CRISTO RAUL.ORG

READING HALL

THE DOORS OF WISDOM

OCTAVIUS CAESAR AUGUSTUS :

THE LIFE AND TIMES OF THE FOUNDER OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE

CHAPTER VIII

THE NEW CONSTITUTION, B.C. 30-23

The seven years which followed the death of Antony and Cleopatra witnessed the settlement of the new constitution in its most important points. It has been called a dyarchy, the two parties to it being the Emperor and the Senate. They were not, however, at any time of equal power. As far as it was possible Augustus rested his various functions on the same foundation as those of the Republican magistrates, and treated the Senate with studious respect. But in spite of all professions, in spite even of himself, he became a monarch, whose will was only limited by those forces of circumstance and sentiment to which the most autocratic of sovereigns have at times been forced to bow. The important epochs in this reconstruction are the years BC29, 27, 23; but it will be necessary sometimes to anticipate the course of events and to speak at once of what often took many years to develop.

The reduction of the vast armaments which the various phases of the civil war had called into existence was made possible by the wealth which the possession of Egypt put into Octavius Caesar’s hands. Though Egypt became a Roman province it was from the first in a peculiar position, governed by a “prefect” appointed by the Emperor, who took as his private property both the treasures and domain lands of the Ptolemaic kings and the balance of the revenues over the expenses. This formed the nucleus of what was afterwards called the fiscus, the imperial revenue as distinguished from the aerarium or public treasury. He was thus enabled to disband many legions at once, without the dangerous discontent of the veterans, or the irritation of fresh confiscations. It was imperatively necessary to do this if he wished to avoid the dangers which had so often threatened the State from leaders of overgrown military forces. The number of legions under arms during the preceding ten years was indeed formidable. In BC36, when Octavius took over those of Lepidus and Sextus Pompeius, he had forty-four or forty-five legions under his command. Between that time and the war with Antony he had reduced the number to eighteen. But after the victory at Actium and the death of Antony, the legions taken over from him, along with those newly raised for the war, again amounted to fifty. Therefore Octavius had twice to deal with a body of about 250,000 men. He says himself that in the course of his wars half a million citizens had taken the military oath to him. The wealth of Egypt served to purchase lands or compensate towns for such as were taken for the veterans. From first to last more than 300,000 men were provided for in this way. An important purpose also served by this measure was the repeopling of Italy and the renovation of many towns which during the civil wars, or from other causes, had fallen into decay. Republican precedent was followed by recalling the ancient practice of settling “colonies” in the Italian towns, but with this difference, that the new colonists were usually treated as a supplementum of an already existing colonia, lands being purchased for them from private owners or from the communities. Augustus claims twenty-eight of such Italian colonies, of which thirteen are known to have been in past times “Roman” or “Latin” colonies. Other towns, besides a money compensation, were rewarded by being raised to the status of a colony, generally with the addition of “Iulia” or “Augusta” to their name. This system was presently extended beyond Italy—to Africa, Spain, Sicily, Illyricum, Macedonia, Achaia, Gallia Narbonensis, Asia, Syria, and Pisidia. Settlements in these countries were all colonies of veterans, except Dyrrachium, which was filled with dispossessed Italians. This was not altogether a novelty: for extra-Italian colonies had been already established in Cisalpine and Transalpine Gaul, at Carthage, and at Corinth. Iulius Caesar is said to have settled 80,000 citizens in this way outside Italy. The extra-italic colonies of Augustus, however, differed from these last in regard to status. They had what was called Latinitas, that is, citizenship without the right or voting or holding office at Rome. In virtue of this citizenship they come under the Roman law and belonged to the assize (conventua) of the provincial governors. Some of them, again, had the special privileges which were summed up in the general term “Italic right” (ius Italicum), and included freedom from the jurisdiction of the provincial governor (libertas), and exemption from tribute (immunitas). The general aim seems to have been to put the extra-italic colonies as far as possible in the same position as those in Italy. As a rule also the veterans settled in a colony had been enlisted in the province, and had, therefore, already local connections. Augustus took trouble in fostering and adorning these towns, whether in Italy or the provinces, and records with pride that many had become populous cities during his life-time. In many cases their subsequent importance showed that they had been well selected. Thus Carthage had a great mediaeval history; Durazzo and Philippi were long places of consequence; Saragossa, Merida, Cordova, Aix, Patras, Beirut, all trace their prosperity to the colonisation of Augustus.

