The Ludi Saeculares of Septimius Severus: The Ideologies of a New Roman Empire 9781138290143

Citation preview

The Ludi Saeculares of Septimius Severus

This is the first monograph to examine in detail the Ludi Saeculares (Secular Games) of Septimius Severus and argues that the games represented a radical shift from Antonine imperial ideology. To garner popular support and to legitimise his power, Severus conducted an intensive propaganda campaign, but how did he use the ludi to strengthen his power, and what were the messages he conveyed through them? The central theme is ritual, and the idea of ritual as a process that builds collective identity. The games symbolised the new Severan political and social vision and they embodied the idea of Roman identity and the image of Roman society which the emperor wished to promote. The programme of the games was recorded in a stone inscription and this text is analysed in detail, translated into English and contextualised in the socio-political aims of Septimius Severus. Jussi Rantala is a researcher at the University of Tampere, Finland. His main research interests include questions of religion, ritual, representation, identity and historiography in the Roman Empire.

The Ludi Saeculares of Septimius Severus The Ideologies of a New Roman Empire Jussi Rantala

First published 2017 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2017 Jussi Rantala The right of Jussi Rantala to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-1-138-29014-3 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-26653-4 (ebk) Typeset in Bembo Std by Swales & Willis, Ltd, Exeter, Devon, UK

For my parents

Contents

List of figuresix Acknowledgementsx Abbreviationsxi 1 Introduction The task  1 The evidence  5 Severus, the ludi and the studies  15

1

2 From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty

27

3 Organising the Ludi Saeculares Towards the new era  41 Funding the festivals  45 Purifying the holy grounds  52

41

4 The opening night and day The rituals of the first night  63 Rites of the opening day: the god and his servant  72

63

5 Day two: women take the stage The second night: a prelude?  89 The second day: celebrating Juno  90

89

6 The third night and day: the empire of the sun and the moon A night of abundance  112 The third day: final sacrifices  122

112

viii Contents 7 The closing acts: the Carmen Saeculare and the Trojan Games A hymn for the Golden Age  140 The Trojan Games  154 8 Conclusion

140

165

Appendix 1: The inscription commemorating Septimius Severus’ Ludi Saeculares Appendix 2:  Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares Appendix 3: The rituals of the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204 Appendix 4: The history of the Ludi Saeculares

172 182 191 192

Index

200

Figures

1.1 Relief from the Arcus Argentariorum (Arch of the money-changers) in Rome, depicting Caracalla performing a sacrifice 3.1 A scene from the arch of Lepcis Magna portraying harmony within the imperial family 3.2 Palazzo Sacchetti Relief, Rome. Severus sitting with his sons and councillors to the right, group of senators to the left walking under the Triumphal Arch of Septimius Severus 4.1 Septimius Severus and Julia performing a sacrifice, depicted in Arcus Argentariorum. Image of prince Geta removed later by Caracalla 5.1 Goddess Concordia in Roman imperial coin (c. ce 223), sitting and holding a libation bowl and cornucopia. RIC 4.1, no. 275 6.1 A goddess of plenty on the Altar of Peace of Augustus (Ara Pacis Augustae), erected in ce 9

8 44

52

76

99 120

Acknowledgements

This book consists of a revised version of my PhD dissertation, completed at the University of Tampere in 2013. As a result, I thank the individuals involved in that project, and first and foremost, Docent Katariina Mustakallio and Docent Jussi Hanska. I would also like to thank Professor Christian Krötzl, Professor Ray Laurence, Docent Marja-Leena Hänninen, Docent Maijastina Kahlos and Docent Ville Vuolanto for all their help and for valuable comments and criticism on the original manuscript. Moreover, this work has benefitted greatly from conversations and co-operation in various projects with Professor Christian Laes, Dr Miikka Tamminen, MA Pia Mustonen, MA Outi Sihvonen and MA Jaakkojuhani Peltonen, to whom I also give my thanks. My gratitude also goes to MA Antti T. Oikarinen, who provided me with help with the Latin language, and to Dr Céline Murphy for English proofreading. Furthermore, I would like to collectively thank members of the various seminars and working groups in which I participated, and my many colleagues and teachers at the School of Social Sciences and Humanities (University of Tampere), especially the members of Trivium (Tampere Centre for Classical, Medieval and Early Modern Studies). Finally, I want to express my gratitude to the Ella and Georg Ehrnrooth Foundation for the grant they provided.

Abbreviations

a)  Greek and Latin authors Ael. Aelian   NA   De natura animalium Amm. Marc. Ammianus Marcellinus App. Appian   B. Civ.   Bella Civilia Arist. Aristotle  Pol.   Politica Aristid. Aristides  Or.  Orationes August. Augustine   De civ. D.   De civitate Dei Aur. Vict. Aurelius Victor  Caes.  Caesares Cass. Dio Cassius Dio Cato Cato  Agr.  De agricultura Catull. Catullus Cens. Censorinus Cic. Cicero  Leg.  De legibus   Nat. D.   De natura deorum Claud.  Claudian   VI Cons. Hon.   Panegyricus de Sexto Consulatu Honorii Augusti CTh Codex Theodosianus Dig. Digesta Diod. Sic. Diodorus Siculus Dion. Hal. Dionysios Halicarnassaensis   Ant. Rom.   Antiquitates Romanae Euseb. Eusebius   Hist. eccl.   Historia ecclesiastica   Vit. Const.   Vita Constantini

xii Abbreviations Eutr. Eutropius Fest. Festus Gal. Galen Gell. Aulus Gellius  NA  Noctes Atticae Herod. Herodian Hes. Hesiod  Theog.  Theogonia Hom. Homer  Il.  Iliad Hor. Horace   Carm. Saec.   Carmen Saeculare Hymn. Hom. Ap. Hymnus Homericus ad Apollinem Jul. Obs. Julius Obsequens Juv. Juvenal Liv. Livy  Per.  Periochae Macrob. Macrobius  Sat.  Saturnalia Mal. Ioannes Malalas  Chron.  Chronographia Min. Fel. Minucius Felix  Oct.  Octavius Oros. Orosius Ov. Ovid  Am.   Amores  Fast.  Fasti  Her.  Heroides  Met.  Metamorphoses Paus. Pausanias Philostr. Philostratus   V A   Vita Apollonii   V S   Vita sophistarum Plin. Pliny (The Elder)  HN  Naturalis historia Plin. Pliny (The Younger)  Ep.  Epistulae  Pan.  Panegyricus Plut. Plutarch   Cat. min.   Cato minor  Num.  Numa  Publ.  Publicola   Quaest. Rom.   Quaestiones Romanae  Rom.  Romulus  Sull.  Sulla

Abbreviations  xiii RG Res Gestae Divi Augusti Sen. Seneca (The Younger)  Ben.   De beneficiis Serv. Servius   Comm. in Verg. Aen.   In Vergilii Aeneidem commentarii   Comm. in Verg. Buc.   In Vergilii Bucolica commentarii SHA  Scriptores Historiae Augustae (Historia Augusta)   Alex. Sev.   Alexander Severus  Clod.  Clodius Albinus  Comm.  Commodus  Diad.  Diadumenianus  Get.  Geta  Gord.  Gordiani Tres  Hadr.  Hadrianus  Heliogab.  Heliogabalus   M. Ant.   Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (Caracalla)   Pes. Nig.   Pescennius Niger  Sev.  Septimius Severus Sil.  Silius Italicus  Pun.  Punica Strabo Strabo Suet. Suetonius  Aug.  Augustus  Caes.  Caesar  Calig.  Caligula  Claud.  Claudius  Ner.  Nero  Tib.  Tiberius  Vesp.  Vespasianus Tac. Tacitus  Ann.  Annales  Ger.  Germania Tert. Tertullian   De spect.   De spectaculis Val. Max. Valerius Maximus Varro Varro   Ling.   De lingua Latina Verg. Virgil  Aen.  Aeneid Zos. Zosimus b)  Dictionaries, encyclopaedias, journals and periodicals AHB Ancient History Bulletin AJA  American Journal of Archaeology

xiv Abbreviations AJP The American Journal of Philology Amer. Hist. Rev. American Historical Review Anc. Soc. Ancient Society ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren Forschung, ed. by H. TemporiniGräfin Vitzthum and W. Haase, Berlin 1972– BAR British Archaeological Reports BJ Bonner Jahrbücher BMC Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum, ed. by H. Mattingly et al., London 1923– BNP  Brill’s New Pauly: Encyclopaedia of the Ancient World: Antiquity, ed. by H. Canick and H. Schneider, Leiden 2002–10 CAH Cambridge Ancient History (2nd edition), ed. by A. Bowman, A. Cameron, P. Garnsey et al., Cambridge 1970–2001 CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, ed. by T. Mommsen et al., Berlin 1863– Cl. Ant. Classical Antiquity CPh  Classical Philology Greece & Rome GR  Harvard Studies in Classical Philology HSCP  JHP Journal of Historical Pragmatics JRS Journal of Roman Studies L’Albo Barbieri, G. (1952). L’Albo Senatorio da Settimo Severo a Carino (193–285). Roma: Angeli Signorelli Editore LTUR  Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae, ed. by Margarita Stenby, Rome 1993–2006 NC The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Royal Numismatic Society NECJ New England Classical Journal OCD Oxford Classical Dictionary (3rd ed. revised), ed. by Simon Hornblower and Anthony Spawforth, Oxford 2003 Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society PCPS  Pighi Pighi, G. (1965). De ludi saecularibus populi Romani Quiritum libri sex. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Verlag P. Schippers N.V. PIR² Prosopographia imperii romani (2nd ed.), ed. by E. Groag, A. Stein, L. Petersen et al., Berlin 1933– Rivista di Archeologia RdA  RE Paylus Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumwissenschaft, ed. by G. Wissowa et al., Stuttgart 1894 – München 1978 Rh. Mus. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie RIC Roman Imperial Coinage, ed. by H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham et al., London 1923–94 Römische Mitteilungen RM  RSC Roman Silver Coins, ed. by H. Seaby et al., London 1978–87 YCS Yale Classical Studies

1 Introduction

The task The often idealised era of Roman history, the reign of the ‘good’ Antonine rulers during the second century, eventually came to a halt with Marcus Aurelius’ death in ce 180. Soon after, in ce 193, a civil war broke out. Eventually, Septimius Severus, commander of the Pannonian1 legions, rose to power by crushing both of his main opponents: Pescennius Niger and (a little later) Clodius Albinus. The fact that an emperor took control by means of civil war was a highly exceptional event for the Romans of the period, as there had not been a civil war for over a 100 years. After the war of ce 69 (‘the year of the four emperors’), which saw the birth of the Flavian dynasty, major civil disturbances had been very much absent from Rome.2 As a result, Severus, a usurper from North Africa who had become the new emperor and founder of a dynasty, had to seek various ways to secure, justify and legitimise his power. To achieve these goals, he carried out purges among his political enemies, began a lavish building programme in the capital and held public festivals.3 This study concentrates on one of the main events of Septimius Severus’ reign, the Ludi Saeculares (Secular Games) of ce 204. The festival was a remarkable occasion, a magnificent and extremely rare religious ritual, which was only supposed to be officially celebrated once in 100 (or 110) years. As a result, it provided the emperor with an excellent opportunity to highlight the special nature of his reign. The task of this study is to evaluate the role of the Ludi Saeculares, not only as a single religious event but as a phenomenon which was part of a wider process: the creation of an imperial ideology for Septimius Severus’ own ends and for the new dynasty he created.4 The aim is to find out how Severus used the ludi to legitimise his power: that is, during the creation of a new dynasty which he established by means of a civil war. To be more specific, this study examines which messages he conveyed through the means of this religious festival, and how he consequently justified his power; in other words, I here deal with the ideas and values that Severus employed and brought forth through the means of the celebrations as he created and reformed an ‘imagined community’. As we shall see, the Ludi Saeculares can be viewed as an identity-defining ritual, and as the manifestation of a new age, which symbolised the values of the Roman commonwealth.

2 Introduction A description of the games’ rituals survived on a large inscription which was erected in the Campus Martius. As much of it has been preserved, we possess a good deal of information on the manner in which the games were conducted. This research is therefore based on this piece of evidence. However, it should be stressed that this study is not a line by line commentary of the inscription. Instead, it concentrates on the key points of the programme of the Ludi Saeculares, evaluating how the spectacle was used in building and strengthening Septimius Severus’ power and dynastic ambitions. The Severan Ludi Saeculares were part of a long tradition of games: by ce 204 they had already been celebrated at least six times. The Augustan and Claudian games had, in a similar manner, been recorded in inscriptions, and it is very probable that other imperial games were as well. The tradition of the games was thus well known and the recorded rituals were therefore very similar (but not identical, as we shall see). Indeed, the importance of the idea of traditionalism for Roman religious rites should be kept in mind while analysing the Severan inscription. The legitimisation of the rituals as ‘real’ or ‘genuine’ was not so much based on theological dogmas, but rather on the claim that the way they were celebrated was part of a long tradition.5 Indeed, the lack of theology is a very characteristic feature of Roman state religion, in comparison to Christianity, for example. There were apparently no holy texts giving clear answers to religious problems (as Christians had); in other words, there appear to be no strict religious dogmas. We do possess writings from Classical antiquity which could be considered as theological, such as Cicero’s De divinatione and De natura deorum, but these are first and foremost philosophical texts. The traditional cultic system, on the other hand, continued for centuries despite the philosophers’ discussions. The central aspect of Roman religion was ritual action, and especially sacrifice. The lack of a theological system in sacrifice is especially noteworthy; for example, the question of the position of the gods in ritual was perhaps dealt with in philosophical discussions, but it probably never affected the performance of the ritual itself. This differs from Christianity, as Christians emphasised theology and dogma over ritual.6 Even a clergy was lacking in Roman traditional religion: there were priests, but their duty was mainly to perform and organise the religious rites and celebrations ordered by politicians, usually by the senate. It is also important to remember that politics and religion could not really be separated in Roman society – religious festivals were civic festivals as well.7 As a consequence, even if the celebrations did have an official meaning of some sort, in practice the significance of the ritual altered very much in different times, because of changing social or political situations. Indeed, even a ritual which remained similar in terms of its performance could be interpreted differently according to the period in which it was performed.8 In turning to the Roman calendar, for example, we see that a lot of religious festivals were celebrated annually – much more often than the Ludi Saeculares.9 However, it seems that even in these cases there was room for new interpretations. This occurred because there was no

Introduction  3 strict narrative thread, no ‘grand story’ or such, in Roman religion that could link the festivals together and provide fixed meanings for these occasions. In other words, a religious ritual, which was performed in a very similar manner throughout the centuries, probably had a very different significance for a peasant in archaic Rome and for someone living in the capital centuries later.10 In the scope of this study, it is thus essential to note the uniqueness of the rituals, and their close relation with their own time, as well as the values of the period. As a consequence, when evaluating the significance of a religious festival – and especially in the case of an extremely rare celebration such as the Ludi Saeculares – we must always examine the contemporary social and political context as well.11 The imperial Ludi Saeculares were traditionally considered as a celebration marking a transition from an old period to a new, superior, Golden Age. It is probable that this idea was also relevant to the Severan games, as the civil war period had been over for some time and circumstances had become relatively peaceful. In this sense, the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204 were a manifestation of new, peaceful era (as had been the case for the Augustan games in 17 bce). In addition, the games traditionally consisted of a grand scale purificatory ritual. In the Augustan – and most likely in the Severan celebrations too – this signified that the community left dark memories of the civil war period behind.12 All in all, the games were connected to a period of crisis and change. For this study, this is a noteworthy aspect: it has been claimed that it is often during ages of anxiety that communities start to evaluate, re-evaluate and even invent, some very fundamental questions, like those of one’s identity. Identity, in reality, only becomes a problem when something previously considered as stable begins to change as a result of uncertainty and suspicion.13 Rome was indeed, sociologically, a very fragile construction, at constant risk of collapsing into chaos (like civil war). Avoiding such social anarchy thus required an ongoing reproduction of Roman identity.14 As the Ludi Saeculares were a ritual related to the memory of a major crisis, it accordingly seems likely that the occasion contributed to defining the identity of the communitas. The question of identity is a complicated one. It can be described as an abstract concept associated with the loyalty of an individual to a larger group, based on cultural, national, political, sexual or other similar grounds.15 Benedict Anderson (1983) considered states as imagined communities: he argued that most of the people living within society never personally meet, and most do not even know most of the individuals living within their own community, yet people nonetheless consider themselves as members of the same commonwealth to which they identify themselves.16 For cohesion, a community therefore needs common stories and symbols to which the members can relate. In this sense, national culture is a discourse, a way of constructing meanings with which one can identify. These meanings can be found in stories, memories and pictures surrounding the nation. One important function of the aforementioned rituals is therefore to create, and sometimes even invent these traditions. It is very common practice to use old materials,

4 Introduction like ancient customs, for novel purposes. Rituals are a prime example of this process: in modern societies, rituals are created, for example, around festival pavilions, structures for the display of flags, temples for offerings, processions, gun salutes, government delegations in honour of the festival, and public speeches. The process of inventing tradition occurs especially when a society goes through a rapid transformation or destruction of old social patterns; essentially, when a community experiences a major change.17 Obviously, studies such as Anderson’s concern modern nationalism, not ancient history. However, they can be useful tools for the ancient historian when applied with some caution. Even if nationalism as a concept belongs to the modern era, the idea of togetherness and the importance of rituals in strengthening a community are not just modern phenomena. Cultural identities can be traced to the ancient world as well; one of these identities being Romanness (Romanitas). Greg Woolf (1994: 120) has defined Romanness as membership to a political and religious community holding common values and mores (which means customs, morality and way of life). Of course, this does not mean that it was the only, or necessarily even the most important, identity for the ordinary people of the empire. An individual could identify with many categories, such as ethnicity, age, gender, work, or religion.18 Moreover, identity is never fixed but constantly changing, affected by historical events, the interference of other cultures and so on.19 However, it can be argued that one of the cornerstones of Roman identity was religion and especially the accurate performance of the ritual. Ritual constituted a vital component of Romanness, linking the past to the present and future (by means of traditionalism, as was discussed above).20 Another important concept connected to the ludi is the question of power. Power is a salient factor in the creation of culture and identity.21 The ludi were celebrated by a man who had become the emperor by means of civil war and, perhaps even more importantly, by a man who was not part of the traditional ruling circle but an outsider. This indicates that Septimius Severus’ reign represented a remarkable break in continuity for many contemporaries. As a result, the Ludi Saeculares, consisting of a unique and grandiose event, was for the emperor an excellent chance to manifest his power and legitimise his rule. It should, in particular, be remembered that even if Severus had been in power for over ten years by ce 204, he had been very much absent from the capital. Before spending a few years in the city of Rome from ce 204–207, he had not spent more than twelve months at a time in Italy for forty years.22 As a result, he was probably still a relatively unfamiliar figure for the senatorial and other upper classes of the city, who in practice, were still the most influential social groups of the empire. Severus thus certainly needed to legitimise his power in the capital itself.23 Finally, as we are dealing with a religious ritual, the theoretical starting point of this research should be noted: the idea of a ritual as a process that builds a collective identity (communitas) by means of representation. This means that different people or groups taking part in a ritual can symbolically represent

Introduction  5 a much bigger group; they create feelings of collective identity and loyalty, and in some cases even affection. In addition, it is common that the person (or group) representing the communitas is the one who possesses the ‘power to protect’. To achieve this quality, this person must gain mystical authority which separates her/him from the audience, making her/him an object removed apart from full familiarity. This mystical authority is created during rituals. It must nonetheless be noted that ritual activities were (and are) also important for the community as they represent a sort of mythical starting point. Rituals generally tend to situate themselves at a so called ‘point zero’ – they operate at the turning point for a community; by doing this, they provide a new start and, philosophically speaking, reduce things related to communitas to their potentiality. They are therefore seen as a certain ‘beginning’ for those who participate in them.24 Taking these aspects into consideration, the Ludi Saeculares are seen in this study as a ‘point zero’, a starting (or turning) point for the community and the beginning of a Golden Age which defined the nature and identity of the communitas. Against this background, the rituals of the games will be analysed; I will deal with them in the order in which they appear in the inscription erected right after the games and describing the celebration, from the organisation of the games (which is also described in the record), to the final rituals. In the context of my study, it is essential to understand that even if I deal with a religious ritual, my main focus is not on the religious history of ancient Rome; I am not studying the role of the Ludi Saeculares in Roman religion. Instead, I primarily study the games as a mirror for Roman society in the early third century. In my view, these games, which possess such a unique character and a central role in Severan propaganda, portray the political and social vision of the emperor.

The evidence The different sources dealt with in this study are here seen as texts. As a result, the word ‘text’ is not employed to just refer to written evidence, such as literature, but it also refers to more physical sources as well. One example from the Severan period is the emperor’s vast building programme, conducted in the capital during the first years of the third century. Major changes to the city were not carried out for practical purposes only, such as restoring buildings which were destroyed in the great fire which took place during Commodus’ reign or other damaged buildings. It was also an attempt to portray Severus as the restorer of the state, the bringer of peace after uneasy times.25 As the restored and new buildings carried the name of the one who conducted the works – in this case Septimius Severus – they also preserved the emperor’s importance in public memoria. As a result, I will also occasionally refer to this building project. However, the main ‘texts’ I deal with are the inscription describing the rituals of the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204, literature of the early third century (the most important being the works of historians of this period)

6 Introduction and the coinage of Septimius Severus. All these provide their own kind of problems, however. When employing them as a source, one has to ask how they can be used: to which kind of questions different types of evidence can provide answers. The inscription Although it is in a fragmentary state, the Severan inscription describing the rituals of the Ludi Saeculares is the most thorough report of any single Roman religious festival.26 After the festival, the inscription was erected on the Campus Martius, one of the most holy places in Rome. It was placed in the same spot as the record of the Augustan games of 17 bce stood. It is very likely that other the emperors who had celebrated the Ludi Saeculares had also done the same, although almost no records on other games, except the Augustan and Severan ones, remain.27 The importance of the location of the Severan inscription, the Campus Martius, can be traced in the accounts of many writers, such as Livy, Plutarch and Dionysios of Halicarnassus.28 Strabo, a Greek geographer writing during the Augustan period, also describes the Campus Martius as a perfect place for all kinds of spectacles and as a magnificent site because of its temples, buildings and natural surroundings.29 The development of the field had already begun in the republican era, and the process was maintained until the mid-third century. According to sources, the last emperor to conduct a remarkable monumental development on the Campus Martius was Alexander Severus (who ruled between ce 222 and 235).30 The presence of the inscription on the Campus Martius is in itself a significant feature. Rituals are often performed at historical (real or mythological) sites or monuments, places considered as important for the community. These sacred spaces are thus central stages for ceremonies creating and strengthening the idea of a communitas.31 In his famous study, Maurice Halbwachs (1992) noted how society needs to find landmarks.32 This essentially means that the more illustrious the place of these landmarks is, the more prestige and significance for the communitas the landmark has. In the case of my study, the celebration which took place as part of the Ludi Saeculares was indeed conducted on the most holy grounds of the city of Rome – the Campus Martius, the Capitoline and the Palatine hills. Accordingly, the inscription recording the events of the ludi was also erected in one of the most important sacred spaces of the capital. Inscriptions were an extremely important way of communication in Roman world; they were erected in every corner of the Empire. Inscriptions were often part of a larger monument, a bronze or a marble statue, honouring a significant event or groups of people (the emperor and his family being the most obvious case). As was the case with the inscription of the Severan ludi in Rome, the provincial inscriptions and monuments were usually situated in the most important areas of the towns and cities, thus becoming central parts

Introduction  7 of urban space. They were often erected by communities and local elites.33 It has been estimated that hundreds of thousands of monuments were built to honour the rulers during the Roman imperial era, of which only a fraction remain today (mostly in a very bad condition).34 In other words, the countless inscriptions celebrating emperors and their families that were to be found in the Roman Empire were not actually erected by the orders of the emperors themselves and, strictly speaking, cannot be considered as a part of the imperial policy as such. However, in the case of the Severan Ludi Saeculares, the ­inscription very clearly indicates that it was erected by imperial decision. The function of the Severan inscription was not just to record the programme of the games but, perhaps most importantly, to preserve their memory. Memoria was a concept of extreme importance in Roman political life. When, for example, a person received public honours and statues, his (or sometimes her) virtues were emphasised for the whole community – it became a part of his/her public memory.35 Members of the aristocracy kept the memoria of their ancestors alive by means of grand scale memorials and extravagant public funerals. From the late republican period onwards, many Roman noble families were very rich, but lacked political power, since power was concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. As a result, the wealthiest families displayed their prosperity in commemorating their ancestors, thus hoping to strengthen their own political position.36 The importance of memory for a community is not, of course, uniquely a Roman phenomenon. Every culture has its own ways of remembering. This means that memoria is closely connected to each society’s own way of explaining its identity.37 However, it may be suggested that the relationship existing between memoria and the Roman communitas was somewhat special, perhaps even exceptional. The extreme importance of memory for Roman society is perceptible in ‘almost every aspect of their existence’, as Alain Gowing (2005: 1–2) states; memoria was present in celebrations for the dead, in public speeches and law, in art, on buildings and in literature. As Gowing stresses, memory of the past defined the present for the Romans. The central role of memoria for the Roman community was already present during the republican period and continued throughout the imperial era. Its importance was recognised during the Severan period as well. This is most strikingly demonstrated by the incident which occurred between Severus’ sons, princes Caracalla and Geta. After Severus’ death, Caracalla murdered his brother (and co-ruler) and declared a damnatio memoriae upon him. The act meant removing Geta’s name and image from public places and monuments. Other individuals, such as Caracalla’s wife Fulvia Plautilla and his father in law Gaius Fulvius Plautianus, suffered a similar fate (Figure 1.1).38 In practice, Caracalla’s policy was an attempt to control public memory – after all, memoria was not just about remembering, but also about choosing what to remember and what to forget.39 Indeed, inscriptions were probably one of the most effective ways of keeping elements/aspects considered as important in the memory of the communitas.

