49.43.3; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.121; Iulius Caesar’s games: according to Dio 43.24, in 46 BCE Caesar hosted elaborate games at the tomb of his daughter Iulia – who had died in childbirth eight years earlier – to celebrate victories in Gaul and Egypt. The entertainments included stage plays, gladiatorial combats and beast fights, including the first public display of a giraffe. The games were criticized for their extravagance and the numbers of victims slain, which allegedly included several of Caesar’s own soldiers who had protested that none of the money was distributed to them.
204. Dio 49.43.4: ‘ἵνα μηδεὶς μηδὲν αὐτοῖς ἀναλώσῃ. καὶ τέλος σύμβολά τέ τινα ἐς τὸ θέατρον κατὰ κορυφὴν ἔρριψε, τῷ μὲν ἀργύριον τῷ δὲ ἐσθῆτα τῷ δὲ ἄλλο τι φέροντα, καὶ ἄλλα πάμπολλα ὤνια ἐς τὸ μέσον.’
205. Dio 49.43.5.
206. Horace, Sermones 2.3.185–186: ‘in cicere atque faba bona tu perdasque lupinis, | latus ut in circo spatiere et aeneus ut stes, | nudus agris, nudus nummis, insane, paternis; | scilicet ut plausus quos fert Agrippa feras tu, | astuta ingenuum volpes imitata leonem?’
207. An alternative date is 31 December 32 BCE. Fergus Millar, ‘Triumvirate and Principate’, Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 63 (1973), p. 62, points out that the surviving evidence does not resolve unambiguously the question of when the powers of the Triumvirs expired, either in strict theory or in practice, citing Karl-Ernst Petzold, ‘Die Bedeutung des Jahres 32 für die Entstehung des Principats’, Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 18.3 (Jun., 1969), p. 334.
Chapter 4: Mastermind of Victory at Actium
1. Nepos, Atticus 20.1 and 20.4.
2. Nepos, Atticus 20.5: ‘cum se uterque principem non solum urbis Romae, sed orbis terrarum esse cupere.’
3. Plut., Ant. 61.1–2.
4. See Braund (1984), pp. 75–90.
5. Two good biographies of Herodes are the popular study by Perowne (1956) and, for a deeper, academic treatment, Richardson (1996).
6. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.14.3.
7. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.14.4. Richardson (1996), p.129 notes that Josephus records that Herodes intended to propose Aristobulus III, the 14/15 year old brother of Mariamme, as ethnarch and that Antonius expedited the decisions through the Senate.
8. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.15.1–18.4.
9. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.18.3.
10. App., Bell. Civ. 5.140–144; Dio 49.18.4–5; Vell. Pat. 2.79.5; Strab. 3.2, p. 141; Orosius 6.19.2; Livy, Per. 131; Eutropius 7.6.1; Plut., Ant. 87.2.
11. Dio 49.18.4–5; App., Bell. Civ. 5.144. The right to a trial was the central argument in Cicero’s prosecution of Verres.
12. Plut., Ant. 75.1.
13. Plut., Ant. 37.3: Plut., Ant. 56.1 mentions sixteen legions later stationed in Armenia; cf. Livy, Per. 130 mentions eighteen legions and 16,000 cavalry.
14. Vell. Pat., 2.82.21. According to the Mehr News Agency the site was re-discovered during archaeological surveys near Zahak Castle in Hashtrud located in Iran’s northwestern province of East Azarbaijann in 2005.
15. Vell. Pat. 2.82.2; Plut., Ant. 38.2.
16. Antonios.’ disastrous campaign is described in detail in Plut., Ant. 38.1–49.4.
17. Livy, Per. 130.1.
18. Plut., Ant. 50.1: in 49.4 he notes ‘they fell sick with dropsies and dysenteries’. Livy, Per. 130.2 cites 8,000 men lost.
19. Plut., Ant. 53.1.
20. Plut., Ant. 53.2; Dio 49.33.3–4.
21. Plut., Ant. 36.2: ‘ἐλθούσῃ δὲ χαρίζεται καὶ προστίθησι μικρὸν οὐδὲν οὐδ᾽ ὀλίγον, ἀλλὰ Φοινίκην, κοίλην Συρίαν, Κύπρον, Κιλικίας πολλήν: ἔτι δὲ τῆς τε Ἰουδαίων τὴν τὸ βάλσαμον φέρουσαν καὶ τῆς Ναβαταίων Ἀραβίας ὅση πρὸς τὴν ἐκτὸς ἀποκλίνει θάλασσαν. αὗται μάλιστα Ῥωμαίους ἠνίασαν αἱ δωρεαί.’
22. Dio 49 Index, 49.39.1–2.
23. Dio 49.39.3–4.24.
24. Dio 49.39.5–6.
25. Vell. Pat. 2.82.4; Dio 49.40.3–4.
26. Dio 49.41.2–3; Plut., Ant. 54.3.
27. Plut., Ant. 36.3: ‘οὐ μὴν ἀλλ᾽ ἀγαθὸς ὢν ἐγκαλλωπίσασθαι τοῖς αἰσχροῖς ἔλεγε τῆς μὲν Ῥωμαίων ἡγεμονίας οὐ δἰ ὧν λαμβάνουσιν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν οἷς χαρίζονται φαίνεσθαι τὸ μέγεθος: διαδοχαῖς δὲ καὶ τεκνώσεσι πολλῶν βασιλέων πλατύνεσθαι τὰς εὐγενείας.’
28. Plut., Ant. 36.4: ‘οὕτω γοῦν ὑφ᾽ Ἡρακλέους τεκνωθῆναι τὸν αὑτοῦ πρόγονον, οὐκ ἐν μιᾷ γαστρὶ θεμένου τὴν διαδοχὴν οὐδὲ νόμους Σολωνείους καὶ κυήσεως εὐθύνας δεδοικότος, ἀλλὰ τῇ φύσει πολλὰς γενῶν ἀρχὰς καὶ καταβολὰς ἀπολιπεῖν ἐφιέντος.’
29. Plut., Ant. 54.3, 54.5–6.
30. Plut., Ant. 54.4.
31. Plut., Ant. 36.2.
32. Plut., Ant. 54.3: ‘ἐμισήθη δὲ καὶ διὰ τὴν διανέμησιν ἣν ἐποιήσατο τοῖς τέκνοις ἐν Ἀλεξανδρείᾳ, τραγικὴν καὶ ὑπερήφανον καὶ μισορρώμαιον φανεῖσαν.’
33. Dio 49.41.5.
34. Plut., Ant. 55.1–2.
35. Plut., Ant. 55.2: ‘πρὸς ταῦτα Καῖσαρ ἀπελογεῖτο Λέπιδον μὲν ὑβρίζοντα καταπαῦσαι τῆς ἀρχῆς, ἃ δὲ ἔσχηκε πολεμήσας, νεμήσεσθαι πρὸς Ἀντώνιον ὅταν κἀκεῖνος Ἀρμενίαν πρὸς αὐτόν: τοῖς δὲ στρατιώταις Ἰταλίας μὴ μετεῖναι: Μηδίαν γὰρ ἔχειν καὶ Παρθίαν αὐτούς, ἃς προσεκτήσαντο Ῥωμαίοις καλῶς ἀγωνισάμενοι μετὰ τοῦ αὐτοκράτορος .’
36. Dio 49.44.1.
37. Dio 49.44.2.
38. Dio 49.44.3–4.
39. Plut., Ant. 56.1.
40. Plut., Ant. 56.1: ‘αὐτὸς δὲ Κλεοπάτραν ἀναλαβὼν εἰς Ἔφεσον ἧκε. καὶ τὸ ναυτικὸν ἐκεῖ συνῄει πανταχόθεν, ὀκτακόσιαι σὺν ὁλκάσι νῆες, ὧν Κλεοπάτρα παρεῖχε διακοσίας καὶ τάλαντα δισμύρια καὶ τροφὴν τῷ στρατῷ παντὶ πρὸς τὸν πόλεμον.’
41. Plut., Ant. 58.1.
42. Plut., Ant. 58.2: ‘ὅθεν ἐν τοῖς μεγίστοις ἁμαρτήμασιν Ἀντωνίου τὴν ἀναβολὴν τοῦ πολέμου τίθενται. καὶ γὰρ παρασκευάσασθαι χρόνον ἔδωκε Καίσαρι καὶ τὰς ταραχὰς τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐξέλυσε. πραττόμενοι γὰρ ἠγριαίνοντο, πραχθέντες δὲ καὶ δόντες ἡσύχαζον.’
43. Vell. Pat. 2.83.2. Titius: In 40 BCE he was captured in Gallia Narbonenis by Menodorus, one of Sex. Pompeius deputies, but was pardoned for his father’s sake: Dio 48.30.5; App., Bell. Civ. 5.142. Plancus: uncle of Titius, Munatius Plancus had been a loyal deputy of Iulius Caesar during the Gallic War and was proconsul of Gallia Comata – founding Colonia Copia Felix Munatia Lugdunum – at the time of the assassination, whereafter he shifted his allegiance to Antonius, and was made proconsul of Asia and Syria.
44. Plut., Ant. 58.3–6.
45. Plut., Ant. 58.4.
46. Florus 2.21.2: ‘captus amore Cleopatrae.’
47. Dio 50.1.3.
48. Dio 50.1.4.
49. Dio 50.1.5.
50. Dio 50.2.3.
51. Dio 50.2.4.
52. Dio 50.2.5.
53. Dio 50.2.5–6.
54. Dio 50.2.5–7.
55. Vell. Pat. 2.84.2.
56. Cinna: son of the man of the same name who supported C. Marius, when Iulius Caesar became dictator, Cinna was promoted to praetor. He disapproved of Caesar’s authoritarianism but did not join the conspiracy to assassinate him. Messalla: In 43 BCE he was proscribed, but escaped to the camp of Brutus and Cassius. After the Battle of Philippi he defected to Antonius, but later switched his support to Caesar.
57. Dio 49.44.4.
58. Plut., Ant. 57.2–3; Dio 50.3.2; cf. Livy, Per. 132; Orosius 6.19.4.
59. Plut., Ant. 57.3: ‘κλαίουσαν δὲ καὶ δυσφοροῦσαν εἰ δόξει μία τῶν αἰτιῶν τοῦ πολέμου καὶ αὐτὴ γεγονέναι.’
60. Plut., Ant. 57.3: ‘Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ ᾤκτειρον οὐκ ἐκείνην, ἀλλ᾽ Ἀντώνιον, καὶ μᾶλλον οἱ Κλεοπάτραν ἑωρακότες οὔτε κάλλει τῆς Ὀκταουίας οὔτε ὥρᾳ διαφέρουσαν.’
61. Plut., Ant. 58.2.
62. Plut., Ant. 60.1: ‘ἐπεὶ δὲ παρεσκεύαστο Καῖσαρ ἱκανῶς, ψηφίζεται Κλεοπάτρᾳ πολεμεῖν, ἀφελέσθαι δὲ τῆς ἀρχῆς Ἀντώνιον ἧς ἐξέστη γυναικί ’; cf. Dio 50.4.3–4.
63. Plut., Ant. 60.1: ‘ἐπεὶ δὲ παρεσκεύαστο Καῖσαρ ἱκανῶς, ψηφίζεται Κλεοπάτρᾳ πολεμεῖν, ἀφελέσθαι δὲ τῆς ἀρχῆς Ἀντώνιον ἧς ἐξέστη γυναικί. καὶ προσεπεῖπε Καῖσαρ ὡς Ἀντώνιος μὲν ὑπὸ φαρμάκων οὐδὲ αὑτοῦ κρατοίη, πολεμοῦσι δ᾽ αὐτοῖς Μαρδίων ὁ εὐνοῦχος καὶ Ποθεινὸς καὶ Εἰρὰς ἡ Κλεοπάτρας κουρεύτρια καὶ Χάρμιον, ὑφ᾽ ὧν τὰ μέγιστα διοικεῖται τῆς ἡγεμονίας .’
64. Florus 2.21.2.
65. Dio 50.4.5.
66. Dio 50.4.5: ‘ἅπερ που λόγῳ μὲν πρὸς τὴν Κλεοπάτραν, ἔργῳ δὲ καὶ πρὸς τὸν Ἀντώνιον ἔτεινεν .’
67. RG 25.2.
68. Nepos, Atticus 21.1.
69. Nepos, Atticus 21.2–3: ‘subito tanta vis morbi in imum intestinum prorupit, ut extremo tempore per lumbos fistulae puris eruperint.’
70. Nepos, Atticus 21.4.
71. Nepos, Atticus 22.1–2: ‘Hac oratione habita tanta constantia vocis atque vultus, ut non ex vita, sed ex domo in domum videretur migrare, cum quidem Agrippa eum flens atque osculans oraret atque obsecraret, ne id quod natura cogeret ipse quoque sibi acceleraret, et, quoniam tum quoque posset temporibus superesse, se sibi suisque reservaret, preces eius taciturna sua obstinatione depressit.’
72. Nepos, Atticus 22.3.
73. Nepos, Atticus 22.4: ‘Elatus est in lecticula, ut ipse praescripserat, sine ulla pompa funeris, comitantibus omnibus bonis, maxima vulgi frequentia.’
74. Dio 50.9.2–3, 50.14.1.
75. Dio 50.9.2.
76. Dio 50.9.2–3.
77. Orosius 6.19.7: ‘inde Corcyram cepit; fugientes navali proelio persecutus profligauit multisque rebus cruentissime gestis ad Caesarem venit.’
78. Orosius 6.19.6.
79. Dio 50.11.3; Orosius 6.19.6.
80. Dio 50.11.3 = Zonar. 10.29.
81. Dio 50.11.5; 50.88.2.
82. Dio 50.11.1; Plut., Ant. 62.2.
83. Dio 50.11.2–6.
84. Dio 50.11.4–50.12.36.
85. Dio 50.14.1–2: ‘κἀν τούτῳ ναυμαχία τις ἐγένετο. ὁ γὰρ Σόσσιος Λουκίου Ταρρίου ναυσὶν ὀλίγαις ἐφορμοῦντός σφισιν ἐλπίσας ἄξιόν τι λόγου πράξειν, ἂν πρὶν τὸν Ἀγρίππαν, ᾧ πᾶν τὸ ναυτικὸν ἐπετέτραπτο, ἐπελθεῖν, συμβάλῃ αὐτῷ, ἐξανήχθη τε ἐξαπιναίως ὑπὸ τὴν ἕω, ὁμίχλην βαθεῖαν τηρήσας ἵνα μὴ τὸ πλῆθός σφων προϊδὼν φύγῃ, καὶ παραχρῆμα τῇ πρώτῃ προσβολῇ τρεψάμενος αὐτὸν ἐπεδίωξε μέν, οὐχ εἷλε δέ: τοῦ γὰρ Ἀγρίππου κατὰ τύχην ἀπαντήσαντός οἱ οὐ μόνον οὐδὲν τῆς νίκης ἀπώνητο, ἀλλὰ καὶ προσδιεφθάρη μετά τε τοῦ Ταρκονδιμότου καὶ μετ᾽ ἄλλων πολλῶν .’ The individuals mentioned in the extract are L. Tarius Rufus (one of Caesar’s men), C. Sosius (an early ally of Antonius) and Tarcondimotus (king of Cilicia).
86. Nepos, Atticus 21–22; Dio 50.12.1.
87. Dio 50.12.1.
88. Dio 50.12.7.
89. Dio 50.12.8.
90. Dio 50.12.8: ‘ταῦτ᾽ οὖν προκατασχόντες οἱ Ἀντωνίειοι ἐπί τε τοῦ στόματος πύργους ἑκατέρωθεν ἐπῳκοδόμησαν καὶ τὸ μέσον ναυσὶ διέλαβον, ὥστε σφίσι καὶ τοὺς ἔκπλους καὶ τὰς ἀναχωρήσεις ἀσφαλεῖς εἶναι: αὐτοί τε ἐπὶ θάτερα τοῦ 1 πορθμοῦ κατὰ τὸ ῾̓ ̣ ερόν, ἐν χωρίῳ ὁμαλῷ μὲν καὶ πλατεῖ, ἐμμαχέσασθαι δὲ ἢ ἐνστρατοπεδεύσασθαι ἐπιτηδειοτέρῳ, ἐνηυλίζοντο: ἐξ οὗπερ οὐχ ἥκιστα τῇ νόσῳ καὶ ἐν τῷ χειμῶνι, καὶ ἐν τῷ θέρει πολὺ μᾶλλον, ἐπιέσθησαν ’; cf. 50.15.3.
91. Vell. Pat. 2.84.1.
92. Plut., Ant. 67.7 and 68.4–5. The Greek communities were pressed into providing provisions and materiel for Antonius under increasing cruelty. Among them was Plutarch’s own father.
93. Dio 50.10.1.
94. Dio 50.12.4: ‘καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ ἐπὶ μετεώρου, ὅθεν ἐπὶ πάντα ὁμοίως τῆς τε ἔξω τῆς πρὸς Πάξοις θαλάσσης καὶ τῆς εἴσω 1 τῆς Ἀμπρακικῆς τῆς τε ἐν τῷ μέσῳ αὐτῶν, ἐν ᾧ οἱ λιμένες οἱ πρὸς τῇ Νικοπόλει εἰσίν, ἄποπτόν ἐστιν, ἱδρύθη ’ – the islands he refers to are Paxos and Antipaxos. Cf. Florus 2.21.11.4, Livy, Per. 132.2.
95. Dio 50.12.4.
96. Dio 50.12.5: ‘κἀκ τούτου καὶ ἐφήδρευε καὶ ἐφώρμει τῷ Ἀκτίῳ καὶ κατὰ γῆν καὶ κατὰ θάλασσαν. ἤδη μὲν γὰρ ἤκουσα ὅτι καὶ τριήρεις ἐκ τῆς ἔξω θαλάσσης ἐς τὸν κόλπον διὰ τοῦ τειχίσματος ὑπερήνεγκε, βύρσαις νεοδάρτοις ἀντὶ ὁλκῶν ἐλαίῳ ἐπαληλιμμέναις ’.
97. Vell. Pat. 2.84.1.
98. Dio 50.13.4.
99. Plut., Ant. 63.2.
100. Dio 50.13.4.
101. Dio 50.13.5.
102. Dio 50.13.5: ‘Ἀγρίππας δὲ τότε μὲν τήν τε Λευκάδα καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ σκάφη αἰφνιδίως ἐπεσπλεύσας ἔλαβε .’
103. Vell. Pat. 2.84.2: ‘Denique in ore atque oculis Antonianae classis per M. Agrippam Leucas expugnata, Patrae captae, Corinthus occupata, bis ante ultimum discrimen classis hostium superata’; Dio 50.13.5.
104. Dio 50.13.2–3: ‘καὶ ἦλθε μὲν οὐ πολλῷ ὕστερον, οὐ μέντοι καὶ ἐς ἀγῶνα εὐθὺς κατέστη, καίτοι ἐκείνου τόν τε πεζὸν πρὸ τοῦ στρατοπέδου σφῶν συνεχῶς προπαρατάσσοντος καὶ ταῖς ναυσὶ πολλάκις σφίσιν ἐπιπλέοντος, τάς τε ὁλκάδας αὐτῶν κατάγοντος, ὅπως πρὶν πᾶσαν τὴν δύναμιν αὐτῷ συνελθεῖν, μόνοις τοῖς τότε παροῦσίν οἱ συμμίξῃ.’
105. Orosius 6.19.7: ‘Antonius defectu et fame militum suorum permotus bellum maturare instituit ac repente instructis copiis ad Caesaris castra processit et uictus est.’
106. Orosius 6.19.8; Dio 50.14.3.
107. Dio 50.15.1.
108. Dio 50.13.6, 50.15.3.
109. Dio 50.13.6 and 8; Plut., Ant. 63.2; Vell. Pat. 2.84.2.
110. Plut., Ant. 40.5.
111. Dio 50.11.1: ‘τοιούτων δὴ σημείων προφανέντων σφίσιν οὔτε ἐφοβήθησαν οὔθ᾽ ἧττόν τι ἐπολέμησαν, ἀλλὰ τὸν μὲν χειμῶνα κατασκοπαῖς τε χρώμενοι καὶ παραλυποῦντες ἀλλήλους διετέλεσαν.’
112. Dio 50.31.1.
113. Dio 50.31.2.
114. Lange (2011), p. 208 n. 1, p. 209 n. 5 and 6 puts Vell. Pat., Plutarch, Florus, Ostorius, Ferrabino (1924), Tarn (1938) and Syme (1939) in this camp.
115. Lange (2011), p. 208 n. 3 puts Dio, Kromayer (1899), Gilles, Leake (1835), Merivale and Gravière (1885), Richardson (1937), Carter (1970), Grant (1972) and Kienast (1999) in this camp.
116. Lange (2011), p. 201 n. 14, cites Pelling (1988).
117. Dio 50.15.1.
118. Plut., Ant. 63.3–5; cf. 56.2.
119. Plut., Ant. 64.2; Dio 50.15.4 and 50.31.2; cf. Tarn (1931), pp. 188–9 n. 4.
120. Dio 50.31.2; Plut., Ant. 65.1.
121. Vell. Pat. 2.85.1: ‘Advenit deinde maximi discriminis dies, quo Caesar Antoniusque productis classibus pro salute alter, in ruinam alter terrarum orbis dimicavere.’
122. Lange (2011), p. 617; Plut., Ant. 61.1–2; Vell. Pat. 2.84.1–2. Dio 50.16.2 mentions Antonius’ army comprised of hoplites, cavalry, slingers, peltasts, archers and mounted archers. Plut., Ant. 61.1–2 also lists the client kingdoms arrayed with him: ‘Of subject kings who fought with him, there were Bocchus the king of Libya, Tarcondemus the king of Upper Cilicia, Archelaüs of Cappadocia, Philadelphus of Paphlagonia, Mithridates of Commagene, and Sadalas of Thrace. These were with him, while from Pontus Polemon sent an army, and Malchus from Arabia, and Herod the Jew, besides Amyntas the king of Lycaonia and Galatia; the king of the Medes also sent an auxiliary force.’
123. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.19.1–6.
124. Vell. Pat. 2.85.2.
125. Plut., Ant. 61.1–2: he also states Caesar commanded 80,000 infantry and 12,000 cavalry.
126. Orosius 6.19.8: ‘navali proelio decernere paratus. ducentae triginta rostratae fuere Caesaris naves et triginta sine rostris, triremes velocitate Liburnicis pares et octo legiones classi superpositae, absque cohortibus quinque praetoriis. classis Antonii centum septuaginta navium fuit.’
127. Florus 2.21.5.
128. Florus 2.21.6: ‘Caesaris naves a bini remigum in senos nec amplius ordines creverant; itaque habites in omnia quae usus posceret, ad impetus et recursus flexusque capiendos, illas gravis et ad omnia praepeditas singulas plures adortae missilibus, simul rostris, ad hoc ignibus iactis ad arbitrium dissipavere.’
