Download venus in augustan rome - FAU Digital Collections

VENUS IN AUGUSTAN ROME
by
John Carney
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Wilkes Honors College in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Arts and Sciences with a
Concentration in History
Wilkes Honors College of Florida Atlantic University
Jupiter, Florida
May 2013
VENUS IN AUGUSTAN ROME
by
John Carney
This thesis was prepared under the direction of the candidate's thesis advisor, Dr.
Christopher Strain, and has been approved by the members of his supervisory committee.
It was submitted to the faculty of The Honors College and was accepted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Arts and
Sciences.
Date
ii
ABSTRACT
Author:
John Carney
Title:
Venus In Augustan Rome
Institution:
Wilkes Honors College ofFloridaAtl antic University
Thesis Advisor:
Dr. Christopher Strain
Degree:
Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Arts and Sciences
Concentration:
History
Year:
2013
This thesis examines the development of a goddess in the ancient Mediterranean.
Popularly worshipped since at least the Paleolithic era, this goddess served as the cultural
forbear of various goddesses throughout the region. The dominant religious culture of
both the Paleolithic and Neolithic eras was emphatically matriarchal and
contemporaneous societies mirrored this religious attitude with matrilineal customs. Over
the course of many millennia, the goddess' identity and roles developed in different ways
across the Mediterranea n region. When Augustus came to power in Rome in the first
century B.C.E., he adopted the tradition ofhis family and professed descent from Venus
to lend divine credence to his claim to power. With the help of the poet Vergil, Augustus
manipulated the character of Venus to embody and reinforce female roles desired in his
burgeoning empire.
iii
DEDICATIO N
For Jeanette and Jeffrey, who should feel obliged to read this thesis.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ............... ............... ............... ........... 6
II. Chapter One
The Cultural History ofVenus ............... ............... ........... 7
Paleolithic Progenitor ............... ............... .............. 7
Neolithic Variegation ............... ............... ............. 10
Astarte ............... ............... ............... .......... 14
Indo-European Invasion ............... ............... ...........
is
Turan ............... ............... ............... ........... 17
Aphrodite ............... ............... ............... ....... 20
Venus ............... ............... ............... ........... 23
III. Chapter Two
Becoming Augustus: Octavius the Boy Learns to Marshall Power
.......... 26
IV. Chapter Three
The Virtue ofVergil's Venus ............... ............... .......... 37
Aeneas ............... ............... ............... .......... 38
The Aeneid ............... ............... ............... ...... 39
Publius Vergilius Maro: Poet or Propagandist? ............... ........ 45
V. Conclusion . . ............... ............... ............... ........ 53
Bibliography ............... ............... ............... ........... 55
v
I. Introductjon
In times before writing, the earliest ancestress of Venus was worshipped more
widely and commonly than any other deity. However, this ancestress was far different
from the Roman Venus of the first century B.C.E. Venus first appeared in Rome in the
third century B.C.E., but she was not revered as mater matriae until the Caesars Julius
and Augustus manipulated her image in their campaigns for political dominance in the
first century B.C.E. The apex of this transformation occurred when Augustus pursued
conscious and concerted efforts to reform the image ofVenus, as well as the morals of
Rome, especially concerning women, marriage, and childbirth. Through his patronage of
the greatest literary minds of his time, Augustus helped to create an image ofVenus that
was extremely important and influential to imperial Romans. Augustus commissioned
Vergil to produce a laudatory, heroic epic - the Aeneid. In the Aeneid, Vergil cast Venus as
caring, compassionate, and submissive. This role starkly contrasts the role classically
attributed to Venus' Greek counterpart, Aphrodite.
6
II. The Cultural History of venus
The starting point for a history of the cultural transmission of the goddess Venus
is unfortunately opaque; the farther back in history one attempts to inspect, the more
sources become ambiguous, incomplete, and unavailable. However, the cultural forbear
ofVenus appeared as early as the Paleolithic period as an ultimate and archetypal
'
Goddess widely worshipped across the Eurasian continent. The character of this early
goddess was quite distinct from the Venus that the Romans would come to worship as
their progenitor and protectress, but this was the goddess from which Venus was
spawned.
• Paleolithic Proe;enitor
Paleolithic sources are primarily simple artifacts and archaeological sites and
materials. It is from these that posterity has any remaining notions regarding the era. This
fragmentary evidence also comprises the first record of goddess worship, as well as
evidence for the worshipped Goddess herself. According to David Leeming and Jake
Page in their analysis of feminine deities:
The Goddess archetype took form in our consciousness at a point in preliterate
prehistory that is too distant for us to remember or even imagine with any great
certainty. From her depiction in Upper Paleolithic (30,000-7000 B.C.E.) figurines,
cave paintings, and other archeological material, especially in Europe, the Middle
East, and Africa, however, scholars have surmised certain things about her. 1
1 David
Leeming and Jake Page, Goddess: Myths ofthe Female Divine (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1994), 7.
7
Reliance upon these items as evidence is a result of necessity; no trace of written
language exists and oral traditions were largely eradicated by later militaristic societies.
Thus, there are no literary or mythical accounts of the Goddess from the time of her
earliest religious domination. There are, however, many contemporaneous visual
depictions of women and the Goddess, as Leeming and Page attest: "The great majority
of objects found by archaeologists within the Paleolithic caves are figurines and drawings
of women, some clearly pregnant, nearly all with caricatured large breasts and buttocks
(like the famous Earth Mothers or Venuses of Laussel and Lespugue), and disks and other
objects with vulva slits.''l These 'Earth Mother' figurines have been commonly
associated with fertility and sexuality because of their enhanced sexual organs and
historical interpretations of the symbolism behind their enhancements. The actual
symbolism of these representations, and thus the Goddess herself, is more complicated
than the aforementioned view suggests. In The Living Goddess, Marija Gimbutas argues
that the roles which this Goddess fulfilled were quite broad:
The Old European cultures certainly cared about fertility. But[ ... ] the wide variety
of figurines, and particularly their Neolithic archaeological contexts, suggests that
the feminine force played a wider religious role. The many sophisticated Neolithic
art forms accentuating the female body unveil a natural and sacred sexuality
neglected by modem culture.3
This Paleolithic Goddess was thus not a simple analogue for the Roman Venus, but
something much more multifaceted.
2
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 8.
3
Marija Gimbutas, The Living Goddess (University of California Press, 2001 ), 5.
8
The roles which the Goddess fulfilled in the Paleolithic period were much more
diverse than those of later 'love goddesses,' like Venus. The focus on specific elements of
the body in the Goddess' corporeal depictions seems to belie this fact, but, "In religious
art, the human body symbolizes myriad functions beyond the sexual, especially the
procreative, nurturing, and life enhancing.[ ... ] Renditions ofthe body expressed other
functions, specifically the nourishing and procreative aspects of the female body.''4 It then
follows that these depictions should not be read as evidence of the Goddess as solely a
fertility or a love goddess. She was in fact both of those, and more: "[She] personified
every phase of life, death, and regeneration. She was the Creator from whom all life human, plant, and animal - arose, and to whom everything returned. Her role extended far
beyond eroticism."5 The Goddess from whom Venus claims cultural descent has similarly
been described by Leeming and Page as a supreme and ultimate deity:
In spite of the murkiness of our sources, a portrait of Goddess in her early stages
does emerge from the evidence- at least in silhouette. [... ]Goddess was
thoroughly female; she preceded any differentiation into God and Goddess. She
seems to have been absolute and parthenogenetic - born of herself- the
foundation of all being. She was the All-Giving and the All-Taking, the source of
life and death and regeneration. More than a mother goddess or fertility goddess,
she appears to have been earth and nature itself, an immense organic, ecological,
and conscious whole - one with which we humans would eventually lose touch. 6
However, the Goddess' reign as supreme deity did not last. Although she remained the
primary goddess for many societies, the tides of change were already beginning to rise:
"During the Late Upper Paleolithic (1 0,000-7000 B.C.E.), climatic changes brought the
4
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 5.
5
Ibid, 5.
6
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 7.
9
ice age to an end, and people in what are now Europe and the Middle East gradually
formed more stable settlements. It is clear from figurines and other artifacts from that
period that Goddess rituals remained a significant practice along with those meant to
ensure hunting success. " 7 This societal reformation necessarily entailed a shift in the
society's values. While the Goddess remained supreme, she did not remain a solitary
figure; her roles were divided amongst several goddesses.
• Neolithic Yarie~tion
During the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic period, the Goddess'
roles began to exhibit evidence of specialization. It was at this point that her identity
fractured into several and lesser parts of the former whole. Earth mother, love goddess,
birth goddess, fertility goddess, sacred consort; all of these and more sprang into
existence. However, the Goddess' transformation was gradual and for a period she
retained her previous identity as supreme deity, "enthroned in consciously constructed
shrines as the Supreme Being, taking form as Sacred Maiden and Ancient Crone, but
most often as Holy Birth-Giver.''8 The process by which the Goddess metamorphosed
from supreme and ultimate to divided and variegated is somewhat ironic: Goddess
worship continued throughout the Neolithic period while technology improved. Her
places of worship soon became temples where once they were open air spaces or caves:
7
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 19.
8
Ibid, 19.
10
Modem archaeology has revealed that highly evolved religious beliefs and centers
of worship - temples - existed in Europe and the Near East more than five
thousand years before the classical eras of Greece and Rome. Religious life
centered on the temple from the seventh millennium onward. During the Neolithic
period, these Old European temples harbored a sophisticated spiritual system.
Today, their remnants provide us with artifacts and contexts to help us unravel the
Neolithic sacred system and envision the divine force in the daily lives of the
people who lived in Old Europe. 9
However, as these temples rose in popularity they became specific sites of worship with
differentiated features. So, "it seems likely•that as Goddess was increasingly worshipped
in specific shrine sites, she developed more specific anthropomorphic and personal
characteristics than she had had before." 10 This development was the first step in the .