8 Introduction

Figure 1.1  Relief from the Arcus Argentariorum (Arch of the money-changers) in Rome, erected in ce 204. The relief depicts Caracalla performing a sacrifice; he was originally accompanied by his wife Fulvia Plautilla and his father-in-law Gaius Fulvius Plautianus in this scene, but these figures were removed when they fell out of Caracalla’s favour. The figure of Caracalla’s brother Geta in the other relief of the arch was treated in the same manner (photo: Jussi Rantala).

Through their words, they visually communicated to the readers. This was obvious to those who were able to read and understand how epigraphy worked.40 This was not, however, the only way in which inscriptions conveyed messages. Their physical presence was an important matter as well. The sheer size of the records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares, for example, must have been an impressive sight on the Campus Martius. The sizes and shapes of the inscriptions, their beauty and clarity, the clear lines of the letters they contained and other aesthetic features were all important. In combination with their surroundings (in this case the Campus Martius), and in relation to the architectural and topographic contexts of the city, inscriptions were part of the history and tradition of the communitas, and, as such, were an effective way of preserving collective memory.41

Introduction  9 Based on the function and significance of inscriptions, it can thus be argued that the novelties appearing in Septimius Severus’ programme (in contrast to earlier game records) were connected to a will to preserve the memory of the ‘new’ actions: these additions demonstrated aspects that Severus wanted to maintain in public memory. These novelties will be discussed more thoroughly in the following chapters, but to give just one example, one must notice the inclusion of the empress Julia Domna. She had an important role in the Severan inscription (as we shall see), whereas Livia, Augustus’ wife, is missing in the earlier record altogether. Of course, this omission does not necessarily mean that Livia was not part of the Augustan games; in fact, given her importance in Augustan propaganda it is very possible that she was. However, for Septimius Severus, the role of the empress was apparently of even greater importance; she was important enough to be preserved in the inscription and in the public memory of the games. Severan literature Two contemporary historians wrote about their own (Severan) period during the early third century: Cassius Dio and Herodian. In addition, the much later text of the Historia Augusta covers the Severan period as well. Many other writers, such as Philostratus and Tertullian, are, of course, interesting contemporary witnesses too. Contemporary writers help us understand the historical context and socio-political situation of the period, even if their texts do not directly deal with the subject of the Ludi Saeculares. The most important written source on the topic is the work of Cassius Dio. Born in Nicaea (Bithynia) around ce 165, he held many high offices during the Severan dynasty. He was already senator under Commodus, and became consul for the first time under Septimius Severus. Subsequently, he held various offices in Asia, Pannonia and Africa, until he became consul for the second time under Alexander Severus in ce 229.42 Dio’s extensive Roman history, covering the period from the foundation of the city to the reign of Severus Alexander, was probably written between ce 220–31.43 Dio is often considered as somewhat unreliable and uncritical; Fergus Millar (1964: 118, 171) describes him as a writer who did not bother making any deep interpretations or analyses, merely reporting events one after another. Millar also criticises Dio’s inability to notice, or make interpretations of, great historical turning points of his own time.44 For this study, however, Dio is a very important author. Not only was he a contemporary historian, which makes his descriptions of the Severan age reliable sources (although his history of the Severan period is mostly known through excerpts and epitomes), but it appears that he was also situated at the very heart of the empire during the reign of Septimius Severus. For example, much has been debated about Dio’s involvement in the so called circle of Julia Domna (a group of philosophers and other intellectuals apparently working in the empress’ patronage). Whatever the truth regarding

10 Introduction the existence of such group,45 it is clear that Dio benefited of direct contact with the imperial family, as he mentions this himself in his history. In fact, throughout his history of the Severan period, Dio demonstrates his possession of first-hand knowledge of imperial happenings and his familiarity with contemporary sophists associated with the Julia Domna, regardless of whether this circle existed or not.46 Cassius Dio’s attitude towards Septimius Severus appears a little unclear. He expresses dislike towards many aspects of Severan rule, but he nevertheless supports it in other instances. On frequent occasions, Dio follows Severan propaganda quite uncritically. For example, his description of Septimius’ seizing of the city with his armies during the civil war appears much more favourable than that of other writers, such as Herodian and the Historia Augusta for example.47 However, these positive attitudes were, in truth, necessary, as Dio held high offices and operated with many Severan emperors. Too fierce attacks upon the ruler would have been unwise for a man in his position. It seems that, generally, Dio had major reservations regarding Severus and his rule – according to Alan Gowing, Severus was an emperor for whom Dio ‘did not particularly care’.48 All in all, his work reflects the values of a high-ranking official of the early third century and is thus a valuable source. The other main contemporary historian, Herodian, is a much less known figure. Even if Herodian himself claims to be an eye-witness of some events in ce 192, some of his descriptions appear to be copied from Cassius Dio’s work. It is most likely that he composed his history around ce 250, possibly during the reign of Philip the Arab or Decius. Herodian is often considered as a lowerranking official from Greece (or other Greek-speaking parts of the empire), although little evidence remains for this suggestion. Nevertheless, his lack of interest in the actions of the senate seems to indicate that he was not a part of the senatorial order himself.49 As a historian, Herodian is even more criticised than Dio; he has been called, for example, ‘careless, ignorant and deceitful, a self-conscious stylist who wanted to write a rattling good yarn and happily adjusted the facts to achieve readability and excitement’ (Birley 1999: 204). More recent research on Herodian has nonetheless been a little more positive. As David Potter (2004: 232) summarises, Herodian provides the account of an interested contemporary writer and a reasonable chronological sense, despite his shortcomings. Indeed, for a study on the Severan dynasty, Herodian is an interesting observer. He gives some balance to Cassius Dio, who followed the events of the Severan period from the very core of the empire. Interestingly, some recent studies suggest that Herodian even considered Rome as a kind of ‘alien monarchy’. When he describes Roman practices he (possibly deliberately) tries to show them as foreign customs. This is an attitude very much absent from the texts of Cassius Dio. As a result, it has been suggested that Herodian’s habit of explaining very common Roman practices to his readers are a sign that he was writing for a lower-class audience. However, some more recent studies have considered this habit as a ‘game’ for the purposes of

Introduction  11 Herodian’s Greek upper-class audience, who pondered questions related to Greek identity and culture under Roman rule; the ‘game’ would have allowed them to deal with these issues outside the Roman influence.50 While these arguments are challenged as well,51 we can nevertheless quite safely regard Dio as a ‘true’ Roman historian (despite his Greek background) and Herodian perhaps more as an observer from the outside. This is probably the most valuable aspect of Herodian’s work. The third main literary source for the Severan period is the Historia Augusta. This collection of imperial biographies and accounts on major usurpers has generated much discussion among modern studies. Most scholars presently seem to agree that the books are the product of a single author, writing in the late fourth century. In other words, Severan biographies were not written by a writer contemporary with the Severan rulers.52 As a result, their function in this study is different to that of Dio’s and Herodian’s works. The Historia Augusta does not inform us about the attitudes or values of the early third century; instead, it is occasionally used (with caution) to verify details about the Severan period. Using the Historia Augusta as a source is a challenge, as many of the biographies are generally considered as highly unreliable tales, filled with fiction and false information. However, some are more reliable than others, and the book covering the reign of Septimius Severus (and his follower Caracalla) is considered as one of the least problematic.53 Where the biographies of the other Severan rulers are concerned, the history of Elagabalus is considered as the most complicated: the first part seems to be more reliable than the second half. The biography of Alexander Severus, moreover, is usually dismissed as fictive. This is unfortunate since the period of Alexander was only very sparsely covered by Cassius Dio.54 Returning to the Ludi Saeculares and ancient historians’ accounts on the topic, it is interesting to note that even if Dio is by far the most important literary source for the Severan period, he does not mention the Severan Ludi Saeculares at all. He only records Septimius Severus’ grand celebrations of ce 202 in honour of the tenth anniversary of his power.55 Herodian does, however, describe the games and his text gives the reader the impression that he was present in person.56 There is no mention of the games in the Historia Augusta either (although the biography of Severus in Historia Augusta does not give a very detailed account on the period anyway).57 Dio’s silence about the games could be explained by the omission of the passage by his epitomiser; his coverage of the Severan period is only fully preserved for the years ce 217–218. The rest of his history is constructed from epitomes and excerpts.58 I would nevertheless suggest that Dio also had other reasons to be silent, or at least cynical, towards the games. To this problem I will later return. Contemporary writers other than historians are naturally also of interest. During the Severan reign, Greek prose literature was prominent. Many noteworthy authors, like Galen, Aelian and Athenaeus wrote during this period. Perhaps the most important of the many Greek writers in the early third century was Flavius Philostratus. He was a Roman citizen and had

12 Introduction connections with the Severans’ court. He seems to have been educated with princes Caracalla and Geta.59 Philostratus’ relationship with imperial policy is an interesting topic. For example, one of his major works, Heroicus, is sometimes seen as a reflection of the hero-cult that Caracalla wanted to highlight.60 Of further importance is the claim that the writer belonged to the aforementioned circle of the empress Julia Domna, who, according to Philostratus, admired all kinds of rhetorical speech.61 However, the existence of the circle is nowadays mostly disputed. Cassius Dio does mention that Julia Domna turned to philosophy and spent time with sophists, but there is otherwise very little evidence.62 It seems clear that Philostratus’ texts, or those of any other Greek writer, cannot be taken as direct reflections of imperial policy (even if they sometimes agree with imperial policy and propaganda). They instead deal with topics such as Greek cultural identity and its relationship with both universalism and Roman power.63 As contemporary writers Philostratus and other Greeks are, nevertheless, of value for any study ­covering the early third century ce. The main Latin authors of the period were the jurists: Callistratus, Claudius Tryphoninus, Arrius Menander, Licinius Rufus, Julius Paulus and most famously, Domitius Ulpianus.64 The Latin Christian authors, Tertullian and Minucius Felix, are also interesting contemporary sources. In addition, one (almost) contemporary Latin writer should particularly be mentioned. In ce 238 Censorinus, a Roman scholar, gave his friend a book he wrote about birthdays, named the De die natali liber, as a birthday present. The book contains much information on birthdays, from proper birthday rituals to questions regarding the nature of the universe. It also covers a brief history of the Ludi Saeculares as they were understood in the early third century. Even if Censorinus’ account on the subject is fairly short, it is nevertheless an extremely interesting piece of evidence concerning the perceptions that an individual living during Severan period could hold of the Ludi Saeculares. Numismatic evidence The third main source to be used during a study of the Severan period is coinage. In many ways, coins are by nature a very different source of evidence to ancient literature. The most obvious difference is that they convey messages through imagery, and not by means of written texts (although texts can be found on coinage as well). This is a remarkable aspect, if we think about the audience who received these messages. We do not know for sure how literate Roman society was yet it is safe to say that works of contemporaries such as Cassius Dio were written for very few readers, basically just for the uppermost elite of the empire. Coinage (and monuments and paintings), however, was available to a much wider audience, spread across many social classes. It was thus possible for the illiterate to still interpret the messages carried by currency expressed through the means of images of busts of the emperors, gods and ­goddesses, temples and monuments, for example.65

Introduction  13 Using coinage does nevertheless raises challenges and questions which need to be taken into consideration. When evaluating coins as a source for imperial policy, a question should be first asked: can coins be considered as vehicles for imperial propaganda? Regarding this question, the most important aspect is who authorised the themes seen on the coins in the first place. The most obvious answer would be the emperor himself, and many scholars seem to accept this suggestion.66 However, other theories exist. For example, it is sometimes suggested that mints were responsible for issuing coin types and designs.67 If this is true, coins ought to not necessarily be perceived as propaganda aimed at the Roman communitas but rather as a visual panegyric directed to ruler.68 However, we may ask if these two cases really differ. While it is possible that the mint-masters and other experts had some influence on which images and legends were used in the coins and how they were combined, the masters themselves were most likely appointed by the emperor. It is likely that these officials, who were of course willing to advance their careers, knew exactly what the emperor expected and what kind of imagery he himself promoted. After all, coins were official statements: they usually carried emperor’s portrait and name and were very much part of his public image.69 However, even if we accept that it was indeed the emperor who had the final word regarding coinage, it is true that the question is sometimes more complicated to answer than it initially seems. If we take a closer look at the Severan period especially, Zeev Rubin (1980: 13–14) notes two occasions in which contradictions between coinage and other imperial policies occur. In ce 195, Septimius Severus refused the title of Parthicus which honoured his victory over the Parthians. However, during the same year, some coins on which this title appears circulated (although they later disappeared). A year earlier, some coins were issued in the eastern provinces in honour of Septimius Severus, but oddly these were made in the part of the empire controlled by Pescennius Niger, a rival of Severus for the crown. It thus appears that Severus had no complete control over the coinage struck during his reign. The explanation on these two occasions is probably that the local authorities did sometimes strike coins by their own judgment, and that the emperor did not always have the last word on the subject. However, these occasions were quite rare and, as Rubin also admits, during times of peace, emperors had a tighter grasp on officials in different parts of the empire. The two aforementioned examples from the Severan period took place during the civil disturbances between Severus and his opponents. The period dealt with in this study is one in which Septimius Severus had already stabilised his power by defeating his rivals and was already able to build his image through the empire without too serious internal disturbances. Moreover, this study concentrates on imperial coinage minted in Rome, excluding the provincial coinage and the coins of Greek cities, which were not under direct regulations of Roman central administration.70 As the Severan ludi were held in the capital, it is probable that the audience who came from Rome and other parts of Italy were familiar with the Roman mints.

14 Introduction This is also the reason for which this study does not treat questions of quantification. Quantitative studies of Roman coinage include analyses of coin hoards, coins deposited together at a discrete period in time.71 This method would help us understand, for example, how wide an audience received and was familiar with certain coin-types issued by emperors (and their mint-­ masters).72 However, in this study, this approach is not particularly relevant. The Ludi Saeculares were an occasion traditionally related to one specific part of the empire: the capital itself. No similar festivals are known from any other parts of the empire. It is therefore quite safe to assume that all the relevant coins were known by the audience of the Secular Games. They were struck for the usage of people in and around the capital. It is indeed perhaps not so crucial to evaluate how well these coins were known outside Rome (and Italy), as the games were not directed towards provincial people. Another major question is about how valuable coinage was as a vehicle for imperial propaganda. The messages represented on coins can indeed be regarded as very conventional: one might think that those messages were lost for most coin users as the same subjects kept appearing from one century to another. Indeed, as Clifford Ando (2000: 212) notes, ‘interpretation of the coins rested on contemporaries’ awareness and reception’. However, there is no good reason to think that emperors did not try to connect with the population through coinage. First of all, coins were a tool for strengthening traditionalism.73 By sticking to highly conservative subjects on coins, rulers could claim to be part of great Roman tradition, tracing back to the days of Augustus. In addition, the few reports left by ancient writers on planning and striking new coinage do confirm that the emperors and other rulers (before the imperial period) were very keen on giving orders concerning coin types, whenever they thought it beneficial for their purposes. Suetonius reports how Augustus ordered a new coin type portraying a Capricorn (his personal starsign) to be struck after he made his horoscope public. Nero also had a coin struck depicting himself playing the lyre. This was apparently done to celebrate his return to Rome and to portray him as a new Augustus or Apollo (the tutelary god of Augustus).74 Cassius Dio mentions how Brutus ‘stamped upon the coins which were being minted his own likeness and a cap and two daggers, indicating by this and by the inscription that he and Cassius had liberated the fatherland’.75 The Christian author Eusebius writes how Emperor Constantine ordered a coin in which he is depicted praying.76 At the same time, it demonstrates that ancient authors themselves precisely considered the emperor as a person responsible of coinage and its motifs. This, alongside the other evidence presented above, points to the fact that the Romans related the imagery present on coins with the emperor who had struck it (and whose portrait could usually be seen on one side of the coin). Moreover, coinage was often also connected to public monuments: similar images were depicted on statues, triumphal arches and on other similar architectural features of that type. Together they created a visual language used to affect the majority of Roman society, the illiterate.77

Introduction  15 Accordingly, I regard coins as a tool for the emperor to spread messages about the values and ideas central to him to a larger audience in the empire.78 Indeed, it can be argued that, the role of coinage in spreading imperial propaganda was especially important during Septimius Severus’ reign, since apparently Severus increased the amount of coins in circulation. This was necessary to pay off the soldiers for their support. Nonetheless, reports that Severus’ reign of ended with a surplus in the treasury do also exist, which would indicate that lots of coinage went out of circulation again. It is, moreover, very likely that lots of funds for soldiers’ pay rises came from confiscations; this would mean that there was actually less need for new coinage.79 To conclude, I agree with scholars who claim that the emperor participated in the process of deciding which titles, portraits and reverse types were included on coinage, even if it is not always clear who ultimately made the official decision.80 Moreover, as coins were issued in the name of the emperor, they were as such an extremely important method of communication between the ruler and his subjects, spreading the messages the emperors considered important and, by these means, legitimising his rule.81

Severus, the ludi and the studies The Ludi Saeculares While the Augustan Ludi Saeculares have been well covered in modern studies, the Severan games have not received as much attention. As Clifford Ando (2012: 44) comments about the programme of the Severan ludi, it is remarkable that even if ‘the records of the games are without parallel . . . these still lack even a competent survey’. G.B. Pighi’s De ludi saecularibus populi Romani Quiritum libri sex (1965) is the most important single work on the Secular Games, and a valuable tool for studies of the subject as it gathers the sources of the games through the centuries. However, this is exactly what it is: a collection of sources, less so a study. Despite this, Pighi’s work is a logical starting point for any research on the Ludi Saeculares and this is obviously the case here as well. Even if the Severan games are touched upon in many studies, they are often seen as a very similar occasion to the Augustan games.82 This study approaches the Severan games as more of an entity of their own, and not so much as a copy of the Augustan ludi. This view is based on two observations. First, the Severan games (or, to be more precise, the inscription recording the programme) did present innovations and modifications at least in comparison to the games we have most knowledge of, the Augustan celebrations. These novelties might have been minor, but were still interesting ones, considering the importance of memoria in the Roman world; there had to be a reason why these were recorded in the inscription in ce 204. Second, the context of the games should be remembered, as ritual is always tied to the time and place in which it is performed. Ritual is a set of practices and ideas that is connected to day-to-day

16 Introduction political, social and cultural issues.83 In this particular case, it simply means that the people of the Severan period lived in a very different world to those who lived in the Augustan age, and their interpretations of religious rituals would, as a result, have differed as well. Of previous research concerning the Severan ludi, Charmaine Gorrie’s many articles should be mentioned here as they have influenced this work greatly. As she demonstrates, there was a close connection between Severus’ Ludi Saeculares and his building policy, since one of the important targets of the programme was to build an impressive platform for the games. Accordingly, the Ludi Saeculares were used to demonstrate the new grandiose look of the city, created by the emperor. This observation is an important one, and is one of the basic assumptions of this study as well. Gorrie also highlights the importance of the relationship between empress Julia Domna’s building patronage and her role in the Severan Ludi Saeculares. Moreover, the studies of Gorrie are also valuable in the sense that they deal with the Severan ludi for their own worth, that is, not only as part of the tradition created by Augustus.84 Obviously, research on the Augustan Secular Games is of importance to my research as well, since after all it was apparently Augustus who, ‘created’ (partly at least) the imperial tradition of the Ludi Saeculares.85 A very detailed study on the Augustan games is provided by Bärbel Schnegg-Köhler (2002) with her Die augusteischen Säkularspiele. In her study, Schnegg-Köhler, to mention just a few subjects, discusses the inscription, topography, the priestly group of quindecimviri sacris faciundis and the relationship of the Augustan games to earlier traditions. However, most of the modern research on the Augustan Ludi Saeculares seems to concentrate on the role of the games as part of bigger questions, especially those related to the so-called Augustan cultural programme. Paul Zanker (1988: 167–172), for example, perceives the games as the culmination of the Augustan building programme that symbolised the ideology of a new Golden Age. Karl Galinsky considers them as a manifestation of the traditional and conservative values that Augustus wished to impart through his policy. As he writes about the Secular Games (1996: 100), they: should not be taken out of the context into which they were carefully integrated. They did not celebrate the advent of millennial, passive bliss but took place only after one of the cornerstones of the Augustan program, the legislation on marriage and morals, had been passed in 18 bce. My view on the Severan games is identical: they should not be taken out of their context either, but should be evaluated against the general political situation of the early third century ce. The Severan period The basic starting point for any research dealing with the reign of Septimius Severus is the biography of the emperor, written by Anthony Birley (1999).

