Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T03:19:11.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Civilis Princeps: Between Citizen and King*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Andrew Wallace-Hadrill
Andrew Wallace-Hadrill
Affiliation:
Magdalene College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When the emperor Claudius decided, at the instigation of his freedman Pallas, to make a highly unconventional marriage with his niece, he manoeuvred the senate, through the agency of his staunch amicus Vitellius, into passing an ‘unsolicited’ request that he marry Agrippina. He declared that his hesitations would be overcome if the senate put pressure on him: who was he to resist the will of the community, being but a citizen like the rest? Some senators even rushed to the palace promising to compel him by brute force. The incident encapsulates an ambivalence in the emperor's role familiar to all readers of Tacitus. On the one hand the autocratic reality: a decision of high political moment (it was no surprise that Agrippina's son subsequently acceded to the throne) taken in the palace on the counsel of freedmen, potent and resented, involving a violation of the mos maiorum. On the other hand the elaborate and yet transparent republican façade: the senate decrees, the princeps submits to the will of the citizen body.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 72 , November 1982 , pp. 32 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Andrew Wallace-Hadrill 1982. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Tacitus, , Annals 12, 5–7Google Scholar.

2 A. Alföldi, ‘Die Ausgestaltung des monarchischen Zeremoniells’, Röm. Mitt. 49 (1934), 1–118, and ‘Insignien und Tracht der römischen Kaiser’, Röm. Mitt. 50 (1935), 3–158. Now reprinted together as Die monarchische Repräsentation im römischen Kaiserreiche (1970); citations below are from this edition.

3 So Millar, F., JRS 63 (1973), 67Google Scholar. His The Emperor in the Roman World (1977) is cited below as Millar, Emperor.

4 Veyne, P., Le Pain et le Cirque (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, particularly ch. 4, ‘L'empereur et sa capitale’. Cited as Veyne, Le Pain.

5 Veyne, Le Pain, 683.

6 On the symbolic value of the bare head see Mattingly, BMCRE III, xxii; Sutherland, C. H. V., Coinage in Roman Imperial Policy (1951), 156Google Scholar. The numerous types of regalia on the Constantinian coinage are summarized at RIC VII, 88–91.

7 Plin., Pan. 71, 4 ‘cui nihil ad augendum fastigium superest, hic uno modo crescere potest, si se ipse summittat securus magnitudinis suae’. The thought is echoed at SHA Pius 6, 4, cf. Hadrian 20, 1.

8 Politics 1312 b 17 for hatred and contempt of tyrannies; cf. 1313 a 12 for kingships.

9 Kantorowicz, E., The King's Two Bodies (1957), 26Google Scholar; Synesius, , Peri Basileias (ed. Terzaghi, ) 14–15Google Scholar.

10 This passage appears to be directly imitated in Ammianus' classic description of the adventus of Constantius in Rome (XVI, 10, 1 ff.), see Straub, J., Vom Herrscherideal in der Spätantike (1939), 175Google Scholar f.

11 See the list of such rulers in Duris, FGH 76 F 14.

12 See Plutarch, Demetr. esp. 18; 41–2. Duris F 14 on his mantle. On the dramatic effect produced, Diodorus XIX, 81, 4.

13 Stobaeus, Ecl. IV, 7, 62 p. 267 for Diotogenes. Edited by Delatte, L., Les Traités de le Royauté d'Ecphante, Diotogène et Sthénidas (1942), 39 fGoogle Scholar. Estimates of the date of these curious pieces vary wildly: Thesleff, H., An Introduction to the Pythagorean Writings of the Hellenistic Period (1961)Google Scholar for a hellenistic date; Taeger, F., Charisma 1 (1957), 398Google Scholar for third century A.D.; Delatte (p. 108) more plausibly for second century A.D.

14 E. R. Goodenough, ‘The Political Philosophy of Hellenistic Kingship’, YCS 1 (1928), 58 ff. The Diotogenes passage is taken as ‘official’ by Welwei, K., Könige und Königtum im Urteil des Polybios (Diss. Köln, 1963), 160Google Scholar f.

15 Synesius, Peri Basileias 19. On Xenophon's influence, K. Münscher, ‘X. in der griechischrömischen Literatur’, Philol. Suppl. 13 (1920). On humility in ancient ethics, see A. Dihle, Reallexikon Ant. Christ. III, s.v. Demut.

