( SEP 20 1910 Divisiou _ 12 Section . t Ci O T ( BY LOUIS MATTHEWS SWEET Roman Emperor Worship The Verification of Christianity Divination and Prophecy— A Study in Comparative Religion A Critical History of the Theory of Evolution A System of Christian Theology RICHARD G. badger, PUBLISHER, BOSTON ROMAN EMPEROR WORSHIP BY LOUIS MATTHEWS SWEET, S.T.D., Ph.D. Professor in the Bible Teachers Training School of New York City; Author of '*The Birth and Infancy of Jesus Christ," "The Study of the English Bible" etc. ■^ OF ?^ BOSTON RICHARD G. BADGER THE GORHAM PRESS COPYBIGHT, I919, BY RiCHAED G. BADGER All Rights Reserved Made in the United States of America The Gorham Press, Boston, U. S. A. TO THE MEMORY OF MY FATHER AMOS LEWIS SWEET, M.D, New York University, Class of 1866 WHO LEFT US WHEN THIS WORK IN WHICH HE WAS DEEPLY INTERESTED HAD JUST BEGUN "How weU he fell asleep! Like some proud river, widening toward the sea; Calmly and grandly, silently and deep, LiJe ioined eternity." "Reliquos enim deos accepimus, Csesares dedimus." — Valerius Maximus. "Stulte verebor, ipse quum faciam, Deos." Nero in "Octavia^^ Act ii. l. 450, FOREWORD THE following pages contain, in substance, a dissertation presented to the authorities of New York University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Doctorate in Philosophy. The work now appears in print and is submit- ted to the judgment of the public with the ap- proval of the University. The research which has gone to the making of the book was carried on and much of the actual writing done in the Latin Seminar Room at University Heights. I wish to put on record my sense of privilege in having access to this noble sanctuary of learning and the incomparable classical library which it contains, especially as this has involved many hours of fellowship with the presiding genius of the place, Professor Ernest G. Sihler, Ph.D., him- self an embodiment of the best traditions of mod- ern scholarship. My work has been done con amove and it is with the deepest satisfaction that I now connect it with the University, the Seminar Room and Dr. Sihler. CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE INTRODUCTION ii I. THE RULER-CULT IN EARLY ANTIQUITY . 15 1. In Babylonia 15 2. In Persia 18 3. In China 20 4. In Japan 21 5. In Egypt 22 IL THE RULER -CULT IN THE MACEDONIAN - GREEK PERIOD 24 1. Alexander the Great 24 2. The Ptolemies 25 3. In Greece 31 4. Greek-Asiatic Dynasties 36 III. BEGINNINGS OF THE RULER-CULT AMONG THE ROMANS 37 1. The Universality of Deification in Paganism 37 2. Deification and Mythology 38 3. Deification Native to the Roman Genius . 42 IV. THE RULER-CULT AND JULIUS CiESAR . . S3 1. C^SAR AND THE DiVI 53 2. The Divine Ancestry of C^sar 54 3. Divine Honors of Cjesar During His Life- Time 56 4. C^sar As Divus 58 5. The Julian Cult 60 6. The Worship of Roma 62 V. THE RULER-CULT IN THE REIGN OF AUGUS- TUS 64 1. Life-Time Worship of the Emperors ... 64 2. The Worship of Augustus and the Augustan Cult 69 9 10 CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE VI. THE RULER-CULT UNDER THE SUCCESSORS OF AUGUSTUS 75 1. The Cult of the Augusti 75 2. The Manifoldness and Pervasiveness of the Emperor-Cult 80 Vn. THE RULER-CULT AS A POLITICAL INSTRU- MENT 84 1. Its Politico-religious Origin 84 2. Its Influence in Consolidating the Empire . 88 VIII. THE RULER-CULT AND THE POSITION OF THE EMPEROR 93 1. Deification and the Mind of the Emperor . 93 2. The Ruler-Cult as a Symptom of Decadence 99 a. The Taint of Sycophancy 99 b. The Glorification of Bad Men 104 IX. THE RULER-CULT AND POLYTHEISM ... 108 1. The Self-Contradiction of Polytheism . . 108 2. Polytheism Essentially Elementary and In- adequate no 3. Emperor-Worship the Final Phase of Pagan- ism Ill a. The Supersession of the Olympians . . . . 112 b. The Absorption of Mithra and Apollo . . . 115 4. Polytheism and Pantheism 124 X. THE RULER-CULT AND THE JUD^O-CHRIS- TIAN MOVEMENT 126 1. The Jews and Emperor-Worship 126 2. Christianity and Emperor-Worship .... 127 a. TheTeachingof Christ and the Imperial-Cult 128 b. Church and Empire in the Book of Acts . . 132 c. Church and Empire in Nero's Reign and After the Beginning of Persecution . . . 133 d. The Causes of Persecution 134 e. Conclusion — Christ and Caesar 140 BIBLIOGRAPHY 143 INDEX 149 INTRODUCTION THE Roman Imperial Cult began with the first Caesar and continued until the final overthrow of paganism in the Empire. An ex- haustive study of the Cult in all its ramifications would practically involve a survey of Roman his- tory during the imperial epoch and would trans- cend all reasonable limits. A bald analytical re- view, merely, of the data which have passed under my own eye in the course of this investigation, would break bounds. A rigid and somewhat pain- ful process of elimination has, therefore, been ex- ercised both in the use and presentation of the available data in this field. Particularly in the matter of the local origins and spread throughout the empire of the ruler-cult I have been com- pelled to turn a deaf ear to many alluring sug- gestions. There are in this region many urgent problems awaiting solution, which I have not ventured even to broach. They can be solved only by the examination and analysis of hundreds of additional inscriptions and historic references — an undertaking which waits upon occasion. A II 12 Introduction fit and appropriate opportunity for a more ade- quate and exhaustive presentation of the theme may at some future time offer itself. Meanwhile what is herein contained may be counted as vital prolegomena to a great and still largely unworked field of investigation. "Ars longa, vita brevis est." The quite sufHcient task, which I have actually set for myself, is two-fold. First, to exhibit the grounds upon which my conviction rests that the Roman system of imperial deification has a broader context in antiquity, and strikes its roots more deeply into the past, than has often been realized even by those most conversant with the facts. Second, to exhibit the fact and to unfold the significance