129. See Chapter 3, n. 41–42.
130. Dio 50.23.2, 50.18.4 inferred.
131. Orosius 6.19.8; Plut., Ant. 65.1; Dio 50.31.3.
132. Dio 50.31.3.
133. Dio 50.23.2.
134. Dio 50.18.4–6 has Antonius dismissing Agrippa’s fleet, putting into his mouth the words ‘so great is the difference between us two; but, as a rule, it is those who have the better equipment that secure the victories’.
135. Plut., Ant. 61.1: ‘ἐν αἷς ὀκτήρεις πολλαὶ καὶ δεκήρεις κεκοσμημέναι σοβαρῶς καὶ πανηγυρικῶς ’. Florus 2.21.3: ‘Aureum in manu baculum, ad latus acinaces, purpurea vestis ingentibus obstricta gemmis.’
136. Florus 2.21.5–6: ‘sed numerum magnitudo pensabat. Quippe a sensis novenos remorum ordines, ad hoc turribus atque tabulatis adlevatae castellorum vel urbium specie, non sine gemitu maris et labore ventorum ferebatur; quae quidem ipsa moles exitio fuit.’
137. Orosius 6.19.9: ‘navium … nam decem pedum altitudine a mari aberrant.’ A Roman foot is believed to be 0.967 modern Imperial feet, or 294.7mm.
138. Dio 50.23.3: ‘καὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτὰ πύργους τε ὑψηλοὺς ἐπικατεσκεύασε καὶ πλῆθος ἀνθρώπων ἐπανεβίβασεν, ὥστε καθάπερ ἀπὸ τειχῶν αὐτοὺς μάχεσθαι .’
139. Orosius 6.19.8; Dio 50.31.3.
140. Plut., Ant. 64.2: ‘λέγων ὅτι δεῖ μηδένα φεύγοντα τῶν πολεμίων διαφυγεῖν .’
141. Plut., Ant. 61.1.
142. Florus 2.21.5: ‘ducentae non minus hostium’; Orosius 6.19.9: ‘classis Antonii centum septuaginta navium fuit’.
143. Plut., Ant. 64.1; Orosius 6.19.6–9; Dio 50.15.4, 50.12.1.
144. Dio 50.14.1–2, 50.31.2.
145. See the careful analysis of Lange (2011), pp. 612–615.
146. Dio 50.31.4; Plut., Ant. 65.4.
147. Vell. Pat. 2.85.2, Dio 15.19.1.
148. Plut., Ant. 65.3.
149. Plut., Ant. 65.3; Dio 50.31.4.
150. Vell. Pat. 2.85.2, Dio 15.19.1.
151. Dio 50.31.4.
152. Orosius 6.19.x.
153. Plut., Ant. 65.4. Romans measured time as hours after sunrise. Sunrise in Athens on 2 September is 6.56am.
154. Vell. Pat. 2.85.2.
155. Plut., Ant. 66.3; Florus 2.21.8: ‘Prima dux fugae regina cum aurea puppe veloque purpureo in altum dedit.’
156. Dio 50.31.4.
157. Dio 50. Plut., Ant. 65.4.
158. Plut., Ant. 65.4.
159. Dio 50.31.5.
160. Dio 50.31.6. Carter (1970), p. 217–218 argues Antonius arrayed his fleet in two lines.
161. Carter (1970), p. 218.
162. Iapyx: Ver., Aen. 8.710: ‘fecerat ignipotens undis et Iapyge ferri.’
163. Orosius 6.19.10: ‘ab hora quinta usque in horam septimam incerta uincendi spe grauissimae utrimque caedes actae.’
164. Plut., Ant. 66.1–2: ‘ἀρχομένου δὲ τοῦ ἀγῶνος ἐν χερσὶν εἶναι, ἐμβολαὶ μὲν οὐκ ἦσαν οὐδὲ ἀναρρήξεις νεῶν, τῶν μὲν Ἀντωνίου διὰ βάρος ῥύμην οὐκ ἐχουσῶν, ἣ μάλιστα ποιεῖ τὰς τῶν ἐμβόλων πληγὰς ἐνεργούς, τῶν δὲ Καίσαρος οὐ μόνον ἀντιπρῴρων συμφέρεσθαι πρὸς χαλκώματα στερεὰ καὶ τραχέα φυλασσομένων, ἀλλὰ μηδὲ κατὰ πλευρὰν ἐμβολὰς διδόναι θαρρουσῶν.ἀπεθραύοντο γὰρ τὰ ἔμβολα ῥᾳδίως ᾗ προσπέσοιε σκάφεσι τετραγώνων ξύλων μεγάλων σιδήρῳ συνηρμοσμένων πρὸς ἄλληλα δεδεμένοις. ἦν οὖν πεζομαχίᾳ προσφερὴς ὁ ἀγών: τὸ δὲ ἀληθέστερον εἰπεῖν, τειχομαχία. τρεῖς γὰρ ἅμα καὶ τέσσαρες περὶ μίαν τῶν Ἀντωνίου συνείχοντο, γέρροις καὶ δόρασι καὶ κοντοῖς χρωμένων καὶ πυροβόλοις: οἱ δὲ Ἀντωνίου καὶ καταπέλταις ἀπὸ ξυλίνων πυργων ἔβαλλον.’
165. Dio 50.32.1–8.
166. Dio 50.32.7: ‘ἐδύναντο, αἱ δὲ ἔπασχον. ἐπονοῦντο δὲ καὶ ἔκαμνον τοῖς μὲν οἵ τε κυβερνῆται καὶ οἱ ἐρέται μάλιστα, τοῖς δὲ οἱ ἐπιβάται: καὶ ἐῴκεσαν οἱ μὲν ἱππεῦσι τοτὲ μὲν ἐπελαύνουσι τοτὲ δὲ ἐξαναχωροῦσι διὰ τὸ τούς τε ἐπίπλους καὶ τὰς ἀνακρούσεις ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς εἶναι, οἱ δὲ ὁπλίταις τούς τε πλησιάζοντάς σφισι φυλασσομένοις καὶ κατέχειν αὐτοὺς.’
167. Plut., Ant. 66.3.
168. Carter (1970), p. 222–223, argues breaking a hole in Agrippa’s line was Antonius’ battle plan from the start.
169. Dio 50.33.1–3; Plut., Ant. 66.3–4. The sixty ships which escaped represented 35 per cent of his fleet – no mean achievement under the circumstances.
170. Dio 50.33.3; Plut., 66.5; Vell. Pat. 2.85.3; Florus 2.21.9.
171. Plut., Ant. 67.1.
172. Plut., Ant. 67.2: ‘ἐν τούτῳ δὲ λιβυρνίδες ὤφθησαν διώκουσαι παρὰ Καίσαρος: ὁ δὲ ἀντίπρῳρον ἐπιστρέφειν τὴν ναῦν κελεύσας τὰς μὲν ἄλλας ἀνέστειλεν.’
173. Plut., Ant. 67.2–3: ‘Εὐρυκλῆς δ᾽ ὁ Λάκων ἐνέκειτο σοβαρῶς, λόγχην τινὰ κραδαίνων ἀπὸ τοῦ καταστρώματος ὡς ἀφήσων ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν. ἐπιστάντος δὲ τῇ πρῴρᾳ τοῦ Ἀντωνίου καί ‘τίς οὗτος,’ εἰπόντος, ‘ὁ διώκων Ἀντώνιον;’ ‘ἐγώ,’ εἶπεν, ‘Εὐρυκλῆς ὁ Λαχάρους, τῇ Καίσαρος τύχῃ τὸν τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκδικῶν θάνατον.’ ὁ δὲ Λαχάρης ὑπ᾽ Ἀντωνίου λῃστείας αἰτίᾳ περιπεσὼν ἐπελεκίσθη. πλὴν οὐκ ἐνέβαλεν ὁ Εὐρυκλῆς εἰς τὴν Ἀντωνίου ναῦν, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἑτέραν τῶν ναυαρχίδων ῾δύο γὰρ ἦσαν᾽ τῷ χαλκώματι πατάξας περιερρόμβησε, καὶ ταύτην τε πλαγίαν περιπεσοῦσαν εἷλε καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μίαν, ἐν ᾗ πολυτελεῖς σκευαὶ τῶν περὶ δίαιταν ἦσαν .’
174. Dio 50.33.4.
175. Dio 50.33.6–8: ‘οἱ μὲν γὰρ τά τε κάτω τῶν νεῶν πάντα πέριξ ἐκακούργουν καὶ τὰς κώπας συνέθραυον τά τε πηδάλια ἀπήραττον, καὶ ἐπαναβαίνοντες ἐπὶ τὰ καταστρώματα τοὺς μὲν κατέσπων ἀντιλαμβανόμενοι τοὺς δὲ ἐώθουν, τοῖς δὲ ἐμάχοντο ἅτε καὶ ἰσοπληθεῖς αὐτοῖς ἤδη ὄντες: οἱ δὲ τοῖς τε κοντοῖς σφᾶς διεωθοῦντο καὶ ταῖς ἀξίναις ἔκοπτον, πέτρους τε καὶ ἄλλους τινὰς ὄγκους ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο παρεσκευασμένους ἐπικατέβαλλον, καὶ τούς τε ἀναβαίνοντας ἀπεκρούοντο καὶ τοῖς ἐς χεῖρας ἰοῦσι συνεφέροντο. εἴκασεν ἄν τις ἰδὼν τὰ γιγνόμενα, ὡς μικρὰ μεγάλοις ὁμοιῶσαι, τείχεσί τισιν ἢ καὶ νήσοις πολλαῖς καὶ πυκναῖς ἐκ θαλάσσης πολιορκουμέναις. οὕτως οἱ μὲν ἐπιβῆναί τε τῶν σκαφῶν ὥσπερ ἠπείρου καὶ ἐρύματός τινος ἐπειρῶντο, καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐς τοῦτο φέροντα σπουδῇ προσῆγον: οἱ δὲ ἀπεωθοῦντο αὐτούς, ὅ τι ποτὲ ἐν τῷ τοιούτῳ φιλεῖ δρᾶσθαι μηχανώμενοι .’
176. Florus, 21.6: ‘itaque habites in omnia quae usus posceret, ad impetus et recursus flexusque capiendos, illas gravis et ad omnia praepeditas singulas plures adortae missilibus, simul rostris, ad hoc ignibus iactis ad arbitrium dissipavere.’
177. Dio 50.34.1; Vell. Pat. 2.85.4.
178. Dio 50.34.2–7: ‘κἀνταῦθα ἄλλο αὖ εἶδος μάχης συνηνέχθη. οἱ μὲν γὰρ πολλαχῇ ἅμα προσπλέοντές τισι βέλη τε πυρφόρα ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς ἐξετόξευον καὶ λαμπάδας ἐκ χειρὸς ἐπηκόντιζον καί τινας καὶ χυτρίδας ἀνθράκων καὶ πίττης πλήρεις πόρρωθεν μηχαναῖς ἐπερρίπτουν: οἱ δὲ ταῦτά τε ὡς ἕκαστα διεκρούοντο, καὶ ἐπειδή τινα αὐτῶν διεκπίπτοντα τῶν τε ξύλων ἥπτετο καὶ φλόγα αὐτίκα πολλήν, ἅτε ἐν νηί, ἤγειρε, τὸ μὲν πρῶτον τῷ ποτίμῳ ὕδατι ᾧ ἐπεφέροντο ἐχρῶντο, καί τινα κατέσβεσαν, ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐκεῖνο καταναλώθη, ἤντλουν τὸ θαλάττιον. καὶ εἰ μὲν πολλῷ τε καὶ ἀθρόῳ αὐτῷ ἐχρῶντο, ἐπεῖχόν πως τῇ βίᾳ τὸ πῦρ: ἀδύνατοι δὲ δὴ πανταχῇ τοῦτο ποιεῖν ὄντες ῾οὔτε γὰρ πολλὰ ἢ καὶ μεγάλα τὰ ἀντλητήρια εἶχον, καὶ ἡμιδεᾶ αὐτὰ ἅτε ταραττόμενοι ἀνέφερον᾽ οὐχ ὅσον οὐκ ὠφελοῦντό τι, ἀλλὰ καὶ προσπαρώξυνον αὐτό: ἡ γὰρ ἅλμη ἡ θαλαττία ἂν κατ᾽ ὀλίγον ἐπιχέηται φλογί, ἰσχυρῶς αὐτὴν ἐκκαίει. ὡς οὖν καὶ ἐν τούτῳ ἥττους ἐγίγνοντο, τά τε ἱμάτια αὑτῶν τὰ παχέα καὶ τοὺς νεκροὺς ἐπέβαλλον: καὶ χρόνον μέν τινα ἐκολούσθη τε ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν τὸ πῦρ καὶ ἔδοξέ πῃ λωφᾶν, ἔπειτα δὲ ἄλλως τε καὶ τοῦ ἀνέμου σφοδρῶς ἐπισπέρξαντος ἐπὶ πλεῖον ἐξέλαμψεν, ἅτε καὶ ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν ἐκείνων αὐξανόμενον. καὶ μέχρι μὲν μέρος τι νεὼς ἐκαίετο, προσίσταντό τέ τινες αὐτῷ καὶ ἐς αὐτὸ ἐσεπήδων, καὶ τὰ μὲν ἀπέκοπτον τὰ δὲ διεφόρουν: καὶ αὐτὰ οἱ μὲν ἐς τὴν θάλασσαν οἱ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐναντίους ἐρρίπτουν, εἴ πως καὶ ἐκείνους τι λυμήναιντο. καὶ ἕτεροι πρὸς τὸ ἀεὶ ὑγιὲς αὐτῆς μεθιστάμενοι ταῖς τε χερσὶ ταῖς σιδηραῖς καὶ τοῖς δόρασι τοῖς μακροῖς τότε δὴ καὶ τὰ μάλιστα ἐχρῶντο, ὅπως τινὰ ἀντίπαλον ναῦν προσαρτήσαντές σφισι μάλιστα μὲν μετεκβῶσιν ἐς αὐτήν, εἰ δὲ μή, καὶ ἐκείνην συγκαταφλέξωσιν.’ During explorations of the sea floor off the coast of Preveza in 1993 and 1994, divers of The University of South Florida and The Greek Ministry of Culture found what are believed to be stone balls (12cm, 4.7 ins., in maximum diameter) fired by ballistas or catapults: http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~murray/actium/brochure.html).
179. Dio 50.35.1–4.
180. Plut., Ant. 68.1.
181. Orosius 6.19.10: ‘inlucescente iam die victoriam Caesar consummavit.’
182. Florus 2.21.7: ‘Quippe inmensae classis naufragium bello factum toto mari ferebatur, Arabumque et Sabaeorum et mille aliarum Asiae gentium spolia purpura auroque inlita adsidue mote ventis maria revomebant.’
183. Plut., Ant. 68.1 states 300 ships were captured of the total 700 Antonius brought to Actium (n. 141 above), but this seems an exaggerated base number compared to the other ancient historians and 35 per cent had escaped (see n. 169 above) with the queen.
184. Plut., Ant. 68.1; Orosius 6.19.12.
185. Plut., Ant. 68.3.
186. Plut., Ant. 68.3; Vell. Pat. 2.85.5–6.
187. Dio 51.1.4.
188. Vell. Pat. 2.84.2; Dio 50.13.5.
189. Plut., Ant. 68.4; Dio 51.4.1.
190. Plut., Ant. 68.4–5.
191. Strab., 7.7.6.
192. Dio 51.3.1.
193. Dio 51.3.1, 51.3.4.
194. Dio 51.3.5.
195. Vell. Pat. 2.88.2: ‘C. Maecenas … non minus Agrippa Caesari carus, sed minus honoratus (quippe vixit angusti clavi plene contentus), nec minora consequi potuit, sed non tam concupivit.’
196. Dio 51.3.5–6: ‘Μαικήνου … καταφρονήσωσιν ὅτι ἱππεὺς ἦν, τὸν Ἀγρίππαν ὡς καὶ κατ᾽ ἄλλο τι ἐς τὴν Ἰταλίαν ἔπεμψε. καὶ τοσαύτην γ᾽ ἐπὶ πάντα καὶ ἐκείνῳ καὶ τῷ Μαικήνᾳ ἐξουσίαν ἔδωκεν ὥστε σφᾶς καὶ τὰς ἐπιστολάς, ἃς τῇ τε βουλῇ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἔγραφε, προαναγιγνώσκειν, κἀκ τούτου καὶ μεταγράφειν ὅσα ἐβούλοντο. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο καὶ δακτύλιον ἔλαβον παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, ἵν᾽ ἐπισφραγίζεσθαι αὐτὰς ἔχωσι. διπλῆν γὰρ δὴ σφραγῖδα, ᾗ μάλιστα τότε ἐχρῆτο, ἐπεποίητο, σφίγγα ἐν ἑκατέρᾳ ὁμοίαν ἐκτυπώσας. ὕστερον γὰρ τὴν εἰκόνα τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἐγγλύψας ἐκείνῃ τὰ πάντα ἐσημαίνετο .’
197. Dio 50.3.7.
198. Plut., Ant. 73.3.
199. Vell. Pat. 2.88.3; App., Bell. Civ. 4.50; Dio 54.15.4; Livy, Per. 133; Suet., Div. Aug. 19.1.
200. Dio 51.5.3.
201. Plut., Ant. 67.4.
202. Dio 51.5.6.
203. Plut., Ant. 69.2: the two friends were the Greek rhetorician Aristocrates and the Roman, Lucilius.
204. Dio 51.5.6.
205. Plut., Ant. 71.1.
Chapter 5: Architect of the New Rome
1. Dio 51.4.3.
2. Dio 51.4.4–5.
3. Dio 51.4.2–8; Orosius 6.19.14; Suet., Div. Aug. 17.3.
4. Dio 51.4.6.
5. Dio 51.4.7–8: it was an ironic reversal of the proscriptions.
6. Dio 51.5.1.
7. Caesar’s route was via the Diolkos, Dio 51.5.2: The Diolkos was an ancient trackway or proto-railway used to drag ships overland across the narrowest part of the Isthmus of Corinth. Just 6.4km (4 miles) long, the Diolkos connected the Corinthian Gulf to the Saronic Gulf, representing a considerable saving over the 400km (250 miles) long journey around the Peloponnese. It also reduced the risk of encountering a dangerous weather event, which could be 25–35 per cent in summer and up to 40 per cent in winter. It was built from immense blocks of stone, forming a continuous roadway 3.5–5m (10–16.5ft) wide, with two parallel tracks engraved in it, spaced 1.5m apart for trolley wheels. The gradient is just 0.023 per cent, or 70m (230ft) in 3km (1.9 miles). The Diolkos was in operation in the first century BCE and was last recorded in use in 883 CE. See Engels (1990), pp. 58–9; Pettegrew (2011); Werner (1997).
8. Dio 51.9.1, 51.16.3; Livy, Per. 133.2.
9. Dio 51.14.1–6. For an assessment of whether Kleopatra’s death was suicide or murder, see Goldsworthy (2010), p. 384.
10. Plut., Ant. 86.4.
11. Caesarion: Dio 51.15.5; Plut., Ant. 81.2. Antyllus: Plut., Ant. 81.1 and 87.1
12. Dio 51.7.1–3.
13. Carsten Hjort Lange, Res Publica Constituta: Actium, Apollo and the Accomplishment of the Triumviral Assignment, Brill: Leiden (2009), p. 93, convincingly shows that Augustus was acknowledged to have won both a civil war – the Actian War – as well as an external war – viz. the Alexandrian War.
14. Dio 51.19.1, 51.19.5.
15. Dio 51.19.2. On the use of Iulius Caesar during Augustus’ principate see Robert A. Gurval, ‘Caesar’s Comet: The Politics and Poetics of an Augustan Myth’, in Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, Vol. 42 (1997), pp. 39–71.
16. Dio 51.19.3, 51.19.5.
17. Dio 51.19.7.
18. Dio 51.19.3; Plut., Ant. 86.5.
19. See Flower (2006), pp. 116–121.
20. Dio 51.19.4.
21. Dio 51.19.6.
22. Dio 53.17.9–10; Livy 3.20.7.
23. Dio 51.19.7.
24. Dio 51.20.1–4.
25. Dio 51.1.4.
26. Dio 51.1.5.
27. Dio 51.1.5, 24.37.1–2.
28. E.g. RIC2 263, 264, 265. Gurval (1998), pp. 47–50; cf. Zanker (1990), pp. 53–57.
29. Dio 51.21.3: ‘καὶ ἐτίμησεν ὥσπερ εἴθιστο, καὶ τόν τε Ἀγρίππαν ἄλλοις τέ τισι καὶ σημείῳ κυανοειδεῖ ναυκρατητικῷ προσεπεσέμνυνε ’.
30. Livy, Per. 129.4: ‘M. Agrippa nauali corona a Caesare donatus est, qui honos nulli ante eum habitus erat.’ Reinhard (1933), p. 60, notes that the award was unique in recorded history of antiquity.
31. Dio 51.21.3.
32. Servius, Commentary on the Georgics 3.29: ‘ac navali surgentes aere columnas columnas dicit, quae in honore Augusti et Agrippae rostratae constitutae sunt. Augustus victor totius Aegypti, quam Caesar pro parte superaverat, multa de navali certamine sustulit rostra, quibus conflatis quattuor effecit columnas, quae postea a Domitiano in Capitolio sunt locatae, quas hodieque conspicimus: unde ait ‘navali surgentes aere columnas’. nam rostratas Duilius posuit, victis Poenis navali certamine, e quibus unam in rostris, alteram ante circum videmus a parte ianuarum.’ They appear to have been of a similar design to columns erected to mark Caesar’s victory of the Sicilian War in 36 BCE over Sex. Pompeius recorded by App., Bell. Civ. 5.130.
33. Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Koeniglichen Museen zu Berlin, Griechische Urkunden, 4.1047, II, 13–14 (Berlin 1912). Maecenas also had an estate in Egypt.
34. Dio 53.27.5. TDAR p. 114, notes the house was probably considered old fashioned, and Antonius prefered use the house at Carinae. It burned down in 25 BCE while still in joint possession.
35. RG 8; Dio 52.42.5; Tac., Ann. 11.25.3.
36. For a full discussion see George Willis Botsford, ‘The Lex Curiata’ in Political Science Quarterly 23.3 (Sep., 1908), pp. 498–517 and J.J. Nicholls, ‘The Content of the Lex Curiata’ in The American Journal of Philology 88.3 (Jul., 1967), pp. 257–278.
37. Dio 52.41.3.
38. Augustus, RG 4; Livy, Per. 113; Dio 51.21.5–9; Strab., Geog. 12.3.6, 12.3.25; Vell. Pat. 2.89.1; Suet., Div. Aug. 22, 41.1, Tib. 6; Florus 2.21.10; Servius, ad Aen. 8.714; Orosius 6.20.1.
39. Dio 51.21.5–6.
40. Suet., Tib. 6.4. Beard (2007), p. 224.
41. Dio 51.21.7. There is no mention in the extant sources of Agrippa having been granted an ovation for the Illyrian or Actian War.
42. Dio 51.21.7.
43. Dio 51.21.8. After the triumph the children were taken into the care of Caesar’s sister, Octavia, and raised in her household – Plut., Ant. 87.1.