Introduction  17 As valuable as it is as an introduction to the reign of Severus, its main observation that Septimius Severus was a very ‘African’ emperor is somewhat problematic.86 According to T.D. Barnes (1967: 94–95), for example, the proportions of modern research characterising Septimius Severus as Punic, or claiming that there was a certain Punic inspiration behind his policy, are problematic. Both gentes from which his family came, the Fulvii and the Septimii of his home town Lepcis Magna, were not of Punic origin but of Italian origin.87 The interest Severus expressed in the cult of Serapis, a god who had a magnificent temple in Alexandria and which Severus visited, has also sometimes been considered as proof of the emperor’s Africanness. This is likewise disputed. Interest in Serapis was also expressed by some of the earlier emperors – Vespasian, for example, who was hardly an African.88 Moreover, a famous family portrait depicting Septimius Severus, empress Julia Domna and the two princes, Caracalla and Geta, does represent Septimius Severus as much darker-skinned than the rest of his family. This is, however, not necessarily proof for his Africanness. A plausible explanation could be that, as it was quite common to paint men as much darker-skinned than women in Roman art, the difference in skin colour was more related to gender than ethnicity.89 Besides, none of the main literary sources describe Septimius Severus as a particularly ‘African’ emperor. When Cassius Dio describes Severus, he does not mention his African origins at all. Herodian is silent on the subject too. The Historia Augusta describes Severus as native of Africa, but emphasises his Roman roots by reporting that his ancestors were Roman knights before Roman citizenship became universal.90 A Byzantine chronicler Ioannes Malalas, writing in the sixth century, called Severus dark-skinned, but he also mentions that the emperor had a long nose, which does not seem to be true according to ­remaining marble busts of Severus.91 It should be noted, however, that the question of Septimius Severus’ Africanness is not a completely forgotten subject in recent research either. In his quite recent study, Achim Lichtenberger (2011) deals with the subject very thoroughly and with an extremely wide range of evidence. While he seems to remain cautious over Septimius Severus’ African identity, he does nevertheless conclude that Hercules and Liber Pater, two gods of major importance to Severus and his family, had not completely lost their Punic roots by the early third century. Lichtenberger also notes the existence of some African tendencies in other areas as well (especially in Severan coinage). While I find these claims plausible, I do not consider them as sufficient to regard Severus as an African emperor. Regarding other research published about the Severan period, David Potter’s Roman Empire at Bay ad 180–395 (2004) is an excellent general introduction to the age. Potter sees the emperor’s changing role as one of the most important features which eventually changed the whole Roman Empire and claims that the process started precisely during the late second/early third century. According to Potter, Severus’ changes of Marcus Aurelius’ policy, which was to find balance between the different powerful groups of the empire,

18 Introduction demonstrated ‘deliberate insecurity’ on his behalf. The emperor could occasionally delegate power to officials he knew he could trust, but nevertheless made it clear that he could easily remove and even destroy servants who proved to be untrustworthy. This is considered by Potter as s new idea of imperial rule which replaced the one of Marcus Aurelius and of other Antonines. Potter’s view is also my starting point.92 Women of the Severan period played important roles in many aspects: religion, culture, as well as political life. Barbara Levick’s Julia Domna. Syrian Empress (2007), which covers the life of Empress Julia Domna, is a very valuable source for all studies concentrating on the Severan dynasty. Levick depicts the role Julia Domna from many points of view, especially emphasising her role as a mother in the imperial family, and the propaganda that was employed to promote her. She also addresses the empress’ role in the intellectual field of the early third century, especially in her so-called circle mentioned above. Severan Culture, an excellent collection of articles edited by Simon Swain, Stephen Harrison and Jas Elsner (2007), covers a wide area of Roman culture in the Severan period, but in terms of religion and religious rituals, the book concentrates mainly on Christianity and the philosophy of the Severan era. This is, to some extent, understandable. The first truly remarkable Christian writers can be traced to the early third century (especially Tertullian), and philosophy has always been considered as an important subject for the period, particularly because of the prominent position of the so-called Greek second sophistic movement in the early third century.93 In addition, Christianity might have perhaps been gaining more attention from the very top of the empire during this period; Eusebius, a writer from the late third/early fourth century ce, claims that Severus conducted a persecution against the Christian churches, and that because of the harsh policy some Christians even suspected that the coming of the Antichrist was near.94 As a result, traditional Roman religion in the early third century is perhaps a slightly overlooked subject compared to Christianity, mystery cults (like the cult of Mithras) or new ideas in philosophy. However, even if state religion did not overcome dramatic and significant changes during the early third century, it does not automatically mean that it had become irrelevant or meaningless. The lack of innovations in traditional Roman religion was a result of its very nature: the centrality of traditionalism in the sacrifices and other rituals. Despite this stability, it was a living religion which continuously adopted new ideas and significances among the people in whose society it was practiced. When the society changed, its religion changed with it.

Notes 1 Pannonia was a Roman province, framed north and east by the Danube, and located in an area now belonging to western Hungary, eastern Austria, northern Croatia, north-western Serbia, Slovenia, western Slovakia and northern Bosnia-Herzegovina. 2 For the civil war of 68–69, see Greenhalgh 1975.

Introduction  19 3 The best general introduction to the life, career and deeds of Septimius Severus is by Birley 1999. 4 The rituals are dealt with in the following chapters; for the programme in general, see Appendix Three. 5 Gradel 2002: 23–24. 6 The nature of Roman religion and the centrality of ritual, especially sacrifice, are well presented in Gradel 2002: 1–26. 7 Beard, North & Price 1998: 27–30; 54–67; 101–118; 125–140. 8 See Beard, North & Price 1998: 47–48. 9 For the structure of the Roman calendar, see Scheid 2003: 48–54. 10 Beard 2003: 273–277. 11 A similar view is given by David Cannadine (1983: 105) in his article on the rituals of the British monarchy. As Cannadine writes: ‘So, in order to rediscover the “meaning” of royal ritual . . . it is necessary to relate it to the specific social, political, economic and cultural milieu within which it was performed. With ceremonial, as with political theory, the very act of locating the occasion or the text in its appropriate context is not merely to provide the historical background, but actually to begin the process of interpretation’. 12 For the Augustan Ludi Saeculares as a purificationary ceremony, see Rantala 2011: 235–253. 13 Mercker 1990: 43. See also Flower 2006: 7. 14 Rasmussen 2008a: 259. As Emma Dench (2005) highlights, Roman identity was a combination of many ideas and influences, such as Greek and Italian. She emphasises that complexity was a central concept to Romanitas, and that in different periods of Roman history, different aspects of these ideas were highlighted. Dench’s arguments have been extremely important to my study, as they have helped create the framework in which I operate: it is precisely my aim to find out which ideas were highlighted in the Severan Ludi Saeculares, and how these celebrations promoted Roman cultural identity (as seen by the emperor, of course). 15 In academic discussion, Roman identity started to receive interest especially from the 1990s, and after that, a number of interesting studies can be found. Much of the research has concentrated on the question of citizenship (the prominent work still being Sherwin-White: 1973), but cultural identity has received some attention as well. In his Rome’s Cultural Revolution (2008), Andrew Wallace-Hadrill argues the manner in which Roman identity was dramatically changed during the reign of Augustus. From that period on, Roman identity was no longer expressed through actions such as voting, but rather through cultural symbols. These cultural markers became relevant for defining Roman identity because citizenship, the traditional way of understanding Romanness, began to spread through the Mediterranean world. Therefore, new ways to identify oneself as a Roman were needed; to separate the idea of Romanness from the concept of mere citizenship which was becoming a more common phenomenon than in the republican period. This approach is very similar to mine: changes bring a need to find new symbols that strengthen identity. 16 It should be stressed that for Anderson, the fact that national cultures are imagined does not mean that they are not real. It could be argued that even if national cultures are perhaps sometimes based on a historical or traditional myth, they are ­nevertheless a social reality. 17 Hobsbawm 1983: 4–6.

20 Introduction 18 Huskinson 2000: 10–11. According to Huskinson, it is sometimes claimed that some forms of identity, such as ethnicity and gender, are determined by non-negotiable factors, like biology. This ‘essentialist’ view, however, has been challenged by a more relative view. In relation to Roman history and culture, it seems that, for example, gender was a concept that was constructed by one’s situation or behaviour, not only by biology. It should also be remembered that due to the lack of evidence, Roman identity can be properly studied from the viewpoint of an emperor and the literate elite mainly. However, since the emperor was the single most important symbol uniting the culturally heterogeneous empire, the meanings and values that were propagated from the very top of society were probably at least a very important, if not the only way, for people to identify themselves as Romans. 19 Rasmussen 2008a: 263. 20 Rasmussen 2008b: 38–41. 21 Huskinson 2000: 18. The importance of power in Roman identity is evident in a number of ways. For example, Craig A.Williams (2010) highlights the major importance of gender roles. As he explains, a true Roman knew the concepts of virtus and imperium. The first one pointed to moral virtues – for Roman men, for example, this meant avoiding overtly feminine ideas, such as excessive softness. Moreover, for a good Roman, self-control was an essential quality. Imperium, on the other hand, signified a man’s dominant position; a proper Roman needed to control women, as well as foreign peoples. 22 For Severus’ stays in Rome before ce 204, see Birley 1999: 169. 23 One definition of legitimacy is that it is multi-dimensional. It is a concept containing three distinct levels: power, rules and consent. Power should conform to established rules; the rules should be justifiable by reference to beliefs shared by both those who rule and those being ruled and, finally, there should be evidence of consent by the subordinate to the particular power relation. Even if this definition has its roots in modern social sciences, I find it a useful tool. As David Beetham (1991) mentions, this approach views legitimation as related to power relations and the different ways those relations are organised. Power relations are central to this study. See Beetham 1991: 5, 15– 16. 24 Sorensen 2008: 21. 25 Gorrie 2002: 461–481; Gorrie 2004: 466–467. 26 Recorded in CIL 6 32326–32335, Pighi 1965: 140–175 and Appendix One. 27 A few fragments remain from the inscription of the Claudian Ludi Saeculares, but nothing else from any other occasions. However, it is very likely that at least Domitian followed the Augustan example of erecting an inscription on the Campus Martius. He apparently followed the Augustan model extremely closely in all possible ways, as is suggested by numismatic evidence celebrating the games of ce 88. 28 The field was, according to the legend, once owned by the last king of Rome, Tarquinius Superbus. After his expulsion, it became property of the state. See, for example, Liv. 2.5; Plut. Publ. 8. Dionysios of Halicarnassus’ version (5.13) is slightly different. 29 Strabo 5.3.8. 30 SHA Alex. 26.7 describes how Alexander Severus began constructing the Basilica Alexandriana, a building ‘one hundred feet broad and one thousand long and so constructed that its weight rested wholly on columns’ (passage translated by D. Magie). For the chronology of the development of the Campus Martius in Roman history, see Jacobs II & Conlin 2014: 177–180.

Introduction  21 31 Koster 2003: 216–217. 32 See also Assmann 2006: 8–9. Assmann goes further than Halbwachs; according to Assmann, Halbwachs did not want to go as far as analysing the symbolic and cultural frameworks, but would rather stay in ‘living memory’ instead of tradition. Assmann, however, has underlined the significance of tradition for cultural memory. 33 Meyer 2011: 191–205. 34 Fittschen 2010, 221. 35 Mustakallio 1994: 12–13. 36 Larsson Lovén 2011: 128–129. 37 Flower 2006: 6–7. 38 For damnatio memoriae, see Pekáry 1985: 134–142 (p. 138 for the case of Geta). 39 Flower 2006: 6–7. 40 Miles 2000: 41, 50. 41 Bodel 2001: 23–27; Miles 2000: 50–51. 42 For the career of Dio, see Millar 1964: 1–27; Birley 1999: 203–204. 43 Birley 1999: 203–204. 44 Millar 1964: 118, 171. 45 Julia Domna as a philosopher and her circle are mentioned in Philostr. V S 622 and VA 1.3. 46 Moscovich 2004: 356–368. 47 Rubin 1980: 52–74. 48 Gowing 1992: 28. For the political views of Cassius Dio, see for example Schettino 2008; for Dio’s attitude towards Severus in general, see Rantala 2016 (forthcoming). 49 Sidebottom 2007: 76–77. 50 Sidebottom 2007: 81; Gabriele 1998: 2908–2910. 51 Recently in Kemezis 2014: 266–270. 52 Apparently, the author of the Historia Augusta used many sources. The biography itself mentions Marius Maximus (probably a contemporary historian to Septimius Severus), the memoirs of the emperor, Herodian and two almost completely unknown authors Aelius Maurus, and Aelius Junius Cordus. Cassius Dio is not mentioned in the Historia Augusta as a source for Severus, but it is very likely that he was used. See Platnauer 1970: 17–18. 53 Barnes 1978: 32–78. 54 For the question of the Historia Augusta as a source for Alexander Severus see, for example, Bertrand-Dagenbach 1990. For all the literary sources of the period, see Soraci 1974: 9–50. 55 Cass. Dio 77[76].1. 56 Herod. 3.8.10. 57 Birley 1999: 160. 58 Birley 1999: 160, 204. 59 Whitmarsh 2007: 32. 60 Whitmarsh 2007: 36. 61 Philostr. V A 1.3.1. 62 Whitmarsh 2007: 33. For problems regarding the idea of Julia Domna’s circle see Levick 2007: 111–116. Some scholars, however, do accept the importance of the circle – see for example Hemeljrik 1999: 122–126. 63 Whitmarsh 2007: 49–51. 64 The Severan period as a whole is so rich in legal documents that it might even be called the ‘golden age of the jurists’. For details, see Coriat 1997: 23–67.

22 Introduction 65 Rowan 2012: 19. 66 For discussion, see Ando 2000: 206–228. 67 See for example Levick 1999: 41–60. 68 Rowan 2012: 20. 69 Horster 2007: 293–294; Rowan 2012: 20–21. 70 Horster 2007: 295. 71 Rowan 2012: 24. 72 For a quantitative analysis, see Rowan 2012: 24–31. For a criticism of the quantitative method, see Howgego 1992 and Buttrey 1993. 73 Horster 2007: 292–293. 74 Suet. Aug. 94.12; Ner. 25.2–3. 75 Cass. Dio 47.25.3 (transl. E. Cary). Of course, Brutus was not an emperor, but he was still a figure who held great power during the last age of Roman republic. 76 Euseb. Vit. Const. 15.1. 77 Rowan 2012: 20–23. 78 A similar view can be found, for example, in Bruun 1999: 31. 79 Crawford 1975: 562–568. 80 See for example Lusnia 1995: 120. 81 Miles 2000: 43–44. 82 For example, Alison Cooley (2007: 391–393) substantially addresses the Severan ludi in her excellent article, in which she uses them, and their similarity to the Augustan ones, mainly as proof of how ‘Augustan’ Emperor Septimius Severus was. I completely agree with her claim that Severus wanted to act as the new Augustus, and that organising the games was one way for Severus to connect himself with the Augustan tradition as such, but my aim here is to study Severan games as more of an independent phenomenon. 83 Beard 2007: 265. 84 Gorrie 2004: 61–72. Other (short) accounts on the Severan lSaeculares are provided, for example, in Ando 2012: 40–44; Birley 1999: 156–160; Cooley 2007: 391–393; Scheid 1998: 13–35. 85 See Beard, North & Price 1998: 202–203. 86 Birley 1999: 1–46 for the ‘African’ background of Severus. 87 It should also be noted that Severus’ birthplace, Lepcis Magna, even with its Punic origins, had culturally been Roman long before Severus; there seem to be no lasting traces of Punic practices and culture in the city in the first century. In addition, Severus received a traditional Hellenistic education, studying both in Rome and Athens and, according to Dio (77.16.1), was eager for education. 88 Serapis as evidence Septimius Severus’ African identity: McCann 1968: 53. This claim is disputed, for example, in Takács 1995, 115–116. 89 This can be observed, for example, in Roman wall paintings, discussed in Newby 2002: 137–140. 90 SHA Sev. 1.1–3. The story in the Historia Augusta about Severus’ sister who could not speak Latin is probably just a joke; see Isaac 2004: 333. 91 Mal. Chron. 12.18 (291). However, the heirs of Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Elagabalus and Alexander Severus, can be considered more clearly as Syrian emperors.They represented the noble Syrian family of Emesa, which was connected to the dynasty by Empress Julia Domna, Septimius Severus’ wife. 92 Potter 2004: 578–579.

Introduction  23 93 The concept of the second sophistic was used by Philostratus in the early third century. He referred to the intellectuals acting after the ‘first’ sophists of Greece with this term (from the late the fifth century ce onwards). Otherwise, he is not very precise in his separation between the ‘first’ and ‘second’ group of philosophers. Anderson 1993: 13–21. 94 Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 6.1.; 6.7–8. The claim of serious persecution during this period is very questionable, and even if there probably were some incidents during the early phase of the Severan dynasty (during the reigns of Septimius Severus and Caracalla), the latter part was apparently very peaceful for the Christians. Dal Covolo 1999: 189–192.The number of Christians was still relatively low during the Severan reign – perhaps one in twenty – although locally, in some provinces, they consisted of ten percent of the population. Edwards 2007: 402–403.

Bibliography Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism Revised Edition). London: Verso. Anderson, G. (1993). The Second Sophistic: A Cultural Phenomenon in the Roman Empire. London: Routledge. Ando, C. (2000). Imperial Ideology and Provincial Loyalty in the Roman Empire. Oakland: University of California Press. Ando, C. (2012). Imperial Rome ad 193 to 284. A Critical Century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Assmann, J. (2006). Religion and Cultural Memory. Ten Studies. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Barnes, T. (1967). The Family and Career of Septimius Severus. Historia, 16, pp. 87–107. Barnes, T. (1978). The Sources of Historia Augusta. Bruxelles: Collection Latomus. Birley, A. (1999). Septimius Severus. The African Emperor. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Beard, M. (2003). A Complex of Times: No More Sheep on Romulus’ Birthday. In: C. Ando, ed., Roman Religion, 1st ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 273–288. Beard, M. (2007). The Roman Triumph. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S. (1998). Religions of Rome. Vol. 1: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Beetham, D. (1991). The Legitimation of Power. London: Macmillan. Bertrand-Dagenbach, C. (1990). Alexander Sévère et l’Histoire Auguste. Bruxelles: Collection Latomus. Bodel, J. (2001). Epigraphy and the Ancient Historians. In: J. Bodel, ed., Epigraphic Evidence. Ancient History from Inscriptions, 1st ed. London: Routledge, pp. 1–57. Bruun, P. (1999). Coins and the Roman Imperial Government. In: G. Paul, ed., Roman Coins and Public Life under the Empire. E. Togo Salmon Papers 2, 1st ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 19–40. Buttrey, T. (1993). Calculating Ancient Coin Production: Facts and Fantasies. NC, 153, pp. 338–345. Cannadine, D. (1983). The Context, Performance and Meaning of the Ritual: The British Monarchy and the ‘Invention of Tradition’, c. 1820–1077. In: E. Hobsbawm, and T. Ranger, eds., The Invention of Tradition, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 101–165.

24 Introduction Cooley, A. (2007). Septimius Severus: The Augustan Emperor. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 385–400. Coriat, J.-P. (1997). Le prince législateur. La technique législative des Sévères et les méthodes de création du droit impérial à la fin du principat. Paris: De Boccard. Crawford, M. (1975). Finance, Coinage and Money from the Severans to Constantine. ANRW, II.2, pp. 560–593. Dal Covolo, E. (1999). I Severi e il cristianesimo. In: E. Dal Covolo and G. Rinaldi, eds., Gli Imperatori Severi, 1st ed. Roma: LAS, pp. 189–192. Dench, E. (2005). Romulus’ Asylum. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Edwards, M. (2007), Severan Christianity. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 401–419. Fittschen, K. (2010), The Portraits of Roman Emperors and Their Families: Controversial Positions and Unsolved Problems. In: B. Ewald and C. Noreña, eds., The Emperor and Rome. Space, Representation, and Ritual, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 221–246. Flower, H. (2006). The Art of Forgetting. Disgrace & Oblivion in Roman Political Culture. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. Gabriele, M. (1988). Erodiano e la Crisi dell’Impero. ANRW, II.34.4, pp. 2837–2927. Galinsky, K. (1996). Augustan Culture: an Interpretive Introduction. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Gorrie, C. (2002). The Severan Building Programme and the Secular Games. Athenaeum, 90.2, pp. 461–481. Gorrie, C. (2004). Julia Domna’s Building Patronage, Imperial Family Roles and the Severan Revival of Moral Legislation. Historia, 53, pp. 61–72. Gowing, A. (1992). The Triumviral Narratives of Appian and Cassius Dio. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Gowing, A. (2005). Empire and Memory: The Representation of the Roman Republic in Imperial Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gradel, I. (2002), Emperor Worship and Roman Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Greenhalgh, P. (1975). The Year of the Four Emperors. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Halbwachs, M. (1992). On Collective Memory. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Hemeljrik, E. (1999). Matrona Docta. Educated Women in the Roman Elite from Cornelia to Julia Domna. London: Routledge. Hobsbawm, E. (1983). Introduction: Inventing Traditions. In: E. Hobsbawm, and T. Ranger, eds., The Invention of Tradition, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–14. Horster, M. (2007). The Emperor’s Family on Coins (Third Century). In: O. Hekster, G. De Kleijn and D. Slootjes, eds., Crisis and the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 291–309. Howgego, C (1992). The Supply and Use of Money in the Roman World 200 B.C. to A.D. 300. JRS, 82, pp. 1–31. Huskinson, J. (2000). Looking for Identity and Power. In: J. Huskinson, ed., Experiencing Rome. Culture, Identity and Power in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. London: Routledge, pp. 3–27. Isaac, B. (2004). The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Introduction  25 Jacobs II, P. and Conlin, Di. (2014). Campus Martius. The Field of Mars in the Life of Ancient Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kemeziz, A. (2014). Greek Narratives of the Roman Empire under the Severans. Cassius Dio, Philostratus and Herodian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Koster, J. (2003). Ritual Performances and the Politics of Identity. On the Functions and Uses of Ritual. JHP, 4.2, pp. 211–248. Larsson Lovén, L. (2011). The Importance of Being Commemorated: Memory, Gender and Social Class on Roman Funerary Monuments. In: H. Whittaker, ed., In Memoriam. Commemoration, Communal Memory and Gender Values in the Ancient Greco-Roman World, 1st ed. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp.126–143. Levick, B. (1999). Messages on the Roman Coinage: Types and Inscriptions. In: G. Paul, ed., Roman Coins and Public Life under the Empire, 1st ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 41–60. Levick, B. (2007). Julia Domna. Syrian Empress. New York: Routledge. Lichtenberger, A. (2011). Severus Pius Augustus. Studien zur sakralen Repräsentation und Rezeption der Herrschaft des Septimius Severus und Seiner Familie (193–211 n. Chr.) Leiden: Brill. Lusnia, S. (1995). Julia Domna’s Coinage and Severan Dynastic Propaganda. Latomus 54, pp. 119–140. McCann, A. (1968). The Portraits of Septimius Severus. Rome: American Academy in Rome. Mercker, K. (1990). Welcome to the Jungle. In: J. Rutherford (ed.), Identity. Community, Culture, Difference, 1st ed. London: Lawrence and Wishart, pp. 43–71. Meyer, E. (2011). Epigraphy and Communication. In: M. Peachin, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Social Relations in the Roman World, 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 191–226. Miles, R. (2000). Communicating Culture, Identity and Power. In: J. Huskinson, ed., Experiencing Rome. Culture, Identity and Power in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. London: Routledge, pp. 29–62. Millar, F. (1964). A Study of Cassius Dio. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Moscovich, M. (2004). Cassius Dio’s Palace Sources for the Reign of Septimius Severus. Historia, 53, pp. 356–368. Mustakallio, K. (1994). Death and Disgrace. Capital Penalties with Post Mortem Sanctions in Early Roman Historiography. Helsinki: Academia Scientarum Fennica. Newby, Z. (2002). Reading Programs in Graeco-Roman Art: Reflections on the Spada Reliefs. In: D. Fredrick, ed., The Roman Gaze: Vision, Power, and the Body, 1st ed. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 110–140. Pekáry, T. (1985). Das römische Kaiserbildnis in Staat, Kult und Gesellshaft: Dargestellt Anhand der Schriftquellen. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag. Pighi, G. (1965). De ludi saecularibus populi Romani Quiritum libri sex. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Verlag P. Schippers N.V. Platnauer, M. (1970). The Life and Reign of the Emperor Lucius Septimius Severus. Westport: Greenwood Press Publishers. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge. Rantala, J. (2011). No Place for the Dead: Ludi Saeculares of 17 bc and the Purificatory Cults of May as Part of the Roman Ritual Year. In: C. Krötzl and K. Mustakallio, eds., On Old Age. Approaching Death in Antiquity and the Middle Ages, 1st ed. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, pp. 235–251.