Nor did he meanwhile forget to encourage restoration at Rome, to which he had already given a strong impulse. Nothing had damaged Antony in the eyes of the Romans more than the report of his intention to transfer the seat of Empire to Alexandria. A similar report as to the establishment of an imperial city for the East at Ilium caused a like uneasiness a few years later, which found expression in one of Horace’s most spirited odes. Octavius prudently showed not only that he held firmly by the Imperial position of Rome, but that he also wished to make it externally worthy to be the capital of the world. As in all his projects, no one co-operated more loyally than Agrippa. But others also were pressed into the service; and those especially who had earned triumphs were encouraged to use a portion at least of their spoils in public works. In the next few years there was a great outburst of temple restoration, and it became the fashion among the immediate friends and followers of Augustus to signalise their tenure of office or a military success by undertaking some important building. Horace again has reflected the view of such matters which the official classes were expected to take, and perhaps to a certain extent did take. The sufferings of the Romans in the revolutionary period had undoubtedly been great. The ruinous state of the temples was doubtless connected with the unsettled times—whether as cause or consequence, who could exactly say? It was not unnatural to suppose that among the other delicta maiorum this too had moved the wrath of the gods. At any rate moral laxity went side by side with scepticism and neglect of religious observances. Nor need we regard either poet or emperor as a monster of hypocrisy in supporting such a doctrine. Habit and tradition are stronger than philosophy. There always remains the Incalculable after all our reasoning; and many today regret the decay of religious sentiment as a public misfortune, who are yet profoundly uncertain as to what they in truth believe themselves.

On his return from Asia and Greece, where he had spent the winter and spring of BC 30—29, Octavius was received with enthusiasm by all classes. Solemn sacrifice was offered by the consul in the name of the people, and every honour which the Senate could bestow was awaiting his acceptance. Those voted after Actium were lavishly increased in September BC30, on the news of Antony’s death and the occupation of Alexandria. Two triumphal arches were to be erected, one at Rome and another at Brindisi; the temple of the divine Iulius was to be adorned with the prows of captured ships; his own birthday, the day of the victory at Actium, and that of the entry into Alexandria were to be for ever sacred; the Vestal Virgins and the whole people were to meet him on his return in solemn procession; he was to have the foremost seat at all festival; and was to celebrate three triumphs—one for the victory over the Dalmatian and neighbouring tribes, a second for Actium, and a third for Egypt. The tribunicia potestas for life had again been voted to him with the right of exercising it within a mile radius beyond the walls. He was to have the right to hear all cases on appeal and to have a casting vote in all courts. His name was to be mentioned in public prayers for the state. On the 1st of January, BC29, all his acta had been confirmed; and when it became known that the Parthians had referred a disputed succession to the throne to his arbitration, some fresh honours were devised. The disasters under Crassus and Antony had made the Romans particularly sensitive in regard to the Parthians; and this apparent acknowledgment by them of a superiority attaching to Augustus, however indefinite, was represented by the court party and the court poets, not only as a veritable triumph over the Parthians, but as a step in a career of Eastern conquest of almost unlimited extent. Accordingly his name was now to be coupled with those of the gods in hymns; a tribe was named Iulia in his honour; he was to wear the chaplet of victory in all assemblies; and to nominate as many members as he chose to all the sacred colleges. Caesar accepted most of these honours, but begged to be excused the procession on his return. This was an honour which he always avoided if he could, preferring to enter the city quietly by night. It was no doubt a trying ordeal at the end of a long journey, and he may have felt like Cromwell that a larger crowd still would have come out to see him hanged. The three triumphs, however, were now celebrated with the greatest splendour, especially the third 0ver Egypt, in which a figure of the dead queen lying upon a couch, with son and daughter beside her, was a prominent feature.