Goddess' transformation, which Gimbutas similarly affirms: "The Neolithic Europeans
dedicated their temples to a deity and performed rituals associated with the functions of
this deity. Certain themes emerge: birth, the renewal of life after death or winter, and
continuing fertility for humans, animals, and the earth." 11 The Goddess' roles remained
nearly unchanged; she was still responsible for birth, regeneration, and fertility. However,
just who "she" was becomes problematic again, because her identity began to be
associated with "specific shrine sites" and their associated rituals. Thus, "she" necessarily
became ''they," who were the forbears of Astarte, Aphrodite, Turan, and eventually
Venus.
9
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 72.
ro Leeming and Page, Goddess, 22.
11
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 97.
11
The dominance of the Goddess in Paleolithic and Neolithic civilizations was
reflected in the societal organization of some early civilizations. Women were not
subjugated or controlled in these societies, but revered:
Given Neolithic religious symbolism, it is extremely difficult to imagine that Old
European society would not be matrilineal, with the mother or grandmother
venerated as progenitor of the family. In fact, the spiritual and social worlds were
intimately intertwined: part of Old European religion was ancestor worship, in
which the oldest women in the family, progenitors of a particular branch of the
family, were venerated. [... ] An ana~ysis of the skeletons found underneath Old
European houses or near them reveals two important facts essential to
understanding Old European social structure and religion: first, these burials were
almost always women, and second, the women were usually of an older age. 12
This analysis of skeletons is strong evidence of the privileged position women occupied
in some early civilizations. However, the argument is further buttressed when compared
with the religious imagery of the time: "During the Paleolithic and Neolithic eras of
prehistory[... ] the religious symbolism is permeated by symbols based on the lifecreating female body. The mother and the mother-daughter images are present throughout
Old Europe, while the father image, so prevalent in later times, is missing." 13 The
position, or conspicuous absence, of the male in Neolithic art is striking because ofthe
later dominance of patrilineal societies and the associated domination of the male in the
arts, both as producer and subject.
The role of males in the myths and religions of Neolithic Eurasian societies was
similarly beginning to change: "The next stage in the Goddess' interaction with the male
force reveals her as still dominant, but on increasingly dangerous grounds. [... ]By the
12
Gimbutas. The Living Goddess. 113.
13
Ibid, 112.
12
Late Neolithic, she had accepted the necessity of a male companion." 14 One
demonstratiou of the "necessity of a male companion" is evident in the hieros gamos:
Another important, but different, role for the male god is that of consort of the
great-goddess; he appears in festive rites of sacred marriage, the hieros gamos.
This ritual mating ensured the smooth process of the vegetation cycle and secured
fertility and happiness for the land. This rite is well known from historical times,
but although images of copulation date back to the Neolithic, such images are ·
rare. In the early historical era, the hieros gamos was celebrated in erotic hymns
in Suiner and other Near Eastern cultures and in India. 15
The foremost example of a Neolithic hieros gamos is the Sumerian myth of"The
Courtship oflnanna and Dumuzi." The myth explicitly describes Inanna as a figure of
procreation, fertility, sexuality, and as a giver of life: "My vulva, the hom,/ The Boat of
Heaven,/ Is full of eagerness like the young moon./ My untilled land lies fallow./ As for
me, Inanna,/ Who will plow my vulva?/ Who will plow my high field?/[ ... ] Who will
station the ox there?/ Who will plow my vulva?"16 However, Inanna's character in the
myth demonstrates the still dominant Goddess forced to rely upon a male consort,
Dumuzi. Inanna was further important as the forbear of two Neolithic Near Eastern
goddesses, Babylonian Ishtar and UgariticAstarte: "Probably the oldest ofthe planting
myths is that of the goddess Inanna, the Great Goddess of the ancient Sumerians, whose
civilization flourished in the Tigris-Euphrates valley of Mesopotamia (Iraq) beginning in
the fifth millennium B.C.E. Under the Babylonians in the second millennium, Inanna
14
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 59.
15
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 118.
16
"Courtship oflnanna and Dumuzi." <http://www.piney.com/BabCourship.html>
13
£ .
.tz££ii%£A&
became Ishtar. " 17 This Isthar was furthermore, "clearly related to the Ugaritic Star
Goddess, Astarte."18
• Astarte
Astarte was the goddess ofUgarit associated with the falling star which originally
brought her to Byblos. 19 She was widely known and worshipped in the Mediterranean
region: "[Astarte] was known to the Phoenicians on Sicily and at Carthage, even as far as
Cadiz beyond Gibraltar, and on Thera, Cyprus, and Crete. On Malta, Canaanites built
great stone temples in her name.''20 Evidence from Astarte's temples and inscriptions
establishes her primarily as, "the Queen of Heaven, the Mother of all deities, the Holy
Guardian of the earth, the Great Goddess."21 In this way, she still exhibited and shared the
Goddess' identity, but she was also addressed by titles which denote specific tasks:
"Astarte, lady of heaven, mistress of all the gods;" and also, "Astarte mistress of the
stable who punishes the enemy."22 Thus, in keeping with the specialization which
resulted from the development of temples, Astarte had taken on an individual identity.
Furthermore, her identity was not of a weak and dependent deity, but rather one of central
importance:
17
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 60.
18
Ibid, 105.
19
Ibid, 32.
20
Ibid, 33.
21
1bid, 33.
22
lzak: Cornelius, The Many Faces ofthe Goddess, (Switzerland: Academic Press Fribourg, 2004), 81-82.
14
. &£££
&
JJCii&U
_iii&AU&ta.£&&
In the Ugaritic pantheon lists Astarte is placed after Anat and in the mythological
texts she plays a lesser role and is indeed 'elusive.'[... ] In the Ugaritic texts the
beauty of Huriya is compared to that of Astarte, but she is also warlike and a
huntress.[ ... ] Astarte also occurs as an important goddess at Emar where she is
called 'Astarte of battle.'[... ] Astarte is depicted as a warrior, but especially as the
'goddess of horse-riders.'[ ... ] She is a 'mistress ofthe animals.' 23
While Astarte was described as beautiful, and "mistress of all the gods," she was
nevertheless a warrior. In other words, her beauty did not define nor limit her like it did
for later goddesses.
Astarte is a useful goddess to consider because she represents the roles that the
Goddess continued to play in the time immediately preceding the Indo-European
invasions. Here, she is essentially an analog for Inanna, Ishtar, and any other of the
goddesses undergoing identity fractalization from the Goddess. While the details of each
of these goddesses (lnanna, Ishtar, and Astarte) are nuanced, they shared the same fate.
This was the twilight of the Goddess' supreme reign; winter was coming for the deity of
nature's bounty.
•Indo-European lnyasion
Beginning in the Bronze Age (ca. 3500 B.C.E.), matrilineal societies were
dominated or destroyed by invaders. These invaders were the Indo-Europeans, or Aryans.
Their path to domination over the cultures of the Mediterranean and Mesopotamian
regions was by no means quick, but over the course of three thousand years (ca.
3200-1200) they established their supremacy across the Eurasian continent:
23
Cornelius, The Many Faces of the Goddess, 87.
15
There are archaeological indications of a small Indo-European presence in what is
now Iran as early as 3200 B.C.E. By 3200 B.C.E., Mesopotamia had been invaded
and by. 3000 B.C.E., Egypt. [... ]In the fourteenth, thirteenth, and twelfth centuries
B.C.E., Greece was invaded by Indo-European Achaeans (Homer's destroyers of
Troy) and Dorians, and the rest of Europe fell to Celtic Aryans in the centuries
that followed. 24
The Indo-Europeans were able to conquer so efficiently because their society instilled
different values than those of the matrilineal societies thus far considered:
It is thought that these people, inhabitants of a landscape less abundant in
"Goddess bounty" than that of Europe and the Fertile Crescent, had long practiced
the art of military raids on one anothers' [sic] settlements and herds to augment
their wealth, and that in search of more productive territory, they undertook
southern migrations into the Goddess world during the Bronze Age (3500-1 000
B.C.E.).25
The Indo-Europeans thus were familiar with the practice and philosophy of warfare; they
were capable of engaging in battle and willing to eradicate a group of fellow humans. The
Indo-Europeans brought with them new methods of fighting, new weapons, and new
ideas: "The Aryans were experienced warriors who brought superior weapons, including
war chariots. Not surprisingly, they also brought religions that reflected their priorities
and thus were dominated not by Goddess, but by a warrior Father God of thunder and
light.''26 The religions and deities that the Indo-Europeans brought to the lands that they
conquered had a far reaching effect on the value systems held by the indigenous peoples.
The roles of goddesses and women drastically changed during and after these invasions,
but they did retain aspects of their former glory:
24
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 87.
25
Ibid, 87.
26
1bid, 88.
16
The emergence ofthe Indo-European sky gods to positions of suprem
e power and
the concurrent abuse of Goddess as monster and source of all evil did
not [... ]
eliminate the need for the feminine, in the patriarchy's vision of the cosmo
s. As
mothers, wives, and daughters, females continued to exist and to functio
n, though
in conditions that we would call oppressive. The male-oriented religio
us
pantheons, which had to include goddesses as mothers, consorts, and
daughters of
gods, kept Goddess alive, with her ancient functions temporarily sublim
ated in the
new patriarchal values. 2 7
As the Indo-Europeans migrated throughout the Eurasian continent, their
influence was
felt to varying degrees by different civilizations. While Grecian godde
sses were
subordinated to a numbe r of male deities, it seems that the Etruscan's
goddesses retained
their independence. Considering the roles of women in Etruscan and
Greek societies as
an analog for their perspectives regarding the "feminine force" suppo
rts this view.