26 Introduction Rantala, J. (2016). Dio the Dissident. The Portrait of Severus in Roman History. In: C. Lange and J. Madsen, eds., Cassius Dio. Greek Intellectual and Roman Politician, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill (forthcoming). Rasmussen, S. (2008). Priests, Politics and Problems in Identity Construction in Ancient Rome. In: A. Rasmussen, and S. Rasmussen, eds., Religion and Society. Rituals, Resources and Identity in the Ancient Graeco-Roman World, 1st ed. Rome: Edizioni Quasar, pp. 259–265 (Rasmussen 2008a). Rasmussen, S. (2008). Ritual and Identity: a Sociological Perspective on the Expiation of Public Portents in Ancient Rome. In: A. Rasmussen and S. Rasmussen, eds., Religion and Society. Rituals, Resources and Identity in the Ancient Graeco-Roman World, 1st ed. Rome: Edizioni Quasar, pp. 37–42 (Rasmussen 2008b). Rowan, C. (2012). Under Divine Auspices. Divine Ideology and the Visualisation of Imperial Power in the Severan Period. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rubin, Z. (1980). Civil-War Propaganda and Historiography. Bruxelles: Collection Latomus. Scheid, J. (1998). Déchiffres de monnaies. Réflexions sur la representation figurée des Jeux séculaires. In: C. Auvray-Assayas, ed., Images romanies, 1st ed. Paris: Éditions Rue d’Ulm, pp. 13–35. Scheid, J. (2003). An Introduction to Roman Religion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Schettino, M. (2008). Storiografia, politica e utopia in Cassio Dione. In: C. Carsana and M. Schettino, eds., Utopia e utopie nel pensiero storico antico. 1st ed. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider, pp. 79–88. Schnegg-Köhler, B. (2002). Die augusteischen Säkularspiele. Archiv für Religionsgeschichte, 4. Band. K.G. Saur Verlag: Leipzig. Sherwin-White, A. (1973). The Roman Citizenship. 2nd ed. London: Clarendon Press. Sidebottom, H. (2007). Severan Historiography. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison, and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 52–82. Soraci, R. (1974). L’opera legislative e amministrativa dell’ imperatore Severo Alessandro. Catania: Casa Editrice Muglia. Sorensen, J. (2008). A Theory of Ritual. In: A. Rasmussen and S. Rasmussen, eds., Religion and Society. Rituals, Resources and Identity in the Ancient Graeco-Roman World 1st ed. Rome: Edizioni Quasar, pp. 13–21. Takács, S. (1995). Isis and Serapis in the Roman World. Leiden: Brill. Wallace-Hadrill, A. (2008). Rome’s Cultural Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Whitmarsh, T. (2007). Prose Literature and the Severan Dynasty. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 29–51. Williams, C. (2010). Roman Homosexuality. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Woolf, G. (1994). Becoming Roman, staying Greek: Culture, Identity and the Civilizing Process in the Roman East. PCPS, 40, pp. 116–143. Zanker, P. (1988). The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

2 From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty

To understand Septimius Severus, we should start with the Antonines. The actions and ideas emerging during the Severan reign were constantly evaluated against the age of the previous dynasty. This is demonstrated both by the emperor’s policy and by the writings of contemporary historians, especially Cassius Dio, who quite straightforwardly considered his own period as an age of iron and rust compared to the golden period of Marcus Aurelius.1 The Antonine age has, as was mentioned above, often been considered as the most successful period of Roman history. Perhaps the most famous expression of contemporary writers sharing this opinion is the so-called Roman Oration of the Greek sophist Aristides: As on holiday the whole civilized world lays down the arms which were its ancient burden and has turned to adornment and all glad thoughts – with power to realize them . . . The whole earth has been beautified like a garden . . . Thus it is right to pity only those outside your hegemony – if indeed there are any – because they lose such blessings. It is you again who have best proved the general assertion that Earth is mother of all and common fatherland. Now indeed it is possible for Hellene or non-Hellene, with or without his property, to travel wherever he will, easily, just as if passing from fatherland to fatherland. Neither Cilician Gates nor sandy approaches to Egypt through Arab country, nor inaccessible mountains, nor immense stretches of river, nor inhospitable tribes of barbarians, cause terror, but for security it suffices to be a Roman citizen, or rather to be one of those united under your hegemony. Homer said, ‘Earth common to all’, and you have made it come true. You have measured and recorded the land of entire civilized world. You have spanned the rivers with all kinds of bridges and hewn highways through the mountains and filled the barren stretches with postering stations. You have accustomed all areas to a settled and orderly way of life.2 Even if Aristides can hardly be considered as a first-class political thinker, there is at least some basis behind his praise. The Antonine period can mostly be considered as a prosperous time in which the pax romana prevailed and

28  From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty many capable emperors ruled in succession.3 This is not to say, of course, that there were no problems: the rise of general prosperity did not really change the fact that there was still a vast amount of very poor people living in the empire. Urbanisation that generally enriched the empire did not have a very favourable effect on the lower, illiterate classes of the cities, and in the countryside the poor lived a life where hunger was often present and starvation a true danger. In fact, it has been estimated that during the Antonine era, the gulf between the rich and the poor became wider, even if the empire became wealthier as a whole. In addition, despite the fact that there were no major wars or other military struggles before the reign of Marcus Aurelius and his wars against Germanic tribes, occasional local disturbances did exist, especially because of brigandage.4 However, on a wider scale it does appear that the empire was more successful than it had ever been before. The western part of the empire enjoyed a great economic success and its administration was very stable. The amount of cultivated land increased and cities expanded. Intellectual life blossomed as well, especially in the province of Africa. In addition, Roman citizenship spread quite fast among the local elites of the western empire. The situation in the eastern empire had many similarities, but also some differences. Roman citizenship was not as common in the east as it was in the west; it appears that the peaceful era of the Antonines did not affect the eastern nobilities in the same way as it did their western counterparts. However, there are some differences in the economic progress between the western and eastern parts of the empire as well. Like the west, the east did see a remarkable growth of economic success during the Antonine period. However, while the mid-second century ce can be considered as the economic ‘Golden Age’ for the west (during which that part of the empire reached a peak it never fully achieved again), the process of growing prosperity continued in the east even after this period. There are many reasons behind this phenomenon; these include, for example, a more developed urban life (encouraged by the emperors), commercial relations with the eastern empires, together with the general goodwill that emperors showed the eastern provinces.5 Perhaps the most important reason behind the success of the empire during the second century ce was, of course, that it was very lucky with its rulers. Nearly all of the Antonine rulers are known to have maintained a fairly good relationship with the senate which, in itself, increased the stability of the empire. Nerva (who ruled in ce 96–98) was on amicable terms with senators and managed to handle the period after the fall of Domitian (a hated tyrant from the senate’s view) very skilfully. His successor Trajan (ce 98–117) was a modest man of good will, who preferred simplicity over magnificent shows. He showed kindness to the senators and other administrators below him, and his correspondence with Pliny depicts him as a ruler with common sense and respect towards law and justice. Trained mainly as a soldier and an administrator, he was able to make good political decisions and gained popularity among both the people and the Roman senate.6

From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty  29 Some problems, however, did occur during the reign of Hadrian (ce 117–138). It appears that the goal of the emperor was to actively develop the empire’s political system ‘from above’. He no longer sought to act in a reactive manner as had been the case with his predecessors. Accordingly, it seems that the emperor tried to personally intervene in politics and administration as much as possible. He showed interest in the codification of the legal system and questions concerning the law. It appears that he also appointed more people from the class of the equites to act as imperial administrators and divided Italy into four judiciary districts; each of these areas was entrusted to consularis. The latter act, especially, proved to be unpopular among the senators, and the last years of Hadrian’s reign saw the relationship between the emperor and the senate become so bad that some senators were accused of treason and sentenced to death.7 When Hadrian died in ce 117, he was succeeded by Antoninus Pius. The senate was still hostile towards the deceased emperor. As a result, a difficult political situation arose when the new ruler asked the senate for the deification of his predecessor and for the ratification of his official actions. The senators were very reluctant to do this, and it took a great deal of persuasion on the part of the new emperor for these requests to be accepted. However, after this uneasy start, the relationship between Antoninus Pius and the senate improved considerably. This was at least partly because the emperor abolished the four circuit judges in Italy, the system that was so vehemently disliked by senators. The latter felt it limited their control over the region. Moreover, it is probable that even after Hadrian’s deification, he only became a kind of a second-class god with limited public worship and a cult with limited celebration.8 One concrete sign of Antoninus Pius’ conciliatory attitude towards the senate was the fact that the genius of the senate was honoured by a series of coins during his reign.9 These examples usually depict the genius of the senate standing and holding branch and spectre, though there are some variations as well.10 Generally speaking, the coinage of Antoninus Pius showed a great deal of conservatism, which might have pleased the senators as well. The mythical history and great stories of Rome and Italy were common subjects, and they were struck on a year-by-year basis for nine years before his celebrations of Rome’s nine-hundredth birthday in ce 147 (or 148), which are often considered as the Ludi Saeculares.11 That particular year saw a great number of traditional subjects. Overall, Antoninus Pius’ imperial coinage indicates that a lot of attention was given to anniversaries of temple foundations in the capital.12 It could be seen as a friendly gesture towards the senators, who were probably conservative in their attitude and defended traditional values, both in politics and religion. Moreover, we do know one interesting example of senate’s new position which hints to the fact that it was considered as an object of worship. A bronze statue depicting genius senatus was erected in a temple dedicated to the imperial cult in Emerita, province of Lusitania (modern Portugal and a small part of western Spain). This statue dates most likely from the mid-second century ce. The statue itself depicts a male figure wearing a toga and, apparently, distinctive senatorial sandals; the male figure symbolised age and wisdom, which are

30  From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty features often connected with the senate. It is very interesting that a statue of this kind was erected in the west during the Antonine period. The eastern part of the empire was a different case: from this part we have a lot of evidence about devotion to the senate that, in practice, took religious forms. The genius of senate was depicted in eastern coins for hundreds of years, usually with some local deity, the emperor, or goddess Dea Roma. We also know priests of the senate from Cyprus, Athens and various places in Asia Minor, although all the details of the cult are otherwise unknown. However, finding a cult statue of a senate in the western part of the empire is remarkable indeed, and underlines the growing importance, perhaps not in political but in ideological level, of the senate during the Antonine period.13 The follower of Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, roughly continued the policy of his predecessor with regard to the Roman senate, improving its prestige in many ways. Noteworthy is his request to the senate to vote for more funds to be used in warfare; he also reduced the amount of compulsory investment in Italian land that was demanded from senators, which helped individual senators financially. Furthermore, Marcus also struck medallions celebrating the genius of the ­senate, following in the footsteps of the previous emperor.14 All in all, the relationship between Antonine rulers before the rule of Commodus (Hadrian being, perhaps, an exception) can be described as one of respect. Even if it can be claimed that this relationship already had its roots in the first century, it was perfected during the Antonine period. Most of the emperors who ruled during the first two centuries ce tried to strengthen the authority and the nominal powers of the senate. Co-operation between the ruler and the senate actually brought to the control of senators many activities that previously belonged to the people voting in the Forum. The senate accepted the primary position of the emperor: in practice the emperor respected the senate’s position as such by asking its opinion and the senate acknowledged this goodwill on behalf of the emperor by agreeing with the ruler. This respect between the emperor and the senate resulted in great prestige for the senators. Even if its actual power was now more limited, compared to the days of the Roman republic, the senate’s empire-wide prominence during the early imperial period was much greater than it had been previously, when it had true power, and it is no wonder that it was the era of early emperors, not that of republican consuls, that witnessed the senate becoming the object of a cult.15 This sums up the imperial ideology of the second century ce: the power of the emperor was more or less absolute, but the senate was still a prestigious, powerful institution which enjoyed the respect of the emperor and paid back this respect by loyalty and obedience. The reign of Commodus, however, brought hard times for the senators. The new emperor quite soon dismissed the advisers his father had left him (perhaps out of laziness) and it seems that he did not show much respect to the senators who expected it. As his relationship with the nobility became worse, a failed conspiracy against him eventually occurred, followed by a bloody retaliation

From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty  31 on his behalf. Eventually Commodus’ behaviour became so erratic that he was murdered in ce 192. After the short reign of Pertinax, things went from bad to worse and civil war broke out.16 From this situation Septimius Severus, the victor of the war and new ruler of the empire, had to ponder his relationship with the senate and, at the same time, decide what kind of imperial ideology he would build his rule and dynasty on. Before his rise to power, Severus, a general from North Africa (born in Lepcis Magna in ce 145), acted as a governor of the Pannonia. Supported by the Rhine and Danube legions, he marched on Rome in ce 193. Before that he had formed an alliance with Clodius Albinus, commander of Roman troops in Britain. When Severus was near the capital, most of the troops there decided to support him – most likely contacted by Severus before he entered the city – and eventually the senate named Severus emperor. Didius Julianus was murdered. After entering the city, Severus secured his own position by replacing the powerful praetorian guard with his own supporters. This was, however, followed by a civil war against Pescennius Niger, commander of the Roman troops in Syria. The war was over in ce 194, when the army of Severus won the last troops of Niger and the usurper was killed in Antioch (although the city of Byzantium, which remained loyal to Niger, was only captured in ce 196). After the victory, Severus made a brief campaign in the east, invading northern Mesopotamia with some success.17 Year 195 ce was a crucial one for the birth of the Severan dynasty. At that time, Severus’ son Caracalla was appointed to the rank of Caesar, making him the successor of his father. Another civil war broke out, as the appointment went against the agreement established between Severus and his former ally, Clodius Albinus (who was supposed to be the successor). Albinus declared himself emperor, but was not backed by enough legions; he was defeated and killed in Lugdunum (in Gaul) in ce 197. After his victory, Severus briefly returned to Rome where he had 64 senators arrested for being too sympathetic towards Albinus; it is claimed that 29 of them were executed. The last phase of the civil war was now over and Severus’ position much more secure.18 The internal struggles of the empire during the late second century were, for many Romans, a shocking experience. This is at least what the contemporary historians express in their writings. Apparently, the period right before Severus (Commodus’ reign) was already filled with problems.19 According to Cassius Dio, writing as a contemporary witness, events went terribly wrong at the end of the second century, as is recounted in his description of the period after Marcus Aurelius’ death (in ce 180): This matter must be our next topic; for our history now descends from kingdom of gold to one of iron and rust, as affairs did for the Romans of that day.20 These rather pessimistic lines indicate that, for Dio, something remarkable was taking place during his own lifetime. What is more, he does not comment

32  From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty about events becoming normalised after Commodus. On the contrary: civil war broke out, and Severus’ taking of power appeared, to Dio, as a break between the past and present. For him, the age of Severus belonged to the beginning of a new (worse) era. The same kind of sentiments can be found in the texts of another early thirdcentury writer, Herodian. His choice of subject indicates that he perceives the period following Marcus Aurelius’ death as special. In fact, as his work on the reign of Aurelius is remarkably short, this might be interpreted as a hint that this ‘good’ emperor was included in his account for just one purpose: to show the reader the difference between the troubled times of Commodus (and the Severans) and the good days of Marcus Aurelius. Herodian writes: A comparative survey of the period of about two hundred years from Augustus – the point at which the regime became a monarchy – to the age of Marcus would reveal no such similar succession of reigns, variety of fortunes in both civil and foreign wars, disturbances among the provincial populations and destruction of the cities in both Roman territory and many barbarian countries. There have never been such earthquakes and plagues, or tyrants and emperors with such unexpected careers, which were rarely if ever recorded before.21 Pessimism is clearly present in his account: wars, destruction, disturbances and tyrants. While he might have intended to entertain his readers with descriptions of these troubles, it is difficult to believe that he, and his audience, did not understand their own period as an age of change, even crisis, given the accuracy of his words. In other words, it seems unlikely that his text was not based on events that he and his audience had noticed; after all, he was writing a history of his own time. Even with all its possible exaggeration, Herodian’s history itself strengthens the idea of the ‘age of rust’ that, for Dio, began in 180.22 Pessimism towards one’s own time was, as such, quite a common phenomenon in Roman literature, even before the Severan era. However, there is cause to suggest that the early third century was seen in an especially gloomy light by contemporary writers. First of all, even if several authors of the early imperial period complained about the declining culture, politics and ethics, the nature of the complaints seems to be somewhat different from those expressed in early third-century literature, which lamented decay in all sections of public life. Another point to be remembered is that the second century, up until the reign of Commodus, was a period in which Roman self-reliance was probably higher than it had ever been. Troubles only began at the end of that century, initially with military difficulties suffered by Marcus Aurelius, and followed by the troublesome reign of Commodus. Later, with the break out of civil war, which saw the rise to power of the Severan dynasty, a general pessimism probably spread into at least some parts of society.23 So, even if the Gibbonian views of the decline of the empire from this point onwards are somewhat over-simplified, it nevertheless seems that the members of the

From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty  33 upper class, at least, saw their own age as a critical period for Rome.24 Of course, whether these events can be characterised as a ‘crisis’ or not is a different question; the answer probably depends on what we mean by the word ‘crisis’. Today some scholars tend to argue that there was no real crisis during the early third century; however, the idea that a major change occurred back then has not been disputed.25 When Severus became emperor, he tried to secure his power by various means. Not only did he crush his opponents by military force, but he also wanted to create a public image of himself as a man who had brought peace and who had restored and renewed the empire after the hard times of civil struggles.26 One of the most noteworthy expressions of his propaganda was his grand building programme for the capital, the most remarkable one since the days of Augustus. The restored ancient buildings, as well as the completely new ones, were a concrete message about how the new emperor had brought prosperity to Rome.27 The importance of the building programme for Severus can be traced, for example, from numismatic evidence: his reign witnessed the greatest number of different buildings on coins (from Rome) since the days of Trajan, and only three rulers in the history of Roman empire exceeded him in this aspect: Augustus, Domitian and Trajan. Severus was also the last ruler to actively portray buildings in his coinage, as the number decreased rapidly right after his rule.28 Another way to highlight Severus’ power was, of course, public games. Probably the most remarkable of these occurred in ce 204, when the emperor celebrated the extremely rare ­religious festival, the Ludi Saeculares. In order to understand the importance of the Ludi Saeculares for Severus, one ought to first appreciate their uniqueness – after all, the games consisted of a ceremony that was only supposed to be celebrated once in about 100 years. The games date back to the republican period at least, as we evidence exists that they were celebrated in 249 bce and again in 146 bce.29 It seems that their purpose was to celebrate the passing of an era, or an ‘age’ (saeculum).30 However, it looks certain that when Augustus, after a break of about 130 years, organised the next celebrations in 17 bce, the festival had a completely new look compared to the republican games.31 The Augustan rituals began on the night of 31 May and lasted for three nights and days. The gods of the underworld, Dis and Proserpina, who had been the main deities of the secular games in the republican period, were replaced by a number of new gods and goddesses: Moirae (Fates), Eileithyia and Terra Mater. All of them were Greek deities and received a sacrifice according to the Greek rite32 in the nocturnal rites on the Campus Martius.33 Daytime rituals, on the other hand, included offerings to the traditional Roman gods Jupiter Optimus Maximus, Juno Regina, Apollo and Diana. These daytime celebrations took place mainly on the Capitoline hill, but on the last day, the ritual was performed on the Palatine hill. The festivals also included purificationary rites (sellisternium) performed by 110 married women and a hymn that was sung by 27 boys and girls (Carmen Saeculare). The games of the imperial period seem to follow the Augustan model quite closely,

34  From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty despite the fact the Augustan games and the Severan games in ce 204 are the only events for which substantial evidence remains: an inscription containing the programme of the festival, erected on the Campus Martius, survives from both festivals.34 The most important detail to understand about the nature of the games, however, is that from the time of Augustus onwards, the Ludi Saeculares were a religious ritual that celebrated the beginning of a so-called Golden Age. This concept was often connected to the decadent nature of one’s own time (or recent past) and the coming of a new, better era. This can be seen, for example, in the Roman literature of the Augustan period, which saw the ‘proper moral values of old’ as central to the Golden Age. The culmination of decadence for Augustan writers was, of course, the civil war they had experienced, and therefore the ideas of the new Golden Age were closely connected to this catastrophe. According to Horace, the two main reasons for the civil wars were the neglect of the gods and the adultery of married women. As Roman women behaved immorally, their sons were not properly educated. As a result, when they grew up, they become bad soldiers and bad citizens. The problem increased with every generation, and the only way to stop this evil process was to both return to the proper ways of worshipping the gods and to create a moral reform.35 These ideas became Augustus’ central policy when he established his rule after the civil war. Accordingly, the theme of the Augustan Ludi Saeculares was to celebrate the moral rebirth of Rome and thus the new Golden Age.36 In that sense, the Ludi Saeculares were the beginning of a new, better era, following the turmoil of the civil war. It is evident that Septimius Severus was in a very similar situation to Augustus, as he too had gained power by fighting other Romans. Moreover, memories of the Augustan civil wars appear to have still been alive in the early third century, at least among the upper class of the empire (no doubt because of the people’s experience of civil war). These memories were considered as warnings for what might happen if political turmoil arose again.37 In addition, it seems that both Augustus’ and Septimius Severus’ ludi were celebrated soon after a victory over the Parthians: Augustus had regained the military standards that were lost in Crassus’ catastrophic military operations of 53 bce (apparently Augustus did this by means of diplomacy rather than through conquests), and Severus had conducted relatively successful military operations in the east a few years before his ludi.38 It is thus quite easy to observe how important an occasion the Ludi Saeculares were for Septimius Severus. This rare ritual gave him the opportunity to present himself as a bringer of a Golden Age, as the civil wars had ended and a few peaceful years had already followed. Moreover, Severus had also conducted a successful campaign in Parthia. By doing this, he was able to identify himself with the first emperor of Rome, Augustus.39 Public festivals in general were occasions of high importance for Roman society, as they gave people an opportunity to have a direct contact with the emperor. In the case of the Ludi Saeculares, contact did probably not occur

From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty  35 during the actual sacrifices, but it may have during the shows organised after the nocturnal sacrifices, as they were likely more relaxed occasions (and possibly also more popular), during which interaction between the emperor and his subjects was possible. Indeed, the significance of public shows in Roman political life as phenomena that defined the relationship between rulers and subjects should not be underestimated. Cicero already mentioned that there were three places in which the people could express its wishes: public assemblies, elections and public games. It was also common throughout the imperial period for people to make requests to the emperor in public shows. Even if it was not necessary for the emperor to agree to these requests, he was nevertheless obliged to at least listen to the crowd. If the emperor turned down the wishes of the people, he had to have an explanation for his decision. In fact, it is a familiar topos in Roman literature that bad emperors, such as Caligula and Domitian, were described as not caring about the opinion of the people. Good emperors always listened and were always present. The necessity of their presence at public shows was based on three main factors. First, it was essential for constructing imperial power – the magnificent celebrations strengthened the power of the emperor, and his presence was thus appropriate. Second, the shows were an occasion for the people to protest in the presence of the emperor; on many occasions the shows eased public pressure during anxious times. Third, when the emperor was seen among the people, he acted as a citizen among citizens – fulfilling his role as the first citizen.40 Anxiety and public pressure were definitely present among the audience, at least if we believe Tertullian, a writer of the Severan era: Since, then, all passionate excitement is forbidden us, we are debarred from every kind of spectacle, and especially from the circus, where such excitement presides as in its proper element. See the people coming to it already under strong emotion, already tumultuous, already passion-blind, already agitated about their bets. The praetor is too slow for them: their eyes are ever rolling as though along with the lots in his urn; then they hang all eager on the signal; there is the united shout of a common madness. Observe how ‘out of themselves’ they are by their foolish speeches. ‘He has thrown it!’ they exclaim; and they announce each one to his neighbour what all have seen. I have clearest evidence of their blindness; they do not see what is really thrown. They think it a ‘signal cloth’ but it is the likeness of the devil cast headlong from on high. And the result accordingly is, that they fly into rages, and passions, and discords, and all that they who are consecrated to peace ought never to indulge in. Then there are curses and reproaches, with no cause of hatred; there are cries of applause, with nothing to merit them. What are the partakers in all this – not their own masters – to obtain of it for themselves? Unless, it may be, that which makes them not their own: they are saddened by another’s sorrow, they are gladdened by another’s joy. Whatever they desire on the one

36  From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty hand, or detest on the other, is entirely foreign to themselves . . . But what is more merciless than the circus, where people do not spare even their rulers and fellow-citizens? If any of its madnesses are becoming elsewhere in the saints of God, they will be seemly in the circus too; but if they are nowhere right, so neither are they there.41 Tertullian’s vivid account is, of course, written from a very hostile perspective towards the traditional pagan culture: the shows, despite their size and occasional disturbances, were under strict control and the emperor was seldom in danger. It was not uncommon, however, that the shows led to such major protests against the emperor that drastic measures were needed. For instance, Cassius Dio reports the protests against Commodus (and one of his high officials, Cleander) which took place during a horse race in ce 189. According to him, a choir of children started to shout accusations against Cleander, and soon the crowd followed. The people got what they wanted. Commodus was so frightened that he had Cleander executed.42 Dio also claims that he himself witnessed a similar act in ce 196, when the civil war between Septimius Severus and Clodius Albinus had just begun. A protest was once again held during a horse race. According to the historian, many spectators suddenly started to clap their hands and shouted how they hoped the civil war would end. Even if the practice might have been common, Dio expresses his astonishment at how so many voices could shout in such disciplined manner, just like a trained chorus. In fact, Dio was sure it was a case of divine inspiration.43 Herodian also records the situation in ce 193, when Didius Julianus had just become emperor. From the very beginning of his reign, he appeared to be an inadequate ruler, wasting his time on a luxurious lifestyle, feasting and drinking and neglecting the public welfare. First the soldiers and then the ordinary people started to oppose him. He was jeered, as Herodian writes, when he came out in public. The historian subsequently explains how the people gathered in the circus to express their opinions.44 Herodian, like Cassius Dio, mentions that the people went to the circus with the sole purpose to protest, but the Historia Augusta reports that the actual games were also taking place.45 Herodian’s role as a writer, as we have seen, might have been one of an outside observer (at least compared to Cassius Dio), so his motif was to explain actions and phenomena familiar to Romans (but strange to his own audience). Thus his writing seems to indicate that the expression of public opinion was still quite a common custom in the third century. In explaining ‘normal’ Roman customs to a Greek-speaking audience, which was not necessarily familiar with the happenings of the capital, Herodian stresses that the circus was indeed an important place for public opinion to be expressed. This indicates that the interaction between audience and performer, in our case Septimius Severus, was essential for the games such as the Ludi Saeculares to be successful. As a result, the officials did their best to gather as much audience as possible. In the Secular Games, it was in fact an old custom to invite all the people to see the spectacle, ‘such as they had never witnessed and never would again’, as Suetonius records,

From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty  37 and also mentions the heralds who invited people to the games of Claudius (in ce 47).46 In ce 88, even a coin was struck to celebrate Domitian’s Ludi Saeculares with an image of a herald inviting people to see the games.47 In the Severan period, the important role of the audience was perhaps even more recognised than in earlier Ludi Saeculares. This is demonstrated by the fact that even if most of the audience was, of course, composed of inhabitants of the capital, the heralds did not only travel through Rome but also through Italy, summoning all to attend the games.48 Moreover, the games also received interest outside the Italian peninsula – indicated by an epitaph that was found in Rome, commemorating a man who had travelled to Rome from Tripolis to attend the Ludi Saeculares and had died during his stay in the capital.49 Perhaps the most important part of the audience of the Severan Ludi Saeculares was, however, the senatorial class. It is very likely that the messages the ritual contained were directed predominantly towards it, as Severus naturally wanted to strengthen his position in relation with the inner circle of the elite in the capital to which he did not originally belong (besides, this was the group from which the challengers for power could possibly arise, or which could at least give political support for possible usurpers among the even more dangerous group – military commanders). Because of this, it seems rather logical that a public display of power was necessary for Severus whenever there was a chance, especially as by ce 204 he had only been in Italy for about twelve months over the last 40 years. In these circumstances, Severus celebrated the unique festival of Ludi Saeculares and erected the inscription to commemorate the event. To this monument we will turn next.

