61801, USA Available online: 14 Jan 2009

Transcription

1 This article was downloaded by: [Istanbul Universitesi Kutuphane ve Dok] On: 05 December 2011, At: 13:32 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: Registered office: Mortimer House, Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Rhetoric Society Quarterly Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: The Ara Pacis Augustae: Visual Rhetoric in Augustus' Principate Kathleen Lamp a a Department of Communication, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA lamp@uiuc.edu Available online: 14 Jan 2009 To cite this article: Kathleen Lamp (2009): The Ara Pacis Augustae: Visual Rhetoric in Augustus' Principate, Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 39:1, 1-24 To link to this article: PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

2 Rhetoric Society Quarterly Vol. 39, No. 1, January 2009, pp The Ara Pacis Augustae: Visual Rhetoric in Augustus Principate Kathleen Lamp Scholars of rhetoric have veered away from non-traditional rhetorical artifacts in the classical period. In this article I examine the Ara Pacis Augustae, Altar of Augustan Peace, as one such overlooked rhetorical artifact. I argue the altar, although constructed as a war monument, shapes public memory to persuade the people of Rome to accept the dynastic succession of Augustus s heir. In addition, I show a variety of rhetorical theories operate on the altar in visual form including amplification, imitation, and enthymeme. Ultimately I contend that by focusing on nontraditional rhetorical artifacts, we can deepen our understanding of the rhetorical tradition in a period in which rhetoric is generally believed to have faded away. Introduction Augustus, the first emperor of Rome, is remembered as a number of things as a boy of nineteen who was named as Caesar s successor; as a general who marched on Rome not once, but twice; as a youth who inspired disdain from Cicero; as a victor over Antony and Cleopatra, as a patron of the arts whose sponsorship led to the Golden Age of Roman poetry and literature and finally as a beloved ruler, religious leader and father of his country who found [Rome]...built of brick and left it in marble (Suetonius, Aug. 28). Although Augustus, then known as Octavian, was introduced to public life at age twelve when he delivered a funeral oration for his grandmother, and he continued to practice public oratory throughout his life, the one thing Augustus is not remembered as is a great orator (Suetonius Aug. 8.1, ; Quintilian ). Despite Augustus s lack of oratorical prowess, George Kennedy says the ruler had a profound understanding of the rhetoric of empire. A variety of titles and religious forms were used to mask the reality of his power; art, architecture, inscription, and urban planning conveyed the aura of a new golden age (A New History 159). It would seem then that Augustus s understanding of the rhetoric of empire coupled with his use of non-traditional rhetorical media shapes Kennedy s belief that as a practitioner of persuasion the greatest rhetorician of Kathleen Lamp is a Doctoral Candidate in the Department of Communication, University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign, 702 S. Wright St., 244 Lincoln Hall, MC-456, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. lamp@uiuc.edu ISSN (print)/issn X (online) # 2009 The Rhetoric Society of America DOI: /

3 2 Lamp antiquity was...the emperor Augustus (Art of Rhetoric 378). Kennedy claims the Ara Pacis Augustae, Altar of Augustan Peace, was one such significant form of Augustan rhetoric (Art of Rhetoric 383). Kennedy s observation merits further consideration. The Ara Pacis, commissioned in 13 BCE by the Senate and Roman people upon Augustus s return from a successful campaign in Spain and Gaul, took the place of the usual triumphal procession. 1 In his Res Gestae, a self-authored list of Augustus s accomplishments, which stood near the Ara Pacis, Augustus places a great deal of importance on the altar referred to here as an altar of Pax Augusta : On my return from Spain and Gaul in the consulship of Tiberius Nero [the later Emperor Tiberius] and Publius Quintilius [P.Q. Varus from the Teutoburgian Forest], after successfully arranging affairs in these provinces, the Senate resolved that an altar of Pax Augusta should be consecrated next to the Campus Martius in honour of my return, and ordered that the magistrates and priests and Vestal virgins should perform an annual sacrifice there. (12.2) As Augustus indicates, the Ara Pacis was a celebration of his own military success, but it also functioned to garner support for the Julian line and for Augustus s successor. This second function follows an established and widespread statesponsored campaign to create a political myth connecting the Julian line and hereditary succession with the prosperity of Rome. 2 The myth of the Julian line was meant to preserve the Principate after Augustus s death by guaranteeing his choice of successor and the process of succession, which apparently he anticipated would be a moment where civil war could erupt, much as it had when Augustus succeeded Caesar. Tacitus, writing 100 years after Tiberius successfully succeeded Augustus, notes the potential volatility of Augustus s impending death: When advanced in old age...[augustus] was worn out by a sickly frame, and the end was near and new prospects opened, a few spoke in vain of the blessings of freedom, but most people dreaded and some longed for war (Tacitus 1.4). The Ara Pacis, therefore, functioned both immediately as a war monument of sorts, but also as an enduring piece of rhetoric meant to legitimize Augustus s rule and promote the Julian line. The Ara Pacis is the most complete illustration of the Augustan political myth in verbal or visual form, making it a significant, if not the most significant, rhetorical artifact of Augustus s reign, commonly referred to as the Principate, 27 BCE to 14 CE. In this article, I first show that in the field of rhetoric, we have overlooked the 1 I am sensitive to the question of who authored the Ara Pacis. While the Senate and Roman People are attributed as commissioning the altar, it seems likely Agrippa, Augustus s general and right hand man, was responsible for gathering the sculptors of the Ara Pacis, who were probably not from Rome (Strong, Roman Art 83). Although it is impossible to say how much influence Augustus had over the altar, it is likely that he had a hand in all imperial building projects, particularly those in the area of the Ara Pacis including the sun dial, mausoleum, and ustrinum, which related directly to his family line. 2 Fullerton discusses the Augustan political myth specifically in reference to the coin production of BCE (483). Political myth is McGee s term ( ).