16 Athenaeus XII, 510–50 is a collection of passages on ‘those famous for luxury’. The defence of tryphē put up by Heraclides Ponticus is surely devil's advocacy: Athen. 512A = Wehrli, Die Schule des Aristoteles, fr. 55. Clearchus certainly thought tryphē led to ruin, Athen. 522D–524F = Wehrli fr. 46–8. Taken as an official philosophy by Tondriau, J., ‘La Tryphé. Philosophic royale ptolemaique’, Rev. Et. Anc. 50 (1948), 49Google Scholar ff.

17 Plut., Cleom. 13, based on Phylarchus, FGH 81 F 44, cited by Athen. IV, 141–2.

18 Aristeas, , Letter to Philocrates 263Google Scholar; cf. 191 and 211. On the work, O. Murray, JTS 18 (1967), 337 ff., esp. 356 f. on pride.

19 Ariston's work survives in a précis in the Herculaneum papyrus of Philodemus, Peri Kakiōn, ed. , Jensen, 1911Google Scholar. Text in Wehrli, Schule VI, Ariston fr. 13–14.

20 e.g. Veyne, , Le Pain, 228 ffGoogle Scholar.

21 Isocrates, ad Nic. II, 32–4. Megalopsychia is particularly prominent as a regal virtue in Polybius: see Welwei (above n. 14), 143; in general U. Knoche, ‘Magnitudo Animi’, Philol. Suppl. 37, 3 (1935).

22 See e.g. Plut., Polit. Parang. 31, 823A–D (on the statesman rather than emperor); Aristides, Eis Bas. IX, 23–4; Menander Rhetor, p. 375, 9 f. Spengel; Themist., or. XV, 190C, etc.

23 For a Greek recommendation of imperial semnotēs, cf. Dio of Prusa, I, 70 ff. contrasting Basileia and Tyrannis. Marcus, , Meditations VI, 30,Google Scholar 1 contrasts genuine semnotēs and false typhos.

24 The idea of maiestas perhaps comes closest to semnotēs: see esp. Plin., Pan. 4, 6 on the dignitas and maiestas of Trajan's appearance, emphasizing that ‘nihil maiestati humanitate detrahitur’. On the ‘auctoritas dignitasque formae’ of Claudius, Suet., Claud. 30. Similarly Vesp. 7, 2 for the lack of these qualities; Tit. 8, 2 for his behaviour at the games ‘maiestate salva’.

25 Suet., Aug. 53, 2 for his comitas to petitioners; Vesp. 23, 2 on the muleteer.

26 On the elements of the salutatio, Alföldi, Repräsentation, 27–38. The material was collected by Friedländer, L., Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Rotns9 (1922), 1, 90–103Google Scholar. Note however that silentiarii are only attested under Hadrian, and we have no evidence on their function.

27 Compare Pliny's description of Domitian's palace at Pan. 49, 1, ‘arcan a ilia cubilia’ etc.

28 Repräsentation, 127 ff.

29 Plin., NH praef. 11 ‘te quidem in excelsissimo generis human i fastigio positum … religiose adiri etiam a salutantibus scio’. Cited at Repräsentation, 45.

30 Repräsentation, 25–8 plays down the ‘bürgerlicheinfach’ style.

31 Béranger, J., Recherches sur l'aspect idéologique du principat (1953), 137 ffGoogle Scholar. on the ritual of refusal is illuminating, even if more than ritual was involved in Tiberius’ case.

32 On the self-contradictory evidence on the address ‘Domine’ see Alföldi, , Repräsentation, 91 f.Google Scholar; Sherwin-White, , The Letters of Pliny, 557 fGoogle Scholar.

33 For denial of even the pretence of restoration see Millar, F., JRS 63 (1973), 50–67;Google ScholarJudge, E. A., ‘Res Publica Restituta: a modern illusion?’ in Studies in honour of E. T. Salmon (1974), 279–311Google Scholar. On the significance of ritual, Douglas, Mary, Natural Symbols2 (1973)Google Scholar has important insights to offer.

34 Res Gestae 5–6 on honours refused; Velleius II, 122; Plin., Pan. 56–60 on Trajan's recalcitrance against a third consulship; 78, the senate ‘commands’ him to take a fourth.