44. Dio 51.21.9.
45. Dio 51.22.1.
46. For a discussion of Augustus’ promotion of the Caesar cult as a precursor to a cult of his own after his death, see Peter White, ‘Julius Caesar in Augustan Rome’, Phoenix 42.4 (Winter, 1988), pp. 334–356.
47. Favro (1996), p. 99, notes that Augustus could speak in Rome’s political centre and be surrounded by buildings he himself had renovated after the events of Ides of March 44 BCE, in contrast to M. Antonius.
48. Dio 53.2.3.
49. Dio 51.21.3.
50. Dio 51.21.5.
51. Dio 51.21.4.
52. Dio 53 Index.
53. Dio 53.1.2: ‘τὸν γὰρ Ἀγρίππαν ἐς ὑπερβολὴν ἐτίμα .’
54. Dio 53.1.1: ‘ἀπὸ τοῦ πάνυ ἀρχαίου ἐποίησε, καὶ τοὺς φακέλους τῶν ῥάβδων τῷ Ἀγρίππᾳ συνάρχοντί οἱ κατὰ τὸ ἐπιβάλλον παρέδωκεν, αὐτός τε ταῖς ἑτέραις ἐχρήσατο, καὶ διάρξας τὸν ὅρκον κατὰ τὰ πάτρια ἐπήγαγε.’
55. Dio 53.1.2.
56. Dio 53.1.2; Suet., Div. Aug. 63.1; Plut., Ant. 87.2.
57. Suet., Div. Aug. 63.1; Papyrus P. Köln 249; PIR2 C 1102.
58. Reinhold (1972), pp. 119–121.
59. Vell. Pat. 2.127.1.
60. Rüpke (2008), p. 136.
61. Aul. Gell., Noct. Att. 6.7.
62. Rüpke (2008), p. 136: the other members of the college were M. Claudius Marcellus, Cn. Domitius Calvinus, Ap. Claudius Pulcher, L. Cornelius Cinna, Paulus Aemilius Lepidus, Cn. Pompeius and M. Caecilius Corunutus.
63. Strab., Geog. 5.3. The festival occurred on 17, 19, and 20 May, or 27, 29, and 30 May.
64. An inscription preserves an account of the different ceremonies of this festival. It was written in the first year of the reign of the Emperor Heliogabalus (218 CE), who was elected a member of the college under the name of M. Aurelius Antoninus Pius Felix.
65. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 18.2.
66. Th. Mommsen, History of Rome, Book 1, Chapter 15, notes that the Romans of Augustus’ time regarded the document to be the oldest existing in their language. This hints at an origin of the religious rite going back to at least the founding of the City, with legend suggesting Romulus was the founding member of the order.
67. Ver., Aen. 1.148–154.
68. Ver., Aen. 1.174–176 (Trans. John Dryden): ‘Ac primum silici scintillam excudit Achates, | succepitque ignem foliis, atque arida circum | nutrimenta dedit, rapuitque in fomite flammam.’
69. Ver., Aen 1.188–192 (trans. John Dryden): ‘Constitit hic, arcumque manu celerisque sagittas | corripuit, fidus quae tela gerebat Achates; | ductoresque ipsos primum, capita alta ferentis | cornibus arboreis, sternit, tum volgus.’
70. Dio 52.1.2.
71. Dio 53.17.2–3.
72. Cic., de Legibus 3.3; Dio 53.17.7.
73. Dio 52.42.1; CIL IX.422 (Venusia); RG 8 (II2): ‘Senatum ter legi, et in consulatu sexto censum populi conlega M. Agrippa egi.’
74. Suet., Div. Aug. 35; cf. 300 at the time of the founding of the republic reported in Livy, Per. 60, and how numbers were augmented by Iulius Caesar to 900 members as reported in Dio 43.47 and Suet., Caes. 80, but restated as 1,000 in Div. Aug. 35.1.
75. Dio 52.42.2–3.
76. Dio 52.42.4–5.
77. Dio 52.42.6–7.
78. Dio 52.42.8.
79. RG 8; Suet., Div. Aug. 27.5; Dio 53.1.3; CIL 9.422.
80. Dio 53.1.3; Zonar. 7.19, Gellius 147; Cic., Leg. 3.4.
81. Nepos, Atticus 20.3: ‘ex quo accidit, cum aedes Iovis Feretri in Capitolio ab Romulo constituta vetustate atque incuria detecta prolaberetur, ut Attici admonitu Caesar eam reficiendam curaret’; Augustus, RG 4.5; Livy 4.20.7; Dio 44.4.3.
82. Dio 53.1.3.
83. Dio 51.19.2.
84. Dio 53.1.4–5.
85. Dio 53.2.7. See Galinsky (1996), p. 65, who discusses the transition of power in the Commonwealth in the context of arbitrium, ius and cura.
86. In 52.2–40 Dio presents an imaginary dialogue between Caesar, Agrippa and Maecenas on styles of government. In it Agrippa argues for a restoration of the res publica of old, while the other proposes an autocracy. Caesar takes the advice of Maecenas and Agrippa accepts the decision. For a discussion of whether the real Agrippa was actually a democrat at heart see Roddaz (1984), pp. 209–216 and McKechnie (1981), pp. 150–155. Reinhard (1933), p. 65, writes ‘that a man who spent ten years fighting for another could still retain republican convictions is, to me, inconceivable … he resigned himself irrevocably to a monarchical form of government’.
87. Dio 53 Index; Fasti Praenestini: CIL I.12 (Rome) (a) p. 231, (b) 236 = Dessau 2.2.8844 (Fasti Praenestini: CIL I.12 236 (Rome) – Agrippa’s consulate is mentioned for 16 January and for 24 April = Dessau 2.2.8844 indicates 23 April; Tac., Ann. 1.3.1 uses the phrase geminatis consulatibus.
88. Dio 53.3–11.4. For a full discussion of the account presented by Dio and Augustus’ version of events see Turpin (1994), pp. 427–437.
89. Dio 53.11.5.
90. Dio 53.12.1–2, 53.13.4–7, 53.14.1–4; Strab., Geog. 17.25.
91. Dio 53.12.4; Strab., Geog. 17.25.
92. Dio 53.13.1, 53.15.1.
93. Dio 53.12.5–7: Dio notes Augustus soon swapped Cyprus and Narbonensis for Illyricum/Dalmatia; Strab., Geog. 17.25.
94. Dio 53.12.3.
95. Dio 53.22.1–3. The agreement to pay for roads at his own expense recalls Iulius Caesar’s similar gesture as curator viarum (see Chapter 1, n. 73).
96. Dio 53.16.6. See Turpin (1994), p. 437.
97. Dio 53.16.7–8 suggests Augustus would have preferred the name Romulus, but understood the extreme political sensitivity of it; Suet., Div. Aug. 7; Vell. Pat. 2.91; Florus 4.12; Orosius 6.20; Censorinus 22; Ov., Fast. 1.607.
98. Dio 53.16.4–5. Coins: examples BMCRE 317 (Rome), RIC I 77a (Caesareaugusta), RIC I 79a (Colonia Patricia).
99. Virtus, clementia, iustitia and pietas. See Galinsky (1996), pp. 80–88.
100. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.13: as Dio 53.16.8 explains Greek speakers translated Augustus as Σεβαστός from the verb ‘to revere’.)
101. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26: ‘M. Agrippa, vir rusticitati propior quam deliciis.’
102. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26: ‘exstat certe eius oratio magnifica et maximo civium digna de tabulis omnibus signisque publicandis, quod fieri satius fuisset quam in villarum exilia pelli.’
103. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26.
104. Livy, AUC 2.5.2, 40.52.4; Plut., Poplic. 8.1; Florus 1.3..9.1; Cic., Cat. 2.1; Hor., Carm., 1.8.4, 3.1.11. See L. Richardson, jr, A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, pp. 65–67.
105. Dio. Hal. 5.13.2; Festus 204L.
106. L. Richardson, jr, A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome (1929), p. 66.
107. Plut., Caes. 58.4. See also Gregory S. Aldrete, Floods of the Tiber in Ancient Rome, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (2006), Appendix 2; and R. Pareto, ‘On the Works Proper to Preventing Inundations of the Tiber in the City of Rome’ book review in Minutes of Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Session 1876–7 Volume 49 Part III, By Institution of Civil Engineers (Great Britain, London, 1877), p. 337.
108. Porphyrio on Hor., Ars Poetica 67–68: ‘Tiberim intellegamus. Hunc enim Agrippa derivavit, qua nunc vadit; antea per Velabrum fluebat.’
109. Livy, AUC 1.44.1–2; Dion. Hal. 4.22.1–2, 5.13.2; A. Gellius 15.27.4–5; Hor., Carm. 3.7.25–28; Vegetius 1.10; Servius, ad Ecl 1.33.
110. Diane Favro, ‘Making Rome a World City’ in Galinsky (2005), p. 256.
111. Plut., Pomp. 42.4. The monumental statue of Pompeius below which Iulius Caesar had been murdered in the curia of the theatre was moved to a new location behind the porta regia on an arch in the adjoining colonaded Porticus Pompeii when Augustus paid for repairs to the theatre in 32 BCE – RG 20; Suet., Div. Aug. 31.5.
112. Suet., Div. Aug. 100.3–4; Ver., Aen. 6.874; Dio 53.30.5.
113. CIL VI.39087, VI.29781 = ILS 6003 M. AGRIPPA PRIVAT ITER, found in the Tiber near the Ponte Garibaldi. Dio 54.29.4; cf. Ov., Pont. 1.8.37–8; NS 1885, 343.
114. A set of truncated bridge piers was discovered in the 1880s just north of the Ponte Sisto, which has been identified as the remains of the Pons Agrippae, confirmed by a calendar inscription from Ostia – CIL VI.31545 – found in 1938 recording a restoration by Antoninus Pius. For a full discussion of the Pons Agrippae, see Taylor (2002), pp. 8–10. Just upstream from the bridge on the west bank, stood a lavishly decorated, upscale Roman town house nowadays called Villa of the Farnesina (Casa della Farnesina, a modern name, not its original), which possibly belonged to Agrippa as well. To the north lay what came to be known as the Horti Agrippinae, the Gardens of Agrippina, which most likely belonged to Agrippa before they passed to his daughter.
115. Luigi Borsari, Notizie degli scavi di antichita? (1892), pp. 412–28; Luigi Borsari (1888). ‘Del Pons Agrippae sul Tevere tra le regioni IX e XIIII.’ Bullettino della Commissione archeologica comunale di Roma 16, pp. 92–98; R. Lanciani, Forma Urbis Romae (Milan, 1893–1901).
116. Dio 53.27.1: ‘αὐτοὺς ἔκλεισεν, Ἀγρίππας δὲ ἐν τούτῳ τὸ ἄστυ τοῖς ἰδίοις τέλεσιν ἐπεκόσμησε ’.
117. Dio 53.23.1.
118. Cic., Att. 4.16.4; Dio 53.23.2.
119. Dio 53.23.2.
120. TDAR, p. 340.
121. Dio 53.23.2.
122. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.29: ‘nec minor quaestio est in Saeptis, Olympum et Pana, Chironem cum Achille qui fecerint, praesertim cum capitali satisdatione fama iudicet dignos.’
123. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.102 – he also mentions the Circus Maximus built by Iulius Caesar, Basilica of Paulus, Forum of Augustus and Vespasian’s Temple of Peace: ‘nec ut circum maximum a Caesare dictatore exstructum longitudine stadiorum trium, latitudine unius, sed cum aedificiis iugerum quaternum, ad sedem CCL, inter magna opera dicamus: non inter magnifica basilicam Pauli columnis e Phrygibus mirabilem forumque divi Augusti et templum Pacis Vespasiani Imp. Aug., pulcherrima operum, quae umquam vidit orbis? non et tectum diribitori ab Agrippa facti, cum theatrum ante texerit Romae Valerius Ostiensis architectus ludis Libonis.’
124. Dio 55.8.4.
125. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 16.201: ‘fuit memoria nostra et in porticibus saeptorum a M. Agrippa relicta aeque miraculi causa, quae diribitorio superfuerat, xx pedibus brevior, sesquipedali crassitudine.’ The building to which Pliny compared it was Nero’s amphitheature of ‘longa pedes CXX’.
126. Dio 55.8.4.
127. Dio 53.27.1 calls it the στοὰ τοῦ Ποσειδῶνος, and elsewhere (56.24) speaks of a Ποσειδώνιον. See Lucas (1904).
128. Dio 53.27.1: ‘τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ τὴν στοὰν τὴν τοῦ Ποσειδῶνος ὠνομασμένην καὶ ἐξῳκοδόμησεν ἐπὶ ταῖς ναυκρατίαις καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἀργοναυτῶν γραφῇ ἐπελάμπρυνε, τοῦτο δὲ τὸ πυριατήριον τὸ Λακωνικὸν κατεσκεύασε.’ It is generally agreed that the στόα Ποσειδῶνος mentioned by is the Basilica Neputini. Dio 53.27.1.
129. Hor., Epistulae 1.6.26; Mart., 2.14.6, 3.20.11, 111.1.10–12. Some scholars believe the basilica and the portico were actually the same building, but the fourth century CE Curiosum (but not the Notitia) for Regio IX Circus Flaminius mentions both a basilicam Neptuni and a porticum Argonautarum et Meleagri. See Reinhold (1933), p. 75 n. 61; TDAR, pp. 54, 311 and 315. See Rodaz (1984), map of the Campus on pp. 254–255.
130. Dio 53.27.1: ‘τοῦτο δὲ τὸ πυριατήριον τὸ Λακωνικὸν κατεσκεύασε: Λακωνικὸν γὰρ τὸ γυμνάσιον, ἐπειδήπερ οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι γυμνοῦσθαί τε ἐν τῷ τότε χρόνῳ καὶ λίπα ἀσκεῖν μάλιστα .’ According to Vitruvius 5.2, in Roman architecture, sudatorium indicates a vaulted sweating-room (from the Latin sudor, sweat) of a bathhouse or thermae.
131. Paoli (1963), pp. 221–228.
132. Dio 54.11.7; cf. Frontin., 1.10.1–4.
133. Frontin., 1.10.1–4: ‘Virgo appellata est, quod quaerentibus aquam militibus puella virguncula venas quasdam monstravit, quas secuti qui foderant, ingentem aquae modum invenerunt.’ Cf. Pliny Nat. Hist. 31.42 and Cassiodorus, Variae 7.6.
134. Frontin., 10.5; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 31.420.
135. Dio 54.11.7; cf. Frontin., 124.4 where he writes ‘most of the conduits had been laid out through the property of private persons’).
136. Dio 53.27.3: ‘ἠβουλήθη μὲν οὖν ὁ Ἀγρίππας καὶ τὸν Αὔγουστον ἐνταῦθα ἱδρῦσαι, τήν τε τοῦ ἔργου ἐπίκλησιν αὐτῷ δοῦναι: … ἐν δὲ τῷ προνάῳ τοῦ τε Αὐγούστου καὶ ἑαυτοῦ ἀνδριάντας ’.
137. Suidas P. 187. Edmund Thomas, ‘From the pantheon of the gods to the Pantheon of Rome’ in Richard Wrigley, Matthew Craske (eds) Pantheons: Transformations of a Monumental Idea, Aldershot (2004), pp. 14–15. Refuting that the Pantheon is a temple at all are Paul Godfrey and David Hemsoll, ‘The Pantheon: Temple or Rotunda?’ in Martin Henig and Anthony Kings (eds) Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire (Oxford, 1986), pp. 195–209.
138. Dio 53.27.2: ‘τό τε Πάνθειον ὠνομασμένον ἐξετέλεσε: προσαγορεύεται δὲ οὕτω τάχα μὲν ὅτι πολλῶν θεῶν εἰκόνας ἐν τοῖς ἀγάλμασι, τῷ τε τοῦ Ἄρεως καὶ τῷ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης, ἔλαβεν, ὡς δὲ ἐγὼ νομίζω, ὅτι θολοειδὲς ὂν τῷ οὐρανῷ προσέοικεν ’; 53.27.3: ‘μὴ δεξαμένου δὲ αὐτοῦ μηδέτερον ἐκεῖ μὲν τοῦ προτέρου Καίσαρος’. The significance of the choice of deities is that Caesar claimed descent from Mars and Venus, and Augustus was son of the divine Iulius.
139. Dio 51.20.6–8. For discussion of see Taylor (1920), pp. 116–133.
140. Dio 51.20.6–7.
141. Dio 53.27.3, 54.1.1.
142. Dio 66.24.3; Chron. 146; Hieron. a. Abr. 2105, 2127; Orosius 7.12.5; S.H.A. Hadr. 19.10, Ant. Pius 8.2; CIL VI.896 = ILS 129.
143. Rodolfo Amedeo Lanciani, The Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome: A Companion Book for Students and Travelers (Cambridge, 1897), pp. 473–486.
144. Rodolfo Amedeo Lanciani, The Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome: A Companion Book for Students and Travelers (Cambridge, 1897), pp. 480–481; TDAR p. 285. In this interpretation, the north facing front columns of Hadrian’s Pantheon were built over the back wall of Agrippa’s, while the position of the doorways of the two buildings nearly coincides.
145. Thomas (1997), pp. 163–186 and Edmund Thomas, ‘From the pantheon of the gods to the Pantheon of Rome’ in Richard Wrigley and Matthew Craske (eds), Pantheons: Transformations of a Monumental Idea (Aldershot, 2004), pp. 27–28.
146. Edmund Thomas, ‘From the pantheon of the gods to the Pantheon of Rome’ in Richard Wrigley, Matthew Craske (eds), Pantheons: Transformations of a Monumental Idea (Aldershot, 2004), p. 28.
147. MacDonald (1976), pp. 45–49, and figures 49 and 50; p. 68 and figures 77 and 78.
148. Scaife (1953), p. 37. The capitals of the columns are exactly like those of the interior (RA 122), though the entasis of the columns differs (Mem. Am. Acad. 4.122, 142) suggesting that these are contemporary with Hadrian and were not carved in Agrippa’s time.
149. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.38: ‘Agrippae Pantheum decoravit Diogenes Atheniensis; in columnis templi eius Caryatides probantur inter pauca operum, sicut in fastigio posita signa, sed propter altitudinem loci minus celebrate.’
150. MacDonald (1976), p. 60.
151. Vitruvius, De Architectura 1.1.5: ‘Historias autem plures novisse oportet, quod multa ornamenta saepe in operibus architecti designant, de quibus argumenti rationem, cur fecerint, quaerentibus reddere debent. quemadmodum si quis statuas marmoreas muliebres stolatas, quae caryatides dicuntur, pro columnis in opere statuerit et insuper mutulos et coronas conlocaverit, percontantibus ita reddet rationem. Carya, civitas Peloponnensis, cum Persis hostibus contra Graeciam consensit. postea Graeci per victoriam gloriose bello liberati communi consilio Caryatibus bellum indixerunt. itaque oppido capto, viris interfectis, civitate deflagrata matronas eorum in servitutem abduxerunt, nec sunt passi stolas neque ornatus matronales deponere, non uti una triumpho ducerentur, sed aeterna, servitutis exemplo gravi contumelia pressae poenas pendere viderentur pro civitate. ideo qui tunc architecti fuerunt aedificiis publicis designaverunt earum imagines oneri ferendo conlocatas, ut etiam posteris nota poena peccati Caryatium memoriae traderetur.’
152. Stevens and Paton (1927).
153. MacDonald (1976), pp. 45–49, and figures 49 and 50; p. 68 and figures 77 and 78.
154. http://www.nps.gov/thje/index.htm.
155. CIL VI.896 = ILS 129.1: ‘M(arcus) Agrippa L(ucii ) F(ilius) Co(n)s(ul ) tertium fecit’ [in 27 BCE].
156. MacDonald (1976), p. 13.
157. HSA, Hadrian 19.9.
158. Ziolkowski (1994), pp. 261.
159. Ziolkowski (1994), pp. 269–71.
160. MacDonald (1976), p. 77–78; Ziolkowski (1994), p. 268. Inscriptiones Italiae 13 2: 34–5: ‘F(eriae) ex S(enatus) C(onsulto) q(uod ) e(o) d(ie) Imp(erator C)aesar Aug(ustus) Pont(ifex) [ma(ximus)] natus est. Marti, Neptuno in Campo, Apo[l]lini ad theatrum Marcelli.’
161. Ziolkowski (1994), p. 273.
162. Ziolkowski (1994), p. 274.
163. Ziolkowski (1994), p. 275.
164. Ziolkowski (1994), p. 276.
165. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.38; Dio 53.27.2.
166. Dio 54.28.5. Suet., Div. Aug. 97.1 mentions the aedes Agrippae. HJ 572; Mitt. (1903), pp. 48–53. For the Marble Plan of Rome (the so-called Forma Urbs Romae) see http://formaurbis.stanford.edu. Samuel Ball Platner, Thomas Ashby, TDAR identify fragments 72 and 103 as the Sepulchrum Agrippae.
167. A plinth of a column of pavonazetto, documented as CIL XV.988 but which is now lost, was carved with the letters [M AGR]IPPAE.
168. Dio 53.27.4: ‘καὶ ἐγίγνετο γὰρ ταῦτα οὐκ ἐξ ἀντιπάλου τῷ Ἀγρίππᾳ πρὸς τὸν Αὔγουστον φιλοτιμίας, ἀλλ᾽ ἔκ τε τῆς πρὸς ἐκεῖνον λιπαροῦς εὐνοίας καὶ ἐκ τῆς πρὸς τὸ δημόσιον ἐνδελεχοῦς σπουδῆς, οὐ μόνον οὐδὲν αὐτὸν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς ὁ Αὔγουστος ᾐτιάσατο, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ πλεῖον ἐτίμησε .’
169. Vell. Pat. 2.88.2: ‘Erat tunc urbis custodiis praepositus C. Maecenas equestri, sed splendido genere natus, vir, ubi res vigiliam exigeret, sane exsomnis, providens atque agendi sciens, simul vero aliquid ex negotio remitti posset, otio ac mollitiis paene ultra feminam fluens, non minus Agrippa Caesari carus, sed minus honoratus – quippe vixit angusti clavi paene contentus –, nec minora consequi potuit, sed non tam concupivit.’
170. Tac., Ann. 14.53. Dalzell (1956), pp. 151–162.
171. Suet., Viri Illusturi 44: ‘M. Vipsanius a Maecenate eum suppositum appellabat, novae cacozeliae repertorem, non tumidae nec exilis, sed ex communibus verbis, atque ideo latentis.’
172. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26.
173. Strab., 3.4.5; Dio 53.25.5; Florus 2.33. For a summary of the wars before Augustus, see Van Nostrand (1915), pp. 84–91.
174. Suet., Tib. 9.1.
175. Florus 2.33: ‘Haec per Antistium Furniumque legatos et Agrippam hibernans in Tarraconis maritimis Caesar accepit.’ On the inclusion of Agrippa, see Magie (1920), p. 335. Gardthausen (2.374–375) and Motte (245) who propose that Florus compressed different three campaigns into a single statement.