Octavius now had ample powers for every purpose of government. The tribunicia potestas in itself gave him legislative initiative and control over other departments. It was afterwards regarded as the most important of his powers. But in his first measures of reform he availed himself rather of his powers as consul. The consulship was to be really, as it always remained nominally, the chief state office, combining all the prerogatives once centred in the rex. Thus in holding the Census of BC28 he acted as Consul with his colleague Agrippa, exercising indeed a censoria potestas, though not one formally bestowed, but as inherent in the consulship. He concluded it with the solemn lustrum, which had not been performed for forty-two years, the last Censors (BC50) having apparently been prevented from performing this solemnity by the outbreak of civil war. The Census was made the occasion of a reform in the ordines and especially of the Senate. In the first place, he recruited the dwindling number of patrician gentes by raising certain plebeian families to the patriciate, as his own family had been raised by Iulius in BC45 in virtue of a lex Cassia. The same power was now accorded to him by a law proposed by L. Saenius, who was consul during the last two months of BC30. The object seems to have been to preserve a kind of nobility, which at the same time should have certain political disabilities. The patricians, indeed, still had the exclusive right of being appointed to certain religious offices, but, on the other hand, they were debarred from the tribuneship and the plebeian aedileship, the two offices in which a man by legislative proposals or lavish expenditure might make himself politically conspicuous.

A similar desire to restore the ancient order of the State prompted his reformation of the Senate. The powers of this body had always been great precisely because they were not defined by law, and by associating it with himself he would gain all the advantages or this indefiniteness and prestige, while really keeping full control of it. Iulius Caesar had made the mistake of treating it with studied disrespect, and his chief enemies were within its walls. The Triumvirs, though in reality despotic, had looked to it to give their acta an outward show of legality. Thus on Octavian’s demand it had condemned Q. Gallius in BC43, and Salvidienus in BC40, for treason. It had confirmed the triumviral acta en bloc, giving Antony charge of the Parthian war and ratifying his arrangements in the East in advance. It had voted triumphs and other honours to the triumvirs and their agents. It was the Senate that in BC41 voted L. Antonius an hostis, that in BC32 decreed war against Cleopatra, deposed Antony from consulship and imperium, and voted the various honours and powers to the victorious Octavius Caesar. The late civil war had in a way made the importance of the Senate more prominent. So many Senators had joined Antony at Alexandria that, like Sertorius in Spain and Pompey in Epirus, he had professed to have the Senate with him. The victory of Actium had pricked that bubble, and the Senate at Rome remained the only Senate of the Empire. Octavius was wise to put himself under the aegis of this ancient and still respected body. But it was necessary to secure its dignity and effectiveness, which had suffered in various ways during the revolutionary period. Among other things its numbers had been swollen and often with men or inferior social standing. Iulius Caesar had filled it with his creatures—provincials from Gaul and Spain, sons of freedmen, centurions, soldiers, and peregrini—so that a pasquinade was put up by some wit that “no one was to show a new Senator the way to the Senate House”. Another batch of Senators was introduced after Caesar’s death, chiefly by Antony, in virtue of real or fictitious entries found in Caesar’s papers, whom the populace nicknamed “post-mortem Senators”, or sometimes even on their own initiative without any other formality than assuming the laticlave and senatorial shoe. Many Senators no doubt perished in the proscriptions, in the subsequent battles of Philippi and Perusia, and in the contests with Sextus Pompeius, but the Triumvirs appear to have been lavish in enrolling new members without regard to fortune, origin, or official position; and so careless were they in this matter that cases are recorded of unenfranchised slaves having obtained office and seats in the Senate and being then recognised and claimed by their masters. The result was that at the time of the battle of Actium there were more than a thousand Senators. This was too large a number for practical work, without taking into consideration inferiority of character. No doubt a good many who had sided with Antony disappeared in various ways; but in now making a formal lectio Octavius resolved to reduce the number still more. Sixty voluntarily resigned and were allowed to retain the purple and certain social distinctions, but a hundred and forty were simply omitted from the new list. By this means the roll was reduced to about six hundred, which continued to be the number in subsequent lectiones.

