Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:44:43.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Summi fastigii vocabulum: the Story of a Title

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

W. K. Lacey
W. K. Lacey
Affiliation:
University of Auckland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Tacitus described tribunician power (tribunicia potestas, trib. pot. hereafter) as the title of the highest pinnacle (sc. of power) in the Roman world (summi fastigii vocabulum), and Augustus counted his years of trib. pot. from 23 B.C. So much may be stated with confidence and without dispute. In 23 B.C. however trib. pot. was introduced quietly, so quietly that the exact date of the law by which it was conferred (if it was conferred in 23 B.C.) is unknown; and the title itself made so little impact on contemporary opinion that the reaction of the common people of Rome, for whose protection Tacitus says Augustus took the power, was negative—so negative that they spent the next five years trying to re-elect Augustus to the consulate which he had resigned at or about the time that the era of trib. pot. began. We must conclude that the conferment of trib. pot. (if there was any ceremony at all in 23 B.C.) was not made the subject of a great celebration designed to win popular acclaim for this new institution (if it was a new one), nor was it immediately advertised widely as a new formula for the government of the Roman world.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 69 , November 1979 , pp. 28 - 34
Copyright
Copyright ©W. K. Lacey 1979. 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 In Res gestae Augustus insisted that it was ordained by law (10, 1). Mommsen, Th., Römisches Staatsrecht II 3 (1887), 797,Google Scholar n. 3 selected 26 June as the date, Chilver, G. E. F., Historia 1 (1950), 411 and 433Google Scholar f. selected 1 July. Other scholars, H. Stuart Jones in CAH X, 140, Syme, R., Roman Revolution (1939), 336Google Scholar, Scullard, H. H., From the Gracchi to Nero3 (1970), 221Google Scholar, Jones, A. H. M., Studies in Roman Government and Law (1960) (henceforth SRGL), 9 f.Google Scholar, and Augustus (1970), 55, Salmon, E. T., ‘The Evolution of Augustus' Principate’, Historia 5 (1956), 456–78Google Scholaret al. and many more, evade the issue by silence or by phrases like ‘half way through the year’. Sutherland, C. H. V. and others, The Cistophori of Augustus (1970) (henceforth Cistophori), 36Google Scholaret al. is a recent supporter of Mommsen. A few scholars, e.g. Charlesworth, M. P., The Roman Empire (1951), 12Google Scholar, and Grant, M., From Imperium to Auctoritas (1946)(henceforth FITA), 449 f.Google Scholar, carefully avoid asserting that it was conferred.

2 ‘Ad tuendam plebem’, Tacitus, Ann. 1, 2: the negative reaction is systematically documented by Jones, SRGL, 12.

3 A. M. Burnett, Num. Chron. 137 (1977), 46 f. I owe this reference and much help to Mr. T. R. Volk of the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, for which I wish to thank him.

4 Burnett, op. cit., 48–50 for Caesar's head; he rejects the ‘Numa’ CAESAR AUGUSTUS TRIBUNIC POTEST asses as forgeries, ibid., 51–2.

5 cf. Burnett, op. cit. (n.3), 52, concluding that SC is connected with Augustus' resignation from the consulship, not with currency reform, and reverting to Mommsen's view that SC means ‘struck by the authority of the Senate’. Sutherland, C. H. V., The Emperor and the Coinage (1976)Google Scholar (henceforth Emperor), 12: SC ‘denotes senatorial permission to withdraw the metal from the aerarium’ (on which cf. M. H. Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage (1974) 11, 610: the Senate regulated the amount of coinage struck in the denominations established by law). Kraft, K., Jahrbuch für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 12 (1962), 7Google Scholar f.: ‘SC proclaimed that Augustus’ honours had been granted ex SC’. Bay, A., JRS 62 (1972), 119 f.Google Scholar, argued that SC refers to the legislation by which Augustus introduced his reform.