176. Dio 53.25.6.
177. Dio 53.25.7.
178. Dio 53.27.3, 53.28.1.
179. Suet., Div. Aug. 63.
180. Dio 53.27.5.
181. Dio 53.25.7, 53.29.1.
182. Dio 53.28.1.
183. Dio 53.27.5.
184. Dio 53.27.6: ‘τὸν δὲ Ἀγρίππαν σύνοικον ἐποιήσατο .’
185. Vell. Pat. 2.93.1.
186. Dio 53.28.3.
187. Dio 53.28.3; Vell. Pat. 2.93.1.
188. Tac., Ann. 1.3: ‘admodum adulescentem.’
189. Vell. Pat. 2.93.2: ‘M. Marcellus, sororis Augusti Octaviae filius, quem homines ita, si quid accidisset Caesari, successorem potentiae eius arbitrabantur futurum, ut tamen id per M. Agrippam securo ei posse contingere non existimarent.’
190. Augustus also insisted that his stepsons by Livia, Tiberius and Drusus the Elder, undertook military service before advancing far up the cursus honorum.
191. Dio 53.31.4: ‘καὶ ἐγίγνετο γὰρ ταῦτα οὐκ ἐξ ἀντιπάλου τῷ Ἀγρίππᾳ πρὸς τὸν Αὔγουστον φιλοτιμίας, ἀλλ᾽ ἔκ τε τῆς πρὸς ἐκεῖνον λιπαροῦς εὐνοίας καὶ ἐκ τῆς πρὸς τὸ δημόσιον ἐνδελεχοῦς σπουδῆς, οὐ μόνον οὐδὲν αὐτὸν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς ὁ Αὔγουστος ᾐτιάσατο, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ πλεῖον ἐτίμησε .’
Chapter 6: Statesman of the Roman World
1. Dio 53.30.1.
2. Dio 53.30.2.
3. Dio 53.30.1: ‘καὶ τῶν ἱππέων ἀθροίσας διάδοχον μὲν οὐδένα ἀπέδειξε .’
4. Dio 53.30.3.
5. Dio 53.31.1.
6. See Syme (1959), p. 69; Reinhard (1933), pp. 98–99 and 168–69. See also Gray (1970), pp. 227–238.
7. See Gray (1970), p. 231, argues he received imperium aequium, ‘equal to that of any governor or commander in any of the provinces to which he might be summoned by the state, not an imperium maius with respect to the imperium of all such governors or commanders.’
8. Vell. Pat. 2.93.2: ‘Agrippa … ut fama loquitur, ob tacitas cum Marcello offensiones praesenti se subduxerat tempori.’
9. Suet., Div. Aug. 66.3: ‘M. Agrippae patientiam … cum ille ex levi frigoris suspicione et quod Marcellus sibi anteferretur, Mytilenas se relictis omnibus contulisset.’
10. Suet., Tib. 10.1: ‘Quidam existimant, adultis iam Augusti liberis, loco et quasi possessione usurpati a se diu secundi gradus sponte cessisse exemplo M. Agrippae, qui M. Marcello ad munera publica admoto Mytilenas abierit, ne aut obstare aut obtrectare praesens uideretur’ – Tiberius used Agrippa’s withdrawal as the justification of his own retirement to Rhodes when he perceived C. Caesar’s career advancing ahead of his own.
11. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.149: ‘pudenda Agrippae ablegatio.’
12. Tac., Ann. 14.53.3, 55.2–3.
13. Dio 53.32.1.
14. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 15.10.2: ‘πέμπεται δ᾽ Ἀγρίππας τῶν πέραν Ἰονίου διάδοχος Καίσαρι .’
15. See Maggie (1908), pp. 145–152.
16. Iustin 42.5.6; cf. Dio 51.18.
17. Iustin 43.5.7–9; Dio 53.33.
18. Dio 53.30.5–6.
19. Suet., Div. Aug. 29.4.
20. Dio 53.31.2.
21. Dio 53.31.3, cf. Dio 54.2.5 for Augustus’ directive of 22 BCE banning patricians from exhibiting themselves on stage in pubic.
22. Dio 53.31.2.
23. Hor., Carm. 1.6: Scriberis Vario fortis et hostium | victor, Maeonii carminis alite, | quam rem cumque ferox navibus aut equis | miles te duce gesserit. || Nos, Agrippa, neque haec diceere nec gravem | Palidae stomachum cedere nescii | nec cursus duplicis per mare Ulixei | nec saevam Pelopis domum || conamur, tenues grandia, dum pudor | imbellisque lyrae Musa potens vetat | laudes egregii Caesaris et tuas | culpa deterere ingeni. || Quis Martem tunica tectum adamantina | digne scripserit aut pulvere Troico | nigrum Merionen aut ope Palladis | Tydiden superis parem? || Nos convivia, nos proelia virginum | sectis in iuvenes unguibus acrium | contamus vacui, sive quid urimur, | non praeter solitum leves. (translated by John Connington with adaptations by the author.)
24. See Cairns (1995), pp. 211–217.
25. For a full discussion, see Cairns (1995), pp. 213–214. He proposes a parallel link with Agrippa and Diomedes and the town of Argyri(p)pa.
26. See Chapter 1, n. 10.
27. Dio 53.32.1: ‘οὐ μέντοι καὶ ἐς τὴν Συρίαν ἀφίκετο, … αὐτὸς δὲ ἐν Λέσβῳ διέτριψε .’
28. Strab., Geog. 13.2.2; Hor., Carm. 1.7.1, Epistulae 1.11.17.
29. Strab., Geog. 13.2.2: ‘ἔχει δ᾽ ἡ Μιτυλήνη λιμένας δύο, ὧν ὁ νότιος κλειστὸς τριηρικὸς ναυσὶ πεντήκοντα, ὁ δὲ βόρειος μέγας καὶ βαθύς, χώματι σκεπαζόμενος: πρόκειται δ᾽ ἀμφοῖν νησίον μέρος τῆς πόλεως ἔχον αὐτόθι συνοικούμενον: κατεσκεύασται δὲ τοῖς πᾶσι καλῶς.’
30. Strab., Geog. 13.2.3.
31. For example P. Rutilius Rufus; Cic., Pro Rab. Post. 10.27.
32. Dio 53.31.3.
33. Dio 53.30.4.
34. Dio 53.33.4. The suggestion that Livia was a conspirator, popularised by novelist Robert Graves in I, Claudius, is highly dubious.
35. Dio 53.30.5.
36. The Theatre of Marcellus as it is still known, stands up to its second storey with substantial Mediaeval modifications above.
37. Aelius Donatus, Vita Vergiliana 32 citing Ver., Aen. 6.884.
38. Vell. Pat. 2.93.2: ‘Agrippa, qui sub specie ministeriorum principalium profectus in Asiam’; Joseph., Ant. Iud. 15.10.2.
39. Dio 53.25.1.
40. Dio 53.32.1: ‘καὶ ὃς ἐκ μὲν τῆς πόλεως εὐθὺς ἐξώρμησεν, … ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι καὶ μᾶλλον μετριάζων ἐκεῖσε μὲν τοὺς ὑποστρατήγους ἔπεμψεν …’
41. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 15.10.2: ‘καὶ τούτῳ περὶ Μιτυλήνην χειμάζοντι συντυχὼν Ἡρώδης, ἦν γὰρ εἰς τὰ μάλιστα φίλος καὶ συνήθης, πάλιν εἰς τὴν Ἰουδαίαν ἀνέστρεφεν.’
42. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 15.9.3, Bell. Iud. 1.21.1, 1.21.4; Hegesippus 1.35.1.
43. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 15.10.20. For Gadara see Matthew 8:28.
44. Roddaz (1984), p. 451, notes Herodes was officially responsible not just for Iudaea but for Cyprus, Lycia and Syria also, citing Joseph., Ant. Iud. 15.360, 16.128, and Bellum 1.399, 1.428.
45. See Braund (1984), pp. 75–85, 91–99 and 105–116.
46. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 15.10.2: ‘Γαδαρέων δέ τινες ἐπ᾽ Ἀγρίππαν ἦλθον κατηγοροῦντες αὐτοῦ, καὶ τούτους ἐκεῖνος οὐδὲ λόγον αὐτοῖς δοὺς ἀναπέμπει τῷ βασιλεῖ δεσμίους ’; cf. 15.7.3.
47. See Braund (1984), p. 68 n. 15, citing G.W. Bowersock, Augustus and the Greek World, 1965, chapter 4.
48. See Braund (1984), p. 57.
49. Dio 53.26.3.
50. Dio 53.29.3.
51. Dio 53.29.4.
52. Dio 53.29.5: ‘τὸ δὲ δὴ νόσημα οὐδενὶ τῶν συνήθων ὅμοιον ἐγίγνετο, ἀλλ᾽ ἐς τὴν κεφαλὴν ἐνσκῆψαν ἐξήραινεν αὐτήν, καὶ τοὺς μὲν πολλοὺς αὐτίκα ἀπώλλυε, τῶν δὲ δὴ περιγιγνομένων ἔς τε τὰ σκέλη κατῄει, πᾶν τὸ μεταξὺ τοῦ σώματος ὑπερβάν.’
53. Dio 53.29.6–7.
54. Dio 53.29.8: ‘πρῶτοι μὲν δὴ Ῥωμαίων οὗτοι, νομίζω δ᾽ ὅτι καὶ μόνοι, τοσοῦτον ἐπὶ πολέμῳ τῆς Ἀραβίας ταύτης ἐπῆλθον: μέχρι γὰρ τῶν Ἀθλούλων καλουμένων, χωρίου τινὸς ἐπιφανοῦς, ἐχώρησαν ’; cf. RG 26.5. J.W. Rich (1990), Cassius Dio: The Augustan Settlement (Roman History 53–55.9), Oxford (1990), p. 165, states that the tomb of a Roman cavalryman, P. Cornelius, has been found there.
55. Strab., 17.1.54: he suggests that it was while Gallus was in Arabia with his army that the Ethiopians saw their opportunity to raid Egypt.
56. Strab., 17.1.54. Remarkably, the bronze head of Augustus with its eyes of glass and stone still intact, was found. Buried in the steps of the Victory Temple of the Kushites, everytime a worshipper ascended the steps they trod on the face of the Roman emperor. It is now in the British Museum, accession number GR 1911.9–1.1.
57. Strab., Geog. 17.1.54. Her full name and title was Amnirense qore li kdwe li, ‘Ameniras, Qore and Kandake’. The name Kandake, the Greek form of the Nubian word, indicates she was a queen. She is mentioned in the Bible, Acts 8:26–27.
58. Dio 54.5.4; Strab., 17.1.54.
59. Dio 54.5.5; Strab., 17.1.54; RG 26.5.
60. Dio 54.5.6.
61. RG 26.5.
62. Refer to Sources: 3. Inscriptions.
63. See Glen Bowersock, ‘Augustus in the East: The Problem of the Succession’ in Fergus Millar and Erich Segal (eds) Caesar Augustus: Seven Aspects (Oxford, 1984), p. 169.
64. Dio 54.1.1: ‘καὶ κεραυνοῖς ἄλλα τε πολλὰ ἐβλήθη καὶ οἱ ἀνδριάντες οἱ ἐν τῷ Πανθείῳ, ὥστε καὶ τὸ δόρυ ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Αὐγούστου χειρὸς ἐκπεσεῖν .’
65. Dio 54.1.2.
66. Dio 54.1.3.
67. Dio 54.1.5.
68. Dio 54.1.4.
69. Dio 54.2.1; in 54.2.2 he writes ‘these were the last two private citizens to hold the censorship together, which was no doubt the meaning of the sign given to them; for the platform, on which they were to perform one of the functions devolving upon them, collapsed as they ascended it on the first day of their holding the office, and was shattered in pieces, and after that no others of the same rank as these became censors together.’
70. Dio 54.2.4.
71. Dio 54.3.1.
72. Dio 54.3.4.
73. Dio 54.3.5.
74. Dio 54.3.6.
75. See Garnsey (1924), pp. 146–161.
76. Dio 54.6.1. The nature of the matters is not disclosed.
77. Dio 54.6.1–2.
78. Dio 54.6.3.
79. Dio 54.6.4.
80. Dio 54.6.4: ‘καὶ μήτε μόνῃ τῇ Ῥώμῃ σχολάζειν δυνάμενος μήτ᾽ αὖ ἄναρχον αὐτὴν καταλιπεῖν τολμῶν, ἐζήτει τινὰ αὐτῇ ἐπιστῆσαι, καὶ ἔκρινε μὲν τὸν Ἀγρίππαν .’
81. Dio 54.6.5.
82. Dio 54.6.5.
83. Dio 54.6.5: ‘καὶ καταναγκάσας τὴν γυναῖκα, καίπερ ἀδελφιδῆν αὐτοῦ οὖσαν, ἀπαλλάξαντα τῇ Ἰουλίᾳ συνοικῆσαι, ἐς τὴν Ῥώμην παραχρῆμα καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ γάμῳ καὶ ἐπὶ τῇ τῆς πόλεως διαχειρίσει ἔπεμψε, διά τε τἆλλα καὶ ὅτι ὁ Μαικήνας συμβουλευομένῳ οἱ περὶ αὐτῶν τούτων εἰπεῖν λέγεται ὅτι ‘τηλικοῦτον αὐτὸν πεποίηκας ὥστ᾽ ἢ γαμβρόν σου .’
84. Dio 54.6.5; Plut., Ant. 87.2; Suet., Div. Aug. 63.1. Marcella was allowed to be single for long and was married off to one of M. Antonius’ sons, Iullus Antonius – Plut., Ant. 87.3, Vell. Pat. 2.110.5.
85. See Fantham (2006), pp. 17–28.
86. Macrobius, Saturnalia 2.5.2.
87. For example, the bust in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek Copenhagen (Fentham (2006), p. 136).
88. Macrobius, Saturnalia 2.5.2–5: ‘Hodie enim me patris oculis ornavi, heri viri’.
89. Dio 54.6.1. An inscription in the Berlin-Brandeburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin attests to the presence of Varus in Pergamon; it was presumably erected for an act of generosity on his part to the citizens. The citizens of Athens and Tenos (the Cycladic island of Tinos) erected similar dedications.
90. See John R. Clarke, ‘Augustan Domestic Interiors: Propaganda or Fashion’ in Galinsky (2005), pp. 271–72. The villa complex was discovered in 1879 beneath the Villa Farnesina.
91. The exquisite painted murals of the rooms of the palatial building have since been moved to the Museo Nazionale Romane-Palazzo Massimo alle Terme in Rome. The frescoes were restored when the Palazzo Massimo was opened in 1998.
92. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35 is an encyclopaedic overview of painting techniques and materials used in the Roman world.
93. See Galinsky (2005), plates V and VIII.
94. The villa complex was discovered quite by accident on March 23, 1903, when the Circumvesuviana – the railway line, which runs from Naples around the base of Mount Vesuvius – was being laid. The owner of the property on which the villa was found, Sig. Cavaliere Ernesto Santini, partially excavated it between 1903 and 1905 with the help of the Italian archaeologist, Sig. Matteo Della Corte. The structure is also known – probably erroneously – by the name Villa of Agrippa Postumus.
95. Von Blanckenhagen, Alexander, Mertens and Faltermeir (1990).
96. See John R. Clarke, ‘Augustan Domestic Interiors: Propaganda or Fashion’ in Galinsky (2005), pp. 272–275. See also Elfriede R. Knauer (1993), ‘Roman Wall Paintings from Boscotrecase: Three Studies in the Relationship between Writing and Painting’, Metropolitan Museum Journal 28, pp. 13–46.
97. The villa’s best painted murals have since been removed to the Museo Archeologico Nazionale in Naples and the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.
98. See Galinsky (2005), plates VI and VII.
99. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26.
100. Dio 49.43.6.
101. Dio 49.43.5
102. Dio 54.8.5.
103. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.66.
104. Dio 54.8.4.
105. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.17.
106. Vegetius, De Re Militari 3.
107. Iulius Honorius, Kosmographia: see A. Riese, Geographi latini minores collegit, recensuit, prolegomenis instruxit. Henninger Bros, Heilbronn (1878), pp. 21–22. Honorius names the Greeks as Nikodemos, Didymos, Theudotos and Polyclitos – see C. Nicolet, P. Gautier Dalché, ‘Les quatre sages de Jules César et la mesure du monde selon Julius Honorius’, Journal des Savants (Oct.–Dec., 1986), pp. 157–218.
108. Strab., Geog. 2.5.17: ‘πλεῖστον δ᾽ ἡ θάλαττα γεωγραφεῖ καὶ σχηματίζει τὴν γῆν, κόλπους ἀπεργαζομένη καὶ πελάγη καὶ πορθμούς, ὁμοίως δὲ ἰσθμοὺς καὶ χερρονήσους καὶ ἄκρας: προσλαμβάνουσι δὲ ταύτῃ καὶ οἱ ποταμοὶ καὶ τὰ ὄρη. διὰ γὰρ τῶν τοιούτων ἤπειροί τε καὶ ἔθνη καὶ πόλεων θέσεις εὐφυεῖς ἐνενοήθησαν καὶ τἆλλα ποικίλματα, ὅσων μεστός ἐστιν ὁ χωρογραφικὸς πίναξ. ἐν δὲ τούτοις καὶ τὸ τῶν νήσων πλῆθός ἐστι κατεσπαρμένον ἔν τε τοῖς πελάγεσι καὶ κατὰ τὴν παραλίαν πᾶσαν. ἄλλων δ᾽ ἄλλας ἀρετάς τε καὶ κακίας καὶ τὰς ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν χρείας ἐπιδεικνυμένων ἢ δυσχρηστίας, τὰς μὲν φύσει τὰς δὲ ἐκ κατασκευῆς, τὰς φύσει δεῖ λέγειν: διαμένουσι γάρ, [p. 162] αἱ δ᾽ ἐπίθετοι δέχονται μεταβολάς. καὶ τούτων δὲ τὰς πλείω χρόνον συμμένειν δυναμένας ἐμφανιστέον, … μὴ πολὺ μέν, ἄλλως δ᾽ ἐπιφάνειαν ἐχούσας τινὰ καὶ δόξαν, ἣ πρὸς τὸν ὕστερον χρόνον παραμένουσα τρόπον τινὰ συμφυῆ τοῖς τόποις ποιεῖ καὶ μηκέτι οὖσαν κατασκευήν, ὥστε δῆλον ὅτι δεῖ καὶ τούτων μεμνῆσθαι. περὶ πολλῶν γάρ ἐστι πόλεων τοῦτ᾽ εἰπεῖν, ὅπερ εἶπε Δημοσθένης ἐπὶ τῶν περὶ Ὄλυνθον, ἃς οὕτως ἠφανίσθαι φησὶν ὥστε μηδ᾽ εἰ πώποτε ᾠκίσθησαν γνῶναι ἄν τινα ἐπελθόντα. ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως καὶ εἰς τούτους τοὺς τόπους καὶ εἰς ἄλλους ἀφικνοῦνται ἄσμενοι, τά γ᾽ ἴχνη ποθοῦντες ἰδεῖν τῶν οὕτω διωνομασμένων ἔργων, καθάπερ καὶ τοὺς τάφους τῶν ἐνδόξων ἀνδρῶν. οὕτω δὲ καὶ νομίμων καὶ πολιτειῶν μεμνήμεθα τῶν μηκέτι οὐσῶν, ἐνταῦθα καὶ τῆς ὠφελείας προκαλουμένης τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ὅνπερ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν πράξεων: ἢ γὰρ ζήλου χάριν ἢ ἀποτροπῆς τῶν τοιούτων.’
109. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.16–17: ‘Longitudinem universam eius prodidit M. Agrippa CCCCLXXV p., latitudinem CCLVIII, sed cum termini Carthaginem usque procederent: quae causa magnos errores conputatione mensurae saepius parit, alibi mutato provinciarum modo, alibi itinerum, auctisque aut deminutis passibus. incubuere maria tam longo aevo, alibi processere litora, torsere se fluminem aut correxere flexus. praeterea aliunde aliis exordium mensurae est et alia meatus. ita fit ut nulli duo concinant. Agrippam quidem in tanta viri diligentia praeterque in hoc opere cura, cum orbem terrarum orbi spectandum propositurus esset, errasse quis credat et cum eo Divum Augustum? is namque conplexam eum porticum ex destinatione et commentariis M. Agrippae a sorore eius inchoatam peregit.’
110. For a discussion of current thinking about Agrippa’s Orbis Terrarum see Carey (2003), pp. 61–74. The idea that Agrippa’s map might have just been an inscription has been proposed by K. Brodersen, Terra Incognita: Studien zur römischen Raumerfassung, Spudasmata 59 (1995), pp. 268–287.
111. Dio 54.11.1–2: ‘Ἀγρίππας … ταῖς Γαλατίαις προσετάχθη. ἔν τε γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἐστασίαζον καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν Κελτῶν ἐκακοῦντο.’ Dio calls the Germanic invaders by the name Κελτῶὶ.
112. Dio 54.11.1.
113. Livy, AUC 21.38; Polyb. 34.10; Ver., Aen 10.15ff.
114. Caes., Bell. Gall. 1.11: in 58 BCE, Caesar picked this as ‘the shortest route to Further Gaul over the Alps’ departing Ocelum ‘the westernmost village in Nearer Gaul’ and reached the Vocontii on the west bank of the Rhone in six days.
115. Alpes Cottiae was a Roman client-kingdom of Ligurian royalty, one of three small independent states straddling the western Alps between modern France and Italy. Its name survives in the Cottian Alps. Plut., Mar. 19 notes the Ligurians called themselves Ambrones, which means ‘people of the water’.
116. On the dynasty of Cottius see Letta (1976), pp. 37–76: King Donnus, or C. Iulius Donnus, was an opportunistic Ligurian who saw his way to longevity by siding with Iulius Caesar during his wars of conquest, whose reward for picking the right side led to his grant of Roman citizen. See Braund (1984), p. 40, who cites an inscription, CIL V.7232, carved for his freedman and freed-woman which preserves the fact of their former master’s name.
117. From Segusio in the Alpes Cottiae, dated 9–8 BCE, the inscription over a triumphal archway BFC 9 (1904), 89 = Ehrenberg and Jones (1955), no. 165: ‘M. Agrippae L. f. [Cos III tri]b. Potest. […] Do[nnus] et Cott(ius?) Cott(i) f .’
118. Amm. Marc. 15.10, 2; Chevalier 1976, p. 49, cites one of the so-called Vicarello goblets listing the crossing as ‘in Alpe Cottia’. Cottius may have charged users of the road a toll just as the Salassi did when travellers passed through their country at a rate of one drachma per head, most famously Dec. Brutus who was fleeing from Mutina in 43 BCE: Strab., Geog. 4.6.7, 4.6.11.
119. Chevalier (1976), p. 160.
120. Dio 54.11.2: ‘ταῖς Γαλατίαις προσετάχθη: ἔν τε γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἐστασίαζον καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν Κελτῶν ἐκακοῦντο.’
121. Cf. Dio 54.24.5 and 54.28.2.
122. Strab., 4.3.4, Tac., Ann. 12.27.1–2, Germ. 28.5 cf. Hist. 4.28, 4.63; and Suet. Div. Aug. 21.1.
123. Strab., Geog. 4.3.4: ‘ταῖς Γαλατίαις προσετάχθη: ἔν τε γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἐστασίαζον καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν Κελτῶν ἐκακοῦντο ’; Suet., Div. Aug. 21.1.