of the fact, that the imperial cult, to a surprising extent, displaced and superseded, not only the hereditary and traditional gods of the Romans, but also absorbed and subordinated the Imported cults, both Greek and Oriental, which were superimposed upon the native worship, hastened the decay and overthrow of the entire syncretic aggregation and gradually gathered to itself the whole force of the empire, becoming in the end the one characteristic and universal ex- pression of ancient paganism. ROMAN EMPEROR-WORSHIP ROMAN EMPEROR-WORSHIP CHAPTER I THE RULER-CULT IN EARLY ANTIQUITY I. In Babylonia THE absolute beginning of the ancient and widespread custom of deifying human be- ings cannot now be discovered. Historic dawns are for the most part veiled in impenetrable mist and when the sun has fairly risen and landscapes are clear and open before us, human affairs are already midway of something, — beginnings are already lost in the distance. Of this much, how- ever, we may be certain, — the custom was al- ready established at the beginning of that portion of history the records of which have come down to us. The most ancient documents afford, once and again, most striking parallels with later de- velopments in the Orient and among the Greeks 15 1 6 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship and Romans. A dim and far-away reflection of the movement in its first phases may be afforded by the great Babylonian Epic in which the hero, Gilgamesh, becomes a solar-deity with accomr panying worship. Another semi-mythical hero, Etana, is also elevated to godhood. That this elevation of heroes to divine honors is something of an innovation is indicated by the fact that hero-deities do not enter the celestial sphere oc- cupied by other gods but are kept in the nether world. ^ It was a very general custom, also, to grant divine honors after death to prominent persons whose careers made a deep impression upon the minds of posterity. Moreover (and the fact is of vital importance to this study) well-known histor- ical personages whose reigns we can date and place were the recipients of divine honors not only after death but during their life-times. This is demonstrable in several instances. Both Gudea, patesi of Shirpurla about 3000 B.C., and Entemena of Lagash about the same date, were deified, receiving offerings and appear- ing in tablets with the determinative for deity con- nected with their names. The latter's statue was set up in the temple E-gissh-vigal at Babylon. ^Consult Jastrow: Religion of Assyria and Babylonia (N. Y., 1898), pp. 47of. The Ruler-Cult in Early Antiquity 17 The proof has been pointed out to me ^ In a date list of Abeshu (2049-2021 B.C.), the eighth king of the First Dynasty, In which appears the state- ment: "The Year In which he (Abeshu) dec- orated the statue of Entemena for his godhead." The same king erected his own statue In the same temple. GImll Sin (2500 B.C.) was deified In his own life-time and had a temple of his own at Lagash. DungI, of Ur (2000 B.C.) was deified. "Shar- ganl-Sharrl, Semitic king of Agade, writes his name commonly, though not always, with the di- vine determinative, and Naram-Sin has his name seldom without It." ^ These Instances are suffi- ciently numerous to Indicate that the custom of deifying rulers both before and after death was quite common. ^By Prof. R. W. Rogers, of Drew Theological Seminary, to whom I am also indebted for the translations which appear in the text. For the antiquity of the custom consult Jastrow: Civ- ilization of Assyria and Babylonia, p. 336. * Dr. Rogers. The same competent authority says: "Deifica- tion was at that time evidently begun even during the king's life-time." So, also, Jastrow, Religion of Assyria and Baby- lonia, p. 561. Prof. Jastrow says: "We may expect to come across a god Hammurabi some day." Dr. Rogers tells me (1918) that this King's name actually appears coupled with the gods in oath formulas. Jastrow's references on this subject should be carefully noted. In the famous "Lament of Tabi-utul-Enlil," 2d tablet, occurs this line: "The glorification of the king I made like unto that of a god" (Jastrow: Civilization of Assyria and Babylonia, p. 478). The context shows that the king's homage was an essential element of religious duty. 1 8 Aspects of Roman Emperor-J^Forship 2. In Persia How ancient the idea of a royal divinity among the Persians was we have no way of knowing. It thoroughly permeates the Zoroastrian docu- ments and must, therefore, be as ancient as they. The Zoroastrian instance is of particular value because it is really alien to the system as such, and reveals more clearly than elsewhere the rul- ing ideas which produced it. The Zoroastrian system of cosmogony begins with Ahura Mazda, the creator, and ends with Saoshyant, the re- storer, of all things. Throughout this entire cycle of cosmic history there is an unbroken succession of leaders and rulers possessing one element in common, the so-called "divine glory." This ele- ment corresponds, exceptis excipiendis, to the "di- vine blood" or ichor in the veins of the Egyptian Kings. A brief resume of the facts will serve to bring to light the essential principles involved. In Yast XIX ^ sixteen sections are devoted to the praise of this heavenly and kingly glory, which is transmitted through the line of Iranian Kings, both legendary and historical, to Saoshyant. In this Yast,^ the glory is spoken of as a quality "that cannot be seized." Elsewhere ^ it is said *Zamyad Yast — see S. B. E., v. 23, pp. 286 seg. °XIX. 55 et passim. 