6 For the exceptions, C. H. V. Sutherland, Emperor, 12. Portraiture on asses but not on dupondii, sestertii and quadrantes was a republican tradition, op. cit., 13. The legend on the SC sestertii is OB CIVIS SERVATOS in conjuction with the clupeus virtutis, but they carry neither Augustus' portrait nor any of his titles. Nor do the quadrantes when they start to appear (c. 9–8 B.C., Mattingly, H. and Sydenham, E. A., Roman Imperial Coinage (henceforth RIC) I (1923), p. 78)Google Scholar. The form TR POT is used only on aurei, H. Mattingly, Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum (henceforth BMCRE) I, 85, denarii, ibid. 95–7 (Rome mint), 427 (Spanish mint), and quinarii (Lugdunum), ibid. 467 etc. (all dated), and on denarii, BMCRE I, 87–9 and 131 (Rome), and sestertii, ibid. 737–44 (East) (all undated). Similarly OB CIVIS SERVATOS is abbreviated to OCS or OBCS on aurei, BMCRE 1, 5, 6, 35, 51, and the clupeus virtutis is called CLV on many Spanish denarii, such as BMCRE 1, 321–2, 333 f., 353 f., 381 etc.

7 Mattingly, BMCRE 1, XCV, recently supported by Burnett, op. cit. (n. 3), 48–52, argued for 23 B.C. A. Bay, art. cit. (n. 5.), in, and C. H. V. Sutherland, Emperor, 12, for about 19. J. P. C. Kent (information from Mr. Volk) has observed that Carisius' (Spanish) aes coinage appears to copy a Roman mint prototype including a reference to trib. pot. (unnumbered). This also argues for the earlier date.

8 This is clearly part of the moneying tradition, and tradition was obviously important, especially in a society in which many were illiterate. Cf. the coinage of Carisius, Grant, FITA, 446: his aes coins have trib. pot., his denarii the praenomen imperatoris. Gold and silver coins were minted to pay troops, but it is less clear that the aes coinage was directed solely to the civil population. Too many specimens are found in military contexts, and common sense in any case dictates that the troops needed small change too. Quadrantes however are very rare in these contexts (information from Mr. Volk).

9 Res gestae 6: the Latin text is missing, but the Greek version is certain, lacking no more than a letter or two. See Suetonius, Aug. 34 for the resistance.

10 Yavetz, Z., Plebs and Princeps (1969), 53 f.Google Scholar, et al.

11 Cf. the fragment of the laudatio funebris of Agrippa, P. Colon. 4701, published in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 5 (1970), 226Google Scholar (the text). The Greek text uses ἐδόθη and πρσεδόθη for the two grants of trib. pot., but ἐν νόμῳ ἐκυρώθμ for the vote of imperium mains by the people.

12 But this must not make us call trib. pot. a magistracy; magistracies were obtained from the people; except for Augustus himself, all grants of trib. pot. were by the Senate. For numeration, compare the Romans' attitude to priesthoods; these were important and brought prestige, but never do holders of priesthoods of any sort enumerate their years of office.

13 Sutherland, Cistophori (n. 1), 102–3 (against Mattingly) for Pergamum; ibid., ch. 1 1 for the coingroups.

14 Simpson, C. J., JRS 67 (1977), 93Google Scholar. Clearly no progress had yet been made on the temple, since in 42 B.C., when it was first vowed, there was no Forum Augusti. Macrobius, Sat. 11, 4, 9, says that the Forum Augusti took unusually long to complete.

15 K. E. Merrington, Cistophori (n. 1), ch. III records 41 triumphal arch coins, two with TR PO IV, 67 Roma et Augustus coins, four with TR PO IV, 59 Mars Ultor temple, none with TR PO IV. Sutherland, ibid., 36 comments on the ‘not very successful TR PO IV style’ compared with the ‘initially brilliant large head TR PO V style’. Note also the inconsistent abbreviations of trib. pot. (obverse TR PO, but TR POT (and the aberrant SPR for SPQR) on the reverse) on the triumphal arch coins.