124. Tac., Germ. 28. See Wells (1972), pp. 134–136.
125. See Wells (1972), p. 135.
126. Caes., Bell. Gall. 5.57–58.
127. A siege camp of T. Labienus was identifed in 2010: Dr S. Hornung entitled ‘Ein spätrepublikanisches Militärlager bei Hermeskeil (Lkr. Trier-Saarburg), Vorbericht über die Forschungen 2010–2011’, Archaölogisches Korrespondenzblatt 42.2, 2012 published by Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz (http://web.rgzm.de/1470.html).
128. See Edith Mary Wightman, Roman Trier and the Treveri, New York (1971), p. 36.
129. MacKendrik (1971), p. 64; MacMullen (2000), pp. 93–95.
130. Caes., Bell. Gall. 1.33.
131. Desbat (2005), p. 5.
132. Strab., 4.6.11.
133. See Reinhard (1933), p.90 n. 76, for a survey of scholarship arguing pro and contra ascribing the building of a fourth road connecting Colonia Copia Felix Munatia Lugdunum/Lyon to Massilia/Marseilles to Agrippa.
134. See Goudineau (1996), p. 488; Strab., 4.3.2 mentions the sixty nations of Tres Galliae comprised of twenty-five in Lugdunensis, eighteen in Belgica and seventeen in Aquitania. Tacitus mentions sixty-four tribes at the time of the revolt of 21 CE (Tacitus, I 3.44) but this may include four civitates that were later part of the Roman province of Germania Superior.
135. On the ‘Romainzation’ of Gaul see: Wightman (1977), pp. 105–126; Woolf (1997), pp. 339–350.
136. See Goudineau, CAH (1996), p. 497.
137. See Goudineau, CAH (1996), p. 496; Wolff (1998), p. 120.
138. Ward-Perkins (1970), p. 5.
139. The date remains controversial: see Amy and Gros (1979); Anderson (2001), pp. 68–79.
140. Espérandieu (1919), p. 337. He argues (1919, p.338) it was replaced after Agrippa’s death with the second inscription ‘C CAESARI AVGVSTI F COS L CAESARI AVGVSTI F COS DESIGNATO PRINCIPIBVS IVVENTVTIS’, CIL 12.3155. Espérandieu (1929), Balty (1960), pp. 59–73.
141. See http://www.arenes-nimes.com/en/discovering-site/maison-carree.
142. CIL XII.3153: ‘M. AGRIPPA L F CO[S III … DAT]’; CIL XII.3154: ‘M. AGRIPP[A L F COS III … DAT]’.
143. RIC I 157; RPC I 523; CRE Ashmolean 413; ACIP 3373; SNG Hunterian 149.
144. CIL XII.3154 was found on the site of the bath house. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.189 – ‘Agrippa certe in thermis, quas Romae fecit …’ – confirms that Agrippa built thermae outside Rome.
145. See E. Espérandieu, Le Pont du Gard et l’Aqueduc de Nîmes, 9–11, 1926.
146. See Fabre, Fiches and Paillet (1991), pp. 63–88. Fabre, Fiches and Paillet (2000).
147. Cf. Claudius may have used plans drawn up by Iulius Caesar for the remodelling of the port at Ostia: Suet., Div. Claud. 20.
148. Dio 54.11.2: ‘οἱ γὰρ Κάνταβροι οἱ ζωργηθέντες τε ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ καὶ πραθέντες τούς τε δεσπότας σφῶν ὡς ἕκαστοι ἀπέκτειναν, καὶ πρὸς τὴν οἰκείαν ἐπανελθόντες πολλοὺς συναπέστησαν, καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτῶν χωρία καταλαβόντες καὶ ἐντειχισάμενοι τοῖς τῶν Ῥωμαίων φρουροῖς ἐπεβούλευον.’
149. See also Colmenero (1979), p. 127. Roddaz (1984), p. 407, shares the view held by G. Alfödy and R. Syme that P. Silius Nerva followed Carisius as governor of Hispania Citerior.
150. Florus 2.33; Augustus, RG 26.2. For a full discussion of the war and a comparison of ancient sources see Magie (1920), pp. 323–339.
151. See Jones (1976), pp. 48–52. Legiones V Alaudae, VI Victrix, and X Gemina operated in Asturias, with VI based at Braga; see Jona Lendering’s excellent website http://www.livius.org/le-lh/legio/legions.htm, who suggests a sub-unit of VIII Augusta also took part, and that during the Cantabrian War I and II Augusta were involved in the building of colonia Acci (Guadix el Viejo) in southern Spain.
152. See Jones (1976), pp. 52–57.
153. Florus 2.33.
154. See Goldsworthy (1996), pp. 131–132, citing Caes., Bell. Gall. 4.23 and 7.45. Concilia are mentioned by Joseph., in Bell. Iud. 3.161–162, 4.366–378, 5.491–502 and 6.236–243.
155. Dio 54.11.3: ‘ἐπ᾽ οὖν τούτους ὁ Ἀγρίππας ἐπιστρατεύσας ἔσχε μέν τι καὶ πρὸς τοὺς στρατιώτας ἔργον: πρεσβύτεροι γὰρ οὐκ ὀλίγοι αὐτῶν ὄντες καὶ τῇ συνεχείᾳ τῶν πολέμων τετρυχωμένοι, τούς τε Καντάβρους ὡς καὶ δυσπολεμήτους δεδιότες, οὐκ ἐπείθοντο αὐτῷ .’
156. Suet., Div. Iul. 70; Livy, Per. 113; App., Bell. Civ. 2.92–4; Dio 42.52–5; Lucan, Pharsalus 5.237–373. Questioning the accuracy of extant accounts of the actual events is Chrissanthos (2001), pp. 63–75. For a general overview of mutinies see Lindsay Powell, ‘The Mood of the Armies: Morale and Mutiny in the Roman Army of the First Century A.D.’, Exercitus (Spring 1988), Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 61–64.
157. Suet., Div. Iul. 70; Plut., Caes. 51; App., Bell. Civ. 2.93; Dio 42.53; Tac., Ann. 1.42; Lucan, Pharsalus 5.357–360.
158. Augustus forbade his legates to use the term comilitiones insisting on milites: Suet., Div. Aug. 25.1: ‘After the civil wars he never called any of the troops ‘‘comrades,’’ either in the assembly or in an edict, but always ‘‘soldiers’’; and he would not allow them to be addressed otherwise, even by those of his sons or stepsons who held military commands, thinking the former term too flattering for the requirements of discipline, the peaceful state of the times, and his own dignity and that of his household.’
159. Dio 54.11.4: ‘ἀλλ᾽ ἐκείνους μέν, τὰ μὲν νουθετήσας τὰ δὲ παραμυθησάμενος τὰ δὲ καὶ ἐπελπίσας, διὰ ταχέων πειθαρχῆσαι ἐποίησε .’
160. Dio 53.25.6.
161. Dio 53.25.5, 53.29.2.
162. Dio 53.25.2.
163. Strab., Geog. 3.3.8.
164. Lucan, Pharsalia 6.259: ‘Cantaber exiguis aut longis Teutonus armis.’
165. A short leaf-shaped dagger and bipennis are depicted on the reverse of a silver denarius minted at Emerita under Carisius, 25–23 BCE (RIC I 41, 7a. BMCRE I 281) and the curved falcata on a denarius (RIC I 2a and 3, BMCRE I 15 and 277, RSC 400b) – see Walter Trillmich, ‘Colonia Augusta Emerita, Capital of Lusitania’ in Edmondson (2009), fig. 14.1 nos. 1 and 2 on p. 430. Strab., 3.4.15; Dio 53.25.6, mentions javelin-throwers.
166. A ‘Celtiberian’ horned helmet is depicted on the reverse of a silver denarius minted at Emerita under Carisius 25–23 BCE (RIC I 7a and 7b, BMCRE I 281 and 282). Round shields are depicted on another silver denarii of Carisius singly (RIC I 2a and 3, BMCRE I 15, RSC 400b) and piled up as trophies of war (RIC I 4b and 5; BMCRE I 283 var. and 284; RSC 402 and 403). See Walter Trillmich, ‘Colonia Augusta Emerita, Capital of Lusitania’ in Edmondson (2009), fig. 14.1 no. 1 on p. 430.
167. Dio 53.25.6.
168. Strab., 3.4.15; Flavius Arrianus. Technè Taktikè 40; Hadrian’s adlocutio is preserved in CIL VIII.2532.
169. Strab., 3.4.18: ‘οὐκ ἴδιον δὲ τῶν Ἰβήρων οὐδὲ τοῦτο σύνδυο ἐφ᾽ ἵππων κομίζεσθαι, κατὰ δὲ τὰς μάχας τὸν ἕτερον πεζὸν ἀγωνίζεσθαι ’. See McCall (2002), pp. 42–43 citing Livy, AUC 26.4.4–10.
170. Strab., 3.4.5; Vell. Pat. 2.90.4.
171. Dio 54.11.2.
172. Dio 54.11.4: ‘πρὸς δὲ δὴ τοὺς Καντάβρους πολλὰ προσέπταισεν ’.
173. Dio 54.11.4: ‘καὶ γὰρ ἐμπειρίᾳ πραγμάτων, ἅτε τοῖς Ῥωμαίοις δεδουλευκότες, καὶ ἀπογνώσει τοῦ μὴ ἂν ἔτι σωθῆναι ἁλόντες ἐχρῶντο ’.
174. Roddaz (1984), pp. 405–410, questions Dio’s account, beginning with the date. He believes the rebellion began in 20 BCE and only after appreciating the gravity of the situation did Agrippa intervene in the spring of the following year. He posits that the captives turned rebels could not have been held far beyond the conflict zone, perhaps at the mines in northwestern Spain, which would explain the speed of the uprising so soon after the war supposedly ended. He further suggests that the entire region, in particular the mountainous areas, had not been subdued in that war. This difficult terrain was unsuited to the Roman style of war fighting, the effect of which was to degrade the morale of the legionaries who perceived the conflict as a war without end.
175. Florus 2.33: ‘quasi quadam cogebat indagine.’
176. Attica: Orosius 6.21; Bergida: Florus: 2.33.
177. Florus 2.33; Orosius 6.21. Mons Vindius may have been one of the mountains in the Cordillera Cantábrica.
178. Florus 2.33 mentions Aracillum; Orosius 6.21 mentions Racilium. For a discussion see Martino (1982), pp. 32–33, 94–98 and 142.
179. Florus 2.33; Orosius 6.21. The Miño is the longest river in Galicia, Spain, with an extension of 340 km. For a discussion of the whereabouts of Mons Medullus, see Magie (1920), pp. 334–335.
180. Florus: 2.33 says 18 miles; Orosius 6.21 says 15 miles.
181. Orosius 6.21.
182. Strab., 3.4.17; cf. Florus 2.22 on the Raeti of the central Alps in 15 BCE.
183. Florus 2.33.
184. Dio 53.25.8.
185. Dio 53.25.7.
186. Denarius: RIC I 4b; BMCRE I 284; RSC 402.
187. Dio 54.5.1.
189. Dio 54.5.2–3.
190. Dio 54.11.5: ‘ἀποβαλὼν τῶν στρατιωτῶν, συχνοὺς δὲ καὶ ἀτιμώσας ὅτι ἡττῶντο ῾τά τε γὰρ …’
191. Dio 54.11.5. Augustus came down hard on recalcitrant units, says Suet., Div. Aug. 24. It is possible Legio I was removed to Aquitania or Belgica where it was reconstituted, suggests Syme (1933), p. 16.
192. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 3.5.1.
193. Dio 54.11.5: ‘τέλος δέ ποτε συχνοὺς μὲν ἀποβαλὼν τῶν στρατιωτῶν … τούς τε ἐν τῇ ἡλικίᾳ πολεμίους πάντας ὀλίγου διέφθειρε καὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς τά τε ὅπλα ἀφείλετο καὶ ἐς τὰ πεδία ἐκ τῶν ἐρυμνῶν κατεβίβασεν .’
194. Hor., Epistulae 1.12.26–27: ‘Cantaber Agrippae … virtute … cecidit’; Vell. Pat. 2.90.1; Strab., 3.3.8, 6.4.2; Suet., Div. Aug. 21.1.
195. Dio 54.11.6: ‘οὐ μὴν οὔτε ἐπέστειλέ τι τῇ βουλῇ περὶ αὐτῶν, οὔτε τὰ ἐπινίκια καίτοι ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Αὐγούστου προστάξεως ψηφισθέντα προσήκατο, ἀλλ᾽ ἔν τε τούτοις ἐμετρίαζεν ὥσπερ εἰώθει, καὶ γνώμην ποτὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ ὑπάτου ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐρωτηθεὶς οὐκ ἔδωκε .’
196. Vell. Pat. 2.90.1 and 4. Magie (1920), p. 339, writes ‘it was not until 19 B.C. that these mountain peoples were finally subjugated by the resolution and persistence of Agrippa’. Syme (1959), pp. 67–68, remarks, ‘the official version celebrated the Spanish campaigns of 26 and 25 B.C. as the final conquest, justifying Augustus’ second closing of the temple of Janus. Yet there was serious fighting in 24 and 22 B.C.; and in 19 B.C. Agrippa completed the subjugation of the Northwest. In fact, there is good cause for speaking of a ten years’ war in Spain.’
197. After 15 BCE the only legionary two units stationed in Spain were Legiones IIII Macedonica at Herrera de Pisuerga and X Gemina at Braga. Veterans of I and II Augusta were resettled in Barcelona and Cartenna (in Mauretania) while those of V Alaudae, X Gemina and XX Valeria Victrix went to Mérida. Learning from the previous legates’ mistakes, after the conflict it seems he may have reorganised the Spanish provinces and turned Asturia and neighbouring Gallaecia into a military district so that never again would the region rebel against Rome, according to Van Nostrand (1915), pp. 95–6. The administrative reorgansation of the Iberian Peninsula during the Augustan period continues to be the subject of debate among modern historians. Some favour 13 BCE, others 27, as the year that the two provinces Hispania Citerior and Ulterior were divided into three, viz. Baetica (with its administrative capital at Corduba), Lusitania (administered from Emerita) and Tarraconensis (administered from Tarraco).
198. Aul. Gell., Noct. Att. 5.6.4; Livy, AUC 26.4. See Maxfield (1981), pp. 76–79.
199. Aureus: BMCRE (Augustus) I 110. Denarius: BMCRE I 121, RIC I 414.
200. The most complete survey of Roman gold mines in north-west Spain in English are Lewis and Jones (1970), pp. 169–185 and Jones and Bird (1972), pp. 59–74. See also Domergue (1978) and Richardson (1976), pp. 140–141.
201. Dio 54.20.3.
202. See Van Nostrand (1915), p. 113.
203. The spectacular colonnaded stage façade which survives to this day was built in 105 CE, during the reign of Emperor Trajan.
204. CIL II.474 = Dessau, ILS 130: ‘M AGRIPPA L F COS III TRIB POT III’. Walter Trillmich, ‘Colonia Augusta Emerita, Capital of Lusitania’ in J.C. Edmondson (ed.) Augustus (Edinburgh University Press, 2009), p.439; see figs. 14.4a. and 4b on p. 440.
205. See Walter Trillmich, ‘Colonia Augusta Emerita, Capital of Lusitania’ in Edmondson (2009), p. 456 and Appendix, p. 466; see fig. 14.11 on p. 457: Trillmich records that the statue was found in the nineteenth century at a house, 13 calle Sagasta.
206. CIL II.1527. Hill (1899), p. 95.
207. See Boatwright (2000), p. 60, quoting Heiss (1870), p. 270, n. 13.
208. Dio 54.11.7.
209. Frontin., 10.5; Pliny Nat. Hist. 31.420. The passus is measured as two marching steps or five feet. Compare to the Pont du Gard: from the source at Fontaine d’Eure, the aqueduct wound around the southernmost foothills of the Garrigues de Nîmes of the Massif Central along a route of 50km (31 miles).
210. Frontin., 121.1–3.
211. Frontin., 22.1: Vitruvius 8.6.1 advises that the fall of an aqueduct should be not less than one-half foot in every 100 feet, or a minimum slope of 0.5 per cent. Compare to the Pont du Gard: most of the aqueduct – 35km (22 miles) – lay underground, comprising a stone conduit enclosed by an arched roof made of local soft limestone slabs, which was then buried with a layer of topsoil. The aqueduct, whose average gradient is only 1 in 3,000 so that the source is only 17m (56 feet) higher than the repartition basin in the city of Nîmes, incorporates regulation basins, dropshaft cascades and multi-cell culverts to manage the water flow – including excess water from storms – on its descent. See Chanson (2002), pp. 326–330.
212. Frontin., 70.3, 84.1: all save 200 quinariae, which were used outside the city, entering Rome. Compare to the Pont du Gard: it brought an estimated 200,000 cubic metres (7.1 million cubic feet) of fresh water per day to the city – a journey that took nearly 27 hours to complete. G. Sobin, Luminous debris: reflecting on vestige in Provence and Languedoc, University of California Press (1999), p. 205.
213. Frontin., 98: ‘qui [Agrippa] iam copia permittente discripsit, quid aquarum publicis operibus, quid lacibus, quid privatis daretur’ and 99 ‘Augustus quoque edicto complexus est, quo iure uterentur qui ex commentariis Agrippae aquas haberent ….’
214. Frontin., 19.2, 22.2, 84.2. The Horti Luculliani lay above the modern Piazza di Spagna. Compare to the Pont du Gard: where required to cross streams or valleys, the conduit was carried over short bridges. Of these the Pont du Gard itself is justifiably the most famous. Its elegant arches skip across the valley of the Gardon River in Vers-Pont-du-Gard near Remoulins. (http://www.pontdugard.fr/en) Containing an estimated 50,400 tons of limestone, the Pont du Gard was constructed almost entirely without the use of mortar or clamps. Three tiers of arches rise to a height of 49m (161 feet) above the river and span distance of 274m (899 feet). At the base it is 9m (30 feet) wide rising to 3m (9.8 feet) at the top. Deming (2010), pp. 47–54.
215. Frontin., 84.2.
216. See Fagan (2002), pp. 105 and 109.
217. TDAR, pp. 518–519.
218. TDAR, pp. 518–519: ‘The general plan of these thermae is known from a fragment of the Marble Plan found in 1900 (NS 1900, 633–634; BC 1901, 3–19; LS II.209; Mitt. 1905, 75); from drawings and plans of the sixteenth century (NS 1882, 347–351) when much of the structure was still standing — three in particular, one of Baldassare Peruzzi (Uffizi 456; Geymüller (1883); NS 1882, pl. XXI), a second of Palladio in the Devonshire collection (port. IX. f.14: Rossi’s edition of the Terme dei Romani, Vicenza 1797, pl. II; BC 1901, pl. II), and a third of S. Peruzzi (Uffizi 642); and from the meagre results of excavations (cf. NS 1881, 276–281; 1882, 351–359),’
219. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26, 36.189.
220. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 34.62: three statues of the Scraper survive, the Pentelic marble ‘Vatican Apoxyomenos’, found complete in Trastevere in 1849, now stands in the Museo Pio-Clementino, Vatican City; while the bronze ‘Croatian Apoxyomenos’, found complete in the Adriatic Sea near Lošinj in April 1999, is now in the care of the Zadar Museum; and a fragmentary version in bronze, excavated in Ephesus in 1896, is now in the possession of the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.
221. See Lloyd (1979), pp. 193–204.
222. Mart., Epig. 5.20, 6.42; cf. Statius, Silvae 1.5.26.
223. Epistles, 87; Ov., Tr., 3.285ff: Ovid uses the poetic phrase Virgineus liquor (Epistulae Ex Ponto 1.8.38) which has been translated ‘flowing streams of the Virgo’ but also as the sexual innuendo ‘damp virgin conduit’.
224. Favro (1996), p. 179.
225. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26: ‘exstat certe eius oratio magnifica et maximo civium digna de tabulis omnibus signisque publicandis, quod fieri satius fuisset quam in villarum exilia pelli.’
226. Strab., Geog 13.1.19.
227. Juv., Sat. 4.10.356.
228. Brixia: CIL V.4315; Septempeda: 9.5576, ‘… DE SUA PE[C] M [AG]RIPPAE ET SUO … BAS[IL]ICAM FA[CI]EN[DAM] OPERI PRAEF.’
229. CIL IV.3878. Alternatively Fagan (2002), p. 63, speculates a connection with his son Agrippa Postumus through a balneator on his staff.
230. Ver., Aen. 8.675–684 (trans. John Dryden): ‘in medio classis aeratas, Actia bella, | cernere erat, totumque instructo Marte uideres | feruere Leucaten auroque effulgere fluctus. | hinc Augustus agens Italos in proelia Caesar | cum patribus populoque, penatibus et magnis dis, | stans celsa in puppi, geminas cui tempora flammas | laeta uomunt patriumque aperitur uertice sidus. | parte alia uentis et dis Agrippa secundis | arduus agmen agens, cui, belli insigne superbum, | tempora nauali fulgent rostrata corona.’
231. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.148: ‘Philippensi proelio morbi, fuga et triduo in palude aegroti et (ut fatentur Agrippa ac Maecenas) aqua subter cutem fusa turgidi latebra ….’ Servius, ad Georg. 2.162: ‘Agrippa in secundo vitae suae …’. For a discussion on the likely content and its use as source material by Roman authors see Lewis (1993), pp. 689–692.
232. Suet., Div. Aug. 21.3, Tib. 9.1, 18; Ov., Fast. 5.595ff; RG 29.2; Iustin 42.5.11; Livy, Per. 141; Eutrop., Brev. 7.9; Orosius 6.21.29L; Vell. Pat. 2.91.1. Suetonius states in his Tib. that Tiberius received the signa, but in the Div. Aug. he states – as all the other sources do – that Augustus did. See also Rose (2005), p. 22. See note above.
233. Aelius Donatus, Vita Vergiliana 35.
234. Suet., Div. Aug. 64.1.
Chapter 7: Associate of Augustus
1. Dio 54.10.1–2, 54.12.3; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.46.
2. Gray (1970), p. 238.
3. Reinhard (1933), pp. 98–99.
4. Tac., Ann. 3.56.3: ‘[Augustus] Marcum deinde Agrippam socum eius potestatis’; cf. 1.3.
5. Dio 54.12.2: ‘τῶν νικητηρίων καὶ ἔπεμπον αὐτά. ὁ γὰρ Αὔγουστος καὶ ταῦτα ἀφθόνως τισὶ τήν γε πρώτην ἐχαρίζετο, καὶ δημοσίαις ταφαῖς πλείστους ὅσους ἐτίμα. τοιγαροῦν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν ἐν τούτοις ἐλαμπρύνοντο, ὁ δὲ Ἀγρίππας ἐς τὴν αὐταρχίαν τρόπον ’; 54.12.4–5: ‘ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ τῷ Ἀγρίππᾳ ἄλλα τε ἐξ ἴσου πῃ ἑαυτῷ καὶ τὴν ἐξουσίαν τὴν δημαρχικὴν. ἐς τὸν αὐτὸν χρόνον ἔδωκε. τοσαῦτα γάρ σφισιν ἔτη τότε ἐπαρκέσειν ἔφη.’ Cf. Vell. Pat., 2.90.1: ‘nunc Agrippae, quem usque in tertium consulatum et mox collegium tribuniciae potestatis amicitia principis evexerat’ and RG 6 and 30–31; Suet., Div. Aug. 27.5; CIL III.494, VI.32323.53, IX.3150, 3913; IG 12.5.740.