35 The praenomen Imperatoris was refused by Tiberius and Claudius, but accepted by Nero, Vespasian and his successors: Combès, R., Imperator (1966), 151 fGoogle Scholar. Pater patriae was regularly deferred, explicitly attested for Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius, Nero, Vespasian, Trajan, Hadrian, Pius: Alföldi, A., Der Vater des Vaterlandes im römischen Denken (1971), 98 f.Google Scholar For etiquette on consulships, Hammond, M., The Antonine Monarchy (1959), 87 f.Google Scholar

36 See Plin., Pan. 16–17 for dismissiveness of Domitian's triumphs. Suet., Dom. 13, 2 for the witticism on his triumphal arches, arkei (‘Enough!’).

37 M. P. Charlesworth, ‘The refusal of divine honours: an Augustan formula’, PBSR 15 (1939), 1 ff. with Chr. Habicht in Le Culte des Souverains (Fond. Hardt XIX, 1972), 55 ff. Honorific monthnames were also worth refusing: K. Scott, YCS 2 (1931), 199 ff. On the etiquette over statues see Plin., Pan. 52, 1–4, with K. Scott, TAPA 62 (1931), 101 ff. This too is an Augustan formula: Suet., Aug. 52.

38 See Veyne, Le Pain, 717–19 on the insecurity of Gaius and the other ‘mad’ Caesars.

39 See Habicht, , Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte2 (1970), 160 ffGoogle Scholar.

40 So Béranger, , Recherches, 157 fGoogle Scholar.

41 Pro Mur. 74 ‘usus, vita, mores, civitas ipsa respuit’. Cato lost his consulship by this attitude according to Plut., Cat. min. 49, 3 f.

42 On Pompey, Dio XXXVI, 24, 5 f. with the sceptical comment of Caelius ap. Cic., ad fam. VIII, 1, 3. That Caesar as dictator made a practice of refusal is implied by Dio XLII, 19, 3–4, though he fails throughout to specify (cf. XLIII, 14, 7; 46, 1; XLIV, 7, 2). The prime instance of refusal for self-advertisement is the Lupercalia incident: Cic., Phil. II, 87 ‘populi iussu regnum detulisse, Caesarem uti noluisse‘— he resists an official command. Note also the complaint at Suet., Jul. 79, 1, ‘ereptam sibi gloriam recusandi’. Cicero refusing divine honours (ad Q.f. I, 1, 26) sits oddly in this company; but he was very vain, and admits he won praise thereby.

43 Esp. Suet., Tib. 27–31, cf. Dio LVII, 11, 3; Dio LX, 6, 1 (Claudius); Suet., Ner. 10, 2; Dio LXVI, 10, 5 (Vespasian); SHA Hadr. 8, 1–11; Pius 6, 5; Marcus 10, 2–9; Dio LXXIV, 3, 4 (Pertinax).

44 For the ritual exhortation, Plin., Pan. 66 ‘omnes ante te eadem ista dixerunt, nemini tamen ante te creditum est’ (!). See Alföldi, Repräsentation, 131–3; contra P. A. Brunt, PBSR 43 (1975), 24–5.

45 Plin., Pan. 63 describes the ceremony and Trajan's participation. Augustus and Vitellius: Suet., Aug. 56, 1; Tac., Hist. 2, 91. Cic., pro Plane. 12 and 49 f. for the aristocratic attitude.

46 Veyne, , Le Pain, 682–701Google Scholar. In stressing the peacock element (684) he ignores civilitas, excellently documented in this context by Cameron, A., Circus Factions (1976), 157 ffGoogle Scholar.

47 Suet., Aug. 44 ‘spectandi confusissimum ac solutissimum morem correxit ordinavitque’. The idea of the spectacula as a sounding board for popular opinion is already in Cic., pro Sestio 106. Further, Nicolet, C., The World of the Citizen in Republican Rome (1980), 363 ffGoogle Scholar. On hierarchical seating arrangements, Bollinger, T., Theatralis Licentia (1969), 13 ffGoogle Scholar.

48 Protest under Augustus, Tiberius and Gaius: Suet., Aug. 34, 2; Tac., Ann. 1, 77–8; Jos., A.J. XIX, 24–7. Cameron, , Circus Factions, 162 ffGoogle Scholar. for the etiquette.