4 Ara Pacis Augustae 3 period of the Roman Principate even though it is a period of great change for the practice of rhetoric. In the body of this article I suggest a possible reading of the Ara Pacis as a narrative construction of the political myth emphasizing the ways in which classical rhetorical techniques are at work in the iconography of the altar. In my reading of the Ara Pacis as an important instance of visual rhetoric, I have included other similar messages from verbal media of the same period. My goal in doing so is not to suggest that verbal and visual communication work in the same way, but rather to supply the critical cultural knowledge necessary to read the altar, while also showing the similarity of messages across state-sponsored media in the Principate. In the conclusion, I offer my reading of the Ara Pacis as a starting point for understanding how the Augustan cultural campaigns, particularly the building program, formed an official account of Augustus s reign, an account that gave the viewer a great deal of agency. The Ara Pacis, when taken together with popular rhetorics, which ultimately draw from official iconography and thereby reiterate state-sponsored messages, shaped public memory of the Principate and ultimately reified Augustus s account of events. Augustan (Visual) Rhetoric? Given Kennedy s claim that Augustus was the greatest rhetorician of antiquity it is perhaps odd that scholars of rhetoric have not, with exceedingly few exceptions, paid Augustan monuments like the Ara Pacis or Augustus himself much heed. Presumably the reason for the excision is not Augustus s reliance on non-traditional rhetorical media. After all, it has been acknowledged that, Public commemorative monuments are rhetorical products of some significance. They select from history those events, individuals, places and ideas that will be sacralized by a culture or polity (Blair, Jepperson, and Pucci 263). In addition to noting the rhetorical significance of monuments generally, a number of scholars have acknowledged the importance of visual and material forms of rhetoric in the classical period. For example, Jens E. Kjeldsen argues, we should also consider ancient rhetoric as a visual discipline (133). James Fredal makes a similar argument, claiming that the scarcity of Greek sources do not allow us access to the full range of rhetorical measures that persuasive artistry in ancient Greece worked its effects through, for example, poetry, sculpture, architecture, city planning, dance, collaborative symbolic actions, and everyday practices, in addition to individually authored speeches (592). No doubt the same scarcity of verbal sources and the need to consider non-verbal sources holds true for the Roman Principate as well. Though scholars such as Kjeldsen and Fredal have stressed the importance of taking up non-traditional rhetorical artifacts, the majority of scholars who have focused on such media in the classical period have broadly linked visuality and rhetoric and more often than not, focused on Greek rhetoric. 3 Those scholars 3 For example, see Jay, Hawhee, Fleming, and O Gorman.

5 4 Lamp who do focus on any form of Roman rhetoric generally focus on the end of the Republic, particularly Cicero, or the Second Sophistic, although a number of scholars of rhetoric have focused on one visual aspect of Roman rhetoric, namely gestures. 4 Several scholars have made interesting ties between the rhetorical canon of memory and non-traditional rhetorical media including Roman monuments, specifically the Augustan building campaign. 5 Art historian Diane Favro has effectively connected classical systems of memory based on heads as described in Roman rhetorical treatises to the Augustan building program, arguing learned Romans were predisposed to look for an underlying, coherent narrative in built environments ; but also that the Augustan building program made use of unusual scale, color or form specifically to create narratives in the built environment (7, 153, 208). Although Gregory Aldrete specifically addresses the role of gestures in the Principate, his claims have interesting implications for how rhetoric used public memory in constructing arguments. Aldrete shows that the gestures of an orator functioned to include buildings and spaces themselves that formed the background or setting [which] were often loaded with symbolic meaning or powerful associations (18 19). Aldrete goes on to mention that the Curia Julia and the Clupeus Virttis (Shield of Virtues), both Augustan monuments, would have provided two such symbolically loaded visual reference points available to speakers in the Senate (21). The associations mentioned by Aldrete show how rhetors utilized the audience s memory, as triggered by buildings and monuments, for rhetorical purposes. Favro s work highlights how rhetorical techniques of creating artificial memory influenced the Augustan building program and Aldrete suggests this could be channeled for rhetorical purposes. Work on what might be broadly termed non-traditional rhetorical artifacts is much more prevalent outside the field of rhetoric than within, and as a result, the relationship between these artifacts and rhetoric is, not surprisingly, rarely considered. For example, Art historian Paul Zanker has argued that the Republic was in such a chaotic state by the time Augustus assumed power that he needed a new way to create order. Augustus, in effect, had a rhetorical conundrum on his hands. Zanker claims that Augustus successfully created order through a new visual language...a whole new method of visual communication (3). Although Zanker does agree that Augustus imagery would have been useless without his legions and enormous resources, he stresses the importance of that imagery, claiming...through visual imagery a new mythology of Rome and, for the emperor, a new ritual of power were created (3 4). Despite Zanker s claim of the importance of the visual imagery of 4 For examples of work on the late Republic or Second Sophistic see Bell, Craig, Douglas, Steel, Gaines, and Podlecki. For gestures see Aldrete and Corbeill. 5 Yates offers the most complete discussion of systems of memory in ancient Rome in the first chapter of her work The Art of Memory.