6. The term ‘co-regent’ used by Reinhard (1933), pp.98–103, and other modern historians, is one Augustus himself went to great lengths to avoid precisely because of its association with kingship and dominatio.
7. It also itself set a precedent for the men who came after Augustus, for example, Tac., Hist. 1.15: ‘exemplo divi Augusti qui sororis filium Marcellum, dein generum Agrippam, mox nepotes sus, postremo Tiberium Neronem privignum in proximo sibi fastigio conlocavit’.
8. Dio 54.15.1: ‘τούτων οὖν οὕτω γενομένων συχνοὶ μὲν εὐθὺς συχνοὶ δὲ καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἐκείνῳ καὶ τῷ Ἀγρίππᾳ ἐπιβουλεῦσαι, εἴτ᾽ οὖν ἀληθῶς εἴτε καὶ .’
9. Sen., Ep. 94.46–47: ‘dicere solebat multum se huic debere sententiae.’
10. Sallust, Bellum Iugurthinum 10.6: ‘Equidem ego vobis regnum trado firmum, si boni eritis, sin mali, inbecillum. nam concordia parvae res crescunt, discordia maxumae dilabuntur.’
11. BMCRE I 115; Cohen 529; RIC I 407 (R2); RSC 529.
12. Zosimus 2.
13. Dio 54.18.2.
14. See Reinhard (1933), p. 104 n. 28.
15. See Barker (1996), pp. 434–446; and Galinsky (1967), pp. 619–633.
16. Zosimus, Istoria Nea 2.5 – translated by anon., New History. London: Green and Chaplin (1814).
17. CIL VI.10094. The inscription is on display at Museo Nazionale Romano, Terme di Diocleziano, Rome, Inv. No. 29340.
18. CIL VI.32323.90–102.
19. CIL VI.32323.103–110.
20. CIL VI.32323.119–122.
21. CIL VI.32323.90–102, 115–118 and 134–138.
22. See Frank (1921), pp. 324–329.
23. Hor., Carmen Saecularum 65– 69: ‘si Palatinas videt aequos aras, | remque Romanam Latiumque felix | alterum in lustrum meliusque semper | proroga aevum’ – translated by John Conington. With great irony the Carmen Saeculare still survives – the Roman Empire does not.
24. CIL 6.32323.165.
25. CIL VI.10046: each man’s name is prefaced by M. Vispanius: see Sources 3. Inscriptions.
26. Dio 54.18.1 = Zonoras 10.35; Suet., Div. Aug. 29, 64.1; Tac., Ann. 1.3.2; Vell. Pat. 2.96.1; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 2.67; Eusebius and Jerome, Year of Abraham 2001.
27. See Eck (2003), p.116.
28. Dio 54.18.1.
29. Sen., Contro. 2.4.12–13: ‘In hac controversia Latro contrariam rem (non) controversiae dixit sed sibi. declamabat illam Caesare Augusto audiente et M. Agrippa, cuius filios, nepotes suos, Caesar [Lucium et Gaium] adoptaturus diebus illis videbatur. erat M. Agrippa inter eos, qui non nati sunt nobiles sed facti. cum diceret partem adulescentis Latro et tractaret adoptionis locum, dixit: non asciti ex imo per adoptionem nobilitati (in)serunt(ur, et) [in hanc] alia in hanc summam. Maecenas innuit Latro(ni) festinare Caesarem; finiret iam declamationem. quidam putabant hanc malignam rem Maecenatis esse; effecisse enim illum, non ne audiret quae dicta erant Caesar, sed ut notaret. | Tanta autem [marcus] sub divo Augusto libertas fuit, ut praepotenti tunc M. Agrippae non defuerint qui ignobilitatem exprobrarent.’ My thanks to Bob Durrett for the translation.
30. See Chapter 1, n. 9.
31. Dio 54.20.4–5; Florus 2.30; Strab., Geog. 7.1.4; Suet., Div. Aug. 23.
32. Vell. Pat. 2.97.1.
33. Vell. Pat. 2.97.1.
34. Suet., Div. Aug. 23; Dio 54.20.4–5.
35. Dio 54.20.6.
36. Dio 54.20.6.
37. Suet., Tib. 9.1
38. Dio 54.22.1–3. For a detailed discussion of the Alpine War of 15 BCE see Powell (2011), pp. 18–48.
39. His departure was before September 16 BCE as the ludi pro valetudine Caesaris, paid for by Agrippa, were held in his absence by the quindecemviri.
40. Butrint is now a World Heritage Site (http://www.butrint.org).
41. CIL 1878.
42. Strab., Geog. 7.7.6: ‘ἡ μὲν οὖν Νικόπολις εὐανδρεῖ καὶ λαμβάνει καθ ̓ ἡμέραν ἐπίδοσιν, χώραν τε ἔχουσα πολλὴν καὶ τὸν ἐκ τῶν λαφύρων κόσμον, τό τε κατασκευασθὲν τέμενος ἐν τῷ προαστείῳ τὸ μὲν εἰς τὸν ἀγῶνα τὸν πεντετηρικὸν ἐν ἄλσει ἔχοντι γυμνάσιόν τε καὶ στάδιον, τὸ δ̓ ἐν τῷ ὑπερκειμένῳ τοῦ ἄλσους ἱερῷ λόφῳ τοῦ Ἀπόλλωνος. ἀποδέδεικται δ ̓ ὁ ἀγὼν Ὀλύμπιος, τὰ Ἄκτια, ἱερὸς τοῦ Ἀκτίου Ἀπόλλωνος, τὴν δ̓ ἐπιμέλειαν ἔχουσιν αὐτοῦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι. αἱ δ ̓ ἄλλαι κατοικίαι περιπόλιοι τῆς Νικοπόλεώς εἰσιν. ἤγετο δὲ καὶ πρότερον τὰ Ἄκτια τῷ θεῷ, στεφανίτης ἀγών, ὑπὸ τῶν περιοίκων: νυνὶ δ̓ ἐντιμότερον ἐποίησεν ὁ Καῖσαρ .’
43. Strab., Geog. 7.7.6: ‘καὶ ἱερὸν τοῦ Ἀκτίου Ἀπόλλωνος ἐνταῦθά ἐστι πλησίον τοῦ στόματος, λόφος τις ἐφ̓ ᾧ ὁ νεώς, καὶ ὑπ̓ αὐτῷ πεδίον ἄλσος ἔχον καὶ νεώρια, ἐν οἷς ἀνέθηκε Καῖσαρ τὴν δεκαναΐαν ἀκροθίνιον, ἀπὸ μονοκρότου μέχρι δεκήρους: ὑπὸ πυρὸς δ̓ ἠφανίσθαι καὶ οἱ νεώσοικοι λέγονται καὶ τὰ πλοῖα .’
44. Dio 51.1.3; Suet., Div. Aug. 18.2, 96.2; Plut., Ant. 65.3; Philippus, Ant. Pal. 6.236; Strab., Geog. 7.7.6.
45. See Murray and Petsas (1989).
46. Twenty-three sockets for rams have been catalogued: see Murray and Petsas (1989), pp. 35–59, figs. 20–30 and fig. 54 (p. 88) for a reconstruction drawing of the complex based on current knowledge. Cf. Dio 51.1; Suet., Div. Aug. 18.2. For a discussion of the significance of the monument, see Gurval (1995), pp. 65–72.
47. Murray and Petsas (1989), pp. I–xi + 1–172, see p. 76, 86: ‘Imp Caesa]r – Div[i – luli .]f vict[oriam consecutus bell]o quod region[e cons]ul [quintum i]mperat[or se]ptimum pace [.] parta terra [marique . Nep]tuno [et Ma]rt[i . c]astra [ex] quibu[s ad . hostem . in]seq[uendum egr]essu[s est . navalibus spoli]is [exornalta . c]onsacravit.’
48. Suet., Div. Aug. 96.2.
49. RPC 1366 with acrostolium on reverse and 1367 with dolphin and trident on reverse; Romeo (1998), pp. 26–27, figs. 44–47.
50. Not, as is often said, Legio XXII. Eusebius, Year of Abraham 2011 (Versio Armenaica).
51. On the city founded by Iulius Caesar in 44 BCE (see The Corinth Computer Project online at http://corinth.sas.upenn.edu/44bc.html).
52. Tribus Agrippia: American Journal of Archaeology 23 (1919), p. 167: ‘M Agrippae Cos Tert Trib Potest D D Tribus Vinicia Patrono’ During 1913–1914 William Bell Dinsmoor, the architect at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, proved that the base of the Agrippa monument was much older than the first century CE and that it had had an earlier use. Also from the forum of Corinth, dating to the time of Tiberius, the inscription honouring T. Manlius Iuvencus for his rôle in the Caesarean Games and his many public offices: T Manlio T F Col Iuvenco Aed Praef I D II Vir Pontif Agonthet Isthmion et Caesarein Qui Primus Caesarea Egit Ante Isthmia Tribus Agrippia Tri [bule]s: O. Broneer, ‘Excavations in the Agora at Corinth, 1933,’ American Journal of Archaeology 37.4. (Oct.–Dec., 1933), p. 568–569; J.H. Kent, The Inscriptions: 1926–1950 (Corinth 8:3), Princeton, NJ, American School of Classical Studies, 1966, no. 154.).
53. Dio 51.5.2. Just 6.4km (4 miles) long, the Diolkos connected the Corinthian Gulf to the Saronic Gulf, representing a considerable saving over the 400km (250 miles) long journey around the Peloponnese. It also reduced the risk of encountering a dangerous weather event, which could be 25–35 per cent in summer and up to 40 per cent in winter. It was built from immense blocks of stone, forming a continuous roadway 3.5–5m (10–16.5ft) wide, with two parallel tracks engraved in it, spaced 1.5m apart for trolley wheels. The gradient is just 0.023 per cent, or 70m (230ft) in 3km (1.9 miles). The Diolkos was in operation in the first century and was last recorded in use in 883 CE. See Engels (1990), pp. 58–9; Pettegrew (2011); Werner (1997).
54. Gytheion: IG 5.1.1166l; Tainaros: CIL III.491 = IG 5.1.
55. Megara: IG 7.64–65; Sparta/Eurykles: RPC 1106, Romeo (1998), p. 27, figs. 48–49; Antony J.S. Spawforth ‘Roman Corinth: The Formation of a Colonial Elite’, Proceedings of the International Colloquium organized by the Finnish Institute and the Centre for Greek and Roman Antiquity, Athens, 7–9 September 1993 (Research Centre for Greek and Roman Antiquity National Hellenic Research Foundation) (1996), p. 173.
56. CIL III.494 = IG 5.1.374.
57. Strab., Geog 8.6.1, 4, 15 notes it was a good harbour.
58. Strab., Geog 8.6.15.
59. Ephemeris Archaeologike (1885), 84–85 = IG 4.1363.
60. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 23.58: ‘siquidem M. Agrippa supremis suis annis conflictatus gravi morbo pedum, cum dolorem eum perpeti nequiret’; cf. 7.45. The U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) defines gout as ‘a kind of arthritis that occurs when uric acid builds up in blood and causes joint inflammation’, noting ‘the exact cause is unknown’, ‘it is more common in men’ and ‘the pain starts suddenly, often during the night and is often described as throbbing, crushing, or excruciating’: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001459/.
61. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 23.58: ‘unius medicorum portentosa scientia ignorante Divo Augusto tanti putavit usu pedum sensuque omni carere, dummodo et dolore illo careret, demersis in acetum calidum cruribus in acerrimo impetu morbid.’ Cf. 7. 45).
62. See Curchin (1986), p. 406.
63. Paus. 1.8.6.
64. For a detailed discussion see John McKCamp II, The Athenian Agora: A Short Guide to the Excavations. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens (2003).
65. Diribitorium: Pliny, Nat. Hist. 16.76. 16.95; Dio 55.8.4. Odeion: It was rebuilt on a smaller scale as a lecture hall able to accommodate an audience of just 500 and in 150 CE it too collapsed.
66. Philostratos, Vitae Sophistarum 2.5.3, 8.2.
67. IG 3.576.
68. The original plinth, originally dedicated in honour of a Pergamene charioteer’s victory in the Panathenaic Games, is believed to have been erected by Eumenes II, king of Pergamon in 178 BCE. See Hans Rupprecht Goette, Athens, Attica and the Megarid: An Archaeological Guide (London: Routledge, 2001), p.17.
69. IG 3.575: ‘O ΔHMOΣ MAPKON AΓPIΠΠAN ΛEYKIOY YION TONEA TOY EYEPΓETHN.’ It is on the west side of the plinth, about two-thirds up and is just legible under the right lighting conditions. Curiously, it is not mentioned by Paunsanias. See Hurwit (1988), p. 278.
70. Ephemeris Archaeologike (1886) 57–59 = IG 7.349.
71. Andros: statue of Iulia, IG 12.5.740; Delos: statue of Agrippa, Rheinisches Museum 22 (1867), p. 292; Mytilene: IGR 4.64 = IG 12.2.204.
72. Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique 4 (1880), p. 517.
73. Dio 54.29.5 notes in passing the Chersonese ‘had come in some way or other into Agrippa’s hands’. Intriguingly, the Romans gave the Thracian Chersonese to their ally Eumenes II of Pergamon in 188 BC – the same man who paid for the plinth and statue on the acropolis of Athens – after the Seleucid king Antiochus III was ousted from there at the request of the Greek population.
74. Antigonia Troas was itself built on the earlier site of Sigeia. The colonia was founded between 27–14 BCE. It is mentioned by Pliny, Nat. Hist. 5.33 (124). Acts 16:8–11 states Paul of Tarsus sailed from here.
75. Strab., Geog 13.1.26: ‘καὶ δὴ καὶ συνέμεινε καὶ αὔξησιν ἔσχε, νῦν δὲ καὶ Ῥωμαίων ἀποικίαν δέδεκται καὶ ἔστι τῶν ἐλλογίμων πόλεων .’
76. Strab., Geog. 13.1.18–19.
77. Strab., Geog. 13.1.19: ‘ἐντεῦθεν δὲ μετήνεγκεν Ἀγρίππας τὸν πεπτωκότα λέοντα, Λυσίππου ἔργον: ἀνέθηκε δὲ ἐν τῷ ἄλσει τῷ μεταξὺ τῆς λίμνης καὶ τοῦ εὐρίπου .’
78. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26.
79. Dio 54.23.7 is contradicted by the inscription of Antonia Tryphanaea, notes Reinhard (1933), p. 109, n. 27, citing IGR 4.146.7–8.
80. Mytilene: IGR 4.114, which heralds Iulia as the ‘new Aphrodite’; Smyrna: Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden I.1900/I.25; Samos: IGR 4.1717; Kalymnos: Tituli Calymnii, Annuario Scuola Archeologica di Atene 22–23, N.S. 6–7 (1944–45), p. 164, n. 141; Kos: R. Herzog, Koische Forschungen und Funde, Leipzig, 1888, p. 229, nr. 223; Keramos: The Journal of Hellenic Studies 11 (1890), p. 128, no. 15.
81. Letoon: Fouilles de Xanthos VII.1981, 23 and 24; Myra: IGR III 719 – on the same inscription Augustus is declared ‘benefactor and savior of the whole Cosmos’; Patara: SEG 44, 1208 – see Engelmann (2004), p. 129.
82. Strab., Geog. 14.6.5.
83. The Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888), p. 243, no. 69. Dio 54.23.7 notes that Augustus gave money to the Paphians, who had suffered from an earthquake and, by a decree, permitted them to call their city Augusta.
84. Ἀγρίππΐος: Chaldaean dodecaeteris in the Codex Parisunus 2420, Liber Glossarum, Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum, 5.165. The calendar also had months named after Livia, Octavia, Tiberius and Drusus the Elder.
85. M. Maas, ‘People and Identity in Roman Antioch’, in C. Kondoleon (ed.), Antioch: The Lost Ancient City, Princeton: Princeton University Press (2000), pp. 13–22.
86. Maas (2000).
87. Lib., Or. 11.124. Oration 11 is known as Antiochikos.
88. Lib., Or. 11.125.
89. Malalas, 9.222.
90. Some historians prefer 14 BCE as the date of Agrippa’s visit, which Reinhold (1933), p. 110 n. 32 and 34 disputes as it is based on ‘dubious chronology’ and of the foundation of the colonia.
91. CIL III.156
92. Cf. the earthquake damage in Paphos n. 82 above.
93. Malalas, 9.225.
94. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.12.
95. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.12: ‘Ταῦτα διοικήσας, ἐπειδὴ καὶ Μᾶρκον Ἀγρίππαν ἐπύθετο καταπεπλευκέναι πάλιν ἐκ τῆς Ἰταλίας εἰς τὴν Ἀσίαν, ἐπειχθεὶς πρὸς αὐτὸν ἠξίωσεν εἴς τε τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ παρελθεῖν καὶ τυχεῖν ὧν ἔδει παρὰ ἀνδρὸς ξένου καὶ φίλου .’
96. The inference in Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.12 is that the party went by sea.
97. See Regev (2010), pp. 197–222.
98. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.13: ‘κἀκεῖνος μὲν εἴξας λιπαρῶς ἐγκειμένου ἧκεν εἰς τὴν Ἰουδαίαν, Ἡρώδης δὲ οὐδὲν ἀρεσκείας ἀπέλιπεν ἔν τε ταῖς νεοκτίστοις πόλεσιν ὑποδεχόμενος αὐτὸν καὶ μετὰ τοῦ τὰς κατασκευὰς ἐπιδεικνύναι πᾶσαν ἀπόλαυσιν διαίτης καὶ πολυτελείας ἐξαλλάττων αὐτῷ καὶ τοῖς φίλοις ἔν τε τῇ Σεβαστῇ καὶ Καισαρείᾳ περὶ τὸν λιμένα τὸν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ κατεσκευασμένον κἀν τοῖς ἐρύμασιν, ἃ πολλαῖς δαπάναις ἐξῳκοδόμησεν, τό τε Ἀλεξάνδρειον καὶ Ἡρώδειον καὶ τὴν Ὑρκανίαν .’
99. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 14.360. In Bell. Iud. 1.21.10 Josephus writes ‘and as he transmitted to eternity his family and friends, so did he not neglect a memorial for himself, but built a fortress upon a mountain towards Arabia, and named it from himself, Herodium and he called that hill that was of the shape of a woman’s breast, and was sixty furlongs distant from Hierosolyma, by the same name. He also bestowed much curious art upon it, with great ambition, and built round towers all about the top of it, and filled up the remaining space with the most costly palaces round about, insomuch that not only the sight of the inner apartments was splendid, but great wealth was laid out on the outward walls, and partitions, and roofs also. Besides this, he brought a mighty quantity of water from a great distance, and at vast charges, and raised an ascent to it of two hundred steps of the whitest marble, for the hill was itself moderately high, and entirely fictitious. He also built other palaces about the roots of the hill, sufficient to receive the furniture that was put into them, with his friends also, insomuch that, on account of its containing all necessaries, the fortress might seem to be a city, but, by the bounds it had, a palace only’.
100. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.2.7, 1.5.4; in 1.21.2 Josephus writes, ‘yet did he not preserve their memory by particular buildings only, with their names given them, but his generosity went as far as entire cities; for when he had built a most beautiful wall round a country in Samaria, twenty furlongs long, and had brought six thousand inhabitants into it, and had allotted to it a most fruitful piece of land, and in the midst of this city, thus built, had erected a very large temple to Caesar, and had laid round about it a portion of sacred land of three furlongs and a half, he called the city Sebastia, from [the Greek] Sebastos, or Augustus, and settled the affairs of the city after a most regular manner.’
101. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.21.6: ‘now although the place where he built was greatly opposite to his purposes, yet did he so fully struggle with that difficulty, that the firmness of his building could not easily be conquered by the sea; and the beauty and ornament of the works were such, as though he had not had any difficulty in the operation; for when he had measured out as large a space as we have before mentioned, he let down stones into twenty fathoms of water, the greatest part of which were fifty feet in length, and nine in depth, and ten in breadth, and some still larger. But when the haven was filled up to that depth, he enlarged that wall which was thus already extant above the sea, till it was two hundred feet wide; one hundred of which had buildings before it, in order to break the force of the waves, whence it was called Procumatia, or the first breaker of the waves; but the rest of the space was under a stone wall that ran round it.’ On constructing moles see M. Vitruvius Pollo De Architectura 2.6.1, which describes the construction of moles and the use of hydraulic concrete.
102. Hohlfelder, Brandon and Oleson (2007), pp. 409–415. See also K.G. Holum, R.L. Hohlfelder, R.J. Bull, and A. Raban, King Herod’s Dream: Caesearea on the Sea, New York (1988), p. 101.
103. Vitruvius, De Architectura 5.12.2–6. See Holum et al. (1988), p. 101 and 105, with isometric cutaway reconstruction as fig. 64 on p. 103 and artist’s painting as fig. 65 on p. 104. The authors note that spruce, pine, fir and poplar were identified by botanists among the timbers found.
104. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.21.6.
105. Holum (1996), Appendix 1, p. 202, Holum (1988), pp. 98–99.
106. See Hohlfelder (2000), pp. 249–253, who draws on an original insight of Keith H. Beebe, ‘Caesarea Maritima: Its Strategic and Political Significance to Rome’, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 42 (1983), pp. 195–207).
107. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.14: ‘ἦγεν δὲ καὶ εἰς τὴν πόλιν τῶν Ἱεροσολυμιτῶν ὑπαντῶντός τε τοῦ δήμου παντὸς ἐν ἑορτώδει στολῇ καὶ δεχομένου τὸν ἄνδρα σὺν εὐφημίαις .’
108. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.14: ‘Ἀγρίππας δὲ τῷ θεῷ μὲν ἑκατόμβην κατέθυσεν, ἑστιᾷ δὲ τὸν δῆμον οὐδενὸς τῶν μεγίστων πλήθει λειπόμενον .’
109. Joseph., Bell. Iud. 1.21.8.
110. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.15: ‘αὐτὸς δὲ ὅσον ἐπὶ τῷ καθ᾽ ἡδονὴν κἂν ἔτι πλείους ἐπιμείνας ἡμέρας διὰ τὸν καιρὸν ἠπείγετ+ο: τὸν γὰρ πλοῦν ἐπιβαίνοντος τοῦ χειμῶνος οὐκ ἐνόμιζεν ἀσφαλῆ κομιζομένῳ πάλιν ἐξ ἀνάγκης εἰς τὴν Ἰωνίαν .’
111. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.16; Philo, Legatio ad Gaium 36–37.
112. Dio 54.24.4–5.
113. Dio 54.24.4 explains that after the death of Asander, Scribonius married Asander’s wife, named Dynamis, who was really the daughter of Pharnakes and the granddaughter of Mithradates VI and had been entrusted with the regency by her husband, and thus he was holding Bosporus under his control.