Notes 1 Cass. Dio 72[71].36.4. 2 Aristid. Or. 26.94–96 (transl. J.H. Oliver; adapted from Grant 1996: 147–148). 3 Ando 2012: 5–6. 4 Grant 1996: 148–155. 5 Le Glay,Voisin, Le Bohec & Cherry 2001: 301, 306–310. 6 Le Glay,Voisin, Le Bohec & Cherry 2001: 267–270. 7 Goodman 1997: 70–71; Le Glay,Voisin, Le Bohec & Cherry 2001: 282. 8 Grant 1996: 10–11. 9 Talbert 1984: 97. 10 RIC 3 (Antoninus Pius), nos. 69, 605, 66a, 856v and 913. The genius is a difficult concept to define, but it can be understood as a ‘life-force’, or ‘the entirety of the traits united in a begotten being’. The genius formed a divine double with every male; accordingly, each woman had the iuno as her double. The genius was not limited to individual humans, however. Localities and establishments had their own genius. The Senate is such an example. See Price & Kearns 2003: 227. 11 But interestingly, not by Censorinus, writing in ce 238, who altogether omits Antoninius Pius’ games from his list of Secular Games (Cens. 17.10–11). The problem is discussed in Chapter Six (see also Appendix Four for a general chronology of the games). 12 Grant 1996: 15.

38  From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty 13 In addition to the statue and the coinage of Antoninus Pius, all the evidence we have from the west are a few inscriptions from North Africa honouring the genius of the senate; however, the dates of these are unknown. Talbert 1984: 95–97. 14 Grant 1996: 40. 15 Ando 2012: 8–9. 16 Potter 2004: 85–101. 17 War against Niger, see Birley 1999: 108–120. 18 For the war against Albinus, see Birley 1999: 121–128. 19 Cass. Dio 72[71].1.1; Herod. 1.3.13; SHA Comm. 15.5. 20 Cass. Dio 72[71].36.4 (transl. E. Cary). 21 Herod. 1.1.4 (transl. C.R. Whittaker). 22 See also Herod. 2.10.3. He states (using the imagined speech of Septimius Severus) that up until Marcus’ reign (Aurelius), the empire was ruled with dignity and was looked upon with awe, until it all changed under Commodus. 23 Alföldy 1989: 321–323. 24 In his classic study, Edward Gibbon considered the second century ce of imperial Rome as the best period mankind had ever witnessed. Although he does give Septimius Severus some credit, he still considers the new emperor as the principal author of the decline of the Roman Empire. See Gibbon 1998: 65–66, 106. 25 For views supporting the idea of crisis, see De Blois 1998: 3391–3443 and 2002: 204–217. To some extent, see also Hose 2007: 461–467. John Liebeschuetz supports the idea of the third-century crisis as well, although he concentrates more on the post-Severan period – see Liebeschuetz 2006: 639–652 and, particularly, Liebeschuetz 2007: 11–20. For more suspicious views towards the idea of crisis in the early third century, see for example Sidebottom 1998: 2776–2836 and Witschel 1999. 26 Restoration and renewal: see Turcan 1978: 996–1084. 27 For Septimius Severus’ overall building programme, see Benario 1958: 712–718. 28 The decrease of buildings depicted in coins does not necessary point to a decrease of interest to architecture as propaganda, but it might (and probably does) indicate that increasing military and economic difficulties in the third century ce prevented emperors from conducting new large-scale building projects. Burnett 2010: 158–161. 29 Liv. 7.2; Per. 49. The festivals of 249 ce are the first occasion that we can be quite sure of, although ancient authors report that there were three games before those: in 509 bce (Cens. 17.10; Plut. Publ. 21;Val. Max. 2.4; Zos. 2.1–3), 449 bce (Cens. 17.10) and 348 bce (Cens. 17.10; Zos. 2.1–3). For the history of the ludi saeculeres, see Appendix Four. 30 The idea of ‘ages’ or ‘eras’ in history was quite common in antiquity, in Greek, Etruscan, as well as in Roman culture. Censorinus deals with both Greek and Etruscan views (Cens. 17.1–5). It seems, however, that the Roman view was influenced by the Etruscans especially – at least in the late republican period; see Hall 1986: 2567–2569. The idea of saeculum is based on a cyclic theory of time, which was a very common thought in the ancient world. Lots of research has been carried out on the subject, the classic study being Eliade 1949. 31 Beard, North & Price 1998: 201–206. It should be noted, however, that even if the nature of the Augustan games changed compared to the republican ones, some elements of imperial celebrations probably came from the earlier tradition, like the wooden theatres without seats and the chorus of 27 girls and boys. Poe 1984: 64–65. 32 Greek rite was, in fact, a very Roman way of sacrificing. It seems that the concept of the Greek rite was created in Rome, when the Romans wanted to underline the Greek nature of some rituals. See Scheid 1995: 15–31.

From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty  39 33 All these Greek deities were previously without a cult in the Roman state. Feeney 2003: 107–108. 34 The next celebrations were organised by Claudius in ce 47, only sixty-four years after Augustus’ (mentioned in Tac. Ann. 11.11) to celebrate the eight-hundredth birthday of Rome. It seems that, for the emperor, the proper way of celebrating the birthday was to use the rituals of the Ludi Saeculares as they were supposed to celebrate a new age. In 88 ce Domitian organised the games again, held about (but not exactly) 100 years after Augustus. The Domitian games are better known because of the coinage that depicts the rituals. For a study, see Sobocinski 2006, 581–602. After Domitian Antoninus Pius in ce 148 the games of Claudius followed which again celebrated the birthday of Rome (Aur. Vict. Caes. 15). For the chronology of the imperial games, see Appendix Four. 35 For discussion, see Liebeschuetz 1979: 90–94. 36 For Augustan moral reforms in general, see Galinsky 1996: 128–138; for the restoration of religion, 288–312; for the Ludi Saeculares as a celebration of moral reforms,100–106. 37 Demonstrated by Cassius Dio’s vivid descriptions (books 41–43 and 46–47) of the civil wars, fought during the last decade of the Roman republic. 38 For Augustus see Galinsky 1996: 101, 155–58. For Severus, see Potter 2004: 110–115. 39 As was the case with Augustus, there is also a lot of resemblance between the Severans and the Flavian dynasties.The Flavians were also outsiders who took power by means of civil war, and propagated their rule through the means of a grand building programme in the capital. They held Ludi Saeculares in ce 88, following Augustus’ example (see Chapter Four). 40 Cameron 1976: 157–193. 41 Tert. De spect. 16 (transl. S. Thelwall). 42 Cass. Dio 73[72].13.3–6. 43 Cass. Dio 76[75].6. 44 Herod. 2. 7.1–3. 45 SHA Did. Jul. 4.7. 46 Suet. Claud. 21.2 47 RIC 2 no. 596 (Domitian). 48 Herod. 3.8.10. 49 Gorrie 2002: 480.

Bibliography Alföldy, G. (1989). Der Krise des Römischen Reiches. Geschichte, Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsbetrachtung. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Ando, C. (2012). Imperial Rome ad 193 to 284. A Critical Century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S. (1998). Religions of Rome. Vol. 1: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Birley, A. (1999). Septimius Severus. The African Emperor. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Benario, H. (1958). Rome of the Severi. Latomus, 17, pp. 712–718. Burnett, A. (2010). Buildings and Monuments on Roman Coins. In: B. Ewald and C. Noreña, eds., The Emperor and Rome. Space, Representation, and Ritual, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 137–161. Cameron, A. (1976). Circus Factions. Blues and Greens in Rome and Byzantium. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

40  From the Antonine era to the Severan dynasty De Blois, L. (1998). Emperor and Empire in the Works of Greek-speaking Authors of the Third Century ad. ANRW, II.34.4, pp. 3391–3443. De Blois, L. (2002). The Crisis of the Third Century ad in the Roman Empire: A Modern Myth? In: L. De Blois and J. Rich, eds., The Transformation of Economic Life Under the Roman Empire (Impact of Empire 2). J.C. Gieben, Amsterdam 2002, pp. 204–2017. Eliade, M. (1949). Le Mythe de l´eternel retour: archétypes et répétition. Paris: Editions Gallimard. Feeney, D. (2003). Ludi Saeculares and Carmen Saeculare. In: C. Ando, ed., Roman Religion, 1st ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 106–116. Galinsky, K. (1996). Augustan Culture: An Interpretive Introduction. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Gibbon, E. (1998). The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. 28 Selected Chapters. Abridged ed. Hertfordshire: Wordsworth. Goodman, M. (1997). The Roman World 44bc–ad 180. London: Routledge. Gorrie, C. (2002). The Severan building programme and the Secular Games. Athenaeum, 90.2, pp. 461–481. Grant, M. (1996). The Antonines. The Roman Empire in Transition. London: Routledge. Hall, J. (1986). The Saeculum Novum of Augustus and its Etruscan Antecedents. ANRW, II.16.3, pp. 2567–2569. Hose, M. (2007). Cassius Dio: A Senator and Historian in the Age of Anxiety. In: J. Marincola, ed., A Companion to Greek & Roman Historiography, 1st ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 461–467. Le Glay, M., Voisin, J.-L., Le Bohec, Y. and Cherry, D (1996). A History of Rome. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Liebeschuetz, J. (1979). Continuity and Change in Roman Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Liebeschuetz, J. (2006). Decline and Change in Late Antiquity. Religion, Barbarians and their Historiography. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing. Liebeschuetz, J. (2007). Was there a Crisis of the Third Century? In: O. Hekster, G. De Kleijn and D. Slootjes, eds., Crisis and the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 11–20. Poe, J. (1984). The Secular Games, the Aventine, and the Pomerium. Cl. Ant., 3, pp. 57–81. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge. Price, S. and Kearns, E. (2003). The Oxford Dictionary of Classical Myth & Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Oxford 2003. Scheid, J. (1995). Graeco Ritu: a typically Roman way of honouring the gods. HSCP, 97, pp. 15–31. Sidebottom, H. (1998). Herodian’s Historical Methods and Understanding. ANRW, II.34.4, pp. 2776–2836. Sobocinski, M. (2006). Visualizing Ceremony: The Design and Audience of the Ludi Saeculares Coinage of Domitian. AJA, 110.4, pp. 581–602. Talbert, R. (1984). The Senate of Imperial Rome. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Turcan, R. (1978). Le culte impérial au III siècle. ANRW, II.16.2, pp. 996–1084. Witschel, C. (1999). Krise-Rezession-Stagnation, der Westen des römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt am Main: Marthe Clauss.

3 Organising the Ludi Saeculares

The first part of the inscription describes the preparation and organisation of the games. A major part of the text deals with the interaction between Septimius Severus and his sons, the priestly group of quindecimviri sacris faciundis and the senate. The first part also records the purification of the holy places, including the Tarentum (in the Campus Martius) in which the nocturnal rituals were held. This appears to be a Severan novelty, as the Augustan source only mentions the Capitoline and Palatine hills. On the other hand, the hills are not directly mentioned in the Severan inscription, but are likely included; this section of the inscription is very fragmentary. It should be remembered, of course, that the Augustan games are the only ones we possess an inscription for, although we do have plenty of numismatic evidence describing the rituals of the Domitian Ludi Saeculares (in ce 88). The latter source seems to portray the games in a similar manner to those of Augustus. This would strengthen the claim that the novelties in the Severan inscription were indeed new details.

Towards the new era Before taking a closer look at the Severan inscription, we must briefly tackle the problem of the date of the celebration. The history of the imperial era’s Ludi Saeculares seems to indicate that even if the games were supposed to be organised once in every 110 years,1 the emperors celebrating them were relatively relaxed about their time span. Augustus started the tradition of imperial ludi in 17 bce, and the next celebrations were already held by Claudius in ce 47. Even if we may, from this point on, speak about two separate ‘cycles’ of games (Augustan and Claudian), the emperors who celebrated the games after them did not always follow the exact 110 year-span: Domitian held games in ce 88, 104 years after Augustus, and Antoninus Pius’ games held in ce 148 were organised 111 years after Claudius’.2 It therefore seems that there were many options for Septimius Severus as well. The Severan Ludi Saeculares were celebrated from 31 May to 3 June, ce 204. Even if Severus had different options for selecting the year of the games, he probably did not have such choice with regard to the day and the month: as far as we know, imperial Ludi Saeculares had always been held at the very

42  Organising the Ludi Saeculares end of May and beginning of June. The exact reasons for these particular dates we can only guess; however, some suggestions can be made. The games were supposed to mark the changing of an era: from an old age to a new one. This idea can already be traced in the republican celebrations, and it was definitely present when Augustus declared a ‘new Golden Age’ by holding the ludi in 17 bce. Taking this into account, it is perhaps noteworthy that the etymology of the names of the months, May and June, do point to a period of transformation. Ovid provides some information about this. According to the poet, there are three possible explanations for the name May (maius): it could originate from the words maiestas (majesty), maiores (old) or to the goddess Maia.3 On the other hand, June (iunius) can be considered as the month of the young (iuvenes).4 Bearing this explanation in mind, one might argue that one reason for Augustus to start celebrating the games in late May and early June was because of the old tradition, recorded by his contemporary writer Ovid. As the transition period of these months marked ‘old’ changing to ‘new’, it could have symbolised the transition of the whole community from an old age to a new one. Some features in the programme of the ludi, such as the central role of children (symbols of the ‘new’ age and the future) on the final day of the celebrations, would perhaps point in this direction as well.5 Of course, we cannot be certain about these reasons (we cannot even be sure if the date was an Augustan innovation or part of the republican tradition that Augustus followed), but it is certain that the date was fixed from the first ­imperial ­celebrations onwards. The first reason for Severus to celebrate the ludi in ce 204 is obvious enough: it was exactly 220 years from the Augustan Secular Games. As was mentioned above, at first glance it seems that emperors were relatively free to hold the celebration whenever they wished, as long as they were conducted about 110 years from the previous ones. After all, Domitian celebrated his games only 104 years after Augustus. However, Domitian was probably well aware of the problems with the time gap between the Augustan games and his own. A passage from Tacitus seems to refer to this: in his Annale’s the historian mentions that he himself was a member of the priestly group quindecimviri sacris faciundis, which was responsible for organising the celebration. In the same passage, Tacitus admits that there were some issues with the chronological calculations. He also writes that he had dealt with the problem in one of the books of his other work (unfortunately, that particular text is lost).6 This does not mean, of course, that Severus did not have a choice. As the examples of Domitian and Augustus demonstrate, emperors had the means to justify the celebration in any year they wanted (as long as they did not depart from the tradition too radically, one might add). However, Severus apparently wished to follow the Augustan tradition very strictly. This seems quite an obvious solution, as there were many parallels between the Augustan and Severan reign, most notably the civil wars. In addition, the public memory of the Augustan ludi was well preserved, not only in the Augustan inscription in Campus Martius, but also in the Res Gestae of Augustus7 (which appeared as a

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  43 public monument at the entrance of the mausoleum of Augustus), as well as in Horace’s Carmen Saeculare, a poem which must have been a familiar piece of work among the upper classes of Rome.8 Another motif behind the schedule was possibly Severus’ grandiose building programme for the capital, as well as his arrival in the city from Africa. Before the celebration of the Ludi Saeculares, Severus had spent very little time in the capital. He was only present for his entry in the city in 193, when he took power from Didius Julianus (after which he stayed in Rome for only thirty days) and two brief periods taking place in ce 196 and 197, before and after the wars with Clodius Albinus. In ce 202, he returned to Rome from the east, where he had conducted a campaign against Parthia and had visited Egypt.9 This occasion was celebrated quite lavishly, as it also marked the tenth anniversary of Severus’ reign. Cassius Dio gives a detailed description of how Severus showed generosity of all kinds to the public and organised animal shows that lasted seven days, during which 700 beasts were slain.10 Dynastic aspirations played a part as well: during the same visit of the emperor in the capital, a royal wedding was organised, as Prince Caracalla married Plautilla, daughter of the praetorian prefect Gaius Fulvius Plautianus (cousin of the emperor himself). The father of the bride received a significant public role during the wedding, as reported by Dio: [Plautianus] gave as much for his daughter’s dowry as would have sufficed for fifty women of royal rank. We saw the gifts as they were being carried through the Forum to the palace. And we were all entertained together at a banquet, partly in royal and partly in barbaric style, receiving not only all the customary cooked viands but also uncooked meat and sundry animals still alive.11 Regarding other major events of Severus’ reign, even if he was relatively successful in his Parthian campaign, there are no actual references to any triumphal celebrations during his stay in Rome. The reason we can only guess. Historia Augusta records that Severus was offered a triumph, but that the emperor refused because of problems with his limbs (it seems that Severus suffered from gout).12 Historia Augusta, as a source, has its problems, so we do not know if this was indeed the case; if Severus did turn down the senate’s suggestion that he hold a triumph, he perhaps wanted to avoid the situation of triumphal celebrations overshadowing his decennalia. Moreover, it is possible that the celebration of his ten-year reign served as a triumphal feast as well, and no separate victory celebrations were thus needed. Severus did not stay for long in Rome but departed to Africa very soon after the celebrations. He visited his home town Lepcis Magna and inspected the building project he had organised and financed, which included a colonnaded street, a grandiose theatre and a new forum (with appropriate buildings). The city had also decided to honour its famous son with a magnificent triumphal arch (which Severus himself paid for).13 The arch not only honoured Severus,

44  Organising the Ludi Saeculares but the whole imperial family, and highlighted the themes central to Severan rule. One of the main reliefs depicted the whole imperial family, including Plautianus and Publius Septimius Geta, the emperor’s brother. The imperial family’s relationships were overseen by Concordia, goddess of harmony, highlighting the concordance between family members, with goddess Roma also present (Figure 3.1). It is interesting to note that both Cassius Dio and the Historia Augusta claim that it was precisely during this period that rifts inside the imperial inner circles started to appear: sources imply that Severus became increasingly critical towards Plautianus. Even if Dio and the Historia Augusta provide different details, both underline that Severus was displeased with his prefect (the emperor possibly thought that Plautianus was competing even with him in visibility in the public monuments), although it seems that the differences were settled for that time.14 When Severus returned to Rome later in ce 203, his building and restoration project in had reached its final phase. In fact, we know from different sources of about fifty buildings, monuments and other such structures that were either constructed or repaired under his orders. The exact dates for most of these are unknown. However, of those that can be dated, almost all were

Figure 3.1  A central scene from the arch of Lepcis Magna, erected during the late second century ce. The scene portrays harmony within the imperial family: Septimius Severus holds hands with his sons, under the protection of goddess Concordia (who stands behind them). To the left, are Empress Julia Domna and goddess Roma, and to the right are the praetorian prefect Plautianus and the emperor’s brother Publius Septimius Geta. Copy of the original relief, Museo della Civiltà Romana (photo: Jussi Rantala).

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  45 finished in the years 201–204, right before the Ludi Saeculares. These include the arch of Nero, the Pantheon, the Septizodium, the Porticus Octaviae, the Temple of Jupiter Stator and Juno Regina, the arch of Septimius Severus and the arch of the money-changers (Arcus Argentariorum).15 If we analyse the Severan project as a whole, we can clearly see that those sites received special attention during the rituals of the ludi.16 All in all, Severus had good reasons to celebrate the festival in ce 204: not only did this schedule tie him closely to the legendary founder of the empire, Augustus, but it also showed the people what great improvements the city had received under his guidance – a sign of a new Golden Age indeed.

Funding the festivals In evaluating the first part of the Severan inscription that stood on the Campus Martius, it becomes immediately evident that it differs considerably from the Augustan one, since it gives quite a detailed description on the organisation of the games. In the Augustan record, this part is very short and does not contain as much information. According to the Severan inscription, preparation began when the priests of the quindecimviri sacris faciundis asked the senate to organise the games with public funds. The leader of the quindecimviri, Manilius Fuscus,17 spoke in the senate while making reference to the Sibylline Books. He stated that according to the Books, the changing of an era (saeculum) should be celebrated by giving thanks to the divinities for the blessings of the previous saeculum, so that the following era would be happy too. The senate consequently asked Septimius Severus and his sons, Caracalla and Geta, their permission for the games, and to allow the event’s costs to be covered by the public treasury.18 The inscription indicates that it was not the money, but rather the permission to use public funds for the games that was granted by the emperor and his sons. Even if the emperors had easy access to public funds, the official separation between the public’s and emperor’s private money still existed. This is also evident in the record. There are other contemporary examples as well. When describing the Augustan building programme, Cassius Dio reports how he had difficulties in separating the public expenses from those of Augustus.19 Moreover, when describing his own times, Dio comments about the building policy of Septimius Severus in a rather disapproving way, noting how the emperor used to add his own names to repaired buildings, as if he had paid for the buildings himself. These examples further imply that the separation between the emperor’s money and public funds was indeed still recognised in Dio’s own period.20 The inscription also describes how there were some restrictions on the mourning period for women before the games, and how the quindecimviri gave tools to the people for a purification ritual (to be carried out at home).21 The incense that was given to the people was apparently supposed to be burnt in homes before the festival.22 The quindecimviri also received symbolic offerings from the people. According to Zosimus (2.5.3) these were first-fruits: wheat,

46  Organising the Ludi Saeculares barley and beans. The officials purified the central places of worship; this was done during the Augustan festival as well, but only the Severan inscription records the purification of Tarentum in the Campus Martius by the chief of the quindecimviri.23 The names of the members of quindecimviri sacris faciundis are also recorded in the inscription. The members of the priestly college appearing in the inscription are: Aiacius Modestus, Atulenus Rufinus, Cassius Pius Marcellinus, Cocceius Vibianus, Crescens Calpurnianus, Fabius Magnus, Fulvius Fuscus Granianus, C. Fulvius Plautianus (also the praetorian prefect), Gargilius Antiquus, Manilius Fuscus, Nonius Arrius Mucianus, Ofilius Macedo, Pollienus Auspex, Pompeius Rusonianus, Saevinius Proculus, Salvius Tuscus, Venidius Rufus, Vetina Mamertinus and Ulpius Soter. Septimius Severus himself, as well as Caracalla and Geta, were also members of the group. In addition, four more individuals appear in the inscription, but these names cannot be reconstructed from the fragments. The magistri of the group were Manilius Fuscus and Pompeius Rusonianus.24 The composition of the quindecimviri is examined in various studies. It seems that the college of fifteen did consist mostly of Africans and easterners; it has been suggested that out of twenty-six priests mentioned in various parts of the inscription, only two were probably of Italian origin. The number of Africans was perhaps nine.25 It is interesting that the large number of Africans seems to be exceptional compared to the other priestly colleges,26 and does also differ from the composition of the senate. It has been estimated that, during the Severan period, over half of the senators were provincials (outside Italy), and of the provincials, about fifty-seven per cent were of eastern origin and twenty-six per cent of African origin.27 This would indicate that the Africans belonging to the quindecimviri during the Severan period were much better represented than the senate, and this could indicate that the quindecimviri group was manned with men trusted by Septimius Severus for a particular purpose, the purpose possibly being the Ludi Saeculares. After all, the quindecimviri had major ­responsibilities in organising these games.28 Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the first part of the inscription is the relationship between Septimius Severus and the senate. In Roman state religion, the senate traditionally made the most important decisions; the priests, on the other hand, took care of those decisions, although the role of the emperor as a religious leader grew during the imperial period.29 Accordingly, in the Augustan inscription, the emperor officially has no central place in organising the games (as Augustus is acting as an ordinary quindecimvir). The Severan inscription, however, presents a different picture: the senate, after accepting the proposal of the quindecimviri of organising the games, asked the emperor and his sons to lead the ceremony. The role of the emperor is not as the leader of the quindecimviri (since the leader of the priests at the time was Manilius Fuscus). The emperor and his sons, however, held a leading role in the inscription as organisers, or perhaps more appropriately, as ‘providers’ (maybe even ‘patrons’), granting the senate permission to proceed with organising the Ludi Saeculares using public funds.