6 Ara Pacis Augustae 5 the Augustan age, which I contend is of great rhetorical significance, these nontraditional rhetorical media have not yet been taken up by scholars of rhetoric. Presumably, then, the reason we have overlooked the Principate is that our understanding of the history of the period precludes the practice of rhetoric, allowing only for propaganda and the dissemination thereof. For example, Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg s account represents how the Principate is thought of by scholars of rhetoric: Oratory in Cicero s time (the first century B.C.E.) was a powerful political weapon one Cicero himself wielded and rhetoric, however derivative its theory, was an art that helped organize civilized communal life. By the time of Quintilian (the first century C.E.), Rome was an empire and political oratory was suppressed. Rhetoric became a form of entertainment, focused on stylistic extravagance. But Quintilian envisions the creation, through rhetorical training that includes broadly humane learning, of a good man speaking well who might save the state. (8) Bizzell and Herzberg go on to elaborate on the causes behind the change in the practice of rhetoric: Octavian consolidated his power by reducing the Senate to a powerless advisory body and accepting from it the title Augustus, which made him officially a demigod. The reign of Imperial Rome, Rome governed by a tyrant, more politely, an emperor, might be said to begin from this time (31). Although it is easy to dismiss Bizzell and Herzberg s summary as an oversimplification intended for undergraduates, the same view is also espoused in more detail by scholars such as George Kennedy and Richard Leo Enos, who write for an audience of students and scholars. Their accounts circulate widely throughout the discipline (Art of Rhetoric 427; Roman Rhetoric 36). This narrative of decline suggests there is nothing after the late Republic worthy of consideration by scholars of rhetoric predominantly because our disciplinary narrative tells us there were no rhetorical audiences, that is, audiences capable of effecting change. I believe our disciplinary narrative regarding the Principate stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the history of the period, due in large part to an overemphasis on Cicero and Tacitus as sources, and to reading Augustus s reign through tyrannical rulers, ancient and modern. For example, the eminent classical historian Ronald Syme, writing in 1939, comments that Roman political life has sometimes induced historians to fancy that the Principate of Caesar Augustus was genuinely Republican in spirit and in practice a modern and academic failing. Tacitus...knew better (3). No doubt, as Syme suggests, interpretations of Augustus s reign stem from which sources historians choose to emphasize; however, the period in which the historian writes influences which sources hold the most resonance, as the timing of Syme s criticisms indicate. 6 6 For more on Syme and Stalin see Linderski.

7 6 Lamp Although the Principate of Augustus was by no means genuinely Republican, filtering Augustus s rule through modern fascists such as Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin, as was the case with Syme, is no less of a misreading of the period (Linderski 48 49). 7 It might help, then, to bracket the narrative of decline and to consider the Principate as a time of great change for the practice of rhetoric. This aspect of the Principate is yet unexplored and holds great significance to our understanding of the history of rhetoric. The Ara Pacis Augustae History The Ara Pacis would have originally been situated in the Campus Martius near the Via Flaminia and Augustus s mausoleum in a park-like setting, which featured a large sundial with an obelisk at the center. The Ara Pacis, constructed of white Luna marble from northern Italy, consists of the altar proper and an enclosure wall, which is carved inside and out. Two of the friezes on the outside of the enclosure wall consist of long religious processions. The southern frieze features images of attendants, Augustus, priests of the four state cults, Agrippa (who was Augustus s son-in-law, close friend, general, and designated successor, but who died during the construction of the altar), and the imperial family. The frieze on the northern wall features the senators and their families. It is unclear whether the friezes depict the same religious procession in two parts or two separate events, an actual event, or an idealized procession. The outer wall also has four individual mythological scenes. The first on the west wall features Aeneas making a sacrifice to the penates, household gods associated with the pantry, along with his son and the mythic white sow (see Figure 1). 8 The other panel features Mars presumably at the Lupercal, the wolf s cave where Romulus and Remus were nursed. Both the scenes refer to the mythical founding of Rome and the lineage of the Roman people, as well as the Julian line. The east friezes, those most visible from the road and therefore debatably the most important, feature two female goddesses. The first is Roma seated between Honos and Virtus. The other much-debated scene depicts a female figure that I will refer to as Tellus (see Figure 2). This goddess s iconography is extremely complicated and vague, allowing for multiple readings. 9 The six friezes just described are set 7 To be sure, Mussolini himself invited such comparison with Augustus and sponsored a great deal of archeology, which has preserved monuments such as the Ara Pacis. 8 There are a number of photographs of the Ara Pacis available online both at the website for the Museo dell Ara Pacis and at The Perseus Digital Library, although for ease of reproduction and clarity of detail in this format I have used archeological illustrations here. See < fotografica> and < 27Ara%20Pacis%20Augustae%27> 9 I agree with Kliener that the goddess s identity is of secondary importance. Her imagery obviously is meant to denote abundance and her exact identity may be intentionally vague (96).