'Aban Yast, XLII — cf. Zamyad 51, 56, etc. The Riiler-Cult in Early Antiquity 19 that this glory took refuge in the sea during the reigns of foreign dynasties and wicked kings. This means that the divine quality and dignity belong exclusively to the legitimate line of Iranian Kings. "^ The Dinkard ^ deals with the descent of the heavenly glory from king to king. The royal genealogy is a part of the system. It has been well said that this passage would serve as a short history of the Iranian monarchy. The person of the legitimate ruler is sacrosanct because of an unique divine substance, imparting a correspond- ing divine quality which puts him on a level with the first man, with the Amesha Spentas, with Zara- thustra himself, and with Saoshyant, the restorer, all of whom with his royal ancestors are mani- festations and embodiments of Ahura Mazda. Two tendencies of thought, moving towards a common center, meet in this conception, which, as I have said, is really alien to the spirit of Maz- daism, namely, an excessive idealization of roy- alty and a tendency to materialize the divine glory.^ This deification of the Persian rulers persists through all later history. In a passage of iEschy- 'See Bundahis XXI:32, 33; XXXIV :4. ^'Bk. VII, Ch. I. ® Herodotus (1:131) expresses the spirit of Mazdaisra when he says of the Persians: " wj fihv ifidi Sok^cip '6tl oOk dp6pu}7ro{>eds 20 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship lus ^° Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus, Is addressed as consort and mother of the god of the Persians. Diodorus Siculus^^ states that Darius was ad- dressed as a god by the Egyptians, adding, quite incorrectly, ^^ novov ribv airavroiv ^oLdiKkoiv. Momm- sen points out that uniformly the title of the tri- lingual inscriptions at Naksi Rustam is "The Mazda-servant God Artaxerxes, King of Kings of the Arians, of divine descent," ^^ while we have a palace inscription ^^ of the Emperor Alexander Severus (222-235 A.D.) *E7rt5^/xta ^eoD 'AXe^dz/Spou. This brings us through the Graeco-Asiatic blend- ing to the Roman Imperial house, well on toward the end of its history. A Roman emperor deified in Persia and in Persian style presents a striking example of historic continuity. Nor is this by any means the end of the story as we shall see later.i* 3. In China So far as China is concerned I need simply call attention to the fact that in addition to the regular process whereby deceased ancestors are raised to " Persae, v. 157 B^ov /jlcp evvareipd. Hepauv deov 5i /cat p.-fjT'qp %avV KOLL Koivbv ToO avdpoiTTLvov ^Lod aoiTTJpa. Of like tenor are C. I. G., 2369, 22i4g, 2215, 2957 and C. I. A., Ill 428. Hirschfeld {op. cit., p. 836, note 19) refutes the con- tention of Boeck, who is strangely reluctant to believe that anybody could accept divine honors for himself in his own life-time, that these inscriptions were not addressed to the liv- ing Caesar. In 29 B.C. Caesar was honored as a hero under the title of Men or Sabazios, an Anatolian deity at Nikaia. See Pliny, H. N., VIII, 155. ^^ See page 34 for case of Flamininus. ®^Ad Atticum, 5.21.7; cf. Ad Quintum Fr., 1.1.26. ®^ Chariots for statues equivalent to tensae. 58 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship 4. C^SAR AS Divus Upon the death of Caesar, he was promptly voted both divine and human honors by the Sen- ate. According to Suetonius ^^ he was deified not merely by the mouth of those making a formal de- cree "sed in persuaslone volgl." The games in celebration of his apotheosis were marked by celestial omens. "Stella crinlta per septem con- tlnuos dies fulsit," which was believed to be the soul of Caesar received into heaven.^^^ Dio's list^^^ of posthumous divine honors be- stowed upon Caesar, which contains a rather por- tentous number of items, is very Interesting. Out of the total which I have numbered from one to eleven, a few deserve special mention. His acts were made perpetually binding, the place and day of his assassination were both made accursed; his Image was not to be carried at the funerals of his relatives Kadairep deov tlvos cos aXrjdcos but was to be carried together with a special image of Venus at horse races; no one taking refuge in his shrine, which was formally set apart as to a god, could be banished or stripped of goods, owep ovdevl ovde tcov deoiv irXriv rccv eirl Po/ioXou yevojJLevccv. "" D. I., LXXXVIII. ""For Julian games cf. C. I. L., I, p. 293; cf. Beurlier: Culte, Sec. 55f. ^"'Bk. XLVII, 18, 19. The Ruler-Cult and Julius Casar 59 It is quite evident from Dio's presentation of the ceremonial and other official acts, which are typical of the whole scheme of deification on its mechanical side, that the process was carried out in strict accord with Roman customs and with the deliberate intention of making every item count. The contention of Wissowa, already alluded to, is sufficiently disposed of by the fact that Caesar was deified by the only authority capable of doing it, that is, the Roman Senate, and in the regular and accepted mode. It is also clear that in the dedication of a temple (45 B.C.) and the appoint- ment of a priesthood to perform the rites belong- ing to the new cult, Augustus followed — but did not lead — the Senate and the Roman people in their acknowledgment of the divinity of the great Gaius. Augustus, however, was a devoted ad- herent of the new cult. Velleius Paterculus (A.D. 30 flor.) in a very characteristic passage,^^^ said of Augustus: *'Sa- cravit parentem suum Caesar non imperio sed re- ligione, non appellavit eum, sed fecit deum.'^ This last clause should be interpreted by emphasis: "he not merely called him but made him god." Valerius Maximus ^^^ ironically acknowledges the good offices of Caesar's assassins in procuring ^"'I.VIiis.V.M. wrote under Tiberius. 6o Aspects of Roman Emperor-W orship his exaltation. In an address to Cassar in which he speaks of the divine honors, including altars, temples, priests and ritual which were bestowed upon him, he says finally: "erupit deinde eorum parracidium, qui, dum te hominum numero subtra- here volunt, deorum concilio adiecerunt." In this connection a poetic touch is given to the Caesarean cult by the fact, which Plutarch records, ^^^ that Antony was pleased to be appointed a priest of Caesar. 