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  47 This detail should perhaps be seen in a wider context, as part of changing relationship between the emperor and the senate. The change is, in fact, quite striking if we remember the role of the senate during the Antonine period and compare it with the situation under Septimius Severus. To understand the acts between these two, it is necessary to first more widely portray Septimius Severus’ relationship with the senators, and to discuss how this relationship developed from the very beginning of Severus’ reign. This will help us understand the different roles of the senate and of the emperor portrayed in the inscription. The relations maintained between Severus and the Roman senate have often been described as troublesome – especially because of the purges Severus made a couple of years after he rose to power in ce 193. However, in the very beginning of his reign he had a somewhat more conciliatory attitude towards the senate. Cassius Dio, a historian as well as a senator of the period, claims (rather sarcastically) how Severus, addressing the senate for the first time as an emperor, made promises similar to those given by ‘good’ emperors of the past – that he would not put any senator to death – but he was later the first to violate this law.30 Herodian also displays a cynical attitude. He reports that even if Severus managed to convince most senators that his intentions were good, some of the more experienced members of the senate were concerned by the emperor’s character – and they were eventually right.31 Cassius Dio’s history offers a unique contemporary source for the evaluation of Severus’ relationship with Roman senators. Dio, a senator himself, can be considered to represent the senatorial attitudes quite accurately. This is especially the case as it seems that Dio identified himself strongly with Rome and its institutions, even if his Roman identity is a debated issue. According to Fergus Millar, and the so called traditionalist view, Dio represents par excellence the new Greco-Roman nobility which essentially consisted of the Romanised Greek-speaking elite and held a unified worldview in the Hellenised empire.32 The revisionist view, on the other hand, claims that while the elite of the Greek speaking world had accepted Roman rule, it nevertheless remained mostly Greek in the construction of its identity. There is indeed no need to think that he was anything else than Greek, both culturally and spiritually.33 However, there are strong bases to assume that Cassius Dio embraced the values of the senatorial class of the Roman empire. Thus, he can be considered a Roman. He was, after all, a senator of at least the second generation and clearly identifies himself with that group. His Greek cultural background can be seen in many parts of his writings, but his opinions and attitudes are nevertheless very typical of a conservative Roman senator.34 It should be remembered that Greek-speaking senators like Dio were no longer rare occurrences in the capital by the early third century. A policy encouraging the unification of aristocrats from different parts of the empire by granting them offices in the senate had already begun during the reign of Augustus. As a result, the number of provincial senators gradually increased, especially in the later part of the first century. From that point onwards, the number of senators coming from

48  Organising the Ludi Saeculares outside Italy grew steadily. During the age of Vespasian and his sons, Titus and Domitian, the majority of senators (about three-quarters) were from Italy, but the number of those coming from abroad was growing. This trend continued in the Antonine era, and under Trajan and Hadrian the number of provincials in the senate had risen to about fifty per cent.35 Even if the first non-Italian senators mainly came from the western parts of the empire (Gaul and Spain for example), the number of high officials from Greek-speaking provinces started to rise slowly. Trajan and Hadrian, especially, began recruiting members of the senate from the east, but it was Septimius Severus who finally allowed the Egyptians to hold senatorial offices.36 It has been suggested that, in Dio’s day, the amount of easterners in the senate amounted to about a quarter of the overall number.37 Indeed, the audience for whom Dio wrote was in fact probably the Greek-speaking nobility who came to the capital from the eastern part of the empire to work in the senate.38 His book could, therefore, be read as a handbook; an introduction to Roman values and customs. In other words, it can be considered as a guide to Roman identity. Accordingly, tracing Dio’s values from his history is a way of tracing the values of the Roman senatorial class of the early third century; an important aspect while researching the ­imperial policy of the period. In taking a closer look at the relationship maintained between Septimius Severus and the traditional elite of the capital, it is important to first observe the goodwill shown by Severus towards the senate in the very beginning of his reign. This could be explained by his will to highlight the similarities of his own rule and that of Marcus Aurelius. After all, Aurelius was remembered by Dio and other senators in a good light, and thus considered as an ideal ruler. As a fairly unknown figure in Rome, Severus had to show the senate his good intentions. The oath he gave (not to execute senators) had been a tradition for the new emperors since the reign of Nerva. As a result, it was essential for an ‘outsider’ such as Severus to assure the Roman nobility that his auctoritas would be similar to Marcus Aurelius’, who had handled the senate kindly, made alliances with the leading men of Rome by means of marriages, and apparently succeeded in getting a very large part of Roman society behind him.39 However, Dio criticises Severus for carrying out actions that the senators disliked. The historian is particularly disgusted by the fact that Severus used the army to preserve his safety, and did not rely on the goodwill of his associates.40 The claim that Severus relied on his army could be read as an indication that the emperor made decisions himself, rather than in co-­operation with the senate. In fact, it seems that Severus, from Dio’s perspective, actually acted as a tyrant. This observation is supported by the Classical, Aristotelian, point of view that one of the main marks of a tyrant is his reliance on armed forces for security. Moreover, the same intellectual tradition stressed that it was typical of a tyrant to use foreign troops, and not citizens, to protect himself.41 Accordingly, Dio recorded that many senators disapproved of Severus’ opening of the imperial bodyguard to individuals coming from

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  49 outside Italy, such as Spain, Macedonia and Noricum, which were places hosting more respectable people with better habits (in Dio’s eyes). He also laments that Severus ruined the Italian youth, turning it to brigandage and gladiator fighting, and that the capital became full of soldiers who were up to no good and whose appearance, speech and conversation were, in Dio’s opinion, a disgrace.42 Even if citizenship is not mentioned specifically, these new praetorians appear as foreigners, even barbarians in Dio’s eyes; thus Septimius Severus was acting in a tyrannical way. This passage can be read as an extremely serious criticism of Severus. The historian here takes part in a very old discussion about tyrants and tyranny. The question can be found in very early Greek texts, such as poems from the sixth century ce,43 and later in many genres of literature – for example in the history of Herodotus, where the author’s aim was to show the superiority of a (democratic) Greek polis compared to the barbarians and the tyrannies of some of the Greek citystates.44 This is also the case in the fragments of Democritus, who famously considered poverty in democracy more desirable than well-being in tyranny,45 and in the texts of many other Greek and Roman philosophers who tried to understand the ideal governmental model.46 Moreover, in Roman historical tradition one of the most important stories about the birth of the Roman republic was the expulsion of the tyrant Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome.47 Cassius Dio, who came from the Greek cultural sphere, but also acted as a Roman politician in the capital, was well acquainted with the tradition of both Greek and Roman literature and political history; thus his comments about Severus as a ruler look very severe.48 The crucial phase in the relationship between Septimius Severus and the senate was the year ce 197, when Severus won the civil war against Clodius Albinus. It is possible that Albinus was a more popular choice among the senators and a purge had to be made against them. Cassius Dio claims that twenty-nine senators were executed; Herodian just mentions that all the prominent senators, and those who were richest, were killed. The Historia Augusta even gives a list of the individuals condemned to death,49 although the authenticity of the list is much debated.50 There is, however, no reason to doubt the occurrence of the purge itself. On this occasion Dio overtly recognises that the emperor’s actions demonstrate that lacked the qualities of a good emperor.51 Dio’s attitude could serve to indicate the senate’s sympathies towards Albinus, but what it betrays more strongly is a criticism of Severus’ brutality towards the senate. In Dio’s history this seems to mark a break from the tradition of a proper model for a good government: for him, in the heart of ideal imperial ideology, appears to be a system where the emperor showed patience, compassion and respect towards the senate, as is expressed in his descriptions of the Antonines, the ‘good’ emperors of the second century. Even if Dio’s account of Antoninus Pius is almost completely lost, his stories of Trajan, Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius give a positive picture. For Dio, Trajan was an emperor who honoured good men and treated the senate with dignity. Hadrian, despite some bad qualities, helped in all of the most

50  Organising the Ludi Saeculares important issues of the senate. Dio does not say much about the relationship maintained between the senate and Marcus Aurelius, but he nonetheless paints a picture of an honest, modest emperor, who listened to his teachers and treated everybody with respect.52 The way in which Severus acted was therefore strictly against Dio’s idea of harmonious co-operation between ruler and senate. Another criticism of his is noticeable in his description of Clodius Albinus’ fate. Severus failed to show any clemency (clementia) towards even a dead opponent, as he cut off the usurper’s head and sent it to Rome to be exposed. In mentioning this incident, Dio immediately turns to describing Septimius Severus’ bad qualities, and particularly those the senators especially disliked.53 Dio connects these faults to Severus’ purge in the senate, when he put twenty-nine senators to death. There was certainly no sign of clementia in this case either.54 The relationship between Septimius Severus and the senate and the lack of imperial clementia in Severan policy is an important subject to bear in mind when analysing the first part of the inscription of the Severan ludi that describes the organising process of the games. The interaction between the emperor and the senators was probably considered as an important part of the memoria of the games, as it appears to be a novelty for the Severan Ludi Saeculares. The record seems to define this relationship by means of generosity: the senate asks for permission and the emperor grants it. It is an interesting detail, as generosity had become a central aspect of Roman political life by the Antonine period, especially under the form of clementia. The idea of clementia had, by the beginning of the third century, infiltrated Roman society. Clementia was by its nature considered as a certain ‘clemency among equals’; it had become an ethical ideal which not only included the graciousness of the one who showed mercy, but also the initiative of the suppliant, so that the suppliant assumed a significant responsibility for the mercy he received. This lessened the ‘disability’ of the one to whom the mercy was granted, and lessened sharp distinctions in status.55 Taking this in to consideration, the lack of clementia on Severus’ behalf described by Cassius Dio is very interesting. By disbanding the idea of clementia, that had been very dominant in the imperial period before him, Severus also attacked the idea of ‘equals in clemency’. For example, even if the senators feared for their lives when Severus made the purge, and put a number of them to death after the civil war, they must also have been shocked for other reasons too: the emperor had abandoned the idea that had dominated Roman political life during the reign of the Antonines (excluding Commodus).56 Another example regarding Severus’ lack of clementia towards the senate is manifest in his habit of honouring some controversial figures of Roman history, both recent and distant. In ce 197, Severus had himself adopted as a son of Marcus Aurelius. The reason for this was obviously to attempt to create continuity between the Antonine rulers and himself. The action was widely disliked by the senators, and what they especially disapproved of was the praise Severus gave to Commodus, son of Marcus Aurelius, his new ‘brother’, since Commodus’ reign was still very much remembered with

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  51 horror by many senators.57 Moreover, in his speeches, Severus praised the cruelty of Sulla, Marius and Augustus.58 Severus’ admiration for the latter was obviously very deep, as there are many examples how Severus wanted to appear as a new Augustus,59 but Sulla is an interesting case as well. Lucius Cornelius Sulla was a prominent politician during the early first century ce, as he led the victorious side of the civil war and created a new legislative programme which put power into the hands of the senate.60 The legacy of Sulla was certainly not a good memory for the senators. Only fragments remain of Cassius Dio’s account on the period of Sulla, but we do have enough text to understand that Sulla was seen as a cruel tyrant by the historian. Although Dio gives Sulla some credit for his initial policy, he concludes that, after gaining power, he committed ‘acts which he had censured in other persons while he still was weak and many others even more outrageous’.61 Cassius Dio’s criticism of Sulla is essentially a warning example of what absolute power could do to a man, and of what ill-intentioned supporters could do to a leader. One of the horrors for Dio was the fear Sulla created among the senators, who consequently lived in uncertainty for their fate, as killings in Rome and outside the city continued.62 One could perhaps see an analogy between Sulla and Septimius Severus in Dio’s writings, since both rulers, the emperor and his republican hero, began their reign with modesty, but then suddenly turned out to be much worse (even if Dio does not attack Severus as strongly as Sulla).63 Accordingly, the writers of the early third century, who had experienced a civil war themselves, perhaps felt that they were living in a time which could be compared to the wars of Caesar and Pompey, or Sulla and Marius. The exceptional nature of earlier civil wars can be found in many parts of Dio’s history, for example when he describes the battles between Caesar and Pompey the Great. For Dio, the struggle that the Romans experienced in fighting each other was yet unparalleled in history.64 Even if Dio here describes a war that took place over 200 years prior to the events he discusses, it is easy to see that, for him, civil wars were considered as particularly disastrous events. Thus, Septimius Severus’ praise of Sulla, who symbolised tyranny and other horrors of civil war, must have been unpleasant for the senators, who themselves lived in a post-civil war period. How, then, should the first part of the inscription containing the relationship between Septimius Severus and the senate be understood? Considering Severus’ general policy, it seems that one function of the inscription is to highlight the dependence of the senate on the emperor’s goodwill (and that of his sons). Although the emperor did not traditionally play an important role in the organisation of the games (or, at least, as the Augustan inscription suggests), Severus was absolutely essential to the celebrations. The senate was compelled to turn to him for his generous permission. Moreover, the inscription does not describe the relationship of the emperor and the senate as ‘generosity among the equals’, but rather as a relationship between a patron and his ‘clients’. The message the inscription imparts about this relationship could perhaps be seen as

52  Organising the Ludi Saeculares a reference to the so-called Palazzo Sacchetti Relief from the Severan period (Figure 3.2). The relief describes a group of senators in audience with the emperor, his sons Caracalla and Geta, and a couple of the emperor’s councillors. Septimius Severus is making a gesture with his hand, possibly presenting the new consuls. It is very interesting that Septimius Severus is sitting on the old magisterial symbol of authority, the stella curulis, and that the senators stand below the emperor. As such, it is a reminder that the senators were not equals with Severus and his sons; when the emperor was primus inter pares, he was supposed to stand among equals.65 The relief – and, as I suggest, the beginning of the inscription – perhaps authorises the ideology of the new, more autocratic regime and its prominent position in Roman political life.

Purifying the holy grounds In proceeding further with the inscription, we find a description of the purification of the areas in which the games were held. The purified grounds had already received a lot of attention before Severus’ games, since they were part of his building policy for the capital. The Palatine hill, especially, was heavily repaired, built and re-built. The hill itself had been one of the most important places of Rome since its foundation. The Romans themselves believed that it was indeed the place where the first Romans lived. Livy describes the hill

Figure 3.2  Palazzo Sacchetti Relief, Rome. Severus sits with his sons and councillors to the right, giving audience to a group of senators to the left. Further to the left, is the Triumphal Arch of Septimius Severus, under which the senators walk (photo: Creative Commons/public domain).

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  53 as the place of Romulus’ upbringing, and many other ancient authors give a similar view.66 It contained ancient places of worship, such as the Lupercal (the cave where, according to tradition, Romulus and Remus were nursed by the she-wolf and where the festival of Lupercalia was held), but it also had political prestige from the very early days. Many leading aristocratic families had their houses on the hill and its slopes from the sixth century bce onwards. The imperial era saw constant improvements and new buildings built on the hill. Perhaps the most famous example is the temple of Apollo, built by Augustus, who combined the temple with his own house (thus declaring his close relationship with the god and a new form of imperial power). The f­ollowing emperors expanded the palatial complex.67 Many constructions on the hill had been very badly damaged in the great fire which occurred during the reign of Commodus, as is reported by many ancient authors, both contemporary and later.68 The Severan improvements were thus made partly out of necessity. However, as necessary as the repairs were, they nonetheless gave Severus an excellent opportunity to show his restoration of the state in a very concrete manner. The palace of Domitian was repaired and a new bath complex was constructed. The imperial Palace was expanded towards the Circus Maximus and a large nymphaeum (Septizodium) was built to make a screen on the south-east side of the hill. Overall, the new constructions of the Palatine hill were an impressive sight.69 The Capitolium, the other hill used as the main stage of the rituals of Ludi Saeculares, was another spot of major importance in Roman history. This is first and foremost due the fact that the hill carried the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus and other deities of the so called Capitoline triad, Juno and Minerva, the guardian deities of the Roman commonwealth.70 As is common with other sites of major importance, many stories were associated with this hill, probably the most famous being about the sack of Rome by the Gauls in 390 bce. According to legend, the Romans were able to hold Capitoline hill when the Gauls took the city, preventing that part of the city from ever being conquered.71 Compared to the Palatine, however, the Capitoline hill was never an important place of habitation, but was nevertheless a very significant place religiously and politically. The consuls conducted a sacrifice there at the beginning of each year, and the governors took vows before being sent to their provinces. Moreover, triumphal celebrations culminated in a sacrifice conducted on the Capitoline. Another difference with the Palatine hill was that the Capitoline was never the object of an extensive building policy. Repair was mainly directed to the temple. Many emperors indeed conducted restoration projects for it, and some had to have it completely rebuilt after fires.72 From the Severan period, however, no major improvements to the Capitoline are known, although it is of course possible (and perhaps even probable) that some repairs at least were conducted to some of the buildings. Another place that received attention was the area around the Sacred Road (Via Sacra), a road in Forum Romanum that connects the Capitoline and the Palatine hills. It was extensively rebuilt before the games, as the road was very

54  Organising the Ludi Saeculares important for the ceremonies. During the last day of the festivals, the participants walked in a procession from the Palatine to the Capitoline by that very route.73 The improvements to that area included the Aedes Vestae, one of the most important shrines in the city, and the Atrium of the Vestals (as we shall see, the Vestals had an important role in the Severan Ludi Saeculares). In the centre of the Forum was situated an equestrian statue of Severus. Herodian describes the statue and connects the monument with the divine portent that Severus had received before his reign. As the historian records, Severus took an oath of allegiance to Pertinax when he became emperor. Subsequently, Severus returned to his house and fell asleep. He dreamed of a large horse carrying Pertinax along the Sacred Road. The horse suddenly shook Pertinax off and walked to Severus, who stood watching the scene. Then the horse kneeled down before Severus for him to climb onto his back, and carried him to the middle of the Forum. As Herodian continues, Severus erected a statue on that very spot in the Forum to commemorate his dream.74 On the topic of portents, Cassius Dio mentions a book describing various omens and dreams which foretold Severus’ rise to power. Dio describes how he wrote it himself and presented it to Severus, although he does not mention the story of the horse.75 Another statue dedicated to a member of the imperial family stood by the Via Sacra. A monument dedicated to Julia Domna had been erected to celebrate her roles as the emperor’s loyal wife and the mother of the state. In addition, a number of other, smaller monuments and dedications honouring the imperial family stood in the Forum.76 However, the most remarkable monument honouring Severus was the triumphal arch which stood right before the slope of the Capitoline hill. The arch was finished only a year before the Ludi Saeculares.77 The significance of the arch for the ludi is demonstrated by its addition to the records of the games: the inscription explicitly states how the procession of the Secular Games proceeded via the Sacred Road (and through the arch of Severus and Caracalla).78 The arch itself was situated in such a manner that it was symmetrically aligned with the arches of Tiberius and Augustus, thus symbolically connecting the new era to the past. Moreover, the positioning of the Severan triumphal arch in the Forum could also be seen as a symbol of the hierarchy of power. It was situated very close to the rostra Augusti, a place of great historical significance. The republican rostra had originally been a platform for the speakers, as well a place in which military trophies were exhibited. It was, however, later replaced by a new one, built by Julius Caesar and extended by Augustus. This was probably another way for Severus to associate himself with the first emperor, by placing his arch near the Augustan structures. In addition, the arch also stood right next to the curia, the house of the senate. Facing towards the house of the senators, the arch was possibly a warning to the senate, which had occasionally shown some opposition to the decisions of the emperor. The monument, through its sheer presence, reminded the members of the senate of who the master of Rome really was.79

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  55 Amongst the improvements carried out in the Forum Romanum, that of the Temple of Vespasian is especially noteworthy. It was situated by the Via Sacra, very near to the Severan arch. The procession would thus pass by it when travelling from the Palatine to the Capitoline. Severus restored this temple too, which gave him an opportunity to make a connection between himself and the Flavians – an important connection, as the Flavians were also a new dynasty which took control by the means of civil war and acted as restorers of Rome after internal struggles.80 Vespasian and Severus not only presented similarities where their position with the elite of the capital was concerned, but they also faced the same problems as a result. It was indeed never wise for an emperor who had gained his position by the means of civil war to be seen as a leader fighting against Rome or Romans. Thus, both had to appear as more or less reluctant contenders for power.81 Cassius Dio’s statement (77.16.3) about Severus’ claim to have paid for the buildings himself shows how important the new or repaired temples and other public constructions were for the new dynasty. They were a tool for preserving a memory of the emperor and of his acts, as well a means to demonstrate his goodwill and generosity. Since the inscription of the Ludi Saeculares also mentions the purification of places containing many new and repaired buildings, it reminded its readers of the existence of these magnificent parts of the city, which were places full of new and repaired public buildings carrying Severus’ name. At the same time, it also connected the emperor himself to these important areas, the most holy places of Rome, and strengthened his position as a master who had improved these sacred grounds so vastly. As was mentioned earlier, the Severan inscription records the purification of the Tarentum in Campus Martius.82 The Tarentum was the spot on which the nocturnal rituals of the games were held.83 The subterranean altar dedicated to Dis and Proserpina was situated in that area, as it was the central place of worship for the ludi of the republican era. However, there is no direct reference that the altar was used during the imperial Secular Games. Many other altars were set up in the Tarentum in order to perform sacrifices, and a stage was constructed for the theatrical performances that took place after the nocturnal rituals. The stage had no seats, perhaps to commemorate the ancient tradition. The wooden theatre also built in the Tarentum was also the spot where the Ludi Latini were held as a part of the threeday programme, and the Ludi Honorarii, which took place after the actual Secular Games had begun. It is also possible that the temporary circus, which held the sacrificial procession and races right after the last rites of the Ludi Saeculares, was built in the Tarentum, although this cannot be confirmed. Indeed, it is likely that most of the buildings erected there before the games were temporary structures, unlike those that stood on the Palatine hill, for example. Although they were not permanent, it does not mean that these structures did not appear impressive for those who saw them: on the contrary, they were most likely made out of expensive materials and appeared very decorated and beautiful.84

56  Organising the Ludi Saeculares Severus probably also ordered the construction of other buildings too. Even if they were not directly used as a part of the rituals of his ludi, they nevertheless decorated the area and reminded people about his power, goodwill and generosity. One such building was a large palisade of marble and bronze. Some fragments of a sculptural relief have also been found in the area. The relief has been dated to the Severan era, as the female figure presents a distinctive hair style, typical of Julia Domna and other Severan women. The relief possibly depicts the myth of Alcestis’ rescue by Hercules. However, we do not know what kind of monument the relief was part of. Moreover, although the exact date of when it was built remains unclear, it is probable that it was carved in ce 204.85 It must also be remembered that the larger field of the Campus Martius, where the Tarentum was situated, had become one of the most remarkable places of the city by the time of Severus’ reign. As Strabo, writing in the early first century, records: Pompey, the Deified Caesar, Augustus, his sons and friends, and wife and sister, have outdone all others in their zeal for buildings and in the expense incurred. The Campus Martius contains most of these, and thus, in addition to its natural beauty, it has received still further adornment as the result of foresight. Indeed, the size of the Campus is remarkable, since it affords space at the same time and without interference, not only for the chariot-races and every other equestrian exercise, but also for all that multitude of people who exercise themselves by ball-playing, hoop-trundling, and wrestling; and the works of art situated around the Campus Martius, and the ground, which is covered with grass throughout the year, and the crowns of those hills that are above the river and extend as far as its bed, which present to the eye the appearance of a stage-painting – all this, I say, affords a spectacle that one can hardly draw away from. And near this campus is there is another campus, with colonnades round about it in very great numbers, and sacred precincts, and three theatres, and an amphitheatre, and very costly temples, in close succession to one another, giving you the impression that they are trying, as it were, to declare the rest of the city a mere accessory. For this reason, in the belief that this place was holiest of all, the Romans have erected in it the tombs of their most illustrious men and women.86 The Campus Martius, however, not only hosted temples and other important buildings, but it also carried the memory of one of the most important stories about Rome’s mythical past: the overthrowing of the last king of Rome, Tarquinius Superbus. According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Tarquinius took the field for his personal use and planted it with crops.87 Livy reports what happened to the crops after the king was expelled from the city. He writes that the field became dedicated to Mars and that the crops were cut and thrown into the Tiber. It would have been sacrilegious to consume them.88 Generally,

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  57 the Campus Martius was a space of crucial importance for the birth of the Roman republic, and in that sense for Roman identity, too, by the connection to the story of the expelled tyrant. It is, of course, hard to say if stories as ancient as this one had any real significance for the people of the early third century. However, the legend of the Campus Martius and the last king’s crops were at least known in the early imperial period by Juvenal (writing in the late first or early second century), who described how a worshipper of Isis crawled naked ‘across the field of Tarquinius Superbus’.89 The story was also known by the grammarian Servius Maurus Honoratus, who wrote a commentary on Virgil’s Aeneid as late as the late fourth century. In his ninth book, he describes how the field was granted to the king pro honore, and how it was cultivated with crops.90 In that sense, there is no reason to suggest that the story about the Campus Martius, as the traditional spot of ‘king’s crops’, was not known in the Severan period. The Campus Martius was thus traditionally known as a ‘place of rebirth’ for the Roman communitas, which is an important detail. Moreover, if we take a closer look at the records of the Severan games, we might even find a slight connection between the Ludi Saeculares and the old story about the Campus Martius as a field of crops: the food offerings from the people are described in the inscription. Even if the record is quite fragmentary in this section, it does nonetheless indicate that the priests received some fruits from the new harvest as a symbolic offering.91 This was apparently done at the same time as the purification of the Tarentum. The people also received incense from the priests for private purifications. The offerings given by the people symbolise the traditional themes of the Ludi Saeculares as a manifestation of a Golden Age: fertility, wealth and the overall well-being of the communitas. It can also be noted that the people of Rome were ‘tied’ to the rituals at this point through their interaction: that is, by means of food offerings (from the people) and incense (to the people). The fact that the incense was supposed to be burnt in homes, and by families, is noteworthy, for the family was another main theme of the celebrations. As I shall argue, the celebration was meant to encourage members of the audience (and the individuals who later read the inscription) to evaluate their position in the empire and as part of the communitas, as well as their relationship to the rulers, by means of family values.