8 Ara Pacis Augustae 7 Fig. 1 Aeneas Detail, West Wall, Illustration by Tara Weaver. over a vegetal motif with various animals. The narrative begins on the west wall in mythic time with the founding myths of the city. It then progresses to the present at the point at which the altar was dedicated, before shifting into the mythic Fig. 2 Tellus Detail, East Wall, Illustration by Tara Weaver.

9 8 Lamp present=future, showing the abundance brought to the people of Rome by Augustus with the gods favor. The Ara Pacis, while the high point of Augustan art, was not particularly inventive. Many scholars have discussed the style and antecedents of the Ara Pacis in sculpture, such as the Shrine of Janus Geminus, the Athenian Altar of Pity and the Sanctuary of Athena in Pergamon (Kleiner 90; Strong, Roman Art 80 83). It is worth noting that while for art historians, privileged Romans, and even the sculptors who made the Ara Pacis the monuments that served as models for the altar were=are accessible, only the first, the Republican Shrine of Janus Geminus, would likely have been seen by the average Roman. Finally, although the style of the friezes on the Ara Pacis is potentially of interest for scholars of rhetoric, particularly because as art historian Tonio Holscher has argued, there seems to be a connection between style in classical rhetorical treatises and style in classical art, the use of certain styles with particular subject matter had solidified by the Principate ( , 111). Although generally my reading focuses on the iconography of the Ara Pacis, I briefly return to the question of style in the next section. Although the sculptors of the Ara Pacis have never been identified, it has been suggested that they were not only the best sculptors in Rome, but the best sculptors in the Roman Empire. Art historian Donald Strong suggests that Agrippa was largely responsible for finding artists on his trips east as well as for overseeing the construction of the altar (Roman Art 83). Therefore, we see the concept of manifest destiny depicted on the altar, but the aesthetic quality of the altar offers an argument in and of itself, suggesting Rome s role as ruler of the world. Augustus s involvement in the design of the monument is ultimately unknown; although it is likely he had a hand in all if not many of the cultural reforms of the period. Although the quality of the art work on the Ara Pacis was exceptional for the period, the themes and style of the altar were not (Kleiner 90; Strong, Roman Imperial Sculpture 19). It is true the Augustan building program did little that had not been done before in the late Republic; however, the mass, scale, and sheer repetition in virtually every medium, verbal and visual, of Augustus s cultural program was startlingly new, at least in the Roman world (Zanker 101; Favro 19). For scholars of rhetoric, one important reason to focus on the altar is that while in many ways representative of art of the period and the general themes of the Augustan cultural programs generally, the Ara Pacis is the most complete example of the Augustan political myth in a state-sponsored media, visual or verbal. This myth was disseminated over and over again in literature and poetry, in abbreviated form on coins and sculpture, and was imitated in popular media. By focusing on the altar, it is possible to begin to discern how the political myth was constructed; therefore, the altar offers one way to begin to understand the circulation of state-sponsored or official iconography and the construction of the memory of Augustus s reign.

10 Ara Pacis Augustae 9 The Founding Myths The narration of the Augustan political myth begins with the two mythic scenes on the West wall, which recount the founding of Rome. Although the Roman people would likely have known both the myth of Romulus and Remus as suggested by the Mars scene and the myth of Aeneas, a new version of the Aeneas myth, written by Virgil, was circulating after 19 BCE and was meant to draw as many similarities between the hero and Augustus as possible (Stahl 75). In addition, to introducing the mythic history of the city of Rome, the Aeneas and Mars scenes also introduce the mythic lineage of the Julian line from which Augustus was descended. In utilizing these myths, Augustus uses the past to legitimate the present, depicting himself as the fulfillment of a divine plan, but Augustus also shows that he is ultimately constrained by the Republic, the custom of his ancestors and collective beliefs of the Roman people. The two mythic scenes of Mars and Aeneas function to introduce Augustus s mythic genealogy while also serving as the traditional starting point for a panegyric speech. The author of the Rhetorica Ad Herennium writes that an orator should consider the external circumstances of the subject including the ancestors of whom he is sprung [and] if he is of illustrious decent (3.7.13). 10 Quintilian similarly suggests a speech of praise should include the ancestry of the subject (3.7.10). Though the altar can be read as a rhetoric of praise of Augustus, it is also important to note that the mythic scenes celebrate not only Augustus, but also the Roman people, who play a part in the success of the Principate (Castriota 8). As classical historian Walter Eder notes, Augustus wished to create a mythology of the state more than a mythos of a ruler (87). Although the Roman people may not have literally believed the founding myths, the myths did invoke a sense of pride, and the people were able to feel emotionally excited about the traditional stories of the gods (Ogilvie 1). Cicero, and possibly by extension other elites, found the religious practices of the masses superstitious, but also took great pride in participating in state religion, in part because of the honor involved. Cicero s stance suggests not only the belief of the masses in the gods and the effectiveness of using mythic iconography as the basis of argument targeting mass audiences, especially of urban plebs; but also that the appeal of religious iconography extended beyond the plebs to the patricians, although for different reasons (Ogilvie 5, 21). Although, as previously mentioned, stylistic conventions had largely solidified by the Principate, art historian Tonio Holscher calls attention to the Aeneas scene as typifying the conventions of the period. He notes that the backdrop of the scene uses the Hellenistic style, meant to convey emotion or drama, whereas Aeneas is shown in the classical style to give him dignity (81). The use of the classical style 10 I am using the Loeb edition of the Ad Herennium here, which includes the work in the volumes of Cicero s writings. Because of this compilation, I have listed the work of the unknown author of the Ad Herennium under Cicero in the References.