16 Res gestae 11–12, 1; Fasti Amiterniniap. Gagé, J., Res gestae divi August3 (1977), 182Google Scholar.

17 Grant, FITA, 446, n. 1. Asia needed a new era: the old provincial era had petered out with the start of the civil war in 49 (CIL I2, p. 763). The various communities had a multiplicity of eras (D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor (1950), index s.v. eras) but the commune Asiae, proud of its new temple, needed one. Hence, most exceptionally, trib.pot., and dated, on silver coins of a military character.

18 Pap. Oxy. 1453 = Hunt, A. S. and Edgar, C. C., Select Papyri 11 (1934), no. 327Google Scholar (Loeb Classical Library). I owe this reference to the editor. Cf. Ehrenberg, V. and Jones, A. H. M., Documents illustrating the Principates of Augustus and Tiberius3 (1976)Google Scholar (henceforth E/J Docs.), 116 and 118, dating theoretically from the capture of Alexandria. There was also an Actian era at Samos, dating from Augustus' residence there in 31/30, since 29/8 was year 3. But it did not oust the Sullan era, Magie, op. cit., 440 and 1289, n. 37.

19 For the mint's location, C. H. V. Sutherland, Emperor, 42 f.; for the coins, BMCRE 1, 427–9. Legend (obverse) (in honour of Augustus) SPQR IMP CAESARI AUG COS XI TR POT VI, (reverse) CIVIB(us) ET SIGN(is) MILIT(aribus) A PART(his) RECUP(eratis) (or RECUPER). 427 is an aureus, 428 and 429 are denarii. Cf. RIC 311–13.

20 Legends: RIC 147 (BMCRE 1, 79) SPQR IMP CAE QUOD V(iae) M(unitae) S(unt) EX EA P(ecunia) Q(uam) IS AD A(erarium) DE(tulit) (cf. Res gestae 17 and Gagés note, op. cit. (n. 16), 104). Two more of the same type but TR POT VIII, ibid. 80–1; ibid. 95 (RIC 152) with APOLLINIACTIO; ibid. 96–7 (RIC 153–4) with FOED(us)P R CUM GABINIS; ibid 85 (RIC 158) with AUG SUF(fiit) P(opulum) LUD(is) S(aecularibus). Cf. denarii with TR POT unnumbered and vows for Augustus' health and safe return (BMCRE I, 87–8), and similar issues with IMP CAESAR (ibid. 90 f.), or CAESARIS (RIC 151, an aureus), and no TR POT at all.

21 ILS 86: IMP. CAESAR DIVI F.AUGUSTUS COS. XI TRIB. POTESTATE DEDIT, M. APPULEIUS SEX. F. LEG. IUSSU EIUS CURAVIT. As Appuleius was consul in 20, the in scription should be dated 23, 22 or 21 B.C.

22 ILS 6753: IMP. CAESA[RI] DIVI F. AUGUST. COS. XI IMP. VI[..] TRIBUNIC. POT. SALASSI INCOL. QUI INITIO SE IN COLON. CON[T]. PATRON. Cf. Barnes, T. D., JRS 64 (1974), 21–2,Google Scholar with refs.

23 Dio's comments on the difficulty of ascertaining the truth about plots suggests that these were the first cases, but, if there were condemnations, they escaped Tacitus' notice both in Ann. 1, 10, 4 (Augustus' pax cruenta), and in Ann. 1, 72, 2–3 (his sketch on the history of maiestas charges).

24 The SC decreeing the games is lost, but two of the consequential decrees were moved by the consul, C. Silanus (E/J Docs. 30); Dessau, ILS 5050 for the acta.