49 So Wirszubski, Chr., Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome (1950), 136–8Google Scholar.

50 Evidence for abolitions of the maiestas charge is assembled by Bauman, R., Impietas in Principem (1974), 191 ffGoogle Scholar. It should be stressed that the issue was the reaction to verbal attack; the emperor's right to suppress overt treason was unquestioned.

51 The ambivalence of imperial attitudes is neatly summed up in Tacitus' epigram, ‘libertatem metuebat, adulationem oderat’, Ann. 2, 87. He is well aware that the exercise of libertas could function as refined adulatio, e.g. Ann. 3, 70. For examples of imperial ‘patience’ of free speech Suet., Jul. 75, 5; Aug. 51, 2–3 and 56; Tib. 28; Vesp. 13. Seen in action in Marcus' Meditations, Brunt, P. A., JRS 64 (1974), 13Google Scholar f. For jesters, SHA Pius 11, 8; Marcus 8, 1.

52 See Béranger, , ‘L'accession d'Auguste et l'idéologie du “privatus”’, Principatus (1975), 243 ffGoogle Scholar. with Recherches, 150. For the use of privatus, e.g. Suet., Tib. 26, 1: ‘paulo minus quam privatum’; SHA Hadr. 9, 8; Pius 7, 6; 11, 1 ff.; Marcus 5, 7–8; Sev. Alex. 4, 1. Similarly the use of idiōtes, e.g. Dio LVII, 11, 7 (Tiberius); LX, 6, 1–2 (Claudius); LXV, 7, 1 (Vitellius); LXXI, 35, 4 (Marcus); Herodian II, 4, 9 (Pertinax).

53 Pisistratids: Aristotle, Politics 1315 b 21 ff. and Ath. Pol. 16. Augustus: Suet., Aug. 56. Tiberius: Tac., Ann. 2, 34. Pliny on Trajan's fiscal cases, Pan. 36.

54 Alföldi, , Repräsentation, 127 fGoogle Scholar. on the privata vestis. Augustus and togas, Suet., Aug. 73 and 40, 5. For doubts about the SHA, Alföldi, 128 n. 5. But Marcus is clear enough: Med. I, 16, 8; VI, 30, 2, cf. Brunt, PBSR 1975, 24.

55 Kroll, W., Die Kultur der ciceronischen Zeit (1933), II, 65 ffGoogle Scholar. for the republic; Friedländer, , Sittengeschichte I, 90Google Scholar ff. on the empire. Alföldi, , Repräsentation, 40 ffGoogle Scholar. for the ceremonial of the salutatio.

56 Augustus, Suet., Aug. 53, 3; Dio LVI, 26, 2; Tiberius, Suet., Tib. 31, 2; Dio LVII, 11, 7; Claudius, Dio LX, 12, 1, cf. Suet., Claud. 35, 1; Vitellius, Dio LXV, 7, 1; Vespasian, LXVI, 10, 6; Trajan, LXVIII, 7, 3 and Eutropius VIII, 4; Hadrian, Dio LXIX, 7, 3–4; SHA Hadr. 9, 7; Pius, SHA Pius 11, 1–7; Pertinax, Dio LXXIV, 3, 4; Severus Alexander, SHA Sev. Alex. 4, 3.

57 See Alföldi, , Repräsentation, 110Google Scholar. Add for Trajan, Eutropius VIII, 4, Dio LXVIII, 7, 3; Hadrian, Dio LXIX, 7, 3. Narcissus joins Claudius in the Messalina crisis: Tac., Ann. 11, 33.

58 On kissing at the levee, Alföldi, Repräsentation, 40–2; Friedländer, , Sittengeschichte 1, 95Google Scholar.

59 On discouragement of birthday celebrations, Suet., Tib. 26, 1; Dio LX, 5, 6–7 (Claudius); SHA Hadr. 8, 2.

60 Notes of apology: Plin., Pan. 48, 2; Marcus Med. I, 16, 2. Yet see Fronto, ad Verum I, 3, p. 112 van den Hout, ad Pium 5, p. 159 for such notes.

61 Millar, Emperor, 31 on the ritual. For Augustus, Suet., Aug. 53, 2; Di o LIV, 25, 4. For the later development of adventus ceremonials, MacCormack, S., Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity (1981), 17 ffGoogle Scholar.