Notes 1 Augustus, while in power, transferred the Sibylline Books from the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus to the temple of Apollo. At this point, he most likely carried out many modifications to the books to suit his own political purposes. Parke 1988: 140. 2 For the chronology of the games, see Appendix Four. 3 In Roman mythology, Maia was associated with the god of fire,Vulcan, but also with Mercury, the messenger of the gods. These associations are however puzzling, since her name seems to connect her to growth or increase. In Roman literature, she is mentioned in Gell. NA 13.23.2 and Macrob. Sat. 1.12.18. 4 Ov. Fast. 5.1–111.

58  Organising the Ludi Saeculares 5 Rantala 2011: 242–243. 6 Tac. Ann. 11.11. 7 RG 22.2. 8 Barnes 2008: 266. For Severus as a new Augustus, see also Cooley 2007. 9 Birley 1999: 146. 10 Cass. Dio 77[76].1.1–5. 11 Cass. Dio 77[76].1.2 (transl. E. Cary). 12 SHA Sev. 16.6. 13 Ando 2012: 40. 14 Birley 1999: 154. 15 Benario 1958: 714–718. 16 See Gorrie 2002 for discussion. 17 Manilius Fuscus: PIR² M137; Pighi, comm. lud. sept. I 6. When referring to the inscription containing the records of the Ludi Saeculares, I will use Pighi’s edition. The inscription can also be found in CIL 6 32326–32335 and in Appendix One. The contents of the Severan inscription are also given in Hülsen 1932: 368–369. A small part of the text is translated into English in Lewis and Meyer 1955: 558–560. The priestly group of the quindecimviri sacris faciundis was traditionally responsible for organising the Ludi Saeculares. The celebration was based on the orders of the Sibylline Books, and it was the quindecimviri who supervised them. See SchneggKöhler 2002: 199. See also Appendix Four for more details about the quindecimviri and the Sibylline Books. 18 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. I 5–27. 19 Cass. Dio 53.22.1–4. 20 Cass. Dio, 77[76].16.3. 21 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. I 30. The restrictions imposed on the mourning period for women were quite a common practice during different religious festivals. Thus, the senate’s decision should not be seen as exceptional. Hänninen 2000: 96. 22 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. II 7–13; see also Hänninen 2000: 96. 23 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. II.1. –III.24. 24 The names are provided in Pighi 1965: 240–241. 25 Birley 1999: 160. 26 Schumacher 1978: 805–807. 27 Hopkins 1983: 200. 28 As Severus himself came from Northern Africa, it would be quite natural that he knew the upper class of the region fairly well, and was able to find trusted men from there. This is probably the primary reason for the inclusion of so many Africans in the quindecimviri, and not their African identity, as such. 29 For the traditional role of the senate in Roman religion, see Beard 1990: 30–34. It seems that during the imperial period the role of the emperor as a ‘high priest’, when acting as pontifex maximus, became more important, however. This is also reported by Cassius Dio (53.17.8). See Millar 1977: 359–361. 30 Cass. Dio 74[73].2.1–2. 31 Herod. 2.14.3–4. 32 Millar 1964: 190–191. 33 Swain 1996: 405. For an overview of ‘traditional’ and ‘revisionist’ views, see Sidebottom 2007: 76–77. 34 De Blois 1997: 2655. 35 Potter 2004: 68–69.

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  59 36 Birley 1999: 38; Bowman 2005: 315. 37 For a study, see Halfmann 1979: 74–101. 38 Gowing 1992: 292–294. 39 Moran 1999: 31–37. 40 Cass. Dio 75[74].2.1–3. 41 Arist. Pol. 3.14.25. 42 Cass. Dio 75[74].2.4–6 (transl. by E. Cary). 43 Raaflaub 2000: 38. 44 Winton 2000: 106. 45 See Taylor 2000: 127–128. 46 See for example Gray 2000: 148–150. 47 Mustakallio 1994: 24–26. 48 For Dio’s criticism towards Severus, see Rantala 2016 (forthcoming). 49 Cass. Dio 76[75].8.4; Herod. 3.8.6–7; SHA Sev. 13. Historia Augusta provides 41 names: Mummius Secundinus, Asellius Claudianus, Claudius Rufus, Vitalius Victor, Papius Faustus, Aelius Celsus, Julius Rufus, Lollius Professus, Aurunculeius Cornelianus, Antonius Balbus, Postumius Severus, Sergius Lustralis, Fabius Paulinus, Nonius Gracchus, Masticius Fabianus, Casperius Agrippinus, Ceionius Albinus, Claudius Sulpicianus, Memmius Rufinus, Casperius Aemilianus, Cocceius Verus, Erucius Clarus, Aelius Stilo, Clodius Rufinus, Egnatuleius Honoratus, Petronius Junior, the six Pescennii, Festus, Veratianus, Aurelianus, Materianus, Julianus and Albinus; the three Cerellii, Macrinus, Faustinianus and Julianus; Herennius Nepos, Sulpicius Canus,Valerius Catullinus, Novius Rufus, Claudius Arabianus and Marcius Asellio. In SHA Pesc. Nig. 6.4. it is also claimed that Severus put ‘a countless number’ of senators to death. 50 For discussion, see Jacques 1992: 119–144. 51 Cass. Dio 76[75].7.3–4. 52 Cass. Dio on Trajan: 68[67].6.3–4; 68.7.3. Hadrian: 69[68].7.1; Marcus Aurelius: 72[71].35–36. 53 These included his self-made adoption as a son of Marcus Aurelius, and his public honours to Commodus and Sulla (Cass. Dio 76[75].8.1–4). To these actions I will return in this study. 54 Cass. Dio 76[75].8.4. 55 Dowling 2006: 280–282. 56 It is interesting to note the use of clementia in Clodius Albinus’ propaganda, as the concept appears on his coinage (BMC 5 pp. 64–65, nos. 269–270). It is possible that Albinus attempted to use a very familiar concept in Roman political life, and this could support stories about the senators’ goodwill towards him. For discussion, see Rantala 2016 (forthcoming). On the other hand, it should also be noted that Septimius Severus’ disregard for the senate and, occasionally, his hostility towards it, does not mean that all the administrative power of the senate was declining. On a practical level, Severus’ administration was quite traditional, and senators still held all the most important administrative offices and governorships. In the legal sense, the reign of Septimius Severus did not mean more autocratic government in every-day politics and administration. He was mostly following the practice already created during the time of Augustus, and he maintained the prominent role of the senatorial class. Campbell 2005: 11–12. 57 Cass. Dio 75[74].7; SHA Sev. 11.3–5, 12.7–9. 58 Cass. Dio 76[75].8.1.

60  Organising the Ludi Saeculares 59 For Augustus as an example for Septimius Severus, see Barnes 2008: 251–267; Cooley 2007: 385–401. 60 There is a wide range of research on Sulla – see, for example, Keaveney 2005. 61 Cass. Dio 33.109.2 (transl. E. Cary). 62 Cass. Dio 33.109.6–10. 63 For Augustus and Marius in Dio’s history, see Rantala 2016 (forthcoming). 64 For example, in 41.60, Dio describes the battle between the Romans (in bce 48) as a true ‘epic’, with many incredible, almost supernatural things occurring during the fighting. 65 Hannestad 1988: 268. 66 Liv. 1.7. See also Dion.Hal. Ant. Rom. 1.87 and Tac. Ann. 12.24. 67 Patterson, Richmond & Strong 2003: 1099–1100; Zanker 1988: 65–70. 68 For example, Cass. Dio 72[71].24; Gal. 13.362; Oros. 7.16.3. 69 Gorrie 2002: 472–473. 70 Wissowa 2003: 333–334. 71 Liv. 5.39–48. 72 For the history and development of the Capitoline Hill, see Reusser 1993: 232–234 and Tagliamonte 1993: 226–231. 73 Gorrie 2002: 470–471. 74 Herod. 2.9.6. 75 Cass. Dio 73[72].23.1–2. 76 For Julia Domna’s statue: CIL 6.36934. For other dedications honouring the Severan family in the Forum: CIL 6.36898, 36901, 36921, 36927, 36929, 36932, 36933. 77 Gorrie 2002: 468–470. 78 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 71–73. 79 Birley 1999: 155; Brilliant 1967: 8788; De Maria 1988: 181; Lusnia 2006: 292–293. 80 Gorrie 2002: 471–472. For the Flavian dynasty and its rise to power, see Mellor 2003: 69–101. 81 Hekster 2007: 97–99. 82 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 15–24. 83 The Tarentum has sometimes been called Terentum as well – see Schnegg-Köhler 2002: 186–200 for discussion. I have used the term Tarentum in this study, as this seems to be the case in most modern studies. 84 Gorrie 2002: 474–475. 85 Gorrie 2002: 475–476. 86 Strabo 5.3.8 (transl. H. L. Jones).The chronology of the development of the Campus Martius is provided in Jacobs II & Conlin 2014: 177–180. 87 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 5.13.2. 88 Liv. 2.5.2. See also Plut. Publ. 8.1. 89 Juv. 6.522–526. 90 Serv. Comm. in Verg. Aen. 9.272. 91 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 14.

Bibliography Ando, C. (2012). Imperial Rome ad 193 to 284. A Critical Century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Barnes, T. (2008). Aspects of the Severan Empire, Part I: Severus as a New Augustus. NECJ, 35.4, pp. 251–267.

Organising the Ludi Saeculares  61 Beard, M. (1990). Priesthood in the Roman Republic. In: M. Beard, and J. North, eds., Pagan Priests. Religion and Power in the Ancient World, 1st ed. London: Duckworth, pp. 17–48. Benario, H. (1958). Rome of the Severi. Latomus, 17, pp. 712–718. Birley, A. (1999). Septimius Severus. The African Emperor. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Bowman, A. (2005). Egypt from Septimius Severus to the Death of Constantine. CAH, XII, pp. 313–326. Brilliant, R. (1967). The Arch of Septimius Severus in the Roman Forum. Rome: American Academy in Rome. Campbell, B. (2005). The Severan Dynasty. CAH XII, pp. 393–439. Cooley, A. (2007). Septimius Severus: The Augustan emperor. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 385–400. De Blois, L. (1997). Volk und Soldaten bei Cassius Dio. ANRW, II.34.3, pp. 2650–2676. De Maria, S. (1988). Gli archi onorari di Roma e dell’Italia Romana. Roma: Erna di Bretschneider. Dowling, M. (2006). Clemency and Cruelty in the Roman World. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Gorrie, C. (2002). The Severan building programme and the Secular Games. Athenaeum, 90.2, pp. 461–481. Gowing, A. (1992). The Triumviral narratives of Appian and Cassius Dio. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Gray, V. (2000). Xenophon and Isocrates. In: C. Rowe and M. Schofield, eds., The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 142–155. Halfmann, H. (1979). Die Senatoren aus dem östlichen Teil des Imperium Romanum bis zum Ende des 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Hannestad, N. (1988). Roman Art and Imperial Policy. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Hekster, O. (2007). Fighting for Rome: The emperor as a military leader. In: L. De Blois and E. Lo Cascio, eds., The Impact of the Roman Army (200 bc–ad 476). Economic, Social, Political and Cultural Aspects, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 91–105. Hopkins, K. (1983). Death and Renewal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hülsen, C. (1932). Neue fragmente der acta ludorum saecularium von 204 nach Chr. Rh. Mus., N. F. 81, pp. 367–394. Hänninen, M.-L. (2000). Women as Worshippers of Juno. From the Mid-Republican to the Augustan Era. Helsinki: University of Helsinki (unpublished PhD dissertation). Jacques, F. (1992). Les nobiles exécutés par Septime Sévère selon l’Histoire Auguste: liste de proscription ou enumeration fantaisiste? Latomus, 51, pp. 119–144. Jacobs II, P. and Conlin, D. (2014). Campus Martius. The Field of Mars in the Life of Ancient Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Keaveney, A. (2005). Sulla: the Last Republican. 2nd edition. London: Routledge. Lewis, N. and Meyer, R. (1955). Roman Civilization. Selected Readings vol. II: The Empire. New York: Columbia University Press. Lusnia, S. (2006). Battle Imaginary and Politics on the Severan Arch in the Roman Forum. In: S. Dillon and K. Welch, eds., Representations of War in Ancient Rome, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 272–299. Mellor, R. (2003). The New Aristocracy of Power. In: A. Boyle and W. Dominik, eds., Flavian Rome. Culture, Image, Text, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 69–101. Millar, F. (1964). A Study of Cassius Dio. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

62  Organising the Ludi Saeculares Millar, F. (1977). The Emperor in the Roman World (31 bc–ad 227). New York: Cornell University Press. Moran, J. (1999). Severus and Traditional Auctoritas. In: E. Dal Covolo and G. Rinaldi, eds., Gli Imperatori Severi, 1st ed. Roma: LAS, pp. 31–38. Mustakallio, K. (1994). Death and Disgrace. Capital Penalties with Post Mortem Sanctions in Early Roman Historiography. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica. Patterson, J., Richmond, I and Strong, D. (2003). Palatine. OCD, pp. 1099–1100. Parke,H. (1988). Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity. London: Routledge. Pighi, G. (1965). De ludi saecularibus populi Romani Quiritum libri sex, 2nd edition. Amsterdam: Verlag P. Schippers N.V. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge. Raaflaub, K (2000). Poets, lawgivers and the beginnings of political reflection in Archaic Greece. In: C. Rowe and M. Schofield, Malcolm, eds., The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23–59. Rantala, J. (2011). No Place for the Dead: Ludi Saeculares of 17 bc and the Purificatory Cults of May as Part of the Roman Ritual Year. In: C. Krötzl and K. Mustakallio, eds., On Old Age. Approaching Death in Antiquity and the Middle Ages, 1st ed. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, pp. 235–251. Rantala, J. (2016). ’Dio the Dissident: The Portrait of Severus in the Roman History. In: C. Lange and J. Madsen, eds., Cassius Dio. Greek Intellectual and Roman Politician, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill (forthcoming). Reusser, C. (1993). Capitolium (Republik und Kaiserzeit). LTUR, vol. 1, pp. 232–234. Schnegg-Köhler, B. (2002). Die augusteischen Säkularspiele. Leipzig: K.G. Saur Verlag. Schumacher, L. (1978). Die vier hohen römischen Priesterkollegien unter den Flaviern, den Antoninen und den Severern (69–235 n. Chr.). ANRW, II.16., pp. 655–819. Sidebottom, H. (2007). Severan historiography. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 52–82. Swain, S. (1996). Hellenism and Empire. Language, Classicism and Power in the Greek world, ad 50–250. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tagliamonte, G. (1993). Capitolium (fino alla prima età repubblicana). LTUR, vol. 1, pp. 226–231. Taylor, C. (2000). Democritus. In: C. Rowe and M. Schofield, eds., The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 122–129. Winton, R. (2000). Herodotus, Thucydides and the sophists. In: C. Rowe and M. Schofield, eds., The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 89–121. Wissowa, G. (2003). The Historical Development of Roman Religion: An Overview. In: C. Ando, ed., Roman Religion, 1st ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 330–357. Zanker, P. (1988). The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

4 The opening night and day

We here progress from a discussion of the organisation of the games to an analysis of the ceremonies of the first night and day. As I explained in the introduction, the main foci of this study are the contemporary political and social aspects of the Severan Secular games, rather than their nature as religious rituals as such. Accordingly, the basic assumption shall be kept in mind: the rituals and the different details included in them, as well as their significance for the audience, are connected to the political, cultural and social contexts of their own period. In other words, the rituals do not have a fixed ‘meaning’, but are always connected to the values and ideas of the period in which they are conducted. This approach means that we must not only focus on the rituals themselves, but also bear in mind the wider picture (for example, the role and significance of different gods, the types of rituals and the compositions of the groups taking part in the games). Examining their general position in contemporary society can help us understand their role in the inscription and the significance of their inclusion. This principle obviously applies to the following chapters as well.

The rituals of the first night The first rituals were conducted during the night, between the 31 May and the 1 June, in the Tarentum (where the nocturnal rituals taking place on other nights of the festival were held too). Before the actual sacrifices, an opening prayer was conducted. The prayer was offered by Septimius Severus, Caracalla and Geta, and the rest of the quindecimviri members. Unfortunately, this part of the inscription is very fragmentary. It does nonetheless indicate that the two senior Vestal Virgins, Numisia Maximilla and Terentia Flavola, were also present when the prayer was performed.1 This seems to be a Severan novelty, as the Augustan inscription does not mention the Vestals taking part of the celebration in 17 bce, and the extensive numismatic evidence remaining from Domitian’s games does not show Vestals either. It is, of course, possible that the Vestals were present in the previous festivals too – compared to other inscriptions, such as the Augustan one, for example, the Severan record is much more detailed. It could be that the role of the Vestals in the earlier games

64  The opening night and day was simply left out of the inscriptions.2 However, even if this was the case, it should also be noted that the role of the Vestals was nevertheless regarded in ce 204 as a very important detail of the ritual, as their presence was included in the inscription, despite their absence from the previous records. In other words, it seems that their role was, for the first time in the history of Ludi Saeculares, preserved in public memoria. After the opening ceremonies, the emperor performed a sacrifice to the Greek goddesses Moirae. The victims consisted of nine female lambs and nine she-goats. This part of the inscription is quite fragmentary as well, but the ritual seems to follow the Augustan example quite closely (lambs and shegoats are mentioned in the Augustan inscription and one of Domitian’s coins seems to portray an image of the sacrifice of a goat and a sheep/she-goat at the Tarentum). At the same time, the emperor gave a prayer in which he asked for blessings for the Roman people, the quindecimviri, and for himself, his house and his family (p. R. Q., XVuirum collegio, mihi, domui, familiae).3 After the sacrifices to the Moirae, the programme continued with theatrical performances that were conducted in a wooden theatre without seats. The first night was concluded by a sellisternium to honour the goddesses Juno and Diana. It was celebrated by 110 Roman matrons, among them the empress Julia Domna ­acting as their leader.4 The rituals of the first night give rise to many questions. Who were the Moirae to whom sacrifices were made and what was their role in the ritual? Why were the Vestals involved in the opening prayer, as they seem to not appear in the records of the earlier Ludi Saeculares? And, finally, what is the role of the sellisternium of the Roman mothers in the games, and what was the significance of that ritual for Septimius Severus? A quest for a happy destiny The Moirae, to whom the first sacrifices were made, was a common name for the three Greek goddesses of destiny; the individual names being Clotho, Atropos and Lachesis. All of them had a function of their own. Clotho spun the thread of life for the souls of those born in the world; Atropos, on the other hand, cut the thread of life of a person, when he/she was about to die – apparently this was preordained. Lachesis’ duty was to apportion, for each soul, the important events and circumstances which would affect and shape that person’s life course.5 It seems that the goddesses were quite significant deities in the Greek world, as they not only appear in Greek literature from the earliest times of Homer until the last Hellenistic period, but they were also worshipped in many Greek cities. This was also the case in the Roman Empire, since Pausanias, a Greek writer who lived during the Antonine era, records that the Moirae had sanctuaries at Olympia, Corinth, Sparta and Thebes.6 The Romans called the three goddesses the Parcae, or the Fata (sometimes other names were also used as well, such as Tria Fata, Tres Fortunae, Tres Parcae or Tres Fatae).7 Despite the different names and some differences that

The opening night and day  65 the Parcae and the Fata might have had in archaic Rome, the later Romans apparently considered these two as the same.8 For the Romans, the names of the three different goddesses were Nona for the first, Decima for the second and Morta or Parca for the third, as Aulus Gellius (citing Varro) records. The names seem to indicate that they were closely connected with birth. Nona and Decima (‘ninth’ and ‘tenth’) refer to children born following nine or ten months of gestation, and name Parca is related to Latin word parere – to give birth. However, Gellius also records that sometimes the third goddess was called Morta, which relates to the Greek name Moira.9 From the time of Catullus and the Augustan poets, the Parcae often appear as goddesses spinning the threads of fate, reciting or singing a song of fate, for example, while determining the life and death of each individual.10 In Roman coinage, they appear as late as ce 286, when Diocletian issued coins depicting them next to the text Fatis Victricibus.11 However, while the Greek Moirae were important in Greek literature, and were worshipped in Greek religion, their worship in Roman state religion seems to be quite rare. In fact, the Augustan Ludi Saeculares were apparently the first occasion on which the Moirae were worshipped that way,12 and even after Augustus, there is no evidence of the worshipping the goddesses by the state in other occasions than during the Secular Games. It is noteworthy that even if the goddesses to whom the emperor dedicated a prayer are described as the Moirae in the Augustan inscription, the poem written by Horace for that same occasion (Carmen Saeculare) mentions them (the Fates) with the Latin name Parcae: You Fates, who truly tell what has once decreed (and may that be preserved by the immovable landmark of our fortunes), add a happy destiny to what has already been fulfilled.13 A new poem, now partly preserved, was composed for the Severan games and was included in the inscription (see Chapter Seven). The Severan Carmen refers to many deities which also appear in the poem of Horace, but it does not mention any goddesses of destiny, neither Moirae nor Parcae/Fata, although this may be due the fragmentary nature of the inscription. As a sacrifice was reserved to them during the rituals, it seems likely that the part containing the goddesses was once there but is now simply lost. What can then be suggested about the role of the Moirae during the Severan Ludi Saeculares? One explanation could be that the goddesses were connected to Severus’ marriage laws, as children (and their upbringing) were an important part of the new moral values supported by the emperor. Septimius Severus’ interest in moral legislation is recorded in many sources; it seems that the emperor was particularly strict where the crime of adultery was concerned. Cassius Dio, for example, notes how Severus punished individuals acting unchastely.14 Moreover, he records that during the reign of Severus, soldiers were allowed to get married – an act which promoted family life.15 It is then