• Turan
Turan was the Etruscan goddess of love. As an Etruscan deity, she is
of interest
because, "the Etruscans possessed the earliest civilization on the Italian
peninsula,
predating the Romans and contemporary to the Greeks. During the height
of their power
in the eighth through the sixth centuries B.C., the Etruscans ruled Rome,
traded widely in
the western Mediterraneans, and established colonies in southern Italy."'2 8
The Etruscans
thus dominated a significant portion of the Italic peninsula in the first
half of the first
millennium B.C.E., and influenced the Romans. However, the Etrusc
ans may not have
been native Italians: "The origin of the Etruscans is. somewhat enigm
atic. [.:.]Herodotus
27
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 133.
28
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 165.
17
..
states that the Etruscans emigrated from Lydia in Asia Minor in the thirtee
B.C.[... ] However, the Etruscans could have evolved from the local
nth century
Iron Age culture
known as the Villanovan."29 Regardless, archaeological evidence sugges
people, be they native Italians or Asian immigrants, were similar to the
ts that these
Goddess
worshippers of the Neolithic.
The Etruscans are furthermore interesting because they retained aspect
s of
Goddess culture long after the Indo-Europeans dominated most of the
Mediterranean. In
fact, rather than the forcible imposition of a foreign pantheon on an indige
nous people,
"the Indo-European deities presen t in the Etruscan pantheon evolved
through peaceful
influences, as a result of trading contacts with the Greeks."30 It therefo
re follows
Etruscan culture exemplifies aspects of Goddess worship reminiscent
that the
ofthe 'Old
Europeans:'
One way in which the Old European influence was felt was in the status
of
women in certain European societies in the early historical era. The surviv
al of
.Old European customs is recorded in historical accounts that not only
provide a
confirmation of the matrifocal nature of Old European society sugges
ted by
archaeological research but also provide details of matrifocal custom
s which
archaeology cannot preserve. 31
The Etruscans exemplified just such a society. Women were popular
subjects of Etruscan
art, as made evident by their repeated appearance on extant mirrors and
sarcop
hagi. These
depictions show wome n participating in everyday leisure activities of
the same kind as
29
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 165.
30
Ibid, 167.
31
Ibid, 121.
18
tl
t . .i&\M#L ..-
Etruscan men. On sarcophagi, the women lounge with their husbands; on mirrors, the
women and men sport and game together. According to Girnbutas:
The Etruscans of central Italy also preserved rnatrifocal customs. [... ]The Greek
historian Theopornpus, who wrote during the fourth century B.C., was shocked by
the freedom and power of Etruscan women. Theopornpus recorded that Etruscan
women would often exercise unabashedly in the nude with men and with other
women. They liked to drink, and they dressed in a manner similar to that of men.
They even wore symbols of citizenship and rank: mantles and high shoes. [... ]In
contrast to Roman women, Etruscan women played important roles as priestesses
and seers, and they wore a force in politics. 32
However, the most telling evidence comes again from the graves: "The Etruscans
constructed some of their most elaborate tombs for rich noblewomen or priestesses."33
This custom is reminiscent of the Goddess worshipping Neolithic civilizations that
conspicuously buried their venerated women in similar fashion. Furthermore, religious
artifacts remain which link the Etruscans to the pre-Indo-European Goddess societies:
"The existence of altars, sculptures, temples, temple models, and hundreds of votive
offerings speaks clearly of continuity with the Old European-Anatolian tradition."34 The
religions of Greece and Italy did encroach upon and influence that of the Etruscans, but,
"from the inscriptions and portrayals of goddesses and gods, it appears that an
overwhelming number of Etruscan divinities stern from Old European deities.
Notwithstanding their Indo-Europeanization via Greek and local Italic influences, they
retained an almost complete Old European tradition." 35 The influence of 'Old European'
religion inherent in Etruria found its antithesis in Greece, where Indo-European religion
32
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 122.
33
Ibid, 166.
34
Ibid, 167.
35
Ibid, 169.
19
attained dominance in an era when Greece had no writing capabilities. In the Dark Age of
Greece, the aFt of writing was lost. The influence of Indo-Europeans in culture, religion
and linguistics dominated Greece between the times ofLinear A and B,3 6 and the
development of classical Greek.
•Aphrodite
Aphrodite was the ancient Greek goddess of love. In stark contrast to Turan of
Etruria, Aphrodite demonstrates the subordination of the specialized goddesses to a
pantheon of Indo-European deities. This religious subordination mirrors the historical
subjugation of Greece at the hands of two successive waves of Indo-European peoples:
The Myceneans, who were themselves descended from earlier Indo-Europeanized
tribes from the north (central Europe), eventually succumbed to more militarized
Indo-Europeans. Around 1200 B.C., a new wave of peoples from central Europe
swept through Greece and the Aegean Islands. Subsequently, the Greek and
Aegean Islands fell into a Dark Age, from which, centuries later, the civilization
of classical Greece would rise. 37
The civilization which did eventually arise, classical Greek, is laudable for many
remarkable achievements. Nevertheless, the treatment of women within that society has
long been a derisive subject. The position ofwomen inAthenian38 society can be stated
rather succinctly: "Classical Athenian society excluded women from public life. Women
36
The syllabaries of Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations, respectively
37
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 152.
38 Classical Athens serves in many ways as an analogue
for classical Greek culture. Although there are
glaring dissimilarities between cultures across the period and region, Athens was the most influential
city-state, and thus the one about which we know the most. As such, for my purposes, "Greek" and
"Athenian" may be used interchangeably. The anomaly of Sparta, a city-state in which women were
afforded a great deal more autonomy than women of Athens, will thus not be discussed.
20
participated in almost no significant social, political, or intellectual activities."39 The
early literature of Greece demonstrates similar attitudes towards women. In the eighth
century B.C.E., Hesiod described the role women played in Greece: "The deadly female
race and tribe of wives/ Who live with mortal men and bring them harm,[ ... ] Women are
bad for men, and they conspire/ In wrong, and Zeus the Thunderer made it so."40 It is thus
unsurprising that the position of classical Greek goddesses within their pantheon was
subordinate to masculine, warrior gods.
The Goddess' identity was divided among lesser deities as their associated
specific shrine sites gained popularity. This division is reflected in the triads of Greek
goddesses: "In myth, goddesses frequently appear in threes, representing aspects of a
singly deity. Thus, although Hera, Athene and Aphrodite represent quite different forces,
the competition [for the Apple of Strife] may reflect a time when they were less
divided."41 These Greek goddesses represent another stage in the Goddess'
transformation; individual identities of specific Goddess variants or fractals were firmly
established. These identities were familiar as those previously associated with the
Supreme Goddess, but they were also much more limited:
Earlier, during Neolithic millennia, goddesses controlled birth giving, life
sustenance, death bringing, and regeneration. The Old European goddesses
carried out these functions powerfully, as reflected by their physically strong
portrayals in figurine and sculptural art. By classical times, the Old European
goddesses were eroticized, militarized to various degrees, and made subservient to
the gods. Aphrodite loses all functions but love and sexuality. 42
39
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 153.
40
Hesiod, Theogony, trans. Dorothea Wender, (New York: Penguin Books, 1973), 588-601.
41
"Greek Myths," Ed. Steve Eddy, 2001, <www.livingmyths.com/greek.htm>, Oct. 2012.
42
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 164.
21
Hesiod's account of Aphrodite's birth is similarly indicative of the roles to which she was
relegated:
The goddess came forth, lovely, much revered,/ [... ] Her name is Aphrodite among
men! And gods,/[ ... ] Eros is her companion; fair Desire/ Followed her from the
first, both among gods and men,/ She had this honour and received this power:/
Fond murmuring ofgirls, and smiles, and tricks,/ And sweet delight, and
friendliness, and charm. 43
This "honour and power" may seem significant, but not when compared to the extensive
roles of her Goddess ancestress. She had lost all her real power. Similarly, Athena was
stripped of all femininity and sexuality in order to receive her own militaristic powers.
The fettering of Aphrodite to these restricted roles is significant, and demands
explanation. Understanding the male role in procreation undermines the Goddess'
supreme position: "It can probably be assumed [... ] that the time any given culture
recognized the importance of the male in the procreative process, the potential for a
challenge to Goddess and to traditional matrilineal arrangements was present."44 The
recognition ofthe male role and subsequent superiority of males in society is evident
through attitudes which were reflected in myth and religion. These attitudes led to two
associated phenomenon. First, the idea that, "Female power[... ] was feared and had to be
controlled. The cult of virginity would emerge as a means of ensuring male ownership
and would become an important factor in the overthrowing of the matrilineal economic
system of the Neolithic cultures."45 Aphrodite was by no means a virgin, so her power
43
Hesiod, Theogony, 185-206.
44
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 87.
45
Ibid, 88.
22
had to be relinquished or subordinated. Even in the paltry form which she took in
classical Greece, Aphrodite was still feared for her sexuality:
In patriarchal Greece[ ... ] she is seen not only as a femme fatale and sometimes as
a nymphomaniac, but as a threat to the institution of marriage, with its extensive
financial ramifications. The story of the goddess of love and her lame husband,
Hephaistos, and handsome lover Ares could have emerged only from a culture
that had buried the old Goddess values in patriarchal ones. 46
Second of the phenomena, "The independent, parthenogenetic (creating life without male
participation) goddesses gradually became the brides, wives, and daughters of the IndoEuropean gods, albeit not always successfully or consensually."47 Aphrodite represents
both of these themes: while she retained a power of sorts, it was severely truncated to
include only love and sexuality; and she was finnly subordinated to the male pantheon,
some of whom eventually would copulate with her, consensually or not.
• Venus
The traditional founding of Rome in 753 B.C.E. situates the city in the midst of
the cultural transmission of the love goddess, offspring of the Supreme Goddess.
Although comparable to the goddesses ofEtruria and Greece, the civilizations which
most readily and successfully influenced Rome, Venus undoubtedly had unique and
distinct characteristics. However, prior to the first century B.C.E., the Roman love
goddess appeared infrequently. Venus first appeared prominently in Rome in the third
century B.C.E.:
46
Leeming and Page, Goddess, 139.
47
Gimbutas, The Living Goddess, 164.