11 10 Lamp in depicting Aeneas also allows for greater comparison with Augustus because, as Holscher notes, mythic subjects were usually depicted in the Hellenistic style, whereas the ethos necessary for Roman statesmen demanded the classical style (33, 46). The artistic convention of using the Hellenistic style, then, again emphasizes the emotion such scenes could convey to the audience whereas depicting Aeneas in the classical style highlights the comparison between Augustus and Aeneas. The narrative of the Ara Pacis, therefore, begins on a note of common ground with almost all of the Roman people, which would have invoked feelings of pride, heritage, and patriotism. If the altar is read in this manner, the two mythic scenes function analogously to the exordium, which, according to Cicero, brings the mind of the auditor into a proper condition to receive the rest of the speech and which Quintilian says is for making the audience well-disposed, attentive and ready to receive instruction (De Inventione ; Quintilian 4.1.5). Cicero defines five types of audience and two approaches for the exordium, the introduction and insinuation. He defines the latter as, an address by dissimulation and indirection [which] unobtrusively steals into the mind of the auditor, reserving this type of introduction for the difficult case where the audience is violently opposed (De Inventione ). Augustus s Ara Pacis, therefore, begins on a note to draw in those opposed to Augustus s rule, as well as on a note of interest for all, including the less politically inclined. This rhetorical technique suggests that Augustus faced a mixed audience of hostile elites and more neutral non-political equestrians and plebs who did not fully accept his rule or the idea of dynastic succession. The Aeneas scene, like all images on the altar, contains a variety of elements that would allow various readings depending on the audience. The scene depicts Aeneas, surviving hero of the Trojan War, sacrificing to his household gods. Accompanying Aeneas is his son Julus-Ascanius, founder of the Julian line, as well as two attendants, one with fruit, the other with a sow. The sow conjures up two possible myths: that of the sow sacrificed as thanks to his household gods for escaping Troy and that of the sow with the thirty piglets that served as the omen to signal Aeneas where to settle (Kleiner 93; Hannestad 73 4). A priest delivers the prophecy of the sow to Aeneas in Virgil s Aeneid: Beneath shore oaks you find a giant sow, Snow-white, reclining there, suckling a litter Of thirty snow-white young: that place will be Your haven after toil, site of your town. And have no fear of table-biting times; The fates will find a way for you; Apollo Will be at hand when called. (3.526 ff.) In recalling the sow as a sign from the gods, the viewer would likely recall the gods favor in the founding of Rome and the Julian family s connection with

12 Ara Pacis Augustae 11 Venus. In addition, there is an explicit reference to the piety of Aeneas, which will be continued by his son and eventually by Augustus. The household gods also depicted in the Aeneas scene would have had a wealth of meaning for the people of Rome. Aeneas made the sacrifice to his household gods depicted in the scene on the Ara Pacis when he came to the city of Rome, which was a homecoming of sorts. Augustus s return from campaign was a similar homecoming, inviting identification between the two men (Hannestad 73 74; Kleiner 93). Augustus s comparison with Aeneas falls under the definition of amplification as explained by Aristotle. Aristotle gives many examples of amplification, including making comparison with famous people; for the subject is amplified and made honorable if he is better than [other] worthy ones (1368a.38; 86). Quintilian too discusses techniques of amplification: one thing may be magnified by allusion to another: the valour of Scipio is magnified by extolling the fame of Hannibal as a general (8.4.20). Scipio s defeat of Hannibal is made more impressive because the rhetor builds up Hannibal s achievements. On the Ara Pacis both techniques are used. Augustus is compared directly to his famous ancestor, but the deeds of Aeneas are also magnified to heighten Augustus s accomplishment of similar feats. The Aeneas scene, compared with the depiction of Augustus, invites a direct identification of Augustus with his mythic ancestor. Here Aeneas is depicted as he is in Virgil s Aeneid, not as a young man fleeing Troy with his son and father in tow, but as the older, mature and pious Aeneas (Kleiner 93; Hannestad 73 74). Both men are pictured with their togas drawn over their heads, another sign of reverence, in the act of sacrifice (Strong, Roman Art 84) (Compare Figures 1 and 3). In addition, both men are shown in relation to family members, meant to conjure the idea of familial lines or familial succession specifically related to the Julian line (Kleiner 93). In comparing the two men, a Roman viewer might be invited to consider other similarities as drawn out in the Aeneid, and to see both men as executor of a Fig. 3 Augustus (Center), South Wall, Illustration by Tara Weaver.