5. The Julian Cult The extent and character of the Julian cult may be seen from a few selected inscriptions. A marble inscription ^^^ belonging to the pre-Augus- tan age (cir. 43 B.C.) now in the museum of the Vatican at Rome, reads : Divo lulio lussu Populi Romani Statutum est Lege Rufrena ^•^ Antony, 33. The words are worth recording: kvros 5e Ka^crapi Xapifo^eyos tkpevs awedelxdv toO irporepov Kalcrapos. Ci- cero (2d Phil. 43.110) points the finger of scorn at Antony for his delay in playing the role of Julian priest: "Et tu in Caesaris memoria diligens? tu ilium amas mortuum? quern is majorem honorem consecutus erat, quam ut haberet pulvinar, simulacrum, fastigium, flaminem? Est ergo, flamen, ut lovi, ut Marti, ut Quirino sic divo lulio M. Antonius? Quid igitur cessas?" etc. In the same connection Cicero expresses his dis- like of the whole proceeding. "'C. I. L., IX, 2628. The Ruler-Cult and Julius Casar 6i Another most suggestive inscription ^^^ comes from iEsernia : Genio ^^^ Deivi luli Parentis Patriae Quem Senatus Populusque Romanus in Deorum Numerum Rettulit i<^8 A rather startling inscription comes from Athens, which specifically calls Caesar, god.^^^ The extent of the cult may be inferred from the fact that in a group of three inscriptions recording flamens or sacerdotes of Caesar, one is from Terventum of Regio 4 in Rome,^^^ one from Reii ^^^ in Narbonensian Gaul, and one from Rusicade ^^- in Numidia. "« c. I. L., I, 626. ^*" On the the use of genio in this inscription see below, page 68. ^"^ Particular attention should be called to this word. It sig- nifies that Caesar belongs inherently to the company of the gods, to which he is restored at death. Cf. Velleius Paterculus, 2.124 "post redditum caelo patrem et corpus eius humanis honoribus, numen divinis honoratum," etc. (Written under Tiberius.) The reference in "patrem," etc., is, of course, to Augustus. The word "Numen" is used exactly as in ordinary references to the gods). And see below, p. lOo. ^^ C. I. A., 65 virb Faiou'louXtou Kato-apos deov. "°C. I. L., IX, 2598. '" C. I. L., XII, 370. "' C. I. L., VIII, 7986. 62 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship Taken all In all, the Imperial cult Is In full swing upon the death of Julius Caesar and the accession of Augustus. 6. The Worship of Roma At this point, I am compelled to go somewhat aside for the purpose of taking up a very Impor- tant unattached thread In this development. I refer to the Roma-cult, which Is closely united with the ruler-cult, and formed a sort of Intermediate link between the new personalism and the old Olympian system of personified nature-powers. The glorification of Rome under the title of the goddess Roma, began, according to Hlrschfeld,^^^ Immediately after the entrance of the Romans Into Asiatic affairs. According to their own claim, this cult was founded by the City of Smyrna, whose inhabitants boasted that "when Carthage yet stood and mighty kings ruled in Asia," ^^* they had erected the first temple to Roma. HIrschfeld points out that Rome had thus become the tutelary goddess of Smyrna. This side-development Is especially important because It exhibits the elasticity of the polytheistic creed which was continually expanding to admit '''op. cit., p. 835. "* Tacitus: Annates, 4:56. The Ruler-Cult and Julius Casar 63 new members and also the operation of the polit- ical factor which contributed so largely to the ad- vancement of the emperors to the position of divine preeminence. The Roma-cult is Interlocked from the beginning with the imperial. There were temples of Dea Roma and Divus lullus for Roman citizens at Ephesus and Nicaea and probably else- where. The worship of Roma was connected with that of the AugustI almost uni vers ally. ^^^ "° See C. I. G., 3524, 2696, 2943, 478 (Roma and Aug. in four cities incl. Athens), and below, pp. yif. On the Roma-cult in general, consult Wissowa, H. K. A., p. 283 and Preller: Rom. Myth., pp. 283f. CHAPTER V THE RULER-CULT IN THE REIGN OF AUGUSTUS I. Life-Time Worship of the Emperors WE are now fairly embarked upon the im- perial era, which I have divided into two sections, about equally balanced in importance; the era of Augustus, and that of the successors of Augustus. The Augustan age itself stands out as the period during which the imperial cult was organized, established, endowed with institutional machinery and generally put on a permanent and self-perpetuating basis. The question which occupies first place in all critical discussions of the emperor cult among the Romans is this: Were the emperors worshiped by the Romans of Italy during their life-times or only after death? That they received divine hon- ors in the Eastern provinces while still alive is abundantly proved. The other point, which is of the utmost impor- tance for an understanding of the relationship of the cult to the history of Roman religion, is still 64 The Ruler-Cult in the Reign of Augustus 6^ sub judice. We may as well take up the matter now. Let us begin with Tacitus. This historian says ^^^ that he found in the records of the Senate an entry showing that a certain Cerealis Anicius moved the erection of a temple Neroni Divo, on the ground that Nero had attained to more than human power. This honor though unusual was refused solely because the action was thought to be ominous of the emperor's death, — "nam," says Tacitus, "deum honor principi non ante habetur, quam agere inter homines desierit." The question at once arises whether this rule, as Tacitus states it, was kept. Formally, by the Senate, perhaps it was, but actually it was not. Take, for example, the paean sung to Nero himself at Rome on the occasion of his triumph, A.D. 68. He was called: "Olympian Victor, Pythian Victor, Augustus, Her- cules, Apollo," etc. He was also acclaimed: "Our National Victor, the only one from the beginning of time" and "Augustus, Augustus, Divine Voice, Blessed are they that hear thee I" ^^^ This repre- sents and expresses the flattery of an excited and servile populace, and there are not wanting indi- cations that the enthusiasm was officially and arti- ficially stimulated, but the point is that public adu- ^^^ Annales, 15:74. "'Dio, 63.20.3. 66 Aspects of Roman Emperor-W orship lation so constantly takes the form of deification.