23
In 217 B.C.E., after the Roman defeat at the battle of Lake Trasimene, the dictator
Quintus Fabius Maximus Cunctator consulted the Sibylline books, which ordered
him to dedicate a temple on the Capitoline Hill to Venus Erycina. Eryx, at the
western end of Sicily, was the site of a great temple to the Phoenician fertility
goddess Astarte, who later became identified with Aphrodite and then with Venus.
The dedication of the temple ofVenus Erycina in 215 was significant in the
development ofthe worship ofVenus at Rome.48
Few specific details about Venus are known before this point, and she is described
ambiguously by modern and contemporary mythologists. A typical example appears in
Mark Morford and Robert Lenardon's Classical Mythology: "Venus was an Italian
fertility goddess whose original functions are not known. She was worshipped in a
number of places. [... ] During the fourth century, contact with the Greek world led to
identification of Venus with the Greek goddess of love, Aphrodite." 49 However, Venus
was a daughter of the Goddess, and as such retained aspects of the former deity (e.g.
Demeter and Persephone, Christian god and Jesus). Furthermore, in keeping with the
goddess traditions established by Neolithic civilizations, which were reflected in the
nearby Etruscan civilization, Venus likely began in the same manner as her forbears
Astarte, Aphrodite, and Turan--that is, as a Supreme Goddess.
Cicero related the origins of Venus in Rome in his De Natura Deorum. His
account demonstrates the degree of syncretism inherent in Roman culture and religion. It
also provides some evidence about the manner by which the love goddess was
transmitted:
48 Mark Morford and Robert Lenardon, Classical Mythology, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007),
674.
Morford & Lenardon, Classical Mythology, 674; c.f. Cicero, De Natura Deorum, (Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press, 1967).
49
24
The first Venus is the daughter ofCaelus (Sky) and Dies (Day); I have seen her
temple at Ellis. The second was engendered from the sea-foam, and as we are told
became the mother by Mercurius of the second Cupidus. The third is the daughter
of Jupiter and Dione, who wedded Vulcanus. but who is said to have been the
mother of Anteros by Mars. The fourth we obtained from Syria and Cyprus, and is
called Astarte. 50
Cicero relates the existence of several goddesses, with associated temples, myths, and
names. However, they were all claimed as "Venus." Thus, Cicero demonstrates how
foreign deities and cults carne to Rome, and how the Romans then internalized the
resultant syncretic culture.
Venus assumed a prominent role in Rome in the first century B.C.E. Her identity
in the times of Rome's mythic kings (753-510 B.C.E.) was essentially lost, and she
remained elusive throughout the Republic period (510-27 B.C.E.) until about the turn of
the third century B.C.E. The first imperial Caesars, Julius and Augustus, manipulated
Venus' image to reenforce their visions of her as well as their visions for Rome. They also
sought to use her to lend divine credence in their struggles for power. The Caesar clan
had claimed descent from Venus for several centuries, but Julius made her a focal point of
his reign, a stratagem that his successor, Augustus, utilized to great effect. Furthermore,
the whole program is representative of the manner in which Augustus assumed power:
that is, through following the examples set by his uncle Julius.
°Cicero, De Natura Deorum, 3.21-23.
5
25
III. Becomipe Aueustus; Octayius the Boy Learns to Marshall Power
Gaius Octavius was born in Rome in 63 B.C.E., but raised in Velletri, a small hill
town about twenty five miles southeast of Rome. His family was respected and well .
established in the town. When Octavius was four, his father died and he was sent to live
with his maternal grandmother, the sister of Julius Caesar. He stayed with her until her
death in 51 B.C.E. Notably, the twelve year old Octavius was given the honor of
eulogizing his late grandmother. Civic instability marked Octavius' teenage years, as the
confrontation between Julius Caesar and Pompey escalated. Octavius remained outside of
the city until his uncle began including him in state affairs, around his seventeenth
birthday. In his biography, Augustus, Anthony Everitt describes the significance such
inclusion would have held for the young Octavius:
Toward the end of September [46 B.C.] there were eleven days of victory
celebrations, during which Caesar held an unprecedented four triumphs on four
days. [ ... ] The dictator planned to mark the conquest of Gaul, the brief Egyptian
war, the even briefer Asian war, and the defeat of Juba, the king of the northern
African kingdom ofNumibia. Juba was a stand-in for Cato and the republican
army, Caesar's real opponents: a fact that could not be openly admitted because
they had been Roman citizens, with whom it was forbidden to go to war. It so
happened that Octavius' seventeenth birthday fell during this festival of triumphs,
on September 23; to honor his great-nephew, Caesar invited Octavius to
accompany him in the parade for the African war and awarded him service medals
as ifhe had actually served on his staff during the campaign. The day of the
triumph will have been one of the most exciting in Octavius' life so far. Here were
fame and glory manifest, the ultimate prize to which a Roman could aspire. 51
It was an experience that irrevocably shaped Octavius' future. When he later marched
into Rome to 'save' the city, Octavius expected to receive similar treatment as Julius
51 Anthony Everitt, Augustus: The Life ofRome s First Emperor,
(New York: Random House, 2006),
39-40.
26
Caesar received from his loyal supporters. Nevertheless, Octavius was soon given further
opportunity in the responsibility for managing the theatrical program of the triumphal
celebrations. Soon thereafter, he was sent to Apollonia in anticipation of Caesar's
Parthian campaign in 45 B.C.E. Octavius was to spend the next four months completing
his education in literature and public speaking, as well as training with the army. The
intention was to provide Octavius with military experience, an important step towards a
political career for a Roman patrician. The easy assumption was that Octavius was being
groomed for command.
Octavius continued to await his great uncle inApolloni a until the Ides of March,
44 B.C.E. In Rome, Gaius Julius Caesar was assassinated in Pompey's theater on his way
to meet with the Senate. He was murdered mere months after being declared Dictator
perpetuo ("continual dictator"). The culprits were a group of senators led by M. Junius
Brutus and G. Cassius Longinus. When news of the murder reached Octavius, he decided
to return to Italy along with the legions that were to accompany Caesar to Parthia, as well
as groups of grieving veterans. However, the rest of Rome did not regard Octavius with
the same degree of respect as Caesar did, and he encountered problems soon after his
arrival. As Karl Galinsky notes in Augustan Culture: "When the young Octavian
appeared on the scene in 44 B.C. after Caesar's assassination, he had all too little
auctoritas. That, at least, was Cicero's assessment in one of his letters52 to Atticus."53
52
16.14.2
53
Karl Galinsky, Augustan Culture, (New Jersey: Princeton University Press), 15.
27
Auctoritas was a "quintessentially Roman" concept of power or authority that
incorporated a sense of morality and beneficence. 54
Upon his return, Octavius discovered that Caesar had written a new will during
his briefltalian sojourn following his Spanish campaigns in 45 B.C.E. Caesar's will was
read three days after his death by his father-in-law, C. Piso Caesoninus, at the consul
Marcus Antonius' house on the Palatine Hill. The bulk of Caesar's wealth was left to
Octavius, with the further stipulation that he be legally adopted by Caesar, postmortem.
However, M. Antonius refused to allow the young Caesar to receive his inheritance,
claiming that the money was needed for affairs of state. Octavius announced to the
Roman people that he would ensure that they received their own Caesarian legacy of 300
sesterces, even if he had to pay it from his own personal wealth. This confrontation
marked the first of several schisms between Octavius and Antonius; it was the birth of a
power struggle that would define the Roman world for nearly fifteen years.
After the adoption, Gaius Octavius changed his name to Gaius Julius Caesar
Octavianus. Soon thereafter he dropped 'Octavianus' completely. 55 Both changes were
intended as public statements by the erstwhile Octavius: he was no longer a child and
servant of Caesar, but a man capable of bearing the mantle left him by his new father. The
inheritance was not merely nominal either, as a corollary to the adoption Octavian
received Caesar's clientela. As Everitt explains, this act had a huge significance: "The
adoption was a personal, not a political, act. However, Caesar was handing Octavius a
54
c.£ Galinsky, Augustan Culture, 15.
55 For the sake of consistency and following the nomenclature of previous scholars (i.e. Everitt), he will
be referred to as 'Octavian' until his assumption of the title 'Augustus.'
28
priceless weapon: his name and his clientela, all those hundreds of thousands of soldiers
and citizens who were in his debt. As he must have known, he was giving the boy an
opportunity to enter politics at the top if he wished to do so - and if he had sufficient
talent." 56 Furthermore, the boy who entered the city with all too little auctoritas soon saw
his fortune reversed: "One [factor that contributed to augmenting the auctoritas of
Augustus] was the deification of Caesar. [... ] To be the son of a slain dictator was a mixed
blessing; to be the son of a god, an unmitigated one. Henceforth, divus Julius and
Octavian, Caesar divifilius, appeared on coins along with an image ofthe temple of the
Divine Julius Caesar which was being built in the Roman Forum." 57 A military
confrontation between Antonius and Octavian was inevitable as both men staked their
claim to be first citizen of Rome.
The first decisive battle between Octavian and Antonius took place at Mutina on
April21, 43 B.C.E. However, the recently inaugurated consuls G. Vibius Pansa
Caetronianus and Aulus Hirtius ('Pansa' and 'Hirtius') were responsible for leading their
forces combined with Octavian's Caesarian legions. In the days immediately preceding
the battle, forces on both sides were moving into the region ofMutina and staging for
war. Ambushes were laid and engaged and skirmishes broke out intermittently. The
prelude to the Battle ofMutina was Octavian's second opportunity to prove himself a
capable military leader, the first being his nearly catastrophic occupation of Rome
following Caesar's death. Hirtius and Pansa were both seasoned military commanders
and Caesarian compatriots from the recently 'concluded' Roman Civil Wars. Both
56
Everitt, Augustus, 57.
57
Galinsky, Augustan Culture, 17.