114. Dio 54.24.4–5; Lucian, Macrobioi 17; Strab., Geog. 11.2.3.
115. Dio 54.24.6; Strab., Geog. 11.2.3.
116. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.20.
117. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.21.
118. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.21.
119. Dio 54.24.6: ‘καὶ ἐνίκησε μέν, οὐ μὴν καὶ παρεστήσατό σφας πρὶν τὸν Ἀγρίππαν ἐς Σινώπην ἐλθεῖν ὡς καὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς στρατεύσοντα. οὕτω δὲ τά τε ὅπλα κατέθεντο καὶ τῷ Πολέμωνι παρεδόθησαν .’
120. Orosius, 21.28: ‘Bosforanos vero Agrippa superauit et signis Romanis, quae illi quondam sub Mithridate sustulerant, bello recuperatis victos ad deditionem coegit.’ The signa were captured when Mithridates beat L. Licinius Murena in the Second Mithridatic War of 83–81 BCE.
121. Dio 54.26.6. A praefectus cohortis Bosporanorum is mentioned on an inscription found at Antiocheia in Pisidia and dated to 8–7 BCE: Cheesman (1913), pp. 253–266.
122. For the Chersonesos see Carter (2003).
123. Dio 54.24.7: ‘οὔτε γὰρ ἔγραψεν ἀρχὴν ἐς τὸ συνέδριον ὑπὲρ τῶν πραχθέντων οὐδέν, ἀφ᾽ οὗ δὴ καὶ οἱ μετὰ ταῦτα, νόμῳ τινὶ τῷ ἐκείνου τρόπῳ χρώμενοι, οὐδ᾽ αὐτοί τι τῷ κοινῷ ἔτ᾽ ἐπέστελλον .’
124. Dio 54.24.8: ‘ἐδέξατο: καὶ διὰ τοῦτο οὐδ᾽ ἄλλῳ τινὶ ἔτι τῶν ὁμοίων αὐτῷ, ὥς γε καὶ ἐγὼ κρίνω, ποιῆσαι τοῦτο ἐδόθη, ἀλλὰ μόναις ταῖς ἐπινικίοις τιμαῖς ἐγαυροῦντο .’
125. Drusus in Germania: Dio 54.33.5; Tiberius in Illyricum: Suet., Tib. 9.2; Dio 54.31.4.
126. Nic., Autobiography Fragment F134; 3 in K. Müller, Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, vol. 3 (Paris, 1874), p. 350.
127. In the first century CE the Greeks assessed the value of the drachma as having parity with the denarius. Roman authorities officially deemed the value of the drachma at 75 per cent of a denarius. The fine imposed by Agrippa was therefore equivalent to 75,000 denarii or the annual pay of 333 Roman legionaries.
128. Cf. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.26.
129. ‘Συνγενὴς τῆς πὸλεως ’: IGR 4.204.
130. Suet., Tib. 7.2: ‘ut quam sensisset sui quoque sub priore marito appetentem, quod sane etiam uulgo existimabatur.’
131. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.6: ‘raptus … in tormentis adulteriorum coniugis.’
132. Tac., Ann. 1.53.4.
133. Suet., Calig. 7. Her name appears on statue bases which were erected at Delphi (Dittenberger 779) and Thespiae (A. Plassart, Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique 50 (1926), pp. 447–448, nos. 88–89) but which omit her older sister, Iulia.
134. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.23.
135. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.22, ‘πᾶν γοῦν ἦν αὐτῷ κατὰ τὴν στρατείαν Ἡρώδης, ἔν τε τοῖς πραγματικοῖς συναγωνιστὴς κἀν τοῖς κατὰ μέρος σύμβουλος, ἡδὺς δὲ κἀν ταῖς ἀνέσεσι καὶ μόνος ἁπάντων κοινωνὸς ὀχληρῶν μὲν διὰ τὴν εὔνοιαν, ἡδέων δὲ διὰ τὴν τιμήν .’
136. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.24–25: ‘καὶ γὰρ αὐτὸς ὅσα διὰ χρημάτων ἦν ηπίξεως οὐ παρέλειπεν ἐξ αὐτοῦ τὰς δαπάνας ποιούμενος καὶ τῶν παρὰ Ἀγρίππα τισὶν ἐπιζητουμένων μεσίτης ἦν καὶ διεπράττετο μηδενὸς ἀτυχῆσαι τοὺς δεομένους. ὄντος δὲ κἀκείνου χρηστοῦ καὶ μεγαλοψύχου πρὸς τὸ παρέχειν ὅσα τοῖς ἠξιωκόσιν ὠφέλιμα ὄντα μηδένα τῶν ἄλλων ἐλύπει, πλεῖστον ἡ τοῦ βασιλέως ἐποίει ῥοπὴ προτρέπουσα πρὸς τὰς εὐεργεσίας οὐ βραδύνοντα τὸν Ἀγρίππαν .’
137. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.26.
138. Cohen 1.180.
139. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.23.
140. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.27.
141. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.27–28. The two drachma coin was the didrachma; Matthew 17:24. Reinhold (1933), p. 119 n. 81, writes, ‘I take the passage above from Josephus to mean that the Jews complained, not of compulsion to perform military service and liturgies, but of the illegal taxation and the appropriation of sacred money, exempted by the Roman government, to meet such civic expenses.’
142. Suet., Div. Aug. 76.
143. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.29–30; Bell. Iud. 1.21.11.
144. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.31–57.
145. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.58–60.
146. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.60: ‘συνιδὼν οὖν Ἀγρίππας βιαζομένους ἀπεκρίνατο ταῦτα: διὰ μὲν τὴν Ἡρώδου πρὸς αὐτὸν εὔνοιάν τε καὶ φιλίαν ἕτοιμος εἶναι πᾶν ὁτιοῦν χαρίζεσθαι Ἰουδαίοις, ἃ δὲ ἀξιοῦσιν καὶ καθ᾽ αὑτὰ δίκαια δοκεῖν: ὥστ᾽, εἰ μὲν ἐδέοντο καὶ πλειόνων, οὐκ ἂν ὀκνῆσαι τά γε μὴ λυποῦντα τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν παρασχεῖν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἃ καὶ πρότερον εἰλήφασιν ἄκυρα μὴ γενέσθαι, βεβαιοῦν αὐτοῖς ἀνεπηρεάστοις ἐν τοῖς οἰκείοις διατελεῖν ἔθεσιν .’
147. Joseph., Antiquitates Iudaicae 16.167–168: ‘Ἀγρίππας Ἐφεσίων ἄρχουσι βουλῇ δήμῳ χαίρειν. τῶν εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν τὸ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις ἀναφερομένων ἱερῶν χρημάτων τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν καὶ φυλακὴν βούλομαι τοὺς ἐν Ἀσίᾳ Ἰουδαίους ποιεῖσθαι κατὰ τὰ πάτρια τούς τε κλέπτοντας ἱερὰ γράμματα τῶν Ἰουδαίων καταφεύγοντάς τε εἰς τὰς ἀσυλίας βούλομαι ἀποσπᾶσθαι καὶ παραδίδοσθαι τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις, ᾧ δικαίῳ ἀποσπῶνται οἱ ἱερόσυλοι. ἔγραψα δὲ καὶ Σιλανῷ τῷ στρατηγῷ, ἵνα σάββασιν μηδεὶς ἀναγκάζῃ Ἰουδαῖον ἐγγύας ὁμολογεῖν .’ Silanus may have been a ‘special legate’ not a proconsul, according to Gray (1970), p. 236.
148. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.169: ‘Μᾶρκος Ἀγρίππας Κυρηναίων ἄρχουσιν βουλῇ δήμῳ χαίρειν. οἱ ἐν Κυρήνῃ Ἰουδαῖοι, ὑπὲρ ὧν ἤδη ὁ Σεβαστὸς ἔπεμψεν πρὸς τὸν ἐν Λιβύῃ στρατηγὸν τόντε ὄντα Φλάβιον καὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους τοὺς τῆς ἐπαρχίας ἐπιμελουμένους, ἵνα ἀνεπικωλύτως ἀναπέμπηται τὰ ἱερὰ χρήματα εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα, ὡς ἔστιν αὐτοῖς πάτριον, ἐνέτυχόν μοι νῦν, ὡς ὑπό τινων συκοφαντῶν ἐπηρεαζόμενοι καὶ ὡς ἐν προφάσει τελῶν μὴ ὀφειλομένων κωλύοιντο: οἷς ἀποκαθιστάνειν κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον ἐνοχλουμένοις, καὶ εἴ τινων ἱερὰ χρήματα ἀφῄρηνται τῶν πόλεων τοὺς εἰς ταῦτα ἀποκεκριμένους καὶ ταῦτα διορθώσασθαι τοῖς ἐκεῖ Ἰουδαίοις κελεύω .’
149. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.165.
150. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.173: ‘ᾔτουν τε, ὅπως κἀγὼ ὁμοίως τοῖς ὑπὸ τοῦ Σεβαστοῦ καὶ Ἀγρίππα δοθεῖσιν τὴν ἐμὴν γνώμην βεβαιώσω. ὑμᾶς οὖν βούλομαι εἰδέναι ἐν τοῖς τοῦ Σεβαστοῦ καὶ Ἀγρίππα βουλήμασιν συνεπιτρέπειν αὐτοῖς χρῆσθαι καὶ ποιεῖν κατὰ τὰ πάτρια χωρὶς ἐμποδισμοῦ .’ The decree dates to 4 BCE.
151. CIG 9907.
152. Eresos: IGR 4.7 = IG 12.2.531; Argos: ‘Property of the Gerontes: Agrippa greets the Gerontes of Argos, descendants of Danaus and Hypermestra. I am aware from the information with which I have been provided of the reason for the continuation of your system and the preservation of your ancient honors, and I have restored many of your rights which had lapsed and for the future I am able to provide and care for you …’ – translation taken from K. Chisholm and J. Ferguson, Rome: The Augustan Age, Oxford (1981), pp. 132, 134–35.
153. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.86.
154. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.66–77.
155. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.78–86.
156. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.85–86).
157. Dio 54.28.1.
158. See Ryberg (1949), p. 84.
159. Dio 54.12.4–5; cf. Vell. Pat., 2.90.1; RG 6 and 30–31; Suet., Div. Aug. 27.5; CIL III.494, VI.32323.53, IX.3150, 3913; IG 12.5.740.
160. Dio 54 index.
161. Dio 54.28.1; CIL XIV.2230. See J.A. Crook, ‘Political History: 30 B.C.–A.D. 14’ in A.K. Bowman, E. Champlin and A. Lintott (eds), Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. 10, p. 97. See also Gray (1970), pp. 227–238.
162. E.g. BMCRE I 103, I 110, I 112–114 – see Sources 2(b).)
163. Dio 54.32.2. For a full discussion of Drusus’ campaign of 12 BCE see Powell (2011), pp. 68–80.
164. Vell. Pat. 2.96.2–3.
165. Agrippa Postumus was conceived in October 13 BCE.
166. Dio 54.28.1–2; Vell. Pat. 2.96.2.
167. Dzino (2012), p. 470, citing S. Dušcanić (2008).
168. Florus 2.24 mentions one Vinnius – presumably Vinicius – winning a victory over the Pannonians between the Drava and Sava rivers.
169. Dio 54.28.2–3 = Zonar. 10.34. Dio specifically states Καμπανίᾳ.
170. Dio 54.28.2 ‘καὶ μηδὲν ἔτι νεωτερισάντων ἐπανῆλθε, καὶ ἐν αμπανίᾳ γενόμενος ἐνόσησε ’ = Zonar. 10.34.
171. Syme (1939), p. 391, proposes Agrippa was simply ‘shattered by a winter in Pannonia’.
172. Dio 54.28.3: ‘πυθόμενος δὲ τοῦτο ὁ Αὔγουστος ῾ἔτυχε δὲ ἐν τοῖς Παναθηναίοις ὁπλομαχίας ἀγῶνας τῷ τῶν παίδων ὀνόματι τιθείσ᾽ ἐξωρμήθη .’
173. RG 10: Augustus assumed the position on the death of Lepidus who held the office even while banished from Rome. Ov., Fast. 3.419–420 (on 6 March): ‘Caesaris innumeris, quos maluitille mereri, | accessit titulus pontificalis honor’; Fasti Maffeiani, CIL I2.223: ‘hoc die Caesar pontifex maximus factus est’; Fasti Praenestini, CIL I2.223: ‘[Quir]inio et Valgio coss’. Inscriptiones Italiae 13 2: 34–5 entry for 23 September 12 BCE.
174. For the case for Augustus in Athens see Hoff (1989), pp. 267–276; for the case against see Habicht (2005), pp. 226–228. On quinquatria Minervae, which was originally sacred to Mars, see Suet., Domitianus 4.4.
175. Dio 54.28.3.
176. Dio 54.28.2.
177. Vell. Pat. 2.96.1; Tac., Ann. 3.56.3; Livy, Per. 138.2; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.46.
Chapter 8: Noblest Man of His Day
1. Dio 54.29.7, 54.29.1–3.
2. Dio 54.28.5: ‘Now Augustus not only did what I have recorded, but also had the funeral procession of Agrippa conducted in the manner in which his own was afterward conducted’ – ‘τοῦτό τε οὖν οὕτως ἔδρασε, καὶ τὴν ἐκφορὰν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ τρόπῳ ἐν ᾧ καὶ αὐτὸς μετὰ ταῦτα ἐξηνέχθη ἐποιήσατο .’
3. Flower (1996), p. 2, notes that the death mask is not to be confused with the imago made during life.
4. Paoli (1973), p. 128.
5. Dio 54.28.3: ‘καὶ καταλαβὼν αὐτὸν τεθνηκότα ἔς τε τὸ ἄστυ τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ἐσεκόμισε καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀγορᾷ προέθηκε .’
6. Suet., Div. Aug. 100.2.
7. Cf. Polybios 6.53.8; Consolatio ad Liviam 177.
8. Dio 54.28.3.
9. Paoli (1973), p. 129. The date of the funeral is not known.
10. Paoli (1963), p. 128.
11. Paoli (1973), p. 129.
12. At the funeral of Octavia the Elder Drusus the Elder spoke from here (Dio 54.34.5), and Drusus the Younger spoke on the same spot on the occasion of Augustus’ (Suet., Div. Aug. 100.3).
13. Augustus as pontifex maximus: Inscriptiones Italiae 13 2: 34–5. Curtain: Dio 54.28.4.
14. See http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/NRWakademie/papyrologie/Karte/VI_249.html.
15. For discussions of the difficulties of reconstructing the Latin original from the Greek translation see Haslam (1980), pp. 193–199 and Badian (1980), pp. 97–109.
16. Papyrus: P. Köln 249, I 10 4701 – translated by David Potter: ‘ἡ [γ]όρ τοι δημαρχική σοι ἐξουσὶα εὶς πέν- | τε ἔτη κατὰ δόγμα συνκλἡτου | Λἐντ kλlων ῦπατευόντων ἐδόθη καὶ | πὰλιν αὕτη εὶς ἄλλην Ὀλυμπιάδα | [ῦ]πατευόντωίας Τιβερὶου Nέρωνος | καὶ Kυιν kτι lλὶου Oῦόρου γμβρὠν τὠν | σὠν προσεπεδόθη. καὶ εὶς {ς} ἄς δἡπο- | τἐ σε ῦπαρχείας τὰ κοινὰ τὠν Ῥω- | μαἰων ἐφέλκοιτο, μηθενὸς ἐν ἐ- | κείναις ἐξουσὶαν μείζω kεἴναι l τῆς σῆς ἐν | νόμωι ἐκυρὠθη. ὰλλὰ σὐ εἴς πλεῖστον | ὑψους καὶ ὴμετἐραι [σ]πυδῆι καὶ ὰρε- | ταἴς ίδίαις {ίδίαις} κα[θ] ὸμοφοσὑνην συμ- | πἀντων ἄνθρὠπων δια{ι}ρἀμενος .’ Suet., Div. Aug. 86.1 remarks that Augustus developed a ‘style of speaking that was chaste and elegant … making it his chief aim to express his thought as clearly as possible’, which is evidenced by the laudatio.
17. Suet., Div. Aug. 100.3.
18. Suet., Div. Aug. 100.3
19. Dio 54.29.6.
20. Dio 53.30.5.
21. Strab., Geog 5.3.8: ‘ἐν μέσῳ δὲ τῷ πεδίῳ ὁ τῆς καύστρας αὐτοῦ περίβολος καὶ οὗτος λίθου λευκοῦ, κύκλῳ μὲν περικείμενον ἔχων σιδηροῦν περίφραγμα, ἐντὸς δ᾽ αἰγείροις κατάφυτος .’
22. Paoli (1973), pp. 131–132.
23. Dio 54.28.5.
24. Dio 54.29.7: ‘οὕτω γοῦν οὐκ ἴδιον τοῦτο τὸ πάθος τῇ τοῦ Ἀγρίππου οἰκίᾳ ἀλλὰ καὶ κοινὸν πᾶσι τοῖς Ῥωμαίοις ἐγένετο, ὥστε καὶ σημεῖα ὅσα πρὸ τῶν μεγίστων συμφορῶν [p. 360] συμβαίνειν σφίσιν εἴωθε, καὶ τότε συνενεχθῆναι. βύαι τε γὰρ τῇ πόλει διεφοίτησαν, καὶ κεραυνὸς ἐς τὴν ἐν τῷ Ἀλβανῷ οἰκίαν, ἐς ἣν οἱ ὕπατοι ἐν ταῖς ἱερουργίαις καταλύουσιν, ἐνέσκηψε.’
25. Dio 54.29.8: ‘τό τε ἄστρον ὁ κομήτης ὠνομασμένος ἐπὶ πολλὰς ἡμέρας ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἄστεως αἰωρηθεὶς ἐς λαμπάδας διελύθη. καὶ πυρὶ ἄλλα τε τῆς πόλεως συχνὰ καὶ ἡ τοῦ Ῥωμύλου σκηνὴ ἐκαύθη, κοράκων κρέα ἐς αὐτὴν ἐκ βωμοῦ τινος ἔμπυρα ἐμβαλόντων .’ Chinese annals record the visit of a comet from 26 August 12 BCE: see Williams (1871), pp. 9–10. The Hut of Romulus (casa Romuli ) was the home of the legendary founder of Rome on the Palatine Hill. The fire of 12 BCE is the last recorded at the site.
26. Dio 54.30.1: ‘οὕτω μὲν τὰ κατὰ Ἀγρίππαν ἐγένετο .’
27. Dio 54.29.4.
28. Dio 54.29.4–5.
29. Dio 54.29.4.
30. Acastus Agrippianus: (CIL VI.5849); Castor Agrippianus: (CIL VI.5223); Cozmus Agrippianus: (CIL VI.2020–5203); Philargrus Agrippianus: (CIL VI.8012); Philotimus Agrippianus: (CIL VI.4808); Servius Agrippianus: (CIL VI.5299); Zoilus Agrippianus (CIL VI.33768, 8756). A steward (dispensator) Coinnagus Atticus Agrippianus is also recorded (CIL VI.8820).
31. See Reinhold (1933), p. 130 n. 30.
32. BMCRE I 121; Cohen 1.121, no. 418; Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 35, figs. 86–87.
33. BMCRE I 122; Cohen 1.121, no. 418; Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 35, figs. 88–89.
34. BMCRE I 124; Cohen 1.121, no. 419; Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 35, figs. 90–91. The star may be a reference to the comet which appeared after Agrippa’s funeral – see note 25 above.
35. Dio 54.29.6. Tiberius celebrated games for his father and grandfather in the Forum and in an amphitheatre: Suet., Tib. 7.1.
36. Dio 54.29.6.
37. Fragments of the altar were discovered in the silt in 1568 and reassembled under Benito Mussolini in 1938. A controversial cover building designed by Richard Meier and opened in 2006 now houses the Ara Pacis.
38. Dio 55.26.4–5.
39. Augustus assigned the aediles’ responsibility for the fire service to the vicomagistri. See Diane Favro, ‘Pater urbis: Augustus as City Father of Rome’, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 51.1 (Mar., 1992), pp. 76–79.
40. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.17.
41. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 6.139.
42. Dio 55.8.4.
43. E.g. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 6.139.
44. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 16.4.1.
45. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 13.13.3; Bell. Iud. 1.4.2, 5.4, 21.8.
46. Joseph., Ant. Iud. 17.2.2, 18.5.1.
47. IGR 4.79g = IG 12.2.164; IGR 4.65b = IG 12.2.169; IGR 4.69 = IG 12.2.170; IGR 4.78a = IG 12.2.172.
48. Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique 5 (1881), 230–231 and 234–235.
49. ILS 8897: construction work on the agora was finished around 4–3 BCE. Statues were also erected of Augustus and Livia.
50. Apameia: RPC 2011; see Ilaria Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 31, figs. 68–69 and 70–71. Alabanda: RPC 2816, Cohen 1.187, Ilaria Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 30, figs. 64–65. Amisus: RPC 2149, Ilaria Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 31, figs. 72–73. Agrippia-Phanagoria: RPC 935, Ilaria Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 29, figs. 60–61. Zecca: RPC 1685, Ilaria Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 29, figs. 56–59. Knossos: RPC 976; Ilaria Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 29, figs. 54–55. Crete/Cyrene: RPC 942, Ilaria Romeo, Ingenuus Leo (1998), p. 28, figs. 52–53.
51. Inscription of Antonia Tryphaena, IGR 4.146.7–8. Cf. Dio 54.23.7 where he claims Augustus was the restorer.
52. DuPont (1992), p. 91.
53. Duncan Fishwick, The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the Ruler Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire Volume 1 (Brill Publishers, 1991), pp. 82–83.
54. CIL X.3691, X.3691a (Cumae).
55. Eυεργέτης: IG 12.2.203.
56. Θεός Σωτήρ: IGR 4.70a = IG 12.2.171, IG 12.2.166c, 12.2.168 and 12.2.171 where Agrippa is associated with Agrippa Postumus: see Rodaz (1984), pp 4453–444. For discussion of a recently identified inscription see Christian Habicht, ‘Marcus Agrippa Theos Soter’, Hyperboreus 11 (2005), pp. 242–246.
57. See Roddaz (1984), pp. 445–449.
58. IG 12.6, 7; IG 5.1, 374 = SEG XVIII 156; PH 104; I. Smyrna 331. Lagina: SEG XLVII 1585, 1586. For the issues raised by the suggestion of a cult of Agrippa, see Pleket (1958), pp. 11–17. Reinhard (1933), p. 133 n. 41, dismisses inscriptions bearing the words ευεργέτης, κτίστης or σωτήρ as evidence of divine honours and for a cult of Agrippa in the East as ‘hardly deserves serious consideration’, yet recent studies point to the opposite conclusion, such as Kalfoglou-Kaloteraki (2003).