To secure their attendance and to prevent interference in the provinces the regulation was enforced which prohibited any Senator from leaving Italy (except for Sicily or Gallia Narbonensis) unless he had imperium or was on a legatio, that is, practically, unless he was serving the state in some way on Caesar’s nomination. In the next lectio (BC19) Augustus tried an elaborate system of co-option, by nominating thirty on the existing roll, each of whom were to name five who were to draw lots for admission, and so on till the number was made up. But finding that it was not worked fairly he stopped this and made up the roll himself. This continued to be the system, but as time went on the difficulty was not so much to exclude unworthy men as to induce enough of the right sort to serve. Membership became less attractive as the imperial power developed, and the holding of profitable offices depended on the will of the Emperor, who was not bound to select from the Senate. Moreover, a property qualification was now required. None had existed under the republic by definite law, though a certain fortune was regarded as practically necessary; and as the Senate was recruited from the ordo equester, a minimum was in the last century of the republic automatically secured. Octavius fixed 8oo,ooo sesterces, and later on a million sesterces as the Senatorial fortune, though in cases of special fitness he gave grants to enable men to maintain their position. Still the honour of membership was not found to make up for its disabilities—the difficulty of going abroad and the prohibition as to engaging in commerce. In BC13 Augustus was obliged to compel men who had the property qualification to serve. Even then the attendance was so slack that in BC 11 the old quorum of four hundred was reduced. In BC9 various regulations were introduced to facilitate business, such as the publication of an order of the day, fixed days of meeting, a variation as to the quorum required for different kinds of business, a scale of fines for non-attendance, the selection by lot of thirty-five Senators to attend during September and October, and an extension to the praetors of the power of bringing business before the house. Towards the end of the life of Augustus, when his age made it too much of an exertion to meet the full Senate, a committee of sixteen Senators was selected by lot to confer with him at his own house. The inevitable consequence was that this small committee practically settled most questions, which only came formally before the whole body, whose administrative function was farther lessened by the diminished importance of the aerarium as compared with the imperial treasury or fiscus. Finally, it lost the right of coining silver, retaining only the bronze. On the whole, then, the tendency was towards restricting the functions of the Senate and making membership less attractive. But this does not appear to have been the original design of Augustus. He habitually addressed it with respect, referred all his powers to its confirmation, and took it into his confidence on imperial affairs. He revived the ancient dignity of princeps Senatus—in abeyance since the death of Cicero—and held that rank himself all his life. Certain of the provinces were still left to its management, and cases of majestas were referred to its decision. The publication of the Senate’s acta had originated with Iulius Caesar (BC59), who was not likely to have done anything to enhance its prestige. The prohibition of this publication by Augustus was perhaps intended partly to protect the proceedings from criticism, partly to emphasise the fact that the Senate shared with him the intimate secrets of government which it was not for the public advantage to have generally known. The effect, however, was not good; what could not be ascertained with exactness from official sources was often misrepresented by irresponsible rumour, and one of the early measures of Tiberius was to reverse this order.

With a Senate purified by his first lectio Octavius felt that the constitution might in form, at any rate, be restored. But first the end of the revolutionary period had to be marked. On January 11, BC29, the temple of Ianus was closed, for the first time since BC235, for the third time in all Roman history. It was still shut when Octavius returned from Asia, and on the 1st of January, BC28, the augurium salutis was taken. This ceremony—ascertaining by augury whether prayers for the people should be offered to Salus—could only be performed in time of complete peace. At the same time a single edict annulled all the acta of the triumvirs, which were to have no force from his sixth consulship (BC28). The constitutional significance of this will be best seen by recalling some facts as to the triumvirs. Whether its acts were good or bad, the triumvirate was in Itself a suspension of the constitution. Established by a lex on the 27th of November, BC43, to hold office till the 31st of December, BC 38, its authority had been renewed in the course of BC 37 to the 31st of December, BC 33, whether by another lex or by the will of the triumvirs themselves is a moot point. But, however appointed, the triumvirs were like dictators in superseding all other magistrates, and more powerful than dictators from the length of their tenure of office, and because the terms of their appointment (reipublicca constituedae causa) gave them absolute legislative powers. They could abolish, modify, or grant dispensation from existing laws. Their edicts had the force of laws, and such laws as were passed in the regular way during their office either confirmed their powers, or were passed at their desire to give formal permanence to their edicts. They had complete control of elections, and agreed between themselves as to the nomination of magistrates, often for several years in advance. They controlled the treasury, the domain lands, the raising or removal of taxation in Rome and Italy. They divided among themselves the command of the military forces and the government of the provinces. Each of them, personally or by a legatus, exercised imperial powers in the provinces assigned to him; set up or put down client kings; granted immunities or freedom to cities, or abolished them; bestowed or withdrew the citizenship of individuals; waged war with surrounding nations; raised or remitted taxation. At Rome also they had exerted the right of summoning, consulting, and presiding over the Senate, of vetoing the motion of other Senators, but without being subject to the tribunician veto themselves. To abolish the acta of such a despotic body might with reason be regarded a considerable step towards a restoration of the constitution. Even if some of his own acta were thereby abolished, Octavius would have no difficulty in re-enacting them if desirable. The point was to abolish the memory of a period of unconstitutional government, to prevent its enactments remaining as precedents or grounds of claim by citizen or subject, and to leave the field open for the new arrangement which Octavius wished men to regard as a restoration of the republic. For he had already conceived a plan, in virtue of which the people, magistrates, and Senate should resume their old functions, while he himself should be practically the colleague of the higher magistrates—endowed with their powers, though not necessarily with their office—and thereby practically direct the policy of the state. The key to the policy—as he wished it to be regarded—is contained in his own comment: “After that time (January 1, 27) I was superior to all in rank, but of power I had no more than my colleagues in the several offices.” There were some of his powers difficult to reconcile with this theory of a restored constitution; but he was careful to rest these on votes of the people or Senate, to accept them only for fixed periods, or to profess to share them with his colleagues.