29
consuls acted deftly and urgently to outmaneuver Antonius and turn a supposed ambush
into a blood-soaked rout. Octavian, on the other hand, failed to garner any accolades, and
was later accused by Antonius of hiding while allowing the consular generals to marshall
the troops. On April 21st, the main battle of the confrontation erupted. Both consuls died
in the battle and Octavian fmally won a victory, along with some military acclaim and
much desired respect. Octavian reportedly rode into battle with Hirtius as they invaded
Antonius camp. When Hirtius was killed in the fray, Octavian protected the body, "like a
Homeric hero dragging his friend out of the melee."58 Furthermore, according to
Seutonius: "Though bleeding and wounded, [Octavian] took an eagle from the hands of a
dying aquilifer (standard bearer) and bore it back upon his shoulder to the camp." 59 This
encounter, along with his failed coup several moths earlier, taught Octavian a valuable
lesson about power, prestige, and respect. When he recalled his new father's legions and
invaded Rome, he did so under the presumption that not only the soldiers, but the city
itself would rise up in thanks and support ofhis mission. The name 'Caesar' clearly
meant a great deal more to Octavian than it did to contemporary Romans. Octavian
quickly learned that in an atmosphere of military conquest and social upheaval he was to
be judged on the basis of his own merits more than any pedigrees he may have offered.
With that lesson in mind, Octavian began to build and buttress his power through extramilitary means.
In November of 43 B.C.E., Octavian, Antonius, and M. Aemilius Lepidus met
near Mutina. They agreed to ally their forces and rule jointly in the fashion of the First
58
Everitt, Augustus, 73.
59
Suetonius, Twelve Caesars, (London: Penguin Books, 1979), 2.10.
30
Triumvirate. 60 According to Everitt, when the generals met, "there were three items on
the agenda: how to legalize their power; how to raise the funds needed to finance the war
against Brutus and Cassius; and how to keep the opposition from regaining its
strength."61 For Octavian, concerns over consolidation and legalization of power were
omnipresent ever since his near disastrous 'rescue' of the Republic. The newly
established 'Second Triumvirate' was confirmed by the Senate as Triumviri Rei Publicae
Constituendae Consulari Potestate ("Triumvirs for Confirming the Republic with
Consular Power"). With legitimate power, the other two goals were easy to achieve with
the simple act of legally declaring much of the opposition enemies of state, thus requiring
either their death or exile and also confiscating their wealth. These declarations and
subsequent murders were known as 'proscriptions,' and they effectively raised necessary
funds and kept opposition in Rome from regaining strength.
On January 1, 42 B.C.E., the Triumvirs participated in a ceremony celebrating the
apotheosis of Julius Caesar. This event was a portent for the way Octavian would conduct
himself in his continual endeavor to secure power for himself and reenforce his position.
With the mythological exception of Romulus set aside, never before had a mortal Roman
been elevated to divine status. For Octavian, this meant that he could now refer to himself
as divifilius, "the son of the god." The ceremony was further useful for Octavian because
now Brutus and Cassius hadn't merely murdered Caesar the dictator, they had murdered
the divine Julius. This ceremony is incredibly significant because it demonstrated that
Octavian had begun to understand that there were ulterior means of establishing his
60
G. Julius Caesar, Gn. Pompeius Magnus, and M. Licinius Crassus; ca. 60-53 B.C.E.
61
Everitt, Augustus, 78.
31
auctoritas, the full scope of his power. He had begun to perform in what Richard
Beacham refers to as the Augustan 'pageantr y of power:' "This theatricalization of
perception and experience [that] was a major defining element of the language, style,
ceremony, and metaphors through which the Augustan principate imagined and presented
itselfat every level and on every occasion." 62 The apotheosis ceremony was one of the
first events in which Octavian displayed his guile for civic strategizing through a
combination of politics, religion, and tradition.
With matters seemingly settled in Rome under the Triumvirs, Octavian shifted his
attention to pursuing Brutus and Cassius. They had their showdown in Greece at the
Battle ofPhillip i in 42 B.C.E. Here again, Octavian failed to secure for himselfth e
trappings of power, what he seems to have wanted more than anything else, namely
prestige and respect on the battlefield. He fell ill before the battle commenced and was
forced to command from the rear, a shameful and dishonorable course of action to the
Romans. Everitt offers a pragmatic explanation for Octavian's absence:
The likeliest scenario is that when it became clear that there was to be a battle,
Octavian was advised by his doctor that he was too ill to play an active part, and
would be wise to withdraw to a place of safety. Not very admirable behavior, but
understandable in a sick young man with little experience of battle. The damaging
consequence, though, was that Octavian acquired a reputation for cowardice. 63
The outcome of this unfortunate turn of events was a bittersweet victory for Octavian; he
had finally defeated the men he decried as his father's murderers, but in so doing he
reenforced his own unsavory military reputation. At this point, Octavian had technically
62 Richard Beacham, "The Emperor as Impresario:
Producing the Pageantry of Power," The Cambridge
Companion to the Age ofAugustus, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 152.
63
Everitt, Augustus, 91.
32
been the reigning general of two Roman victories, but he was still saddled with a
'reputation for cowardice.'
When the war against Brutus and Cassius ended, Octavian returned to Italy with
three of the eleven legions remaining to the triumviral forces. However, Antonius rather
than Octavian was largely seen as the senior Triumvir:
Although Octavian had much for which he could congratulate himself, his
position was subordinate and insecure. The real victor of Philippi was Mark
Antony, whose generalship contrasted shamingly with his own performance on
the battlefield. For the time being, Octavian had no choice but to accept his
colleague's predominance; he must seize each opportunity to advance his
authority as and when it presented itself.64
Additionally, the veterans under Octavian's command insisted upon receiving the land
grants that were promised them for their service, and Octavian acceded to their demands
by confiscating the land in eighteen Italian cities and turning it over to soldiers. One of
those evicted during this time was Publius Vergilius Maro, or more commonly - Vergil.
Meanwhile, Antonius had set off for the east with eight legions. He was supposed
to undertake the long awaited Parthian campaign, something that took him a few years to
get around to starting. However, almost immediately after he parted company with
Octavian, Antonius began presenting himself as the 'New Dionysus:' "Trumping the divi
filius, Antony decided to claim divine status on his own account. He presented himself to
the people of Asia as the new Dionysus. " 65 The relationship between Antonius and
Octavian was always strained and tenuous. When Antonius cast himself as a god it was
an obvious challenge to Octavian's recently acquired status of semi divinity. While he
64
Everitt, Augustus, 95.
65
Ibid, 100.
33
was away, Antonius met Cleopatra VII Philopator. She travelled to Tarsus in 41 B.C.E.
and presented herself as Aphrodite to Antony's Dionysus.
Word spread that Aphrodite (whom many worshippers identified with Isis) had
come to revel with Dionysus 'for the happiness of Asia.' This notion doubtless
originated with Cleopatra, but it shows that Antony's religious propaganda
featuring himself as the New Dionysus was evidently working its way into the
public mind. She herself well understood the role of religion in royal selfpromotion. If she was consciously presenting herself as Aphrodite, she was at one
level making a direct sexual offer; but, more profoundly, she was also putting in a
claim to be Antony's divine partner. 66
Octavian too understood the important role that religion played in royal self promotion,
but imitating the route of Antonius would not have been accepted in Rome. The Roman
senators had never yet officially accepted a living god, and they had killed the last man to
attain even a fraction of that power. Octavian didn't immediately respond to the inherent
challenge proffered by Antonius and Cleopatra's claims to divine status, and Octavian 's
own pretensions to divinity had not even properly begun at this point. Nevertheless, it
was enough to distance himself from Antonius' actions, which were increasingly
perceived as oriental.
In 40 B.C.E., the triumvirate was rededicated and renewed at Brundisium. In the
same year, Antonius married Octavian's sister, Octavia. The marriage was intended to
seal the newly signed triumviral treaty with a public statement of unity. The marriage
lasted eight years, more than half of which saw Antonius away from Italy and Octavia.
However, while Antonius was away, Octavian had more important matters to oversee; he
was dealing with a lengthy challenge from Pompey Magnus' son, Sextus Pompeius, while
simultaneously attempting to set the burgeoning empire back on a stable foundation. He
66
Everitt, Augustus, 102.
34
also was married, became a father, divorced, and remarried. The latter and final of his
marriages, to Livia Drusilla in 38 B.C.E., was to last for the remainder of his life. In 36
B.C.E., Antonius began the long awaited Parthian campaign (planned by Julius Caesar) ,
during which time he reunited with Cleopatra. Antonius and Cleopatra continued on to
Armenia in due course before returning to Egypt. Although Antonius' marriage to Octavia
was intended to reestablish a portrait of cohesion, it instead was yet another source of ire
between Antonius and Octavian.
In 32 B.C.E., the tenuous relationship between Antonius and Octavian irrevoca bly
disintegrated. A battle of declarations, insults, and propaga nda broke out between the two
men. Antonius then formally divorced Octavia and Octavian had Antonius' will publishe
d
in which he left pieces of the Roman empire to his children as inheritance, in other words,
he was portrayed as having 'gone native;' he was more an easterner than a Roman. Both
Triumvirs took the affronts from the other as declarations of war. Octavian won a
decisive sea battle off the coast of Actium in 31 B. C.E. Antonius and Cleopatra escaped
capture by fleeing to Alexandria, where they were besieged by Octavian. Both Antonius
and Cleopatra soon committed suicide, when they realized they had no chance of
emerging victorious. The way was now clear for Octavian to assume sole rulership of
Rome and to continue his program of consolidating and legitimizing his own power.
Octavian grew from a slight and sheltered boy in the country to be the premier
ruler of Rome in the first century B.C.E. He had been groome d for the position in various
ways since he was a teenager under the tutelage of his great uncle Julius. He was forced
to learn through experience as much as by exemplum; his military endeavors and his
35
----------------
-------
-----~--
-
failed political machinations both served to show him the wrong way of doing things. In
his quest to attain the prestige and auctoritas of his adoptive father he nearly lost his
inheritance, his reputation, and his life, but he nevertheless victoriously assumed the role
of first citizen, the princeps.