^^^ Wissowa ^^^ flatly affirms that Augustus was wor- shiped as god during his life-time, both in the East and in the West. From that time on, he holds, until Diocletian, the rule was, the divus received divine honors together with the Genius of the living emperor which included the adoration of the imperial statue. This statue cult was com- bined with the worship of the Lares. ^-^ As a matter of fact, the worship of the Genius, or hypostatized spirit or divine alter ego, of the emperor was a very frail barrier indeed against personal worship — it could scarcely be called more than a convention — while the adoration of the im- perial statue became a system of down-right idol- atry. Moreover, the rules, whatever they may have been, were broken absolutely in the instances of Caligula and Domitian.^-^ Hirschfeld holds ^^- that Augustus, in his life- time, received divine honors throughout the em- pire, but that the cult was not so systematic or well "^Dio says (63.2, 5) that Tiridates offered victims before the altar of Nero and addressed him as "Dominus" — AecrTro'rTjj — and also as Mithra. "'O/*. cit., p. 72. ^ C. I. L,, VI, 307. Sergius Megalensis is spoken of as Cul- tor Larum et Imaginum Augusti. Under date 56 A.D. (Fynes- Clinton) we have an entry which identifies the Augustales "qui Neroni C.C. Augusto et Agrippinae Aug. . . . et genio coloniae ludos fecerunt." ^'^ See below, pp. 94ff. '^0/>. cit., p. 838. The Ruler-Cult in the Reign of Augustus 67 organized In the West, as shown by the scattered epigraphic remains.^^" Dolllnger^^* maintains that until Caligula it was understood at Rome that the emperor by a special decree of the Senate and the successor should be raised to godhood as divus. This process was analogous to the cult of the Manes. ^^^ The same acute student points out two striking facts: (a) that divine honors were pressed upon the emperors, rather than sought by them,^^® and (b) that the divus became a new god added to the pantheon, whereas the living ^^ Heinen (p. 175, see bibliography) gives the following list of inscriptions as indicating the priests, altars and temples of the living Augustus in Italy: C.I.L., V, 18/3341,^4442,^ IX, 1556;* X, 816,'^ 820,« 837,' 1613,' 5169,'* 630s;" XI, 1331," 1420," 1421,^^ 1922," 1923/' 3303;'" XIV, 73" 353^' 2964.^'' Of these identifications of date i, 3, 8, 12, 13, 17 seem probable but un- certain; 16 seems obviously incorrect; 11 belongs to the age of Nero but speaks of an Augustan priesthood which by inference H. carries back to Augustus; 19 depends upon a reading ques- tioned by Mommsen ; the remaining references are beyond ques- tion. Throwing away those which are doubtful we have ten contemporaneous inscriptions from Italy. ^H. J., p. 615. ^ Manes — see P. W., sub. voc. and above, pp. 45, 47. Dill (Roman Society, etc., N. Y., 191 1, pp. 61 5f) asserts that the be- lief in the deity of the emperors "was long a fluctuating and hesitating creed." The evidence which he offers for this hesi- tancy concerns the attitude of the emperors toward their own deification (see below, pp. 94ff). On the side of the people there was no hesitation at all, or, if there was, this attitude was con- fined to a very few who gave no sign of their secret feeling. Dill is at least verbally correct in saying that Domitian was the first emperor who claimed the double title "Dominus et Deus" {cj. p. 98). ^^H. J., p. 613. See Tac. Annales, 4:37. Nero and Domitian as well as Caligula must be excepted. 68 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship emperor was looked upon as the incarnation — or more strictly, the reappearance of some well- known deity, as Dionysus, Ares, Zeus, etc.^^''^ Looking at the whole body of evidence, it seems clear that the facts are not homogeneous. It is evidently vain to look for consistency in a process which has so many cross-currents of emotion and self-interest.^-^ The spontaneous and popular character of the emperor-worship, and something of its psychol- ogy, I think, can be seen in an instance given by Suetonius. ^-^ Sailors and passengers of an Alex- andrian ship In the bay of Puteoli, when Augustus arrived there "candidati coronatique et tura liban- tes fausta omina et eximias laudes congesserant." In their address to the emperor, they said that "per ilium se vivere, per ilium navigare, libertate atque fortunis per ilium frui." How easily the language of flattery passes Into that of actual worship and how readily the preeminence of the emperor merges Into that of the deity as a moun- tain-top melts into the blue of the sky! ^ Op. cif., p. 6i6. As an interesting side-light upon this tendency to look for the embodiment of the gods, the incident of Acts 14:12 should be noted. ^As examples of inconsistency, the use of di-vus in connec- tion with Titus in the oath formula (see below, p. 100), and the combination of Genius and dwus in the inscription cited on p. 61, n. 107. ^Aug. 98. The Ruler-Cult in the Reign of Augustus 69 2. The Worship of Augustus and the Au- gustan Cult The worship of Augustus (B.C. 31-A.D. 14) apparently began at Pergamos, where the em- peror cult was united with the worship of Roma and grafted immediately into the already estab- lished cult of the Attalidas. The foundation of the whole system as afterward developed was thus laid in the year 29 B.C.^^^ According to Momm- sen,^^^ when Augustus permitted divine honors to be offered him by the Diets of Asia and Bithynia *'there was blended for the first time the celebra- tion of the festival for the reigning emperor and the imperial system in general." The machinery of the cult was very complete and elaborate from the start. The whole system of worship was im- perialized just as it stood. The Senate established the Augustalia or Augustan celebrations.^^- This institution spread through the empire with great rapidity.^^^ "" It is to be remembered that the title "Augustus," which had previously been confined to the gods, was bestowed upon Octavian two years before — B.C. 27, Mon. Ancyr. i. 18. 25. "'Romische Gesch. Band V, Kap. VIII, p. 318. ^^^ Monumentura Ancyranum, 6:13, under date of Oct. 12, 735, U. C, i8 B.C. "^Tacitus: Ann., 4. 