62 Tiberius, Tac., Ann. 3, 47; Trajan, Plin., Pan. 22–4, imitated by Pacatus, Pan. Lat. 11 (XII) 47, 3 on Theodosius.

63 Plin., Pan. 4, 5. For the idea of a middle course see Ammianus XXV, 4, 7 on Julian, ‘civilitati admodum studens, tantum sibi adrogans quantum a contemptu et insolentia distare existimabat’.

64 Court pressure against civilitas is alleged at SHA Hadr. 20, 1; Pius 6, 4; Sev. Alex. 20, 3; it may of course reflect fourth-century tensions. On the importance of the evidence of Marcus, see Brunt, P. A., JRS 64 (1974), 10Google Scholar ff., and PBSR 1975, 24 f.

65 Pan. 56, 3. On the theme see Trisoglio, F., La Personalità di Plinio il Giovane … (Mem. Acc. Sc. Torino, Cl. Sc. Mor. ser. 4, 25 (1972)), 85Google Scholar ff. and the introduction to M. Durry's commentary (Coll. Budé, 1932).

66 For contemporary assertions of Tiberius' moderatio, see Velleius II, 122 and the coin series, BMCRE I, 132; cf. Levick, B., Tiberius the Politician (1976), 87 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 Plato, , Laws III, 691CGoogle Scholar ff. on metriotēs as a key factor in the Spartan monarchy. Theopompus: Aristotle, Politics 1313 a 26 ff.; repeated by Plut., Lyc. 7, 2; ad princ. inerud. 779e.

68 Cicero and Livy claim it as a traditional republican quality: see Hellegouarc'h, J., Le Vocabulaire Latin des Relations et des Partis Politiques sous la République (1963), 263Google Scholar. A whole chapter is devoted to moderatio by Val. Max. IV, 1.

69 The majority of Valerius' republican exempla reflect the importance of the Roman tradition of the limitation of magisterial powers. Note that his moderatio also overlaps with the idea of clementia, e.g. IV, 1, 15 (Bibulus). The ideas are similarly linked at Suet., Jul., 75, 1 and Sen., de clem. I, 11, 1.

70 Tac., Ann. 1, 33 on Germanicus: ‘iuveni civile ingenium, mira comitas et diversa ab Tiberii sermone vultu, adrogantibus et obscuris’.

71 Plin., Pan. 23, 6 approach to palace; 24, 2 shaking hands. Domitian's blush: Tac., Hist. 4, 40; Suet., Dom. 18, 2; bitterly attacked at Tac., Agr. 45; Plin., Pan. 48, 4.

72 See Hellegouarc'h, Vocabulaire, 279–90.

73 A useful collection of evidence in Heuer, K. H., Comitas-facilitas-liberalitas: Studien zur gesellschaftlichen Kultur der ciceronischen Zeit (Diss. Münster, 1941)Google Scholar. Also Hellegouarc'h, Vocabulaire, 211–15. See esp. Cic., Comm. Pet. 16, 49–50.

74 Discussed by Combès, R., Imperator, 350–2Google Scholar.

75 Cic., off. II, 48 (hellenistic kings); I, 90 (Philip); ad Q.f. I, 1, 23 (Cyrus).

76 Plin., Pan. 47–8 is more concerned with the salutatio as a social than as a business occasion: Trajan admits men of learning.

77 Comitas at games, Tac., Ann. 1, 76; Suet., Tit. 8, 2; recitation, Suet., Ner. 10, 2, cf. 1; bath, Suet., Tit. 8, 2.

78 Z. Yavetz, Plebs and Princeps (1969), 52, 98 on attitudes of disapproval. For republican criticism of levitas popularis, see also Hellegouarc'h, Vocabulaire, 518.

79 For the early development of this word see Lana, I., ‘Civilis, civiliter, civilitas in Tacito e Svetonio’, Atti Ac. Sc. Torino, 106 (1972), 465Google Scholar ff.; also Scivoletto, N., ‘La civilitas del IV secolo e il significato del Breviarium di Eutropio’, Giorn. It. Fil. 22, n.s. 1 (1970), 14Google Scholar ff. The lexical material is collected in the TLL s.vv. Note also the material s.vv. incivilis, incivilitas, inciviliter.