During the decade preceding the Battle of Actium, Antonius and Cleopatra were
masquerading as Dionysus and Aphrodite (or Osiris and Isis, in Egypt), but as previou sly
discussed, no mortal Roman had ever been officially recognized as divine while alive.
Julius Caesar was only granted the privilege after his death. Therefore, Octavian could
not repay the eastern couple in kind; he had to utilize tactics that were at once more
subtle, and yet still conveye d a sense of awe and respect onto the person of Octavian. In
formulating his strategy, he followed the exemplum set by his great uncle Julius as well
as
the help and advice of his friends. Chief amongst those friends was G. Cilinius
Maecenas' circle of poets and historians, especially Vergil. Octavian thus coupled his
ambition with the greatest contemporary literary talents in Italy.
36
IY. The Virtue ofYer:il's venus
In 27 B.C.E., the Senate bestowed upon Octavian several special privileges.
Foremost among these privileges was a newly created title: Augustus. As a result of his
many military difficulties, Augustus learned that legitimated power could come from a
variety of sources. His uncle, G. Julius Caesar, had followed the dictatorial model of
Marius and Sulla; that is, military takeover and martial law. While Julius made an effort
to appear more legitimate and less bloodthirsty than his predecessors, he still came to an
untimely death at the hands of several senators after surviving numerous and lengthy
campaigns abroad. Additionally, Augustus' military victories were rarely even recognized
as distinctly his; Hirtius and Pansa shared credit for the victory over M. Antonius in the
Battle of the Forum Gallorum (43 B.C.E.), and M. Vipsanius Agrippa deservedly received
credit for much of the military prowess that the imperial legions exhibited during his
extensive reign as general (including the Battle of Actium). Therefore, Augustus began a
series of efforts directed at shoring up his position, legitimating his power, and elevating
his personal and familial status. In "Augustus and the Power of Tradition," Walter Eder
describes Augustus' concerted efforts: "[Augustus] always sought recognition for his
accomplishments and assiduously saw to raising his and his family's profile in both
Rome and the provinces through the media of architecture, literature, and art. At the same
time, he had also renounced all insignia of personal power: no scepter, no diadem, nor the
golden crown and purple toga of his adoptive father." 67 To further these goals, Augustus
67 Walter Eder, "Augustus and the Power of Tradition,"
The Cambridge Companion to the Age of
Augustus, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 13.
37
embraced an established Julian tradition: he relied upon his family's claim of divine
ancestry.
• Aeneas
Aeneas was a Trojan prince in Horner's Iliad. He was the son of Anchises and the
goddess Venus (Aphrodite in Horner). He began appearing in Greek artistic
representations beginning at least by the eighth century, from whom the Etruscans
adopted the tradition. However, he didn't make an impact on Rome until the third century
B.C.E. Roman historians (Naevi us, Fabius Pictor, Ennius, Cato) from the third century
onwards described Aeneas as the Trojan progenitor of Rome. 68 About a century later, S.
Julius Caesar began the Julian tradition of portraying Venus on coins. The tradition
continued through L. Julius Caesar (ca. 100 B.C.E.), to G. Julius Caesar, to Augustus. G.
Julius Caesar is the first of the Julii to claim descent from Aeneas, thus making the
family's divine association more plausible and assertive than an obscure claim of descent
from Venus and simultaneously associating the Julii clan with a Trojan hero. In The Art of
Persuasion, Jane DeRose Evans suggests several ways that Caesar vindicated his claim:
After the Battle of Pharsalus in 48, Caesar combined [the propaganda of coins,
inscriptions and building programs] with a specific claim of descent from Aeneas,
heretofore only implied in the Julian propaganda. We know several means by
which he did this, but we still must answer how he managed to transform Aeneas
from a generalized founder of the Roman people to the founder of a specific
family. The most attractive answers are Caesar sforce ofpersonality, the
c.f. Jane DeRose Evans, The Art ofPersuasion: Political Propaganda from Aeneas to Brutus,
(Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1992), 36-40.
68
38
insistence ofhis claim, and the readiness of the Roman people to accept this
personalized version oftheir national foundation story. 69
Furthermore, Evans argues that Caesar undertook this endeavor to "create an image of
legitimacy for his rule over Rome, claiming that it was sanctioned by the very gods
themselves.''7° This is precisely what Augustus did with his own associations with Aeneas
and Venus.
Augustus succeeded the accomplishments of his uncle in many ways. While Julius
briefly and tenuously held ultimate power in Rome, Augustus consolidated power,
established an individual auctoritas, reorganized the politics of the burgeoning empire,
strove to give the Romans mores (morals) to accompany their leges (laws), and largely
ruled Rome and the empire from his return from Egypt in 29 B.C.E. untiJ his death in 14
>,t;
C.E. Augustus also continued the tradition begun by his ancestors and perpetuated by
Julius: he sustained and enhanced the familial association with Aeneas and Venus. For
instance, Julius began construction on the Temple of Venus Genetrix in his new forum.
He dedicated it in 46 B.C.E., but it was Augustus who completed construction on the
temple in 29 B.C.E. Augustus also continued the tradition through coins, statues, and
literature.
• The Aeneid
69
Evans, The Art ofPersuasion, 40-41.
70
Ibid, 41.
39
Vergil's epic, the Aeneid, is the foremost example of Augustan literature. P.
Vergilius Maro began writing his epic poem in 29 B.C.E. and still considered it
incomplete when he died ten years later. Regardless, Augustus had the poem publish ed
and it has since captivated audiences of casual readers and scholars alike. Despite low
rates of literacy in the lower classes ofthe ancient world, e.g. Roman plebes, Vergil's
poem was widely known and enjoyed. Recitations of the poem were commonly
performed and attended among all classes, and these remained more popular than written
distribution throughout Augustus' life. 71 As described by Karl Galinsky, the general
expectation of the poem was that it would be, "an Augusteid, and incorporate the Aeneas
story- the Julian family was named after Aeneas' son Julus- by flashback. Such praise
epics, in honor of a statesman or general, had been the fashion in Rome for decades ."72
The poem that Vergil wrote was much more diverse, and was certainly not an Augusteid.
The Aeneid primarily focuses on Aeneas, and occasionally foretells the greatness of times
to come; but the epic achieved what an overblown and idealized apotheosis of Augustu s
couldn't: it established an heroic, mythical past for Augustus' ancestors which lent
Augustus a renewed air of divinity divorced from the claims of Julius Caesar.
Several examples from the Aeneid are illustrative ofVergi l's masterful work in
aligning Augustus' moral imperatives with his own poetic and narrative sensibilities. Two
particular examples that demonstrate the alliance of Augustus' intentions with Vergil's
artistic productions occur in Books Four and Eight of the Aeneid, concerning Queen
71 c.f. Evans, The Art ofPersuasion, 7; Peter
White, "Poets in the new Milieu: Realigning," The
Cambridge Companion to the Age ofAugustus, (New York: Cambridge University Press,
2005), 323.
72 Karl Galinsky, "Vergil's Aeneid and
Ovid's Metamorphoses as World Literature," The Cambridge
Companion to the Age ofAugustus, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 344.
'
40
Dido, and Venus and Vulcan, respectively. The concluding example, of the deities Venus
and Vulcan, further resembles efforts made by Augustus to alter gender ideology in
ancient Rome.
When Aeneas meets Queen Dido in Carthage in Book Four, his course of action is
extraordinarily overdetermined. The scene presents a sharp dichotomy of options for the
hero: he may either remain in Carthage, with his foreign Queen and all the trappings of an
eastern court (i.e. those very things from which he was divested earlier in the epic); or he
may persevere with his divinely ordained and assisted journey to Italy. In this instance,
Dido acts as a phantom of Cleopatra, and delivered a message to Vergil 's and Augustus'
contemporary Roman audience: after Actium and Alexandria, Octavian could have
followed the example set by Julius Caesar and followed by M. Antonius; he could have
stayed in Egypt and potentially aligned himself with Cleopatra and styled himself as an
eastern ruler. Instead, and like Aeneas, he did his moral duty and returned to Italy.
Furthermore, as Galinsky notes, Dido is compared with Diana in Book Four, and this,
"complements Aeneas' comparison to Apollo, thus underlining the affinity between Dido
and Aeneas and, at the same time, the impossibility of a marriage: Apollo and Diana were
brother and sister. " 73 However, the significance of this statement goes even further when
considering the roles that M. Antonius and Cleopatra fulfilled in Egypt. They had long
since assumed divine associations; Antonius through his identification as the "New
Dionysus" in 37 B.C.E., and Cleopatra through the traditional female pharaonic role of
Isis. Through his relationship with Cleopatra, Antonius was further associated with Isis'
73
Galinsky, Augustan Culture, 230.
41
mythic brother and husband, Osiris. Thus, the sting ofVergil' s barb was exacerbated by
disparaging the connotations of the identities assumed by Antonius and Cleopatra.
Vergil's exemplum of Aeneas and Dido is clearly extremely rich and full of meaning.
The depiction ofVenus in Vergil's epic has little similarity to any prior literary or
mythic tradition. In Homer's epics, Aphrodite is depicted as conniving, manipulative, and
unfaithful.74 Vergil presents her in a far different fashion. Augustus needed to recast
Venus in the way that she appears in Vergil's epic. When Antonius began identifying
himself as the "New Dionysus," Cleopatra came to him in the guise of Aphrodite. The
Egyptians believed that Cleopatra, as pharaoh, was the living incarnation of Isis, whose
identity was closely related historically to both Venus and Aphrodite. Furthermore, in the
incorporative religious atmosphere of ancient Rome, deities could have multiple
identities. This multiplicity is demonstrated clearly by the different cults of specific
shrine sites: Iuppiter Feretrius or Iuppiter Optimus Maximus, Venus Genetrix or Venus
Felix; each deity had multiple associations. If Cleopatra was going to play the role of an
oriental love goddess, then the mythical matron of Augustus and the Romans had to be
chaste and modest.
