by
Damien F. Mackey
“Augustan ideas, designed to reinforce
power, ambition and links with the divine and the mythological history of Rome
were adopted by Nero who further attempted to embed his character within Roman
history and thereby emulate Augustus”.
Paul D. Found
Introduction
As I have pointed out in not a few articles, now, I
can become suspicious when some historical character is referred to as being ‘a
[the] new’, or ‘second’, someone, or other.
For instance, we have new David’s, new Solomon’s,
new Jezebel’s, second Judith’s, and so on. Or even someone supposedly much emulating
‘another’.
While sometimes this is simply a case of a later
historical entity being very much like, in various ways, one who has gone
before, it can also mean that a duplication has occurred, that history is
actually repeating itself, rather than merely rhyming.
A colleague’s suggestion to me years ago now that,
contrary to what Assyriologists think, there was a definite overlap in the
reigns of Sargon II and Sennacherib – considered to be, respectively, father
and son – led me, piece by piece, to arrive at the conclusion that:
Sargon II and Sennacherib: [is] More than just an overlap
(2) Sargon II and Sennacherib: More than just
an overlap
that this was full-on subsumption: that Sargon II was
Sennacherib.
And that, then, became a vital core of my 2007
postgraduate thesis.
Again, and more relevant to this present article,
the fact that the emperor Hadrian has been described as “a mirror-image” of
king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, and “a second Antiochus” - coupled with a Jewish
tradition that replaces this king Antiochus with Hadrian in the story of the
martyrdom of the aged Maccabean woman and her seven sons - led me to writing various
articles, such as e.g.:
Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Emperor Hadrian
(5) Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Emperor Hadrian
But that was apparently not the
end of the story.
When reading through Anthony Everitt’s 392-page
book, Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome (Random House, NY, 2009), I was
struck by the constant flow of similarities between Hadrian and Augustus -
which the author himself does nothing to hide.
Here
are just some of the comparisons that I drew from the Anthony Everitt’s book in
my article:
Hadrian a reincarnation of Augustus
(3) Hadrian a reincarnation of Augustus
Pp. 190-191:
Ten years into his reign, Hadrian announced to the
world that, speaking symbolically, he was a reincarnation of Augustus.
P. x:
… Augustus, whom Hadrian greatly admired and
emulated.
P. 145:
Flatterers said that [Hadrian’s] eyes were
languishing, bright, piercing and full of light”. …. One may suspect that this
was exactly what Hadrian liked to hear (just as his revered Augustus prided
himself on his clear, bright eyes).
P. 190:
… the true hero among his predecessors was Augustus.
For the image on Hadrian’s signet ring to have been that of the first princeps was
an elegantly simple way of acknowledging indebtedness …. Later, he asked the
Senate for permission to hang an ornamental shield, preferably of silver, in
Augustus’ honor in the Senate.
P. 191:
What was it that Hadrian valued so highly in his
predecessor?
Not least the conduct of his daily life. Augustus
lived with conscious simplicity and so far as he could avoided open displays of
his preeminence.
P. 192:
Both Augustus and Hadrian made a point of being civiles
principes, polite autocrats.
….
Whenever Augustus was present, he took care to give his entire attention to the
gladiatorial displays, animal hunts, and the rest of the bloodthirsty
rigmarole. Hadrian followed suit.
P. 193:
Hadrian followed Augustus’ [consulship] example to
the letter - that is, once confirmed in place, he abstained.
….
Hadrian’s imitation of Augustus made it clear that he intended to rule in an
orderly and law- abiding fashion ... commitment to traditional romanitas, Romanness.
It was on these foundations that he would build the achievements of his reign.
Like the first princeps, Hadrian looked back to paradigms of
ancient virtue to guide modern governance. Augustus liked to see himself as a
new Romulus …. Hadrian followed suit ….
P. 196:
[Juvenal] was granted … a pension and a small but
adequate farmstead near Tibur …. Hadrian was, once again, modelling himself on
Augustus, who was a generous patron of poets ….
P. 202:
[Hadrian] conceived a plan to visit every province in
his wide dominions. Like the first princeps, he liked to see
things for himself ….
P. 208:
Hadrian introduced [militarily] the highest standards
of discipline and kept the soldiers on continual exercises, as if war were
imminent. In order to ensure consistency, he followed the example of Augustus
(once again) … by publishing a manual of military regulations.
P. 255:
[Eleusis] … at one level [Hadrian] was merely
treading in the footsteps of many Roman predecessors, among them Augustus.
P. 271:
… with his tenth anniversary behind him … the emperor
judged the time right to accept the title of Pater Patriae, father
of his people. Like Augustus, and probably in imitation of him, he had declined
the Senate’s offer for a long time ….