The new constitution was now introduced in a characteristic scene, apparently designed to make it clear that Octavius did not seek power, but undertook it under pressure. In a meeting of the Senate, the beginning of his Seventh consulship, he delivered from a written copy a carefully prepared speech, in which he surrendered to the Senate all the powers which it had bestowed upon him, as well as those which he had acquired in any other way—the command of troops, the powers of legislation, the government of the provinces, fie based his resolution on justice, the inherent right of the people to manage its own affairs, and on his own right to consult for his personal safety, health, and ease. At the same time, he dwelt on his public services and those of his adoptive father, the labours they had both endured, the dangers to which both had been exposed, and justified the exercise up to this time of his various powers. Finally, he urged them to refrain from innovations, to give a hearty obedience to the laws, to elect the best men for civil and military offices without prejudice or favouritism, to deal honestly with public money, to treat allies and subjects equitably, to seek no wars but to be prepared for any, and to see that he had no cause to regret his renunciation of power. The speech was received with loud remonstrances, some sincere and some perhaps cautious and time-serving, but so general that he had to consent with real or feigned reluctance to receive back his autocratic powers. Was he merely playing a part, or had hit any real wish to retire from public life? As in most cases there was probably a division of feeling in his heart. He was in weak health, and had had another illness a few months before. For eighteen years—just half his life—he had been ceaselessly engaged in fatiguing duties, in wars for which he had no genius, and in civil administration which, though much better suited to his taste and abilities, had been carried out amidst constant opposition and difficulty. One side of his mind may well have been eager for rest. But, on the other hand, no man who has tasted power and feels that he can wield it quits it without pain. At no time did he find pleasure in the outward trappings of state, or in the personal indulgences for which it gives opportunity, but he was ambitious in the best sense. He loved his country and desired to be Remembered as the restorer of its prosperity and happiness, as the benefactor of the Empire and the guarantee of its peace and good government. Twenty-four years later when Valerius Messalla, speaking in the name of people and Senate, greeted him with the affectionate title of “Father of his country,” he burst into tears and could only murmur that he had nothing more to pray for except to retain their affection to the end of his life. But whatever secret wish he may have had for rest he must have known that it was impossible. The elements of disorder and oppression were not destroyed. If the restraining hand were removed they would break out into new activity. Nor would it be safe for himself after years of steady working for this end, in the course of which he must have offended countless interests, to trust himself to a new generation of statesmen without the experience in the working of a free state possessed by their ancestors, and yet with the same passions and ambitions. A scheme had, in fact, been elaborated in conjunction with his faithful friends and ministers, Agrippa and Maecenas. Dio represents the former as urging Caesar to withdraw from power and frankly to restore the republic. He grounded his advice on the financial and political difficulties which he would have to face, on the uncertainty of his own health, on the impossibility of drawing back hereafter and the evil destiny of all those who in previous ages had attempted to gain absolute power. Maecenas, on the other hand, not only urged him to retain his power, but went into most elaborate details as to the arrangements which it would be necessary to make. He did not deny the risks, but maintained that the glory was worth them, and that a withdrawal was neither safe for himself nor for the people. It is not deaf how far we pay regard these two speeches, as well as that of Augustus in the Senate, as representing what was really said. It is possible that as they were all written documents they may have been preserved, and that Dio is translating from them; but at any rate they represent fairly well the two sides of the question which Augustus must have considered with care and anxiety.