15, of the year 23 B.C. The historian says: ''Effigiem apud Forum Augusti publica pecunia patres decrevere." 70 Aspects of Roman Emperor-W orship In furtherance of the scheme, Augustales ^^^ were appointed after the model of the Mercu- rlales. Sodales and cultores, who apparently were drawn from civil life to further the cult, were appointed in various localities. The provincial high priests ^^^ of Augustus be- came the eponyms for the year and the chief func- tionaries of their provinces. These men bore the expenses of the annual festivals and since many honors and privileges were connected with the position there was kleen rivalry among distin- guished and ambitious men for it. They were named according to the province, Asiarch, Bithyni- arch,^^^ etc. The dignity of these various perma- nent and temporary priestly functionaries ^^^ in connection with the cult of Augustus, and indi- ^^ For mention of Augustales, C. I. L., X, 977, 994, 1026, 1034, 1066. As early as A.D. 38-41 an Augustalis is found at Avaricum in Britain. See Revue Archeol, Dec, 1879. "° The first High-priest of Augustus was said to have been appointed to a temple on the Island of Salamis built by Au- gustus himself, see C. I. A., Ill, 728. We find inscriptions for Caesarea or Imperial temples from Augustus to Alexander Severus, C. I. L., IX, 1556, Or.-Hen., 961, 2508, 2509. "^ C. I. G., 3487. The Municipal priests appear on the coins of thirteen Doric towns — see Mionnet: Description, etc., iii, 61. I. C. I. L., XIV, p. 367, col. 2. Mommsen: Staatsrecht, ir, sec. 258f. "^ There seems to be no absolutely fixed nomenclature for the priests of Augustus. I have compared a large number of in- scriptions and have been unable to formulate any distinctions in the use of flamen, sacerdos, or pontifex. The provincial high-priest stood by himself. The titles, Augustales, cultores, etc., seem to have been used without any sharp distinction. The Ruler-Cult in the Reign of Augustus 71 rectly the sweep and power of the cult itself, may be inferred from the statement of Tacitus ^^^ that these new religious rites were established and a new line of priests added to the sacerdotal col- lege, which was made up primarily of twenty-one eminent citizens drawn by lot, to whom were added Tiberius, Drusus, Claudius and Germanicus.^^^ The spread of the movement to glorify Augus- tus which seems to have swept both Italy and the Provinces may also be inferred from another state- ment made by Tacitus, ^'^'^ who says with respect to a temple dedicated to Augustus at Tarraco : "Pe- tentibus Hispanis permissum, datumque in omnes provincias exemplum." The first altar to Augustus, with Roma,^^^ was dedicated by Drusus at Lugdunum in Gaul, in the year 12 B.C.^^^ Of the year 11 we have the famous and significant inscription from the forum at Narbo.^*^ About the same date, from Bae- tica ^^"^ comes an inscription equally significant of what is to come : It is addressed to one Lucretius ^^Annales, 1.54. ^'®Acro on Hor. Sat., II, 3.281 says: "Erant autem libertini sacerdotes qui Augustales dicebantur." ^^^ Annates, 1.78. ^'^ See below, p. 90. ^*^ Mommsen : Rom. Gesch. Band V, pp. 85, 89. Bolssieu: Inscript. de Lyon, p. 609. C. I. L,, II, 4248. In this same year there was a Magister Augustalis in Etruria, C. I. L., XI, 3200. "^ See p. 54, n. 87. '"C. I. L., II, 1663. 72 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship Fulvlanus, who Is "Pontlfex Perpetuus Domus Augustae," and to Lucretia, who is Flamlnlca per- petua, etc. From Scardona ^^^ we have a dedica- tion: Sacerdoti ad Aram AugustI, From Praeneste comes a fragment which speaks of Cn. Pompeius Rusticus as "Flamen Caearis Augus- ti." At Nysa, presumably belonging to the temple of Roma and Augustus In that place/^^ there Is an inscription lepeoos 'Pco^rjs avTOKparopos He^udTOV which establishes the fact that the year was named from the priest of Roma and Augustus. An im- portant inscription ^'^^ from Auctarlum In Gallia Narbonensis, furnishes the regulations governing the feasts of Augustus. Another type of inscrip- tion, most significant as Indicating the general trend, passes from the combination of Augustus with other gods to the mention of Augustus alone.^^^ The tendency of the imperial cult to supersede the Olympian, and to throw the older "'C. I. L., Ill, 2810. '*" So Boeck— n. C. I. G., 2943. "'C. I. L., XII, 6038. "^C. I. L., X, 885-890. a. 885-887, Mercury and Maia; b. 888, Augustus, Mercury and Maia; c. 890, Augustus alone. Cf. also C. I. L., XIV, 3679, where also we find a com- bination of the gods with Augustus, then Augustus. The sec- ond column of this inscription combines Augustus with others. See also C. I. L., VIII, 6339, from Numidia, which unites Aug. with Jupiter Optimus Maximus. The Rider-Cult in the Reign of Augustus 73 deities into the shadow began in the reign of Au- gustus. I have made no attempt to fix with exact- ness the dates of all these Augustan inscriptions to determine in each instance whether or not it precedes or follows his decease and formal deifica- tion. It is of no vital importance, as inscriptions of all the leading types belong in both periods. His death made little difference, as his deification was already practically accomplished and the post mortem celebration was merely formal. ^"^^ Suetonius naively discloses the general attitude in this matter when he ascribes to Augustus him- self the curious notion that his punctilio with re- gard to paying his gambling debts would redound to his ultimate glorification: "Sed hoc malo; be- nignitas enim mea me ad coelestem gloriam effe- ret." i^« ^*®Dio (51.20) gives an account of the honors decreed to Augustus in the year 29 B.C. Among other things it was decreed, 2s re vnvovs avrbv e^ itrov tois deois ksy pav\^v lovXiov kir avToO kiravoyia^tadai, etc. The honors included a crown in all processions, senators in purple-bordered togas, a perpetually consecrated day and, particularly the follo\ying, lepeas re avrbv koll virep rbv apidnbv 6(rovs_ av ah kdeXrjcrV aipeiadat 7rpocr/caTecrr77craf TO. Two items in this account are particularly worthy of note. First, the naming of the Julian family; and second, the enlarged list of imperial priests. Dio goes on to say that the custom then established was kept up until in his day the number of priests was boundless. ""Divus Aug. 71, cf. ibid., 97. 