P. 277:
[Hadrian] was soon widely known throughout the
Hellenic eastern provinces as “Hadrianos Sebastos Olumpius”, Sebastos being
the Greek word for Augustus ….
P. 322:
The consecration ceremony was modeled on the
obsequies of Augustus.
….
And so on and on it goes.
All of this led me to conclude that:
Hadrian was more than a New Augustus
(1) Hadrian was more than a New Augustus
that Hadrian was, in fact, Augustus!
Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, Augustus and Hadrian thus needed
to be packed up into the one tyrannical parcel during the Infancy period
of Jesus Christ:
Time to consider Hadrian, that ‘mirror-image’ of Antiochus Epiphanes,
as also the census emperor Augustus
Nero emulating, or being, Augustus?
Now, the last thing that I might have expected when
I was studying ancient history at school and at the University of Tasmania, in
the 1960’s and 1970’s, would be to learn that Nero Caesar was Augustus-like. In
those days I would have taken the text books at face value, without any thought
whatsoever that the chronology might be way out of whack. I would have regarded
Augustus as a most competent emperor, whilst Nero, reigning decades later, was
a tyrannical mad man.
More than half a century later, though, I see things
quite differently.
Augustus himself had a fair share of tyranny and
madness about him if he was indeed Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ (God Manifest), whom
those who disliked him re-named ‘Epimanes’, Mad Man.
And these days, of course, I have no compunction in
altering chronologies when I think that occasion might demand.
Anyway, the hitherto most unexpected, Nero as
Augustus, started to loom as inevitable reality when it became clear to me,
from the writings of others, that:
Nero Caesar can be likened to king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, to the
emperor Hadrian
(4) Nero Caesar can be likened to king
Antiochus 'Epiphanes', to the emperor Hadrian
Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Hadrian being my alter egos
for Augustus Caesar (as noted above).
Nero Caesar Augustus has specifically been
designated ‘The New Augustus’, by, for instance, David Shotter:
THE NEW AUGUSTUS
| 9 | v2 | Nero | David Shotter | Taylor & Francis eB
Nero was supposedly, also, an emulator of Augustus.
This is made very clear in Paul D. Found’s article:
MA Dissertation: Drawing on evidence from the accounts of Suetonius and
Tacitus, to what extent can we determine an effort by Nero to emulate Augustus?
The author, Paul D. Found, makes no attempt actually
to identify Nero as Augustus.
In his Conclusion, he writes,
regarding philhellenism (keeping in mind that I consider
Augustus-Hadrian to have been the Seleucid Greek king, Antiochus):
There
appears to be no evidence to suggest that Augustus had any real passion for the
Greek arts suggesting that the Hellenic experiments in his building programme
were more propaganda orientated than from any personal belief or indulgence.
Suetonius (Suetonius, 2007, p.92:89) tells us that Augustus had ambitions to be
as proficient in Greek as in Latin yet despite a broad, general education, he
never learned to speak Greek with real fluency [sic], and never ventured on any
Greek literary composition. If he ever needed to use the Greek language, he
would write it down in Latin and get someone to make a translation. Despite his
early youth being affected by his mother’s banishment and a dysfunctional upbringing,
Nero developed a real passion for artistic pursuits and it appears he was
fluent in both the Greek and Latin language. One could question therefore
whether the Hellenic aspects of Nero’s rule can be seen as taking Augustus’
patronage to a higher level. In Augustus, we see a man keen to promote himself
as a patron of the arts and ingratiate himself as part of Hellenic culture
through his buildings, coinage and sculptures but in Nero, we see a man
attempting to ingratiate himself into the same by means of fully embracing the
culture and play a personal and active part in its promotion.
For Tacitus
and Suetonius, no such concept of a good quinquennium
existed and both would appear to have their sights set firmly on the artistic
excesses, the obscenities and the repression of the Senatorial circle. However,
it is obvious from the observations of later writers and indeed, later
emperors, that Nero’s government was generally good, albeit overshadowed later
on by the obscenities reported by Tacitus and Suetonius. Nero could brook no
rival in pedigree or largesse, so he set great store by his victories in the
Greek contests which, in Rome, were to involve the defeat of his social peers.
Just as he compensated for his lack of traditional achievements by ascendency
in magnificence and luxury, so he clearly conceived the celebration for his
victories on the Greek tour as an answer to the Roman triumph. As Griffin
(Griffin, 2000, p.208) recognises, the notion of philhellenism is a complex
one.
At least two
elements have to be considered: the Greek tastes which Nero was determined to
pursue and inculcate in others, and the practical benefits he conferred on
individuals, cities, and provinces in the eastern Empire. For Augustus, the
benefits were clear as he sought to administer a smooth transition from
Republic to Principate and it is possible that Nero’s philhellenism, like much
of his cruelty and extravagance, was, in part, a response to the Augustan
Principate. ….
No comments:
Post a Comment