The marital idyll depicting Venus and Vulcan in Book Eight is remarkable
because of the portrait it presents of the love goddess. In the first place, the very meeting
between the two is significant. Although Vulcan was Venus' mythological husband, he
was certainly not her consort. Rather, he was cuckolded by Mars, the god ofwar.75
Nevertheless, Vergil arranges that the two meet, and their interaction is respectful, loving,
74
c.f. Iliad, Book Three; Odyssey, Book Eight.
75
c.f. Odyssey, Book Eight.
42
and tender. Venus approaches Vulcan in order to obtain arms for her son, Aeneas. In her
approach, she beseeches the god of the forge on behalf of their shared love, "as a
suppliant" (and thus aided by Zeus), and "as a mother:" "0 my dearest husband,[ ... ] I
come to you as a suppliant. I approach that godhead which I so revere, and as a mother, I
ask you to make arms for my son." 76 Vergil thus presents the two gods in a deliberate and
novel fashion that is quite literal in its moral suggestions. Venus especially is here
portrayed more virtuously than in any other previous artistic representations. An allusion
is made to her sexual powers, but she is primarily described as submissive and maternal.
Vulcan assents to her request and sets to work the following morning. However,
Vergil prefaces Vulcan's tasks with an idealized portrait of 'a woman's task.' More
importantly, these lines immediately follow the scene with Venus and Vulcan. The divine
interaction thus concludes with a depiction of responsibilities for both men and women
which were delivered as moral imperatives:
When the night had passed the middle of its course, when Vulcan's first sleep was
over and there was no more rest, just when the ashes are first stirred to rouse the
slumbering fire by a woman whose task it is to support life by the humble work of
spinning thread on a distaff; taking time from the night for her labours, she sets
her slave women going by lamplight upon their long day's work, so that she can
keep her husband's bed chaste and bring her young sons to manhood- with no
less zeal than such a woman and not a moment later did the God of Fire rise from
his soft bed and go to work at his forge. 77
76
Vergil, The Aeneid, Trans. David West, (New York: Penguin Books, 2003), 8.381.
77
Ibid, 8.409-416.
43
'A man's task' is then represented both in the work ofVulcan at the forge (mirroring
Venus' work in approaching Vulcan), and the scene of King Evander and Aeneas
discussing their plans and responsibilities in the coming war. 78
A similar and concomitant phenomenon to the moral portrait of Venus in the
Aeneid was a series of laws proposed by Augustus in 18 and 17 B.C.E., the leges Julii.
The Lex Julia de maritandis ordinibus made marriage compulsory for men between the
ages of twenty five to sixty, and women between twenty and fifty. It also set a maximum
mourning period before a widow must remarry, levied prohibitions against maritally
restrictive fathers, and provided incentives for women with three or more children. The
Lex Julia de adulteriis coercendis established firm rules and proceedings in cases of
adultery. While the leges Julii were important to Augustus, the received constant criticism
and revision almost immediately following their reception. As Galinsky argues in
Augustan Culture, "Leges were needed, but mores were even more importan t.[ ... ] A
proper moral attitude was more fundamental than laws and oaths to abide by them."79
Toward that end, Augustus arranged the ludi saeculare, or Secular Games, to celebrate
these new marriage laws. The notion was adopted from an Etruscan custom of
commemorating the end of a saecula, 100 or 110 years. A primary feature of Augustus '
festival was reverence for marriage and childbirth, which is exhibited throughout
Horace's Carmen Saeculare, commissioned by Augustus for the occasion and performe d
by a chorus of twenty seven boys and twenty seven girls.
78
c.f. Vergil, The Aeneid, 8.455-540.
79
Galinsky, Augustan Culture, 102.
44
Following his victory over Antonius and Cleopatra, Augustus set to reorderi ng the
Roman Empire. One of his primary tasks was establishing his family's mythic, heroic
past, and justifying his leges and actions on behalf of the Senate and People of Rome. He
accomplished these goals through various avenues, but they tended to operate collecti vely
and symbiotically. The publication of the Aeneid, the passage of the leges Julii, and the
celebration ofthe Secular Games and recitation ofHorac e's Carmen Saeculare all
occurred between 19 and 17 B.C.E. and represent concerted efforts made by Augustu s to
enforce his revitalized Roman mores. The depiction of Venus in the Aeneid thus
coincided with a series of Augustu s' leges and a concomitant celebration of a new era, or
saecula.
• Publius Yergilius Maro: Poet or Propagandist?
Vergil was hom in 70 B.C.E., seven years before Augustus. He was classically
educated, e.g. in law and rhetoric, but chose to pursue poetry professionally. Vergil's first
encounter with Augustus occurred when Augustus returned from his war with Brutus and
Cassius and seized lands in Italy to give to his troops. Vergil was among the displace d
Italians, but his land was soon returned to him thanks to powerful friends petitioning
Augustus on his behalf. Vergil and Augustus developed a professional and personal
relationship after this. However, the friendship of the two men necessarily raises the
question ofVergi l's motivation for praising Augustus in his works. For instance, Vergil's
Aeneid has long been considered a literary mouthpiece for Augustu s' political message s.
45
The poem was written in the common dactylic hexameter over the course often years.
Vergil dedicated that time to completing the epic (at a pace of about two lines per day),
but was still dissatisfied with the work when he died in 19 B.C.E. Following Vergil's
death, Augustus had the poem published despite Vergil's deathbed pleas to burn the work.
"Arma virumque cano" - "I sing of arms and the man." Thus Vergil began his epic
poem, the Aeneid. But who was "the man" about whom Vergil sang? Was Vergil singing
about Aeneas, as the title suggests, or Augustus, his emperor, personal friend and patron?
While at first glance the answer appears obvious, nevertheless scholars continue to debate
over whose voice is speaking through the text. In the fourth century C.E., Maurus Servius
Honoratus (' Servius ') dedicated one of his texts to comments on Vergil 's Aeneid. The
term "propaganda" had no significance for the Romans whether contemporaries ofVergi
l
or Servius, but Servius makes no mention of any concern over a manipulative hand
working behind the scenes to influence the poet. Servius' focused on interpretation and
close reading in his commentary, largely ignoring the systemic question of the poem's
origins. Only after the tum of the twentieth century did scholars begin looking at the
Aeneid in terms of"prop aganda, " rather than "masterpiece" or "literary genius."
Beginning in the twentieth century, attitudes towards Vergil were overwhelmingly
suspicious. In The Classical Weekly, from April, 1926, Mabel Gant Murphy demonstrates
a common Vergilian reception in her article: "Vergil as a Propagandist." The title itself
asserts her argument before she can even begin to unpack her explications. In her article,
Murphy makes several bold claims about the nature of poetry and society in Augusta n
Rome. The first of these is a sweeping pronunciation that, "Oratory and free speech had
46
died with the Republic." 80 Even this argument has come under considerable speculati on
recently, 81 but she furthers her claim by stating that, "Literature was the only means left
for influencing public opinion. Augustus availed himself of it freely and collected about
him a group of eminent writers. Publius Vergilius Maro became the poetic pillar of the
reign." 82 Furthermore, in one especially bold statement Murphy asserts that, "The Aeneid
was undoubtedly the largest and most important work ofpropaganda undertaken by
Vergil."83 To her contemporaries, these claims were nothing unusual; just another scholar
espousing the canonized views regarding Vergil. However, Murphy's arguments would
all be called into question before the end of the century; for example, was literature "the
only means left for influencing public opinion?," Did Augustus "avail himself of it
[consciously]?" More recent commentators question every assumption upon which
Murphy rests her arguments, but scholarship did not progress fluidly to an antithesis.
In the next decade, conceptions ofVergil' s work remained in tune with the chord
that Murphy had struck. In other words, Vergil was largely accepted as a "propaga ndist."
In 1939, L. Robert Lind largely echoed the sentiments that Murphy had asserted. In his
article, "The Crisis in Literature: Propaganda and Letters," Lind states that, "The quiet
Vergil, most characteristic poet of the age, has left clear traces in his poems of obedienc e
to the wishes of his imperial master, Augustus; the Aeneid is in essence as elevated and
splendid a piece of propaganda as one could desire, hymning the glories ofRome through
so Mabel Gant Murphy, "Vergil as Propagandist," The Classical Weekly, 19 (1926): 169.
81
c.f. Galinsky, Age ofAugustus.
82
Murphy, "Vergil as Propagandist," 169.
83
Ibid, 170.
47
the old story of Aeneas." 84 Here, as in Murphy's article, Vergil is overtly accepted as an
author of "as elevated and splendid a piece ofpropaganda as one could desire." The
motivations of the artist are given little consideration when measured against the
awesome force that was Augustus in the first century B.C.E. However, Lind foreshadows
the approaching attitudes of late twentieth and early twenty first century scholars when he
concedes that, "Art may possess many other characteristics besides those which pertain to
propaganda. It may be beautiful, expressive, communicative, comforting, or completely
silent; qualities like these remain and are often long enduring, regardless of the social
message which the creator also tries to convey.[ ... ] Propaganda, then, is but one of the
many possible functions of painting, architecture, music, prose or poetry."85 So for Lind,
Vergil was a propagandist, but the art that he created may have had further uses,
explanations and connotations.
Lind's article signaled an approaching change of hearts and minds regarding
Vergil's motivations. The attitude that would come to replace that of acceptance of
Vergil 's primary role as a propagandist was heralded in 1964 by Wendell Clausen. He
offered a different account of events in his article, "An Interpretation of the Aeneid,"
published in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology. For Clausen, "Virgil's [sic] vision of
Roman history is not propaganda, for he does not simply proclaim what Rome achieved;
nor is it sentimental, for he does not simply dwell on what the achievement cost. Virgil
values the achievement of Rome [... ] and yet he remains aware of the inevitable suffering
L. Robert Lind, "The Crisis in Literature: II: Propaganda and Letters," The Sewanee Review, 47
(1939): 185.