74 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship Suetonius also says ^^^ that a limit was set to the posthumous honors paid to Augustus but it is not easy to see where the line was drawn inas- much as the usual rites were conducted with great elaboration, ''nee defuit vir praetorius, qui se effi- glem cremati euntem in caelum vidisse juraret." "' D. A., loo. CHAPTER VI THE RULER-CULT UNDER THE SUCCESSORS OF AUGUSTUS I. The Cult of the Augusti IN reviewing the history of the emperor-cult as a whole, from the time of Augustus on — un- der his successors — ^the most striking single fea- ture is the development of the cult of the Augusti. By this process, which grew out of the general organism of imperial deification as fecundated by the dynastic idea, the emperors together with members of the royal family and even of the im- perial entourage were formed into a Roman Olympus — that is, an organized hierarchy of ac- cepted deities.^^^ Certain stages in this unique development are clearly discernible. The first step is disclosed in an inscription already referred to more than once,^^^ in which with Augustus, his "^'In a coin of Sardis (see Eckhel D. N. A., VI, p. 211). Drusus and Germanicus are called veoi deol. Eckhel caustically says: "Vocantur {v. 6.), istud fane pro Graecorum genio, qui Olympum colonis implevere." He also strongly affirms that these coins in honor of the adopted sons of Tiberius were made when the young princes were still alive. ^'^C.LL,Xn,4333. 75 76 Aspects of Roman Emperor-Worship wife, his children and his race, are combined. Other inscriptions refer to Livia, the wife of Au- gustus, under the divine title 'Yyeia,^^* and Julia.i^^ Other women of the imperial house were also honored as goddesses.^^^ Far more important, however, than this tendency to include wives, relatives, and favorites, within the divine nimbus of the emperor, was the self-perpetuating character of the organization which had been built up for the purpose of ad- vancing the interests of the cult.^^'^ ^^ c. I. A., Ill, 460. ^^ C. I. L., XII, 1363, 4249. Flaminlcae luliae Augustae. C. I. L., II, 2038, luliae Augustae Matri Ti. Caesaris Aug. Prin. ^^^ Cf. C I. A., Ill, 315, 316. In these inscriptions the Dalian Priest of Apollo, of Caesar Augustus, High Priest of Antonia Augusta, the priestess of the goddess Antonia, the priestess of Vesta, Livia and Julia are mentioned. It has been hinted that Livia herself was called Vesta — see note ut supra. Julia, the wife of Agrippa, is called Aphrodite Geneteira at Eresos in Asia Minor (23-1 B.C.). Tiberius and his mother Livia were worshiped as divine mother and son at Tiberiopolis in Phrygia (see Ramsay: Hist. Geoff. Asia Minor, p. 147) ; Agrippina was called 6ea AtoXts KapTTo^opos at Lesbos; Poppaea Sabina was honored at Ak- monia as the goddess of "Imperial Fertility" {Xe^aarr] Ev^oaia). See C. L G., 3858. "■^In the Narbo inscription of 11 B.C., referred to elsewhere (see p. 54), occurs the expression: ''Qui se numini eius im- perpetuum colendo obligaverunt." It is no exaggeration to say that the system was intended to be permanent, and as human institutions go, was permanent — it lasted nearly as long as the Empire. The scope and effectiveness of the post-Augustan organiza- tion may be seen from the following facts in Asia Minor. Ramsay {Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia) shows that the Rider-Cult Under the Successors of Augustus 77 For example, in the time of Claudius (41-54 A.D.) there are Augustales Claudlales.^^^ Again, the Seviri, which were originally the six highest priests of Augustus, were perpetuated through suc- cessive reigns, thus : Seviri Tiberiani ^^^ Claudi- ales ^^^ Neronieni,^^^ Flaviales.^^- In the last title the dynastic tendency is in full bloom. It was Domitian who established a temple to the Flavian family,^^^ and it is to this era that the form of oath to be taken by a praetor left in charge during the absence of a duum vir, which includes the em- perors among the gods, belongs. The oath runs thus,^^* "per lovem et divom Augustum et divom provincial and municipal organization was practically com- plete. There were foundations of the imperial cult certainly in many, probably in all, the cities of Asia Minor. Whole provinces united in establishing foundations, and these 'Koiva held festivals in the principalities. Among the cities mentioned in this connection are those to whom the Epistles of the Apoc. were written {op. cit., p. 55). Under Caracalla and Commodus cities competed for the title "Neo/copos," which was bestowed upon those which built a temple dedicated solely to an em- peror. The imperial cult adopted and adapted the existent religious ministrants such as hymnodoi, theologoi, etc., in such a way as practically to confiscate the existing temple-founda- tions. Add to that the accompanying assumption of the func- tions and dignities of the established deities, and the taking over process seems quite complete. The festival of Zeus at Laodi- cea became the feast of Zeus and the Emperors before A.D. 150 {ibid., pp. iif). "'See P. W., II, 2355. "'C. I. L., IX, 6415. "° C. I. L., XI, 714. ^^ C. I. L., V, 3429. ;^C. I. L., V, 4399, XI^ 4639; XII, 1159. "'Suet.: Dom. V. *^C. I. L., II, 1963, and 4. 