13 12 Lamp divine mission; administrator of the nation s interests; facing irresponsible, godless, and criminal factionalism these are features shared by the founder of the Julian race...and by his descendant (Stahl 175). Perhaps the most important theme in the Aeneas scene is the notion of fate or manifest destiny. Virgil s Aeneid describes the concept of fate in Aeneas s arrival in Rome and Augustus role in expanding the empire. Virgil describes the fated arrival of Augustus: Turn your two eyes This way and see this people, your own Romans, Here is Caesar, and all the line of Iulus, All who shall one day pass under the dome Of a great sky: this is the man, this one, Of whom so often you have heard the promise, Caesar Augustus, son of the deified, Who shall bring once again an Age of Gold To Latium, to the land where Saturn reigned In early times. He will extend his power Beyond the Garamants and Indians, Over far territories north and south. (6.789ff.) This passage, the basis of the narrative on the Ara Pacis, repeats the Augustan political myth that Augustus s rule and the conquests of the Roman Empire were fated from the moment Aeneas set out from Troy to found Rome. The Ara Pacis invites comparison not only between Augustus and Aeneas but also between Augustus and Romulus. The Mars scene suggests the heritage of the Roman people in the form of the myth of Romulus and Remus, who were the product of Mars s rape of Rhea Silvia, Vestal Virgin and daughter of Numitor, the usurped king of Alba Longa (Harris and Platzner ). The scene depicts Mars at the Lupercal, the wolf s cave, where Romulus and Remus were suckled after being abandoned by their uncle Amulius who was attempting to avoid the prophecy that one of the boys would overthrow him. Hannestad notes that in the processional scene on the South wall under Augustus s right hand is not an altar, as usually interpreted, but instead a lituus, or an augury tool. If this is the case, the iconography would again identify Augustus with Romulus as the lituus was the insigne of rulers including Romulus (68). In addition, Romulus was used by Augustus as a herald of a new age in other iconography, particularly on coins, as the animating force that informs the new age (Kellum 290). While the Mars scene serves as the pedigree to the Roman people and as an invitation to identify Augustus with Romulus, the image also serves to illustrate the military strength necessary for Augustan peace. Perhaps surprisingly, on an altar dedicated in place of a triumphal procession, there are only two references to war, one considerably vaguer than the other. The presence of Mars on the altar supports the concept that Augustus has regained the gods favor and thus Rome has had success in battle leading to prosperity. The combination of Mars and Romulus also suggests the violence involved in the founding of the city. Commenting on the founding of the city by Romulus, which resulted in his

14 Ara Pacis Augustae 13 brother Remus s death, Harris and Platzner note, The city was thus named Rome conceived in the policy of aggressive expansion enforced by violence and all part of a divine plan for the establishment of Rome (784). Just as violence was required in the founding of the city by Romulus, Augustus has acted in a violent and bloodthirsty manner in the past (Bremmer and Horsfall 37). The scene also suggests a parallel between the divine plan for Romulus and the necessity for Rome to regain its position at the center of the world under Augustus. Ovid makes mention of these deeds in the context of Augustus s fated mission near the end of the Metamorphoses: The valiant son will plan revenge on those who killed his father and will have our aid in all his battles. The defeated walls of scarred Mutina, which he will besiege, shall sue for peace. ( ff.) Ovid goes on to mention Philippi, Actium, and Augustus s other campaigns against barbarian lands, all as actions necessary to fulfill his fate. The civil wars mentioned, the proscriptions which accompanied the triumvirate, and the settlement of Augustus s soldiers on seized land all associated with the campaigns mentioned by Ovid must have remained somewhat controversial aspects of Augustus s reign. After all, Tacitus says of the period after Actium there certainly had been peace but it was a bloodstained peace (1.10). On the Ara Pacis, unlike in Ovid s Metamorphoses, the viewer would have to supply this knowledge and fill in the premise that these events were part of Augustus s fate and beyond his control. The Ara Pacis does not depict Augustus s warlord-like acts, but the narrative could justify them through mythic-history and a powerful comparison to Romulus. The mythic scenes serve to launch the narrative on the Ara Pacis by recalling the founding myth in the minds of the Roman people. Rhetorically this would be an extremely convincing way to gain common ground with a Roman audience, as the founding myth held shared cultural value. The scenes also permit Augustus to invite comparison between himself and Aeneas and Romulus by Roman audiences. In addition, the founding myths portray the pedigrees of Augustus and the Julian line, a standard beginning in epideictic rhetoric. The myths allow Augustus to introduce the themes of fate, piety, and violence legitimized in the mythic and collective history of the Roman people. The narrative on the Ara Pacis begins in mythic time and suggests the ancestors of Augustus founded the city with the gods favor. A Missing Scene Just as Roman viewers would have been able to fill out the Mars and Aeneas scenes with their knowledge of myth, they would also have to fill in Augustus s argument on the Ara Pacis through enthymematic reasoning. While Augustus depicts his rule only in the most positive light, the narrative often justifies the less pleasant