84
85
Ibid, 189.
48
and loss: it is this perception of Roman history as a long Pyrrhic victory of the human
spirit that makes Virgil his country's truest historian. " 86 Here, Clausen presents an
antithesis to Murphy's argument that Vergil was a plain and simple propagandist.
The next significant shift in approaches to Vergil came in the form of Karl
Galinsky's thorough investigation of Roman society in the first century B.C.E., Augustan
Culture. Although published in 1996, the book championed scholarship undertaken from
the 1970s onward. Galinsky begins his analysis of Augustan culture by considering the
historiography of the twentieth century: "There is no question that we are looking at the
Augustan age with different eyes in the 1990s than our forebears did in the 1930s. We
have witnessed that 'ideology ' and 'propagan da' are inadequate foundations for lasting
political systems."87 In this introduction, Galinsky clearly signals the slant that his work
will take. Toward that end, one of Galinsky's primary assertions throughout the work is
that Augustan art cannot be simply interpreted as propaganda. To begin his argument,
Galinsky relies upon The Power of/mages in the Age ofAugustus (1988), in which Paul
Zanker substitutes, "the cliche of Augustan 'propaganda' for a system (which is not
necessarily systematic) of far more autonomous, complex, and organic interactions. " 88
The crux ofthis argument, for both Zanker and Galinsky, is that, "many of [the] Augustan
phenomena were in a state of nascence and evolution."89 When Augustus approached
Vergil about composing an epic, Augustus had recently defeated Mark Antony and
Wendell Clausen, "An Interpretation of the Aeneid," Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 68
(1964): 146.
86
8?
Galinsky, Augustan Culture, 5.
88
Ibid, 5.
89
1bid, 8.
49
Cleopatra in Egypt, thus securing for himsel f all of the Roman empire. Howev
er, in so
doing he also brought peace and stability to a region and people that had been
engage d in
brutal civil wars for nearly a hundred years. The holistic view of Augustus' reign
began to
gain momentum as early as 1974, when Woodman and West addressed the questio
n here
considered:
Easy distinctions such as 'Is this poetry or propaganda?' and 'Are the poets
sincere or are they puppet s?' take us nowhere. The matter is complicated by the
genuine friendships within the circle of writers and principes viri, by the delicac
y
with which Maecenas treats his poets, by the recognition that Augustus had
restored peace, order and idealism to a society which had lost them, by the
significance of the form a poem takes and of the time when it was written. There
can have been few ages in which poets were so intimately and affectionately
connected with the holders of political power, few regimes with a richer
iconography, few poets so profoundly moved by a political ideal and so equipp
ed
to sing its praises with subtlety, humor, learning, and rapture. The reader of these
poems needs a touch of all of these.90
Thus, the tradition that began with Lind and Clausen had developed even further.
only was Vergil not a propagandist, but the very question itself leads one away
Not
from a
plenary interpretation of both Vergil and Augustan culture. Galinsky provides
a succinct
summary for the entire "phenomenon:" "Especially in the arts and literature, the
phenomenon is more complex than mere 'propaganda;' it is a reciprocal and dynam
ic
process in which the empero r's role is hard to pin down.''9 1 However, the difficul
ty of
such an endeavor did not prevent later scholars, as well as Galinsky, from continu
ing to
argue for one interpretation or another.
90 Galinsky, Augusta n Culture,
13; quoting Woodman, T., and West, D., eds. Quality and Pleasure in
Latin Poetry (Cambridge, 1974).
91
1bid, 20.
50
In Augustan Culture, Galinsky concedes that "recently, the pendulum has swung
back a bit: the poets are seen neither as ideological supporters nor cyptocritics, but as
purveyors of ambivalences, ambiguities, and ironies on a rather massive scale.''92 This
viewpoint regarding the poets is commonly held and argued by modem scholars, but it is
not universally accepted. In 2005, Galinsky served as editor for a collection of essays,
The Cambridge Companion to the Age ofAugustus. In this work, for which Galinsk y also
contributed original material, the interpretation espoused in Augustan Culture in 1996
comes under renewed consideration. In the essay "Poets in the New Milieu: Realign ing,"
Peter White claims that currently, "Schola rs are probably less close to agreement about
the proper framework in which to understand Augustu s' relationship with poets than at
any time since the debate began.''93 For instance, in that same collection, Walter Eder
characterizes the years of Augustus' reign as an "inseparable mix of propaganda and
tactics," 94 while Richard Beacham posits that the same years were, "[a] thoroug hgoing
revival of religious practice [... ] to link worship and devout feeling to [Augustus'] own
program of comprehensive renewal and reform.''9 5 These statements make it clear that all
of the commentators here discussed still have their own proponents and detractors, and
that the argument continues to rage over Vergil's and Augustus' role in the product ion of
the epic poem.
92
Galinsky, Augustan Culture, 245.
93 Peter White, "Poets in the New
Milieu: Realingni ng," The Cambridge Companion to the Age of
Augustus, 336.
94 Walter Eder, "Augustu s and the Power of Tradition, " The Cambridg
e Companion to the Age of
Augustus, 22.
Richard Beacham , "The Emperor as Impressario: Producing the Pageantry of Power,"
The Cambrid ge
Companion to the Age ofAugustus, 162.
9S
51
Rome in the first century B.C.E. was a chaotic place that endured rapid societal
and cultural transformation. The literary scene was no different from many other aspects
of civilization. Poets found themselves in a changed and changing atmosphere in which
they could create influence as much as they themselves were influenced. Vergil's epic
poem, the Aeneid, is a primary example of just such a work. In the early decades of the
twentieth century, scholars proposed that Vergil acted as something of a 'minister of
propaganda' for Augustus. As the century wore on, this interpretation came under
question. Through the 1960s, 70s and 80s, the voice of the arguments began to take on a
substantially different tone: Vergil was an artist, as well as a propagandist. In the 1990s,
the argument was carried yet further to almost obliterate the possibility ofVergil being a
propagandist. However, by the turn of the twenty first century, the argument once again
encapsulated the possibility ofVergil acting as both artist and propagandist.
52
X Conclusion
Although Venus didn't appear in Rome until at least after the city's foundation in
the eighth century B.C.E., her forbears were widely worshipped throughout the ancient
Mediterranean region from at least 30,000 B.C.E. However, those forbears did not
determine the identity of successive goddesses, as made evident through analyses of
Ishtar, Astarte, Aphrodite, Turan, and Venus. The identities of these goddesses were
influenced by shrine sites and their cults and operations, military takeovers by patrilineal
societies, and trading associations with religiously syncretic cultures. The Roman Venus
probably resembled one of her contemporary 'sister' goddesses before the intervention of
the Julian family. The early Caesars claimed descent from Venus, but G. Julius Caesar
and Caesar Augustus took the phenomenon farther than their ancestors. Augustus
represents the climax of the tradition. He successfully wed his familial claim to divinity
to a new, moral presentation of his divine matron, and accompanied the conjugation with
a series oflaws intended to instill morals in the people of Rome. Augustus' project of
moral reform in Rome was successful thanks largely to the poets, and other artists, that he
commissioned and patronized and who cooperated with his vision. His partnership with
Vergil produced a portrait of the goddess Venus that was supremely important to Romans
in the first centuries, B.C.E. and C.E. because she was a renewed matron deity of and for
the city. Augustus often credited the stability of his reign and his military and political
victories to her divine assistance; this was made clear through literary works, temple
dedications, and repeated use of her image on coins. Much like Hesiod's elaborate
53
delineations of Greek deities' family trees in his Theogony and Works and Days, Vergil's
explication of Venus' character became a canonized and state endorsed religious doctrine
54
.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cicero. De Natura Deorum. Trans. H. Rackham. Harvard University Press,
Massachusetts, 1967. Print
Clausen, Wendell. "An Interpretation of the Aeneid." Harvard Studies in Classical
Philology 68 (1964): 139-147. JSTOR. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/310802>
Cornelius, Izak. The Many Faces ofthe Goddess: The Iconography of the SyroPalestinian Goddesses Anat, Astarte, Qedeshet, andAshe rah c. 1500-1000 BCE.
Academic Press Fribourg, Switzerland, 2004. Print
Dudley, Donald. The Civilization of Rome. Mentor Books, New York, 1960. Print.
Evans, Jane DeRose. The Art ofPersuasion: Political Propaganda from Aeneas to
Brutus. University of Michigan Press, Michigan, 1992. Print.
Everitt, Anthony. Augustus: The Life of Rome sFirst Emperor. Random House, New
York, 2006. Print.
Galinsky, Karl. Augustan Culture. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1996. Print.
Gimbutas, Marija. The Living Goddess. University of California Press, California, 2001.
Print.
"Greek Myths." Living Myths. Ed. Steve Eddy. 2001. Adapted from Understand Greek
Mythology. Steve Eddy. (Teach Yourself, 2012). Oct. 2012.
<www.livin!j1:myths.com/greek.htm>
Hadas, Moses. A History ofRome. Doubleday & Co, New York, 1956. Print.
Hesiod. Theogony. Ed. Betty Radice. Trans. Dorothea Wender. Penguin Books, New
York, 1973. Print.
Leeming, David and Page, Jake. Goddess: Myths of the Female Divine. Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 1994. Print
Lind, L. Robert. "Crisis in Literature: II: Propaganda and Letters." The Sewanee Review
47 (1939): 184-203. JSTOR. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/27535534>
Morford, Mark and Lenardon, Robert. Classical Mythology. Oxford University Press,
Oxford, 2007. Print.
55
Murphy, Mabel Gant. "Vergil as a Propagandist." The Classical Weekly 19 (1926):
169-174. JSTOR. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4388771>
Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Penguin Books, London, 1979. Print.
The Cambridge Companion to the Age ofAugustus. ed. Karl Galinsky. Cambridge
University Press, New York, 2005. Print.
Vergil. The Aeneid. Trans. David West. Penguin Books, New York, 2003. Print.
56