25 But trib. pot. occurs nowhere on the denarii of this college: on RIC 172 Augustus is COS XI, Agrippa COS TER. For Julia and the boys, see RIC 166; for Augustus' return, Res gestae 12, 2; cf. E/J Docs. 36, with no mention of trib. pot.

26 CIL IX, 5986 and 5989 ( = X, 6914 and 6917) from Via Appia, CIL IX, 5943 and 5950 ( = ILS 5815) from Via Salaria; cf. CIL IX, 5954 (trib. pot. XII, Via Salaria); ClL X, 6903 and 6904, both cos XI trib. pot. unnumbered, Via Latina (but the end of 6904 is broken).

27 E/J Docs. 311, 312, and perhaps 314, since the Latin Josephus has a marginal XI following trib. pot. cf. the Tiberian letter E/J Docs. 318, but not ibid. 319.

28 But not senatus consulta: e.g. E/J Docs. 278 (the aqueducts), 311.5 (Cyrene edicts); cf. E. M. Smallwood, Documents illustrating the Principates of Gaius, Claudius and Nero, 362–3, 365–6. Proconsuls also used their own names and titles, E/J Docs. 313 (Iullus Antonius); cf. Germanicus' edicts, E/J Docs. 320 and Smallwood, op. cit., 380. The consular date for I B.C. appears at Nysa ad Maeandrum in Asia, E/J Docs. 316, an era dated from 6/5 B.C. in the oath of the Paphlagonians of 3 B.C. (E/J Docs. 315); for the Egyptian era in the Julio-Claudian period, E/J Docs. 320a, Smallwood, op. cit., 370, 383.

29 Augustus is DIVI F IMP X, XI, XII, or XIIII; hence 15–8 B.C. For C. Caesar, BMCRE 1, 498–503, C. and L. Caesar, BMCRE 1, 513–43; the legends are: (obverse) AUGUSTUS DIVI F, (reverse) C CAES AUGUS F, and (obverse) CAESAR AUGUSTUS DIVI F PATER PATRIAE, (reverse) C L CAESARES AUGUSTI F COS DESIG PRINC IUVENT respectively.

30 The reverse is the altar to Rome and Augustus, BMCRE 1, 548–60 and 565–9.

31 RIC 188, 191, 194: for the weights BMCRE 1, p. xlix. For the criteria for pseudo-medallions, J. M. C. Toynbee, Roman Medallions, (1944) 24 f.

32 The lack of a portrait of Tiberius on the coins may be due to his dislike of such distinctions, B. Levick, Tiberius the Politician (1976), 38. But even this does not explain the combination TRIB POT PONT MAX.

33 Bahrfeldt, M. von, Die römische Goldmünz-prägung während der Republik und unter Augustus (1923), 160 f.Google Scholar splits the coins into two groups: (i) the earliest two issues, with Augustus' head bare and with the Victory on the reverse with her hands either buried in or holding a fold of her dress, and with the legend IMP XII or TRIB POT XIII, and (ii) the later issues with Augustus' head wreathed, and the Victory on the reverse holding something whose character is not clear till the TRIB POT XXX issue when it is clearly a fillet, or weath, as it continues to be on Tiberius' early quinarii. B. also says that group ii were Rome mint coins, not Lugdunum; if he is right, this would much strengthen the view that they formed some of the gifts alluded to by Suetonius (Aug. 75), who says that Augustus made a habit of giving coins as presents at the Saturnalia and other occasions: ‘modo nummos omnis notae etiam veteres regios et peregrinos.’ Mattingly (BMCRE 1, 467, 496, 497, 504, 505) lists them all under Lugdunum, and describes the Victory as still holding her hands in her dress till TRIB POT XXX. Bahrfeldt's photographs however show the angle of her arms as distinctly different between the adjacent TR POT XIII and XVI coins. A point in favour of their being special issues is their great rarity. Bahrfeldt lists the known specimens as: IMP XII 4, TR POT XIII 2, XV 1, XVI 2, XVII 8, XXIIII I, XXVII 7, XXVIIII 3, XXX 12. On the other hand, the Victory reverse is the common way of advertising a ‘half’ value issue, as on the silver quinarii (half denarii). Toynbee, op. cit. (n. 31), 15–16 for the narrow dividing-line between coin and medallion (or commemorative piece).