80 So Velleius II, 124, 2 on Tiberius.

81 Pan. 2, 4. ‘Unum e nobis,’ must refer to cives, since the expression comes in a string of first person plurals following ‘omnibus civibus enitendum’ at 2, 1. Doubtless he is thinking primarily of senators, as at Pan. 63, 2.

82 The point is made by Lana (n. 79), 467 f.

83 On societas civilis, see esp. rep. I, 49 and leg. I, 62; also de or. II, 68; fin. III, 66; ND II, 78.

84 TLL III, 1213 ff. for the distinction ‘quid ad cives pertinet’ and ‘quid bonum civem decet’. Neither Cic., fin. V, 66, nor leg. III, 42, classed by TLL under the latter, really anticipate the imperial sense, being translations of politikos.

85 Sallust, BJ 85, 35. Note also the Sallustian, Letter to Caesar I, 3, 1Google Scholar where Caesar is urged to use his victory civiliter.

86 Livy XXXIII, 46, 3; cf. XLV, 32, 5 of the Macedonian court: ‘nulli civilis animus, neque legum neque libertatis aequae patiens’.

87 Of violence against tribunes, VII, 5, 2; XXXVIII, 56, 9. On unbroken imperium, esp. XXVII, 6, 4, ‘neque magistratum continuari satis civile’; cf. VI, 40, 7–15.

88 XXXVIII, 56, 12 f. The similarity of Scipio's refused honours to those of Caesar and the presumption of fabrication are discussed by Weinstock, S., Divus Julius (1971), 36 fGoogle Scholar.

89 For contemporary celebration of Augustus' civility, Ovid, Trist. III, 8, 41; IV, 4, 13; cf. Sen., Contr. IV, praef. 5. Messala's words are reported by Jerome, Chron. ann. 728/9 from Suetonius, (Reliquiae, ed. Roth, C. (1858), 290)Google Scholar. Latro is quoted by Sen., Contr. VII, 8, 7.

90 Civilitas first at Suet., Aug. 51, anticipated only by Quintilian (Inst. Or. II, 15, 25) translating politikē in a different sense. The parallel development of civilis is observed by TLL III, 1217, 79 ff. Of earlier passages cited, Plin., NH XVIII, 320 is wrongly construed; and Ovid, Trist. IV, 4, 13 is dubious (the form ‘quid est civilius illo’ avoids direct application of the adjective to a person—what is more civil, not who is more civil). The earliest attestation is thus Plin., Pan. 83, 7 ‘quam civilis incessu’ of Plotina; followed by Suet., Tib. 26 etc.

91 The relevant sections of the Lives are : Jul. 75, 5–79; Aug. 52–6; Tib. 26–32; Cal. 22 and 26; Claud. 12, cf. 35, 1; Ner. 10, 2 (comitas); Vesp. 12; Dom. 12. 3–13. Lana (n. 79), 476 ff., in citing only passages where civilis and its associates occur, conceals the extent of documentation of both civil and incivil behaviour in Suetonius.

92 For the numerous occurrences of the idea in the SHA, Eutropius and elsewhere, see Scivoletto (n. 79).

93 The suggestion that the abstract noun only emerges after practice has become settled fits in with the pattern proposed by Quentin Skinner in a discussion of the emergence of ‘keywords’, Essays in Criticism 29 (1979), 205–24Google Scholar.

94 Tiberius, LVII, 8–9 and 11; Claudius, LX, 5, 3–6, 2 and 12; Vespasian, LXVI, 10, 4–11, 3; Trajan, LXVIII, 6–7; Hadrian, LXIX, 6–7; Marcus, LXXI, 35, 3–5; Pertinax, LXXIV, 3, 4. On these sketches see Questa, C., ‘Tecnica biografica e tecnica annalistica nei libri liii–lxiii di Cassio Dione’, Studi Urbinati 31 (1957), 37Google Scholar ff.

95 As at LVII, 8–9 (Tiberius' moderation in honours) and 11 (accessibility); split by talk of his liberality.

96 Dēmotikos = civilis at LVII, 8, 3; 9, 1; LXVI, 11, 1; LXXIV, 3, 4; 5, 1. cf. P. Sattler, Augustus und der Senat (1960), 38. Other terms employed include metrios, epieikēs, euprosodos, euprosēgoros, koinos, isos.