15 14 Lamp events the Roman people have suffered through during Augustus s rise to power. Just as the viewer can connect the violence of the civil wars and Augustus s foreign campaigns to Romulus deeds in founding the city, the viewer is invited to think of the city before Augustus s reign. Although the narrative on the altar moves directly from mythic time to the depiction of the religious procession in Augustan Rome, the scene of Augustus s and the Senators s piety invites the viewer to think of the neglect of the gods prior to Augustus s religious reforms. Although Ogilvie makes a case that the Roman people never abandoned their religious beliefs, he describes the late Republic as a place where many temples had fallen into decay and many priesthoods were left unfilled (6). Moreover Ogilvie suggests that the people likely associated the hardship they experienced during the late Republic and the civil wars as related to their neglect of religion (7). Horace captures this sentiment well: Though guiltless, you will continue to pay for the sins of your forefathers, until you repair the crumbling temples and shrines of the gods, and the statues that are begrimed with black smoke. It is because you hold yourselves inferior to the gods that you rule. For every beginning seek their approval; to them attribute its outcome. Because they have been neglected, the gods have inflicted many a woe on sorrowing Westland. (Carmina ) The Ara Pacis invites the Roman people to blame themselves for their hardships, while depicting Augustus as responsible for the return of the gods favor. The altar implies this enthymematic argument by showing the four priests of the state cult, including flamen Diales, or the priest of Jupiter, a position a Roman viewer would likely know had stood vacant for seventy-five years before Augustus found someone to fill it because of its difficult and unpleasant requirements (Ogilvie 109). The depiction of the flamen Dialis, along with the illustration of Augustus s own piety, shown as comparable to that of Aeneas s, encourages viewers to question if they had neglected the gods while at the same time drawing them into Augustus s religious reforms, which in turn served to gain support for his rule, his family, and his successor. The similarities between Aeneas and Augustus depicted on the Ara Pacis not only glorify Augustus but also emphasize both as models of piety worthy of imitation for the Roman people who have neglected their gods. Quintilian stresses the importance of imitation; that is, the imitation not just of exemplary texts but also of individuals, as the most important method of learning accomplished best by praising famous men and their best traits. For Quintilian, a paradigm, a speech, or even a person could form the exemplar for imitation (1.6.5; ; ; ; ). On the Ara Pacis Augustus s deeds can easily be compared to Aeneas s through amplification, but in addition, Augustus also imitates the piety of his ancestor and invites the Roman people to imitate both men s behavior. Augustus, throughout his rule, used the strategy of imitation so frequently as to suggest the use was conscious. Suetonius recounts that Augustus, who wanted the people to return to traditional Roman dress, would himself wear this clothing and berate those

16 Ara Pacis Augustae 15 who did not (Aug. 44). Dio recounts a similar instance: Augustus, when speaking to a group of equestrians who had failed to marry and procreate in accordance with the Julian law, held his own adopted sons, thus modeling the behavior he wished the men to emulate (Suetonius, Aug. 34; Dio 56.2; Zanker 159). As art historian Paul Zanker notes, Augustus offered himself as the greatest exemplum and tried in his private life and public appearance to be a constant advertisement for the mores maiorum [the custom of the Roman ancestors] (159). The Ara Pacis, then, through imitation instructs the people of Rome as to how they should behave in order to maintain the gods favor. It is perhaps not surprising that the Roman people begin to imitate the piety of Augustus depicting themselves with togas drawn over their heads in the act of sacrifice in popular art such as the altars of the Lares. The Procession: Augustus, the Imperial Family, the Senate and State Religion The altar s north and south walls feature the procession of the four state priests, Augustus, the imperial family, and the senators and their families. Although the narrative of the altar starts in mythic time, the processional scenes move to Augustan Rome. Augustus is depicted with his toga pulled over his head but also wearing a laurel crown, mixing the symbols of piety and triumph (Hannestad 68) (see Figure 3). 11 This indirect reference to war suggests that Augustus s campaigns were fated and supported through his piety. In addition, the death of Lepidus in 12 BCE left the office of Pontifex Maximus, chief priest, open for Augustus, making Augustus s piety appropriate to his new office. Augustus, as Pontifex Maximus, has taken on the responsibility of mediating the people s relationship with the gods because, as Ogilvie notes, the role of determining the gods will and seeking approval was the responsibility of state religion (21). Similarly, art historian David Castriota notes that the role of the king in ancient non-roman art was to secure or mediate these divine blessings... (2). Castriota goes on to say that the Greeks specifically appropriated the concept of the major deity as progenitor and protector of the royal dynasty and the king as earthly counterpart or executive (6). It seems, while the notion of theocracy was decidedly un-roman, the depiction of Augustus on the Ara Pacis borders on that of a demigod, albeit adapted to the constraints of Roman tradition. The depiction of the Senators and their families on the north frieze of the Ara Pacis Augustae can be explained in a number of ways. Perhaps most importantly, the iconography of the altar strives to show that Augustus has not altered the constitutional structure of the Roman Republic. Dio stresses Augustus s need to depict his reign as republican in nature, though he was not fooled by Augustus s claims to 11 Hannestad s rationale for this claim is that not everyone could have been present who is depicted (68).