78 Aspects of Roman Emperor-W orship Claudlum et divom Vespaslanum et divum Tltum Augustum et genium Caesaris Domitlani August! deosque penates." In the acts of the Arval brothers/^^ an entry for the year 69 A.D. which prescribes the mode of sacrifice on stated occasions (Feb. and March) reads: lovl (bull) lunono (heifer) SalutI Rom. Pop. (heifer) DIvo Augusto (bull) DIvae Augustae (heifer) DIvo Claudlo (bull) On March first, and again on the ninth, the em- peror offered sacrifice as this canon called for, and in addition offered a bull "Genio Ipslus." Just when the term Augusti was first applied as a collective designation for the divi, their liv- ing successor, relations and satellites looked upon as "a fast-closed group of new deities" ^^^ I have been unable to determine. The inscriptions are so numerous, so widespread, and so nearly contempo- raneous that it becomes diflicult, If not Impossible, ^"Henzen: Acta Arvalia, year 69 A.D. Under date A.D. 183 the festival of the Arval Brothers was held in which the old ritual was gone through with the addition of sixteen divi {ibid.). The "Carmen Saliorum" was also addressed to the living emperors, see Wordsworth Fragmenta sub ? 7rarpt5t. His wife is desig- nated in the same way as high-priestess. Another Inscription ^"^^ from the Temple of the Emperors and Zeus Sarapis perpetrates the same double irony upon the Olympian member of the group as in the preceding instance, for the person desig- nated is simply "High-priest of the Augusti.'' Here Is unmistakable epigraphic evidence that, in one locality at least, the emperor cult pushed into the back-ground and practically superseded the Olympian system. ^^- 2. The Manifoldness and Pervasiveness of THE Emperor-Cult We have now come to a point where it will be profitable to attempt a rapid review and summary of results. The Roman imperial-cult had behind it the force of a primary instinct and the accelerated ""409 cf. also 410 410, 411, 412. '"417. "'^ Cf. Wissowa: Op. cit., p. 72; Beurlier: Le Culte Imperiale, p. 17; Sterret: p. 290. The latter says that all the temples at Kara Baulo are identified with the emperor worship. Rider-Ciilt Under the Successors of Augustus 8i momentum of ancient and persistent custom. A world-wide movement recorded In the earliest doc- uments of Babylonia and in the latest of the Roman Empire has passed in review before us. The worship of rulers arose among the Romans partly de novo as a native and spontaneous action, partly through the operation of countless converg- ing lines of Influence. In the early days of the republic, when offices were temporary and filled by the choice of an electorate, certain powerful individuals were sin- gled out for honors indistinguishable from those offered to the gods, while generals and pro-con- suls came back from the provinces with the pres- tige of deification. The movement reached a pre- liminary climax in the honors granted to the domi- nant personality of Julius Cassar, who during his life-time was deified abroad and in Italy, and immediately upon his decease was officially put in the company of the Immortals. In the reign of his successor, Augustus, an organized cult of the DIvus Julius was established and almost simul- taneously with It a priesthood and worship of the reigning emperor was put into operation. Throughout the empire, particularly In the prov- inces, but to a certain extent In Italy itself, the combined worship of the divi and the living rulers was carried on under the highest imperial and local auspices. 82 Aspects of Roman Emperor-W orship Dolllnger enables us to grasp the whole process and to visualize both its forward movement in the direct line of the Augusti and its lateral out- reach to include those who were deified through their close association with the emperor, when he states ^^^ that, from the beginning to the time of Diocletian, there were fifty-three solemn consecra- tions, including those of fifteen women. There were in Rome ^'^^ temples of the Divus lulius; of the Divus Augustus; ^"^^ of the divi;^'^^ of the Divus Claudius; ^^^ of Clementiae Caesaris; ^'^^ of the Divus Marcus Aurelius; of the Divus Tra- janus; of the Divus Vespasianus; of the Divus An- toninus and Faustina. This is certainly an indication of the power and influence of the cult. I might go on indefinitely summarizing in this same way, the multitudinous evidences of the universality and pervasiveness of the cult. I think, however, that an intensive look at a limited group of facts will make the situa- tion much clearer. For example, of flamens and priests of Roma "^ 0/>. cit., p. 6i6. There are extant coins of forty-eight dei- fied royal persons, Duruy: Hist. Rom., Eng. tr., Vol. V, p. i68. "* Kiepert and Huelsen — Formae Urbis, etc., pp. 74ff. ^"Situated on the Palatine: see Suet. Tib., 47, cf. Acta Ar- . -Dio, 59:11. ^'Satire of Seneca, p. 38. 102 Aspects of Roman Emperor-JForship to be symptomatic, for I am much inclined to think that it could have been undermined much more easily if it had been more sincere. At least, a partial justification for this paradox may be found in the Ludus of Seneca -^* on the deification of Claudius, taken in its historical context. Taken, I repeat, in its historical context, for it cannot be understood otherwise, it becomes a most suggestive commentary on the time and is abso* lutely a propos. As Caligula introduced the ele- ment of mental pathology into the history of the imperial cult, so Claudius introduced the element of farce and comedy. He was the cause of much wit, good, bad and indifferent, in others, among them the moralist Seneca. The most interesting feature of the situation, however, is not the mor- dant treatment of Claudius, but the side-light it throws upon the Roman attitude toward the great sanctities. Certain facts are to be noted in connec- tion with the Ludus. Claudius was murdered at the order, if not actually by the hand, of Agrippina, the mother of Nero. Claudius was immediately deified and Agrippina was appointed a priestess to attend upon the new divinity's rites. Seneca's brother made a rather brilliant jest to the effect ^ This work seems to have borne the title of ' AroKoXoK^rfrcaa-ts or "pumkinification" — the implication of which, as applied to Claudius, is quite obvious. Consult Ball : ''The Satire of Seneca" (N. Y., 1902) for a complete discussion of the critical questions which center around the book. Ruler-Cult and the Position of the Emperor 103 tjiat Claudius h^i leer. ira^-^ti :: hei. r - : 2. hook, a'f >