34 CIL I2, p. 29, Frag. XLII.

35 Leges Fufia Caninia (A.D. 2), Aelia Sentia (A.D. 4), Papia Poppaea (A.D. 9).

36 BMCRE I, 271–6. Full titulature and bare head in both cases.

37 The date is uncertain. Tiberius was voted trib. pot. three times; Augustus says so in Res gestae 6.2, since Agrippa was voted trib. pot. twice. The Fasti Capitolini (CIL l2, p. 29) show that his tenure was continuous from A.D. 4, but whether it was then renewed for five years (Suet., Tib. 16) and again in A.D. 9 (nowhere recorded), or for ten years (Dio LV, 13, 2) with a renewal in A.D. 13 (Dio LVI, 28, 1), is uncertain. See next note.

38 Tacitus, Ann. III, 56–7, nowhere suggests that the trib. pot. proposed for Drusus was unprecedented in any way, nor that it was limited in time. This strongly suggests an Augustan precedent.

39 Tac., Ann. 1, 7, 3 and 8, 1. Cf. A. H. M. Jones, SRGL, 16–17, B. Levick, op. cit. (n. 32), 63 and 245 R. Seager, Tiberius (1972), 42, for views on the background to Tiberius' position. For his proconsular imperium, Velleius 11, 121 and Suet., Tib. 21.

40 He even used Imperator as a praenomen, and regularly on the precious metal coins; on the bronze only in the A.D. 12 issues from the Rome mint (BMCRE 1, 275f.).

41 P. A. Brunt and J. M. Moore, Res gestae Divi Augusti (1967), 58.

42 Apart from late insertions like 8, 4, 15, 4, 20, 3 from perfeci to iussi, dated changes of subject occur between 10 and 11, 12 and 13, 14 and 15, 15 and 16, 17 and 18 etc. But the fact should not be ignored that it is precisely in 36 B.C. that our ancient sources first date a vote of trib. pot. to Augustus, even if the three accounts (Orosius VI, 18, 34, using the Livian tradition, Appian BC v, 132, Dio LI, 19, 6f.) differ from one another on exactly who voted what.

43 IMP VII TR POT XVII, BMCRE I, Tiberius 65–9; IMP VIII TR POT XXIIII together or separately, ibid. 70–94; IMP VIII TR POT XXXVI, XXXVII, XXXVIII, ibid., 102–40. The quinarii run from A.D. 15–16 to A.D. 36–7, though there are gaps. It may be significant that military diplomas where complete, all have full imperial titles and numbered trib. pot., e.g. Smallwood, op. cit. (n. 28), 295–6 (A.D. 52 and 61); the only exception in the first century is from Vespasian's first year. As with a magistracy, he did not include a number in his first year of tenure.

44 Tac, Ann. III, 57. The proposal almost certainly was not a brand new idea.

45 See n. 28 for Julio-Claudian examples; cf. McCrum, M. and Woodhead, A. G., Select Documents of the Flavian Emperors (1961), 472, 486Google Scholar, (from Naples and Rome), and 2 f. for the Aryal Brethren; Smallwood, E. M., Documents illustrating the principates of Nerva, Trajan and Hadrian (1966Google Scholar), I f.; cf. ibid. 435, 437 for votes of alimenta; Collingwood, R. G. and Wright, R. P., Roman Inscriptions of Britain (1965), 309 (A.D. 152), 725 (A.D. 191), 1465 (A.D. 221)Google Scholar, the last a military dedication.

46 BMCRE 1, Tiberius 95–7. SC also appears on the obverse, with TRIB POT II.