17 16 Lamp have turned the Republic back over to the Roman people and Senate. Dio says of the events of 27 BCE: Throughout this process the power of both the people and of the Senate was transferred into the hands of Augustus, and it was from this time that a monarchy, strictly speaking, was established....it is true the Romans hated the actual name of monarch so vehemently that they did not refer to their emperors either as dictators or kings or anything similar....and yet in order to maintain the impression that this authority is derived from the laws and not from their own supremacy, the emperors have arrogated to themselves all the functions, together with their actual titles, attached to the offices in which power resided and which were held with the free consent of the people, with the single exception of the dictatorship. (53.17) As classicist Christian Meier argues, Augustus could only defeat the Republic thoroughly and definitively by restoring it, and so in the Ara Pacis the Senators function to legitimize Augustus s rule (69 70). The depiction of the Senate might also bring to mind the second lectio senatus, which Augustus initiated in 18 BCE. Augustus s intent was to purge the Senate and leave it with three-hundred members; however, the senators resistance left Augustus wearing armor under his toga and in the end he relented, settling on six-hundred instead. Eder argues that this concession restored the Senate to a place of prominence and while the Senate lost some of its former power, Augustus did pass several laws including one that gave the Senate s decision the power of law (Eder 115). The depiction of the Senate on the Ara Pacis shows both that Augustus has continued to rule in a constitutional manner, and that Augustus has been honored by the Senate and the Roman people by the construction of the altar and rules at their request. Children are depicted prominently on the north and south friezes of the Ara Pacis. The children in the senatorial frieze suggest two possible arguments. First, the children establish that the qualification for the Senate has traditionally been familial, since the whole structure of Roman aristocratic society was dynastic in the Republic (Wells 63). A Roman audience might also connect familial succession to the idea that auctoritas, roughly translated as authority, could be handed down in Republican families (Eder 120). With these depictions, the altar roots the concept of succession in Republican custom. Second, the children on the altar suggest the moral reforms legislated by Augustus such as the lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus and the lex Iulia de adulteriis coercendis of 18 BCE, which offered incentives for procreation, promoted marriage, and punished adultery and were meant to keep the population of nobles higher than the numbers of freed slaves (Kleiner 92 3). Thus, the Ara Pacis was not targeting just lower-class or illiterate audiences, a claim that largely dismisses the importance of visual communication, to whom these laws would have had few ramifications, but instead suggests that different messages on the Ara Pacis were focused at particular audiences. In the case of the children, the altar targets the

18 Ara Pacis Augustae 17 upper classes, specifically equestrian men, particularly those who subscribed to stoicism or Epicureanism, systems of belief that discouraged marriage and procreation and were in direct conflict with Augustan moral reforms. Dio puts a speech in the mouth of Augustus that both supports this reading and makes connections between the founding myths and the Julian Laws. Dio claims that in 9 CE Augustus made a speech to the equestrians on the importance of marrying and having children. Although this speech is most likely a work of fiction by Dio, it nevertheless suggests both the importance of the issue to Augustus and the way that the founding myth served as an inventional resource: Try to imagine, then, the anger which the great Romulus, the founder of our race, would rightly feel, if he were to recall the circumstances in which he himself was born and could compare with your situation, in which you refuse to beget children even in lawful wedlock. Would it not enrage the Romans who were his followers, if they knew that after they had gone so far as to carry off foreign girls, you by contrast have no feeling even for those of your own race, and that after they had engendered children by the women of an enemy country, you refuse to beget them even by women who are your fellow-citizens? (56.5) On the Ara Pacis, we see the couching of a political necessity, that of the maintaining the ruling class, against the social reality that threatened the longevity of the upper classes. During Augustus s prolonged ill health, Kleiner argues, he began his obsession with the matter of succession, especially in the second half of the 20s B.C. (60, Favro 120). Although succession certainly is a theme expressed on the Ara Pacis, it becomes more apparent if we consider the altar in situ. Other monuments surrounding the Ara Pacis in the Campus Martius included the Augustan sundial with an obelisk at the center, as well as the mausoleum and the ustrinum, the location for the funeral pyre. Hannestad says the area contained a great many portents concerning the child Octavian associated with the sun, maintaining that a direct line led from the birth of the Princeps, via victory and world domination, to Pax, with promises of a future deification symbolized by the mausoleum and the ustrinum (64). The same themes of succession and world domination, which arise out of the narrative, are reinforced by the setting of the Ara Pacis. The processional scenes render the purpose of the Ara Pacis Augustae most starkly; the altar has established the right of succession and inherited auctoritas by inclusion of the senatorial families on the south frieze. A parallel argument is made on the north frieze concerning succession. Whereas Romulus serves to announce the Golden age, Augustus is shown as enacting the qualities necessary to bring about the Golden age. A clear theme on the altar is that sustained prosperity depends on the continued rule of the male progeny of the Julian line (Kleiner 98). Thus, the successor of Augustus is depicted on the Ara Pacis. At the time of the consecration this would have been Agrippa; however, he died later that year. Other possible heirs are shown on the altar as well, including Drusus,