The arrangement actually made was of the nature of a compromise. The provinces were divided, as formerly between Antony and Octavius, so now between Caesar and the Senate. Those that required considerable military forces were to be under Caesar, governed by his deputies with the rank of praetor (legati pro praetore), appointed by his sole authority, and holding office during his pleasure. The rest were to be still governed by proconsuls, selected as of old by ballot under the superintendence of the Senate from the ex-praetors or ex-consuls subject to the existing laws as to length of tenure and the obligation of furnishing accounts, and liable with their staff to prosecution de rebus repetundis in the ordinary courts. The “primacy” of the Emperor, however, was apparent in this partnership with the Senate, no less than in that with colleagues in office. In the allotment of Senatorial provinces he retained the right of nominating the exact number required, so that no one of whom he disapproved could obtain a province. In both classes of province he appointed a procurator, with authority over the finances independent of the proconsul or legatus. In both also the governor received a salary fixed by himself, and had to conform to certain general principles laid down by him. In all alike he possessed a majus imperium, soon afterwards, if not at first, defined as a proconsular imperium.

The Imperial provinces were: Hispania Tarraconensis, and Lusitania, the Galliae (beyond the Alps), including the districts afterwards called Germania, superior and inferior, Coele-Syria, Phoenicia, Cilicia, Cyprus, Egypt.

The Senatorial were: Sicilia, Hispania Baetica, Sardinia, Africa, Numidia, Dalmatia, Greece and Epirus, Macedonia, Asia, Crete and Cyrene, Bithynia and Pontus.

Cisalpine Gaul ceased to be a province and was included in Italy. Subsequent changes were :

BC24. Cyprus and Gallia Narbonensis were transferred to the Senate.

BC21. Dalmatia was transferred to the Emperor.

BC6. Sardinia was transferred to the Emperor for nine years.

The provinces added during the life-time of Augustus: Galatia, Lycaonia, Moesia, and the minor Alpine provinces were imperial.

All provinces added afterwards were imperial.

For the rest Octavius retained his right of being yearly elected consul, his tribunician power, his membership of the sacred colleges, his command of the army. But freedom of election was ostensibly restored to the people, and the Senate was still the fountain of honour, and had the control of the aerarium. But this last was no longer managed by two elected quaestors, but by two men of praetorian rank, nominated by the Emperor. It was, moreover, now of minor importance, as the fiscus (to use the later term) was entirely in the hands of Caesar, and into it went the revenues of the imperial provinces, and, above all, of Egypt. The key of the position was that though the old republican magistrates still existed, Caesar in various ways was their colleague, and of course the predominant partner. The Senate, however, accepted his view of the case, as afterwards expressed in the Monumentum, that he had “transferred the republic from his power to the authority of the Senate and people of Rome.” To show their confidence in him the Senators voted him a bodyguard (the men drawing double pay), and confirmed his authority in the provinces. The latter, which made him princeps throughout the Empire, as he already was in Rome, he refused to accept for more than ten years. But it was always renewed subsequently for periods of five or ten years; and when in BC23, the proconsular imperium was declared to be operative within, as well as beyond, the pomaerium, he had, in fact, supreme control, military and financial, in all parts of the Empire. To mark his exceptional position without offending the prejudice against royalty, it was desired to give him a special title of honour. His own wish was for “Romulus”, as second founder of the state. But objection was raised to it as recalling the odious position of rex, and he eventually accepted the title of Augustus, a word connected with religion and the science of augury, and thereby suggesting the kind of sentiment which he desired to be attached to his person and genius. This was voted by the Senate on the Ides (13th) of January, BC27, and confirmed by a plebiscitum on the 16th. He was now “first” or princeps everywhere, whether in the Senate, or among his colleagues in the offices, or among the proconsuls in the provinces. He was, therefore, spoken of as princeps in ordinary language, and the word gradually hardened into a title. It exactly suited the view which he himself wished to be taken of his political position, as giving a primacy of rank among colleagues of equal legal powers; though, of course, a primacy, supported by the power of the purse and the sword, made him a master while masquerading as a colleague. He, however, adopted the word as rightly expressing his position without giving needless offence, and his successors took it as a matter of course, though it less frequently occurs in inscriptions than their other titles.

Closely connected with the bestowal of the title Augustus was another vote of the Senate, that the front of his house should not only be adorned with the laurels that told of victory over his enemies, but also with the oaken or “civic” crown which told of the lives of citizens preserved. This appears again and again on his coins with the legend—ob cives servatos: and it is mentioned by Augustus himself at the end of his record of achievements, as though—with the later title of Pater Patriae—it indicated the chief glory of his career.

CHAPTER IX

THE FIRST PRINCIPATUS, B.C. 27-23