In this book K. presents an overview and analysis of the role played by the auspices in mediating power during the fourth and third centuries bce. ‘Taking the auspices’, the ritual consultation of the gods to ascertain their (dis)approval of an envisaged action, was a crucial and quotidian aspect of Roman political life. Each morning and before each public action – including, but not limited to, summoning an assembly, setting out from camp or offering battle – a magistrate was required to take the auspices. Should the result be negative, the magistrate was barred from continuing with the planned activity on that day. K.'s tactic is to investigate this topic through examples where magistrates sought to resist or avoid this routine (but critical) practice. In the process, he offers a detailed outline and analysis of the current state of the field on such fundamental issues as the nature of imperium and auspicium, the dictatorship (and its associated office, the magister equitum), as well as radical interpretations of some cruces of Middle Republican historiography. Overall, K. presents a lucid, thoroughly argued account of the auspices, challenges to them and their acceptance as a core principle of Republican government.
K.'s approach to this complex topic is twofold. In Chapters 2–4 he offers an evaluation of the core relevant institutional background, addressing in turn the debates surrounding imperium and auspicium (Chapter 2), the dictatorship (Chapter 3) and the dictator's subordinate, the magister equitum (Chapter 4), as well as putting forward his interpretation of these tricky constitutional matters. Then, in the final four chapters, K. focuses on a series of case studies, from the First Punic War to the disaster at Lake Trasimene, in which elected consuls either ignored or attempted to ignore the verdict of the auspices. While the focus is, inescapably, on notorious episodes (such as the disasters at Drepana and southern Sicily in 249, the consulship of C. Flaminius in 223 and the Trasimene campaign in 217 bce), K. provides a detailed, fresh analysis of this material. Although this split approach is well suited to the topic, it leaves the opening chapter, focused on the famous incident of Fabius Rullianus’ disobedience in 324 bce (Varronian), somewhat adrift. As K. states in the preface: ‘this book is a composite work rather than a straightforward monograph’ (p. ix). Acknowledging this, one wonders whether a more integrated approach would add coherence to the project. K. is an engaging author, but casual readers will struggle to orientate themselves amid a series of shorter studies with little overt signposting.
The centrepiece for the book, according to K., is a novel solution proposed for the date of Fabius Maximus Cunctator's first dictatorship. K. suggests that this abortive dictatorship, ended famously by the squeak of a small rodent (Val. Max. 1.5; Plut. Marc. 5.4), should be dated to the end of the consulship of C. Flaminius in 223 bce. Starting from the reason given for Fabius’ second dictatorship in the fasti Capitolini (interregni caussa, ‘for the purpose of dealing with the interregnum’), K. argues that this should be rendered as a gerundive (interregni [ineundi] caussa, ‘for the purpose of bringing about an interregnum’), namely, to appoint C. Flaminius as magister equitum and thereby to force his resignation from his consulship. Although no single aspect of this argument is inherently implausible, K.'s suggestion that Fabius’ first dictatorship was not recorded in the fasti Capitolini while his second (more famous) one was labelled correctly and acquired the former's caussa is contentious. Moreover, this reconstruction is entirely grounded in a separate insistence that it was impossible for a consul to act as magister equitum during his year of office. The ancient sources offer six examples for K. to explain away. Although there are valid reasons to challenge each example, the view that cumulation was possible predominates in the sources. Finally, K. relies on a reading of Dio's emphasis (43.33.1) on the unprecedented nature of M. Lepidus’ position in 46 bce, which sounds (to this reviewer) to be somewhat forced. It seems more reasonable to take παρὰ τὰ πάτρια (‘contrary to custom’) as referring to Lepidus’ nomination of himself to the position while consul rather than to the cumulation of offices, which, as mentioned, the late Republican and Augustan sources viewed as possible.
That said, the book makes important contributions. The focus on the magister equitum, labelled accurately by K. as the ‘most shadowy and least understood’ (p. x) magistracy, is welcome. In Chapter 2 K. constructs a well-reasoned argument against the existence of the so-called ‘auspices of departure’ or auspicia militaria (already, R. Fiori, Fundamina 20 [2014]; compare, e.g., F.J. Vervaet, The High Command in the Roman Republic [2014], pp. 318–21). Chapter 7 offers a thoroughly argued account of the opening moves of the campaigning season in 217, drawing expertly on a combination of textual and topographical evidence, which demonstrates the accuracy of Livy's account that Flaminius took up his office at Ariminum (21.63.5, 22.1.7; compare Polyb. 3.77.1). A robust defence in Chapter 3 of the Greek sources’ credibility when approaching the dictator will also be important reading alongside M.B. Wilson's recent volume (Dictator [2021]). Moreover, the argument tying together the book's second half – that challenges to the auspices were a key element of second-century politics, but faded after Flaminius’ defeat in 217 – is convincingly presented. Despite a spate of attempts by Roman magistrates to resist the auspices in the mid-third century bce, these ceased with Trasimene, not to be revived until the radically different context of the Late Republic.
The volume is generally well produced with few typographical errors or omissions (though note Blösel 2003 and Kragelund 2016, repeatedly cited without the year, p. 22). The bibliography is extensive, although there is limited engagement with J. Rüpke's (inter alios) extensive work on ‘lived ancient religions’. This is perhaps an artefact of K.'s organisation of the work as a series of tightly focused studies, but this literature seems relevant to overall questions and themes raised here.
K.'s style is combative, but his attempt to advance scholarship on a thorny subject by questioning long-held assumptions is commendable. His work finds its place among a growing literature emphasising the tangible and significant impact that Roman religion and ritual had on quotidian political practice (cf. F. Santangelo, Divination, Prediction, and the End of the Roman Republic [2017]; L. Driediger-Murphy, Roman Republican Augury [2019]), while engaging robustly in the debate surrounding the nature of the Roman constitution (cf. F. Van Haeperen, CCG 23 [2012]; F.J. Vervaet, The High Command in the Roman Republic [2014]; F.K. Drogula, Commanders and Command [2015]). Overall, this work presents a useful, challenging read for scholars of Roman Republican constitutional and religious history.