97 See Schotten, F., Zur Bedeutungsentwicklung des Adjectivs politikos (Diss. Köln, 1966)Google Scholar, esp. ch. 5.

98 So LVII, 11, 3. For Dio's views on ‘democracy’ see Millar, F., A Study of Cassius Dio (1964), 74–6Google Scholar.

99 Diod. XIX, 1–9; cf. the version of Polyaen. V, 3, 7. The parallel between Agathocles and Augustus was drawn by Ed. Meyer, , Gött. Gel. Anz. 1888, 858 fGoogle Scholar. Diodorus is normally assumed to have been writing before 27 B.C. For such recusationes, see Ritter, H.-W., Diadem und Königsherrschaft (1965)Google Scholar, index s.v.

100 e.g. Appian, Mithr. 566 (Pompey); Arrian, Anab. VII, 4, 7 (Alexander); Aelian, VH II, 20 (Antigonus); Josephus, AJ III, 212 (Moses); VIII, 215 (Reheboam). For Plutarch's fondness for the term, see Wardman, A., Plutarch's Lives (1974), 68Google Scholar and Bucher-Isler, B., Norm und Individualität in den Biographien Plutarchs (1972), 16Google Scholar.

101 So Dio LIII, 12, 1 (27 B.C.). Civilis is never qualified by quasi or the like (at Cic., fin. V, 66 it excuses a translation).

102 cf. Syme, , Roman Revolution, 315 fGoogle Scholar.: Liebeschuetz, J. H. W. G., Continuity and Change in Roman Religion (1979), 55 ffGoogle Scholar.

103 Note the salutary warning of Syme, , Roman Revolution, 323Google Scholar: ‘it would be an elementary error to fancy that the ceremony of January 13th was merely a grim comedy’. He stresses the political realities (322): Augustus needed ‘the support of men of property and the active cooperation of the governing class’.

104 So Alföldi, , Repräsentation, 25 fGoogle Scholar.; Sattler, , Augustus und der Senat, 38Google Scholar; cf. Veyne, , Le Pain, 715Google Scholar f.

105 Suet., Cal. 49, 1, ‘se neque civem neque principem senatui amplius fore’.

106 cf. Ner. 37, 3. The thesis of della Corte, F., Svetonio, eques Romanus2 (1967)Google Scholar, that Suetonius manifests an equestrian ideology hostile to that of the senate is demolished by J. Gascou, ‘Suétone et l'ordre équestre’, REL 54 (1976), 257 ff.

107 So Brunt, P. A., Social Conflicts in the Roman Republic (1971), 154 fGoogle Scholar.

108 See the account of Jones, A. H. M., The Later Roman Empire (1964), 525 ffGoogle Scholar.

109 The point explicitly at Plin., Pan. 60, 2–4: Trajan's consulship restores glamour to the office, ‘recepit enim tertium consulatum ut daret’. The reward of merit is an important theme here, esp. 44–5. Conversely malignitas, unwillingness to reward merit, goes with imperial superbia: so Suet., Cal. 34–5; Tac., Agr. 41, 4 (Domitian and Agricola).

110 Suet., Jul. 77, ‘nihil esse rem publicam, appellationem modo sine corpore ac specie’. Contrast Seneca's criticism of Gaius in allowing an aged senator to kiss his foot: ‘non hoc est rem publicam calcare?’ (de ben. 11, 12).

111 So Millar, Emperor, 275 ff. See now Saller, R. P., Personal Patronage under the Early Empire (1982), 41 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar., very much to the point.

112 The prosopographical investigations of Eck, W., Senatoren von Vespasian bis Hadrian (1970), 55 ffGoogle Scholar. and Jones, B. W., Domitian and the Senatorial Order (Mem. Am. Phil. Soc. vol. 132, 1979)Google Scholar, by demonstrating that Domitian was by no means sparing in his awards of magistracies, have only intensified the problem of explaining the attitude of the sources.

113 The contributions of these emperors to social order are documented with emphasis at Aug. 35–40 and Vesp. 8–9.

114 This outline follows the classic account of Sherwin-White, A. N., The Roman Citizenship2 (1973), 221 ffGoogle Scholar.

115 The evidence for the Julianic revival is set out by Scivoletto (n. 79). Julian's civility is linked with his regeneration of the polis by Athanassiadi-Fowden, P., Julian and Hellenism (1981), 112 fGoogle Scholar.