59. BMCRE I 122, Cohen 17; Komnick K50.0; RIC I 817. The coins were minted over many years. Numismatists and historians have long debated whether the coin was first minted under Augustus, Tiberius or Caligula. The evidence is inconclusive with pros and cons for each candidate. The 25th anniversary of Agrippa’s death would be 13 CE. Reinhard (1933), p. 132 n. 39 and p. 136, argues the coins were minted on the 75th anniversary of Agrippa’s birthday, which would put the first issues in 11–12 CE (i.e. under Augustus), though by the same argument it could have equally well marked the centenary, 36–37 CE (i.e. under Tiberius).
60. E.g. Suet., Tib. 21.3–6; Tac., Ann. 6.51.
61. Suet., Tib. 21.4, 27, 28, 30, 46.
62. Suet., Tib. 7.2. Nero Claudius Drusus: he is generally known as Drusus Minor or Drusus the Younger or Drusus II.
63. Suet., Tib. 7.2–3: ‘quanquam bene conuenientem rursusque grauidam dimittere ac Iuliam Augusti filiam confestim coactus est ducere non sine magno angore animi, cum et Agrippinae consuetudine teneretur et Iuliae mores improbaret, ut quam sensisset sui quoque sub priore marito appetentem, quod sane etiam uulgo existimabatur. Sed Agrippinam et abegisse post diuortium doluit et semel omnino ex occursu uisam adeo contentis et [t]umentibus oculis prosecutus est, ut custoditum sit ne umquam in conspectum ei posthac ueniret.’
64. Perhaps 26 June.
65. Dio 54.29.5.
66. Suet., Tib. 7.3.
67. Suet., Tib. 7.3.
68. Suet., Tib. 7.2–3.
69. Tac., Ann. 1.12.
70. C. Asinius Pollio, consul in 23 CE; M. Asinius Agrippa, consul in 25 CE; Cn. Asinius Saloninus – Tac., Ann. 3.75; Ser. Asinius Celer, suffect consul in 38 CE; L. Asinius Gallus, consul in 62 CE.
71. Tac., Ann. 3.19.3: ‘paucosque post dies Vipsania mater eius excessit, una omnium Agrippae liberorum miti obitu: nam ceteros manifestum ferro vel creditum est veneno aut fame extinctos.’
72. Dio 55 Index.
73. Holliday (1990), p. 544.
74. Staccioli (1986), pp. 347–8.
75. Staccioli (1986), p. 348.
76. One interpretation of the event depicted in the frieze is that it represents the suovetaurilia Augustus ordered to be offered annually at the site, on the anniversary of the day the Senate commissioned the altar, marking his return (reditus) from his extended stay in the Tres Galliae and Hispaniae in 13 BCE. However, an equally plausible explanation is that the frieze shows theactual consecration ceremony for the altar (dedicatio) in 9 BCE.
77. See Ryberg (1949), pp. 85–88 argues convincingly that the velatus figure is M. Agrippa; see also Stern (2006), pp. 177–181, who advances that the sculpture helped to build-up Agrippa’s stature, for as a novus homo he lacked the dignitas to lead others in the absence of Augustus; also Toynbee (1961), p. 155.
78. Kleiner (1978), p. 758.
79. Holliday (1990), pp. 542–557; Fraschetti (1980), pp. 957–976.
80. See Rose (1990), pp. 458.
81. Suet., Div. Aug. 48.1. One was the German prince Arminius.
82. See Rose (1990), pp. 464–465.
83. See Holliday (1990), pp. 542–557.
84. See Fullerton (1985), pp. 473–483.
85. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.8.
86. In the letter quoted by Aulus Gellius (Noct. Att. 15.7.3), dated 23 September 1 CE, his sixty-third birthday, Augustus addresses his son as mi Gai, meus asellus iucundissimus, quem semper medius fidius desidero, cum a me abes, ‘my Caius, my darling little donkey, whom the Heavens know I miss when you are away.’
87. Suet., Div. Aug. 64.3.
88. Suet., Div. Aug. 29.4; 43.5.
89. Dio 55.10.19. Coins: aureus: RIC 209 (R3); C 42; Calicó 177; denarius: BMCRE 540; C 43; RIC II, 210.
90. Dio 55.9.3–4.
91. Dio 55.9.9; Suet., Div. Aug. 26.2; Tac., Ann. 1.3.
92. Dio 55.9.10.
93. Dio 55.9.1–2.
94. Dio 55.10.17.
95. Dio 55.10a.9. See Rowe (2002), p. 17, citing Kornemann (1930), who notes the development of parallel careers, and assigning different theatres to pairs of his sons and stepsons was a characteristic of establishing Augustus’ dynastic intentions.
96. Dio 55.10.18; Florus 2.32.
97. Suet., Tib. 10. 1: ‘Quidam existimant, adultis iam Augusti liberis, loco et quasi possessione usurpati a se diu secundi gradus sponte cessisse exemplo M. Agrippae, qui M. Marcello ad munera publica admoto Mytilenas abierit, ne aut obstare aut obtrectare praesens uideretur’; 11.1; 12.1.
98. Dio 55.10.18.
99. Suet., Div. Aug. 54.1; Tib. 12.2.
100. Dio 55.10.18; note also 53.13.2. She is also known by the name Livia.
101. Suet., Tib. 12.2: ‘Comes et rector.’
102. Vell. Pat. 2.97.1; Hor., Carm. 4.9.37f.
103. Dio 55.10.20–1; Florus 2.32.
104. Dio 55.10a.4–6.
105. Denarius BMCRE 500; C 40; RIC II, 199.
106. Dio 55.10a.9.
107. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 9.118.
108. Dio 55.10a.5.
109. Dio 55.10a.6–8.
110. Dio 55.10.19.
111. Dio 55.10a.6.
112. Dio 55.10a.7; Vell. Pat. 2.102.2.
113. Florus 2.32. The Parthian attacker committed suicide when surrounded by many angry Roman soldiers.
114. Dio 55.10a.8; Vell. Pat. 2.102.3.
115. Dio 55.10a.8.
116. Suet., Div. Aug. 65.1; Dio 55.10a.9. ILS 140.
117. CIL XI.1421; ILS 140. Gordon (1983), p. 106, no. 31.
118. Vell. Pat. 2.102.3. An inscription was erected in the Portico that bore his and his brother’s names in the Forum Romanum, next to an arch that straddled a newly-constructed spur of the Via Sacra: Suet., Div. Aug. 29.4; Dio 56.27.5; Gordon (1983), p. 105, no. 30. A marble inscription found in Kempten is dedicated to L. Caesar; see Wamser et al. (2004), p. 15 (fig. 12).
119. Tac., Ann. 1.3, Suet., Div. Aug. 65.1; Dio 55.10a.9–10.
120. Dio 55.12.1. For the honours voted to Caius, see ILS 140; for those voted to Lucius, see ILS 139, from the Roman colonia at Pisa. The honours to Lucius were passed in response to a decree of the Senate, in the form of a letter to Augustus asking him about proper honours for his son. The honours were not of equal weight, however. David S. Potter, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Greek and Latin, Department of Classical Studies, University of Michigan, notes, ‘the vastly more elaborate celebration of Caius probably reflects the final decree of the Senate in Lucius’ case, and a number of honors that were only granted at Rome. Assuming that the Senate will suggest similar measures in honor of Caius, the Pisans are adopting those provisions for their own city, and to do for Caius at their city what the Senate would do at Rome’. Further, he writes, ‘the funeral honors for Lucius and his brother Caius are of great importance because they illustrate the development of the concept of the imperial house defined in terms of relationship to Augustus’.
121. Suet., Div. Aug. 55.2; Suet., Tib. 23; Vell. Pat. 2.103.2–3.
122. Suet., Div. Aug. 55.1. Tiberius’ son by his marriage to Vipsania Agrippina, named Nero Claudius Drusus, now became, in turn, Drusus Iulius Caesar (Drusus the Younger).
123. Suet., Tib. 21.3: ‘Rei publicae causa’; Vell. Pat. 2.104.1. On Tiberius’ adoption, see Kornemann (1960), pp. 37–38; Levick (1976), pp. 49–50; Seager (1972), pp. 35–38.
124. Vell. Pat. 2.103.3. Tiberius expressed his reluctance, publicly, to re-assuming the power, but he relented and accepted it for the good of the state.
125. Suet., Div. Aug. 55.1; Tib. 15.2; Tac., Ann. 1.3; 4.57.
126. Suet., Div. Aug. 55.2. See Jameson (1975), Levick (1972b), and Pappano (1941).
127. Tac., Ann. 1.3: ‘Agrippam Postumum, … rudem sane bonarum artium et robore corporis stolide ferocem, nullius tamen flagitii conpertum.’
128. See Levick (1976), p. 48.
129. See Levick (1976), pp. 48–49.
130. Vell. Pat. 2.103.3. A diagnosis of schizophrenia has been made in modern times – see Levick (1976), p. 58 n. 43.
131. Dio 55.31.1. Powell (2013), pp. 41–53.
132. See Levick (1976), p. 58.
133. Suet., Div. Aug. 65.1: ‘ex quibus Agrippam brevi ob ingenium sordidum ac ferox abdicavit seposuitque Surrentum,’ 65.4: ‘Agrippam nihilo tractabiliorem, immo in dies amentiorem, in insulam transportavit saepsitque insuper custodia militum,’ Tac., Ann. 1.3. See Jameson (1975), Levick (1972b), and Pappano (1941).
134. Dio 56.30.5: ‘καὶ ὁ μὲν οὕτω τῇ ἐννεακαιδεκάτῃ τοῦ Αὐγούστου, ἐν ᾗ ποτε τὸ πρῶτον ὑπάτευσε, μετήλλαξε, ζήσας μὲν πέντε καὶ ἑβδομήκοντα ἔτη καὶ μῆνας δέκα καὶ ἡμέρας ἓξ καὶ εἴκοσι ῾τῇ γὰρ τρίτῃ καὶ εἰκοστῇ τοῦ Σεπτεμβρίου ἐγεγέννητὀ, μοναρχήσας δέ, ἀφ᾽ οὗ πρὸς τῷ Ἀκτίῳ ἐνίκησε, τέσσαρα καὶ τεσσαράκοντα ἔτη, δεκατριῶν ἡμερῶν δέοντα .’
135. Dio 54.28.5, 56.34.
136. Suet., Tib. 22–24; Dio 56.35–41.
137. Suet., Div. Aug. 65.4.
138. Suet., Tib. 22.1.
139. Tac., Ann. 1.5. See Allen (1947), who argues that Postumus may have died a natural death.
140. Suet., Tib. 25. See Detweiler (1970), pp. 289–295.
141. Suet., Div. Aug. 65.3. See Fantham (2006), pp. 86–91.
142. Suet., Tib. 11.4, 50.1. See Cohen (2008), pp. 206–217, and Drogula (2011), pp. 230–266.
143. Dio 57.18.1; Tac., Ann. 1.53.
144. Suet., Div. Aug. 101.3.
145. Suet., Div. Aug. 64.1.
146. Suet., Div. Aug. 65.4.
147. Suet., Div. Aug. 64.2.
148. Suet., Div. Aug. 64.1.
149. See Powell (2013), pp. 150–162.
150. See Powell (2013), pp. 153–156 and 166–170.
151. Tac., Ann. 3.4: ‘cum decus patriae, solum Augusti sanguinem, unicum antiquitatis specimen appellarent versique ad caelum ac deos integram illi subolem ac superstitem iniquorum precarentur.’
152. Tac., Ann. 4.4, 4.8.
153. Suet., Tib. 54.1; Calig. 7.
154. Suet., Tib. 54.1; Calig. 7.
155. Tac., Ann. 4.67.
156. Suet., Tib. 53.2; Tac., Ann. 6.25.
157. Suet., Calig. 8.
158. Suet., Ner. 6.1.
159. Suet., Calig. 24.1.
160. Suet., Tib. 73.1.
161. Suet., Calig. 10.1; Tib. 43.
162. Suet., Calig. 23.1: ‘Agrippae se nepotem neque credi neque dici ob ignobilitatem eius uolebat suscensebatque, si qui uel oratione uel carmine imaginibus eum Caesarum insererent.’
163. See Wood (1995), pp. 457–482.
164. Suet., Claudius 26.3, 29.2.
165. Suet., Claudius 39.2, 43; Ner. 5.2.
166. Suet., Claudius 44.2; Ner. 8.
167. See Barrett (1996), pp. 181–193.
168. See Grant (1973), pp. 201–205; Griffin (1984), pp. 164–182.
169. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.8: ‘sed per utrasque Agrippinas maxime, quae Gaium, quae Domitium Neronem principes genuere totidem faces generis human.’
170. The coin is one of a series issued under Titus of Div. Aug., Tiberius, Drusus the Younger, Livia, Nero Drusus, Germanicus, Agrippina the Younger, Claudius and Galba: Mattingly, BMCRE II 77–78, 281–292 and 261–305.
171. BMCRE II 470. See Sources 2. Coins (b) Imperial Mints (ii).
172. BMCRE II 510. See Sources 2. Coins (b) Imperial Mints (ii)).
173. Dio 66.24.2.
174. Chron. 146; Hier. a. Abr. 2105; cf. perhaps 2101.
175. Oros. VII.12: ‘Pantheum Romae fulmine concrematum’; Hier. a. Abr. 2127.
176. Hist. Aug. Hadr. 19; AJA 1912, 421.
177. Dio 69.7.1.
178. Hist. Aug. Pius 8: ‘instauratum … templum Agrippae.’
179. CIL VI.896.
180. Amm. Marc., 16.10.14: ‘Pantheum velut regionem teretem speciosa celsitudine fornicatam.’
181. Dio 55.8.3.
182. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.102.
183. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 16.95; Dio 55.8.4: ‘νῦν γὰρ δὴ πάσης τῆς στέγης αὐτοῦ καθαιρεθείσης, ὅτι οὐκ ἠδυνήθη αὖθις συστῆναι, ἀχανής ἐστιν᾽ ὅ τε Ἀγρίππας οἰκοδομούμενον κατέλιπε, καὶ τότε συνετελέσθη.’
184. Gladiatorial games: Augustus – Suet., Div. Aug. 43; Dio 55.8; Caligula – Suet., Calig. 18; Claudius – Suet., Claud. 21. Naumachiae: Augustus – Dio 55.10; Caligula – Dio. 59.10: ‘πὰν τὸ χωρίον ἐκεινο ἐξορύξας καὶ ὑδατος πληρώσας ἵνα μίαν ναῦν ἐσαγάγῃ.’ Bazar: Stat. Silv. 4.5.2; Mart. 2.14.5, 57.2; 9.59.1; 10.80.4.
185. Dio 66.24; Hist. Aug. Hadr. 19, Alex. 26.
186. CIL VI.31564.
187. Procopius Bell. Gall. 2.8.1–11.
188. LPD I.505.
189. See Pinto (1985), pp. 9–20.
190. For a digital facsimile: http://reader.digitale-sammlungen.de/resolve/display/bsb10968012.html.
191. E.g. P.S. Frandsen (1835).
192. Oil on canvas 62 × 90cm (24.7 × 35.7 inches) in the Dick Institute, Kilmarnock, Scotland.
193. William Shakespeare, Antony and Cleopatra, Act II, scene 2, 142–145.
194. John Patterson, ‘Cleopatra, the film that killed off big-budget epics’, The Guardian, 15 July 2013.
195. There is absolutely no evidence of a love affair between Agrippa and Octavia in the historical sources. Tom Leach has since become known as the driver turned nobleman Tom Branson in BBC TV/PBS Masterpiece Theater’s Downton Abbey.
1. Pliny: chapter 1, n. 14; Seneca: chapter 1, n. 8.
2. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.6: ‘exercito aevo inter arma mortesque ac noxia accessu’.
3. See chapter 1, n. 174.
4. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 35.26: ‘exstat certe eius oratio magnifica et maximo civium digna.’
5. Suet., Div. Aug. 94.11: ‘cum Agrippae, qui prior consulebat, magna et paene incredibilia praedicerentur.’
6. Vell. Pat. 2.96.1: ‘Mors deinde Agrippae, qui novitatem suam multis rebus nobilitaverat atque in hoc perduxerat.’
7. Seneca, Epistulae 94.46: ‘M. Agrippa, vir ingentis animi.’
8. Dio 54.29.1: ‘Ἀγρίππας μὲν οὖν οὕτω μετήλλαξε, τά τε ἄλλα ἄριστος τῶν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἀνθρώπων διαφανῶς γενόμενος.’
9. Hor., Sermones 2.3.186: ‘astuta ingenuum volpes imitata leonem.’
10. Papyrus: P. Köln 4701).
11. Tac., Ann. 1.3: ‘M. Agrippam … bonum militia et victoriae socium,’ Syme (1958).
12. Galinsky (2012), p. 119.
13. Vell. Pat. 2.79.1–2.
14. See chapter 3, n. 37; Dio 49.49.4.
15. Suet., Div. Aug. 25.4: ‘ἀσφαλὴς γάρ ἐστ᾽ ἀμείνων ἢ θρασὺς στρατηλάτης .’
16. See chapter 3, n. 93.
17. See chapter 4, n. 180.
18. Wallace-Haddrill (1993), p. 3.
19. Syme (1939), p. 297.
20. Dio 51.1.2.
21. Syme (1939), pp. 297–298.
22. Wallace Haddrill (1993), p. 1, 8. For a detailed study see Gurval (1995).
23. Suet., Div. Aug. 25.4: ‘sat celeriter fieri quidquid fiat satis bene.’
24. See chapter 3, n. 17.
25. Reinhold (1933), p. vii, writes ‘if Augustus was the ‘architect of the Roman Empire’, Marcus Agrippa was his ‘superintendent of construction’.
26. Dio, 54.29.1: ‘καὶ τῇ τοῦ Αὐγούστου φιλίᾳ πρός τε τὸ αὐτῷ ἐκείνῳ καὶ πρὸς τὸ τῷ κοινῷ συμφορώτατον χρησάμενος .’
27. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 36.102.
28. Dio 56.30.3: ‘τὴν Ῥώμην γηίνην παραλαβὼν λιθίνην ὑμῖν καταλείπω .’
29. It was considered an act of piety to restore decaying temples. Augustus repaired the Temple of Iupiter Feretrius: Livy 4.20.7; Tiberius continued the practice with the Temple of Castor and Pollux: Val. Max. 5.5.3.
30. Frontin., Aq. 2.100.
31. Vell. Pat. 2.127.2. See Hurlet (1997).
32. Suet., Div. Aug. 73.
33. Galinsky (2012), p. 119. David Stockton, ‘The Founding of the Empire’, in The Oxford History of the Classical World, Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 548.
34. See chapter 3, n. 37.
35. http://www.economist.com/node/12075015.
36. See chapter 3, n. 37.
37. Dio 54.29.2: ‘ὅσον τε γὰρ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀρετῇ κατεκράτει, τοσοῦτον ἐκείνου ἐθελοντὴς ἡττᾶτο, καὶ πᾶσαν αὐτῷ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ καὶ σοφίαν καὶ ἀνδρείαν ἐς τὰ λυσιτελέστατα παρέχων πᾶσαν τὴν παρ᾽ ἐκείνου καὶ τιμὴν καὶ δύναμιν ἐς τὸ τοὺς ἄλλους εὐεργετεῖν ἀνήλισκεν .’
38. Suet., Div. Aug. 72.1: ‘In ceteris partibus vitae continentissimum constat ac sine suspicione ullius vitii.’
39. See chapter 4, n. 71.
40. See chapter 7, n. 131.
41. Cic., Amic. 17.23: ‘Cumque plurimas et maximas commoditates amicitia contineat, tum illa nimirum praestat omnibus, quod bonam spem praelucet in posterum nec debilitari animos aut cadere patitur. Verum enim amicum qui intuetur, tamquam exemplar aliquod intuetur sui.’
42. Val. Max. 4.7.7: ‘orere igitur ab illa, quae sanctorum umbris dicata esse creditur, sede hinc Decime Laeli, illinc M. Agrippa, alter uirorum, deorum alter maximum amicum et certa mente et secundis ominibus sortiti, totumque beatae turbae gregem, qui uestro ductu ueneranda sincerae fidei stipendia laudibus et praemiis onustus peregit, in lucem uobiscum protrahite.’
43. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.6: ‘in tormentis adulteriorum coniugis socerique praegravi servitio.’
44. See Chapter 1, n. 14.
45. Portus Iulius: Suet., Div. Aug. 16.1; Aqua Augusta: Dio 54.11.7; Pantheon: Dio 53.27.3.
46. Dio 53.27.4: ‘οὐ μόνον οὐδὲν αὐτὸν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς ὁ Αὔγουστος ᾐτιάσατο, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ πλεῖον ἐτίμησε .’
47. Seneca, Ep. 94.46: ‘M. Agrippa … qui solus ex iis quos civilia bella claros potentesque fecerunt felix in publicum fuit.’
48. Tac., Ann. 14.53: ‘abavus tuus Augustus Marco Agrippae Mytilenese secretum, C. Maecenati urbe in ipsa velut peregrinum otium permisit; quorum alter bellorum socius, alter Romae pluribus laboribus iactatus ampla quidem sed pro ingentibus meritis, praemia acceperant.’
49. Reinhold (1933), p. vii.
50. Quoted in Cic., Amic. 17.64: ‘Amicus certus in re incerta cernitur.’
51. Vell. Pat. 2.127.1–2: ‘quibus novitas familiae haut obstitit quominus ad multiplicis consulatus triumphosque et complura eveherentur sacerdotia. Etenim magna negotia magnis adiutoribus egent interestque rei publicae quod usu necessarium est, dignitate eminere utilitatemque auctoritate muniri.’
52. Syme (1939).
53. Dio 54.29.3: ‘ἀφ᾽ οὗ δὴ καὶ τὰ μάλιστα οὔτ᾽ αὐτῷ ποτε τῷ Αὐγούστῳ ἐπαχθὴς οὔτε τοῖς ἄλλοις ἐπίφθονος ἐγένετο, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκείνῳ τε τὴν μοναρχίαν ὡς καὶ δυναστείας ὄντως ἐπιθυμητὴς συνέστησε, καὶ τὸν δῆμον εὐεργεσίαις.’
54. Sen., Ep. 94.46: ‘nam concordia parvae res crescunt, discordia maximae dilabuntur’. Hac se aiebat et fratrem et amicum optimum factum.’
55. Syme (1979), p. 309.
56. Vell. Pat. 2.88.2.
57. Dio 49.4.1–2: ‘ὡς δέ τινες λέγουσιν, ὁ Ἀγρίππας, ἅτε καὶ ὑπὲρ τοῦ Καίσαρος ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ μαχόμενος, ἐξαρκεῖν οἱ τὸ τρέψαι τοὺς ἀντιπάλους ἡγεῖτο. καὶ γὰρ εἰώθει λέγειν πρὸς τοὺς πάνυ ἑταίρους ὅτι οἱ πλείους τῶν ἐν ταῖς δυναστείαις ὄντων οὐδένα ἐθέλουσι κρείττω 1 σφῶν εἶναι, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν πλείω, ὅσα γε καὶ πρόχειρον τὴν νίκην ἔχει, αὐτοὶ δι᾽ ἑαυτῶν ποιοῦνται, τὰ δὲ δὴ χείρω καὶ ἀτοπώτερα ἄλλοις προστάττουσι .’