66  The opening night and day possible that, during the games, the goddesses of destiny were addressed for the protection for children, and especially for mothers giving birth. However, it should also be noted that as the Ludi Saeculares marked the changing of the saeculum, the period could be seen as the beginning of a new lifespan for the whole communitas. Therefore, it could be argued that the prayers made to the Moirae, in which requests for happy destinies were placed, were also a request for a fortunate next saeculum for the community. After all, the Moirae were not solely deities of childbirth, but were also connected to the whole span of life. As a result, it seems more plausible that the role of the Moirae was related to the protection of the whole communitas, rather than a more specific group, such as children or women. This idea about the central role of the commonwealth during the first nocturnal rites is somewhat strengthened as we take a closer look at the role of the Vestals in the celebration and the ritual of sellisternium. The witness of the Vestals The inclusion of the two senior Vestal Virgins in the inscription is one of the most interesting aspects of the ritual. The Vestals appear in the opening prayer, but apparently they are not actually praying; the inscription describes that they are simply present during the opening ritual (adstantibus uirginibus Vestalibus Numisia Maximilla et Terentia Flavola).16 In other words, they are just witnessing how the emperor, his sons and the quindecimviri conducted the prayer. No other details are given in the part of the inscription which covers the opening prayer and the sacrifices of the first night (although Vestals appear again on the second day, as we shall see below). So, the question remains, why were they involved in the Severan record, as they seem to be absent from previous festivals? In order to formulate an explanation, we must take a closer look at the position of the Vestals in Severan religious policy, as well as in Roman religious life in general. The cult of Vesta received quite a lot of attention in the Severan period. The empress Julia Domna was particularly connected to the Vestal Virgins, due to the fact that she had the temple of Vesta repaired after it had been burned down in a great fire during the reign of Commodus.17 It appears that she also had the residence of the Vestals, situated next to the temple (and obviously burned down in the fire as well), restored.18 The great fire took place in ce 192 and is reported by Cassius Dio, who took the event as a portent of Commodus’ death (the emperor died quite soon after). According to Dio, the fire started at night and destroyed the temple of Peace, spreading in such a way that nearly all the state records were lost.19 Herodian mentions how the fire then swept across the city and destroyed large parts of it, including the temple of Vesta.20 Julia Domna’s devotion to the cult is depicted in the coinage of the period.21 It is claimed that her involvement with the Vestal Virgins was her way of demonstrating to the public how ‘Roman’ she was (being of Syrian descent).22 It should be noted, though, that imperial women were heavily involved with the

The opening night and day  67 Vestals before the Severans were. The empresses of the previous dynasty, the Antonines, for example, had a close relationship with the cult. However, there is one interesting detail connecting Julia Domna and the Vestals that was not a feature of the previous empresses’ reign. When she had the temple of Vesta repaired, the goddess Vesta received a new epithet: Mater (mother). This detail connects the goddess and the empress: Julia Domna took the epithet ‘mother’ to all new levels with her own honorary titles.23 This shall be further discussed later in this study. When evaluating the interest of the imperial policy towards the cult, one must remember how central the Vestals were for Roman religion and for the city of Rome itself. They were closely connected with the most important stories and myths of Roman history, having a role in the story of the birth of Rome. According to legend, the mother of the founders of the city (Romulus and Remus) was a Vestal Virgin called Rhea Silvia.24 Moreover, the institution of the Vestals was believed to be founded by legendary King Numa Pompilius, who was also considered as the founder of traditional Roman religion.25 The Vestals’ importance for the city is also highlighted by their duties. For example, they kept the objects considered most sacred to Rome, and particularly the palladium (a statue of Minerva), in their temple. According to legend, it was brought from Troy by Aeneas and thus connected the Romans to their heroic past.26 The Vestals also took care of the eternal flame, the ignis inexcintus. The fire was regarded as a symbol of their chastity, but it simultaneously symbolised the stability of the state. If the flame died out, it would be a sign of Vestal unchastity, which in turn would be disastrous for the city.27 All in all, the Vestal Virgins were synonymous with the continuing existence, and safety, of Rome.28 Another important detail that demonstrates the close relationship of the Vestal Virgins and Rome was their judicial position. They were very privileged, but also somewhat isolated. Their privileges included making their own testaments and conducting businesses of their own. They were also financially independent, as the state granted them a stipend for their services. They were nonetheless also considered outsiders to normal society. They were no longer part of their families after being taken as Vestals, and did not belong to the potestas of their father. A Vestal Virgin’s unique juridical position began from the moment, as a little girl, that she was chosen as a Vestal and was taken to the temple by the pontifex maximus. She stepped out of Roman citizenry and became a unique legal entity. Given their ritual uniqueness, the Vestals could not identify with any other category in Rome, legally or ritually. Being excluded from all other groups, they became a symbol for the whole of society. Their identity was thus based only in Romanness.29 Due to their importance, the Vestals took part in many Roman religious festivals. In particular, the chief priestess, the virgo vestalis maxima, was present in rituals like the parentalia and the fordicidia. The first celebration honoured the dead and the second was held for the fertility of the livestock.30 However, even if the rites such as those celebrated in the fordicidia can be

68  The opening night and day seen as connected to fertility, it appears that fertility as such was not the primary idea behind the ritual tasks reserved to the Vestals during that particular celebration. Instead, the primary rites that the Vestals performed in fordicidia were connected with purification and storage rites. These two concepts were apparently the two main ideas to which the Vestals’ duties were connected in Roman religion.31 So, how can the unique status of Vestals in Roman society explain their involvement in Septimius Severus’ Ludi Saeculares? Why did the emperor include the Vestal Virgins in the inscription and thus in the memoria of his games? Considering the central role of the Vestals for Rome and Romanness, their inclusion in the very opening of the Ludi Saeculares could perhaps be seen as a manifestation of Septimius Severus’ own unique position in Rome. As was previously noted, the Vestals were the symbol of the city itself and, of all the priestly groups, they were the most connected to Rome. The attention that the Vestal Virgins received during the Severan dynasty, both during the Ludi Saeculares and in general, could be explained by their special status as the most important symbol of Romanness. In other words, the fact that they were, for example, heavily involved with stories about the foundation of the city might explain their inclusion in the Secular Games – after all, the Ludi Saeculares were occasions which not only celebrated the passing of a saeculum, but also the rebirth of the city and the new Golden Age of Rome. Moreover, the Vestals’ role with the emperor at the very beginning of the festival was a message to the public – for those who witnessed the ritual themselves as well as for those who saw the reports about the rites in the inscription. The connection of the Vestal Virgins with the emperor imparted the idea that Rome – with which the Vestals had such a strong relationship – was closely related to the person of the emperor himself. In fact, as the emperor led the opening prayer (and later the first sacrifices) with the Vestal Virgins present, he also indicated that the Vestals were, in some ways, dependent on him. Severus, who led the sacrifices, can almost be seen as the head of a family, and other participants, like the Vestals, as the other members of his household. This can be observed by evaluating the nature of the private cults and their relationship to the public cults of Rome. In Roman religion, the private cults were usually practiced among families. There are some signs that the family cults were a religious world separate from state cult, in which members of the family could achieve a personal religious experience and a sense of community, which was perhaps impossible for a private person to find in public worship. On the other hand, there were many religious festivals which consisted of both state and private cults. Sometimes, a central ritual was performed in the city and it was accompanied by family rites; on some occasions, the reported rituals were conducted in the home, but there was, most likely, also a corresponding public celebration.32 The private cults were led by the head of the family, the paterfamilias. It was his responsibility to maintain the traditional rites of the family and to pass them on to his descendants. It is interesting, for example, to note the similarities existing

The opening night and day  69 with the description of Cato the Elder about the ceremonies in the country estates, where the whole household gathered to purify the fields and ask the gods to protect the crops and cattle using the prayer of the emperor in the Ludi Saeculares. The formula of the prayer in this old family ritual was very similar to the one used in the Secular Games, when the emperor, upon sacrificing, gave prayer to the gods to whom the offering was made (the same prayer is present in both the Augustan and the Severan inscriptions). The person who conducted the prayer (the paterfamilias or the emperor) asked for blessings for ‘me, my house and my household.’33 As in the traditional family ritual, those witnessing the prayer were the other members of the household; in the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204, those ‘family members’ were actually, in the opening ritual, the Vestal Virgins (alongside other officials who witnessed the event). Pacifying the gods Another ritual which took place in the opening night was the performance of the sellisternium in honour of Juno and Diana by 110 Roman matrons. The exact rituals carried out during the sellisternium are not described in the inscription; there are just a few lines indicating the occasion and the presence of the empress Julia Domna among the matrons. Apparently, they followed a standard procedure for these kinds of rituals.34 The details of the sellisternium as a religious ritual are not very well known. Even if the ritual is apparently very old, there are, for example, no known cases from the republican era. However, it is very likely that it resembled the lectisternium, a ritual about which we possess some information.35 The lectisternium was a very old purification rite which probably had its roots in Greece; Greek religion maintained a similar ritual, known as theoxenia.36 The lectisternium was already celebrated in republican Rome. The oldest literary record of the ritual occurred as early as 399 bce. According to Roman tradition, the city suffered a ‘severe winter’, followed by a ‘pestilential summer’, which were fatal for both people and animals. The senate ordered the Sibylline Books to be consulted and consequently the quindecimviri, who took care of the Books, organised the lectisternium for the first time. The celebration honoured Apollo, Latona, Diana, Hercules, Mercury and Neptune. For eight days, these gods were propitiated on three couches decked with the most magnificent coverlets that could be obtained.37 It thus seems that the lectisternium (and the sellisternium) was an expiatory ceremony which ended with a banquet, during which the images of the gods were present amongst the participants. Based on the little information retrieved, it seems that during sellisternium both gods and people sat on chairs, but during the lectisternium they reclined on couches.38 It seems that, from a very early period, the lecisternium/sellisternium was connected to the goddess Juno. Juno had apparently been honoured in this way for the first time in 217 bce, during the Punic War against Carthage. Hannibal was marching through Italy, plundering the country and threatening to attack Rome. Dictator Quintus Fabius Maximus declared that the military catastrophes

70  The opening night and day experienced by the Romans were a consequence of neglecting religious duties; that the gods were displeased and that they had to be appeased through ritual. As a result, a lectisternium, alongside other rituals, was held for three days under the supervision of the quindecimviri. Six couches were reserved: one for Jupiter and Juno, another for Neptune and Minerva, the third for Mars and Venus, the fourth for Apollo and Diana, the fifth for Vulcan and Vesta and the sixth for Mercury and Ceres.39 Since the sellisternium held during the Secular Games was conducted by women, we may wonder if we are dealing with a rite honouring the two goddesses as the protectors of women especially. The first detail worth noting is that the ritual was conducted during night time. Women were normally prohibited from nocturnal rites; the only exceptions were the rites conducted on behalf of the whole community (pro populo).40 The attitude towards nocturnal rites was generally one of suspicion in Roman tradition; the most famous example is probably that of the suppression of the Bacchanalia, which had been taking place since the republican era (186 bce).41 One major reason behind this suspicion was that night-time rituals were usually associated with magic, and magical practices were not tolerated, at least officially.42 The situation remained similar in the imperial period, including the era of the Christian emperors – indeed, in ce 364, Emperor Valentinian I and Emperor Valens banned nocturnal sacrifices and magical practices.43 The attitudes towards night-time rituals in the Severan period are demonstrated by one of the earliest Christian writers, Minucius Felix.44 His work, Octavius, contains a dialogue between Caecilius Natalis, a supporter of the traditional Roman religion, and a Christian called Octavius Januarius. When Caecilius criticised Christianity, he combined all kinds of immorality with the fact that the Christians, according to him, ­worshipped their god during the night. As he stated: Others say that they actually reverence their private parts of their director and high-priest, and adore his organs as parent of their being. This may be false, but such suspicions naturally attach to their secret and nocturnal rites.45 Felix’ viewpoint was, of course, that of a Christian writer wishing to show his reader how non-Christian arguments were eventually lost to Christian ideals. However, there is no real reason to doubt that he was reproducing, in a fairly genuine manner, the rather suspicious attitude of those practising Roman state religion towards night-time rituals. After all, Minucius Felix was a well-read man who was very familiar with traditional culture.46 Another detail worth mentioning is the fact that, during the sellisternium, the sacrifice made to Juno and Diana consisted of pigs. Pigs were common offerings for neither Juno nor Diana; these animals were usually sacrificed during expiations and funerary rituals. In the cults of the birth-goddesses, bloodless victims were usually offered instead.47 As a result, it seems that the sacrifices made by women during the Ludi Saeculares were not made to Juno and Diana as protectors of women, but rather as protectors of the whole community.48

The opening night and day  71 When evaluating why the sellisternium was included in the imperial Ludi Saeculares in the first place, it can of course be suggested that the organisers chose to follow earlier traditions dating from the republican period. Unfortunately, we do not know enough about the republican festivals to confirm this hypothesis. Nevertheless, in the light of the evidence we presently possess, it seems that the roots of the games conducted during the imperial period can be traced to those of Augustus.49 Since it appears that the Severan programme follows the Augustan one quite closely, I will first examine the Augustan sellisternium and then compare it with the rituals of the Severan Ludi Saeculares. The Secular Games of 17 bce must be considered in context: that of the devastating civil war which happened just before Augustus’ reign. The memory of the war was still very much alive when Augustus conducted the games, and it strongly affected the emperor’s cultural policy.50 Bearing this in mind, one answer to the question regarding the function of the sellisternium during the 17 bce games could be that it ‘mischief of women’ was perceived as a cause for the civil wars of the late republic. This idea can be found in the Roman literary tradition. Many stories are told as examples of proper moral behaviour; and many of these also include women. Four examples, in particular, must be noted from the earliest history of Rome, as recorded by Livy, a contemporary historian of Augustus: the stories of the Roman women Horatia and Lucretia and the two Etruscans, Tanaquil and Tullia.51 Moreover, the experiences of the civil war gave inspiration to many writers, such as Virgil and Horace. The topic of these works is the reason for the civil war. The texts ponder why the Romans suffered such a terrible event. It appears that the poets’ answer was that the civil war was a punishment for moral decline. In Christian terms, we could perhaps say that it was almost like a case of ‘original sin’ – the Romans had committed a crime against the gods in the past and the guilt was transmitted to the generation of Virgil, Horace and Augustus. The civil war itself was an offence against the gods, and at the same time a punishment. But what was the crime then? According to Horace, the two main reasons were neglect of the gods and adultery of married women. As Roman women behaved immorally, their sons were not properly educated. As a result, when they grew up, they became bad soldiers and bad citizens. The problem became worse with every generation, and the only way to stop this evil process was to return to the proper ways of worshipping the gods and to carry out a moral reform.52 These views thus became one of the Augustus’ central political ideas when he established his rule after the civil war. The idea of the Augustan Ludi Saeculares was hence to especially celebrate the moral rebirth of Rome and thus the new Golden Age.53 Returning to the Severan games, we should consider whether the same explanation may be applied to the latter as well. Was the idea that immoral married women could cause troubles for the communitas still alive in the early third century? To some extent, the answer to these questions seems to be positive. The Severan context was very similar to the Augustan one, as Severus had gained power by the means of a civil war. Moreover, it is evident that

72  The opening night and day promoting family life was, for Severus’ new regime, a tool for creating an impression of stability after an uneasy period of internal struggles.54 Severus’ policy, especially his moral legislation (and later, Caracalla’s), would indeed indicate that this was the case. Furthermore, the idea of proper morals was probably an important part of Roman identity for upper-class Romans during the early third century, as can be read in Cassius Dio’s history.55 His work provides some very interesting passages, especially when he describes the reigns of Nero and Elagabalus (the third emperor of the Severan dynasty). Dio portrays these individuals as archetypes of bad emperors, and perceives their wrong conduct, their ‘unmanliness’ or effeminacy as their most severe crime.56 He also mocked Julia Domna in one instance, in describing a conversation (which most likely invented himself) between the empress and a British woman. According to Dio, the empress had made some remarks about the sexual freedom of women in Britain. The British woman answered that they fulfilled the demands of the nature in a better way than Roman women did, since they consorted openly with the best men, while Romans let themselves be debauched by the worst.57 However, the answer might not be so simple. If Julia Domna and the prominent matrons, whose participation was preserved in public memoria by the inscription, symbolised immorality and decadence, this would in practice appear as shaming the empress publicly. It is highly unlikely that Septimius Severus, who had until then only been nothing but a usurper and an outsider attempting to set up a new dynasty, would have benefited of his wife being connected to ideas of immortality and adultery. After all, not even an Augustan example survives: empress Livia is completely missing from the Augustan inscription and the names of the matrons who took part in those rituals are not mentioned either, whereas the Severan inscription includes all the names (although not at this point, but during the description of the rituals of the second day). Therefore, the purpose of displaying Julia Domna and the matrons in the inscription should probably be found elsewhere; I will return to this question later, dealing with the role of various groups of women more closely. However, at this point, we may already conclude that the ‘immorality of women’ was probably not a defining factor for the ideological background of the Severan games. In summary, the rituals of the first night seem to be emphasising the safety of the communitas. The Moirae were prayed to for protection of the new age which was about to begin, the Vestals were present to symbolise the community and the sellisternium of the matrons was held to pacify the gods on behalf of the communitas. The emperor and his sons, as well as his wife, were visibly present from the beginning, taking control of the rituals aiming to secure the happiness and the continuity of Rome until the next saeculum.

Rites of the opening day: the god and his servant The first day of the festival was dedicated to Jupiter Optimus Maximus. The Severan inscription seems to quite closely follow the Augustan model.

The opening night and day  73 Septimius Severus himself was the central figure, sacrificing two bulls to Jupiter and praying to him. Not much else is known, as the part of the inscription containing the programme for the first day is extremely fragmentary. It seems that the victims were white during the daytime rituals, when the heavenly gods were celebrated, and black during the nocturnal rites, which celebrated the chthonic gods. This was an old custom in Roman religion.58 The formula of the prayer was similar to that conducted the previous day – the emperor, once again, asked for the protection of the Roman people, of the quindecimviri and of himself, his house and his household. The sacrifice was conducted in the Capitoline hill, where stood the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, the supreme god of Rome.59 In order to understand the significance of the emperor’s sacrifice to Jupiter during the first day of the festival, we must now turn to an analysis of the position of Jupiter Optimus Maximus during the imperial period in general. This is necessary as, although he was the supreme god of the Roman pantheon, his role in imperial policy throughout history was far from stable. The father(s) of Rome Despite the centrality of Jupiter Optimus Maximus in the Roman pantheon, his importance actually varied at different times of the imperial era. Augustus, for example, did not favour the supreme god of the commonwealth, but instead chose gods which best suited his purposes, and put emphasis on worshipping them. Indeed, when Augustus was in power, Jupiter was a somewhat neglected figure compared to Apollo and Mars. A concrete example of this new context was the transfer of the Sibylline Books from the temple of Jupiter to the temple of Apollo on the Palatine.60 Another dramatic change that affected the fortunes of Jupiter occurred in ce 68, when Nero was thrown out of power and committed suicide; the days of the Julio-Claudian dynasty were then over and civil war broke out. Eventually, the following ‘year of the four emperors’ ended with the victory of Vespasian, who established the Flavian dynasty consisting of himself and his two sons, Titus and Domitian.61 The Flavian dynasty is sometimes called ‘bourgeois’.62 There is some substance behind this claim, as Vespasian came from a family of municipal nobles and had his roots in the equestrian class. Suetonius reports how Vespasian was chosen to put down rebellions in Judea in late 60s ce, as it seemed safe to give such a large army to a man with such an obscure family and name.63 The Flavian dynasty was highly successful in restoring peace, confidence and authority in imperial office. Ways of achieving these included, amongst others, the successful ending of the Jewish war, the stabilisation of the provinces and the strengthening of the administration. The Flavians’ building activity is also noteworthy. Existing temples and other buildings on the Capitolium, the Campus Martius and other central areas in the capital, were repaired and restored, while new constructions were erected.64 Lots of similarities can thus be found with the Flavians and the Severans – both can be considered as

74  The opening night and day outsiders, both had to restore peace after the civil war as well as legitimise their rule, and both conducted a large building programme in the capital. Establishing a new dynasty was obviously problematic for the new rulers (both in the first and the third century ce, one might add). For Vespasian, it was not possible to legitimise his power with blood ties to the family of Augustus, which had been the case until Nero. The new ruler thus needed a new emphasis on divine sanction. As a result, Vespasian gave Jupiter Optimus Maximus a central role in his propaganda. However, even if the importance of Jupiter is noticeable in Vespasian’s propaganda (as well as Titus’), it was Domitian who truly made Jupiter the central figure in imperial ideology.65 Domitian’s coinage, which connects Jupiter with warfare, transmitted an interesting message from ce 85 onwards: the emperor served as the ‘warrior of Jupiter’, acting on behalf of mankind. The coins celebrated victory over the tribe of Chatti and depicted the emperor as a warrior who had fought Jupiter’s war, restored the order and repelled threatening disorder. Domitian’s role was a constant subject in coinage during the last decade of his reign. The themes complemented each other: Jupiter protected and gave victory to the emperor, while the latter protected the human race.66 The period of Domitian’s reign was thus central to the so called ‘Jovian theology’.67 This is possibly connected to the fact that the evolution of monarchy in the Roman world demanded a more unifying political mythology. This unity was provided by worship of the rulers (living and dead) as well as the cult of Jupiter, who was the most prominent of the gods and (especially from Domitian’s time onwards) very closely connected to the emperor.68 However, the reign of Trajan was also pivotal. Pliny the Younger, a writer contemporary with Trajan, deals with the relationship between the emperor and Jupiter in his Panegyricus. In his text, Trajan is depicted as the emperor chosen by Jupiter; his duty is to rule well, to benefit the commonwealth.69 During the Antonine period, the role of Jupiter was stabilised. He frequently appeared in coinage, for example, but in quite an undramatic way. However, it appears that during the reign of Commodus, Jupiter once again received more attention from the emperor. Commodus faced no difficulties in justifying his power, since as the son of Marcus Aurelius, his rise to the throne was legitimised by his membership to the Antonine dynasty. Nonetheless, he placed a new emphasis on the ‘Jovian theology’, in a similar style to Domitian and Trajan. The Commodian Jupiter was thus once again used to highlight the emperor’s role as an intermediate between the god and his subjects. The emperor’s responsibility was to take care of the well-being of his subjects, and this time, the themes of the coinage featuring Jupiter propagated a new Golden Age under Commodus.70 When Septimius Severus took power and established the new dynasty in ce 193, his rule had to be legitimised. It was impossible for him to claim power on the basis of his membership to the ruling dynasty (thus having a similar problem with Vepasian in ce 69). Thus, if the Vespasian background was not noble but ‘bourgeois’, Severus was in no better position. As we

The opening night and day  75 noted above, the concept that the emperor was a warrior of Jupiter, whose duty was to rule rightfully and to do good for his people, was put forward during the Flavian period (and then stabilised during the Antonine era). The beginning of the Severan era apparently underwent a similar process: Severus strove to establish a new regime by using Jupiter. He marked his victory over Pescennius Niger by issuing a coin honouring the god who had proclaimed Severus’ election. In the same year (ce 194), another type appeared. It depicted Septimius Severus and Jupiter clasping hands, with Severus in military garb and holding a spear. Another coin, presenting Septimius Severus and Jupiter both holding a globe in their clasped hands, conveyed an image of the god and his ‘warrior servant’. The thunderbolt, Jupiter’s symbol, was also included on the arch of Lepcis Magna, in the emperor’s home town. On the arch, the emperor is depicted in a peaceful scene, performing a sacrifice but also holding a thunderbolt in his hand.71 On the other hand, it should be remembered that Severus’ association with Jupiter was a very traditional choice. Severus indeed used images of the supreme god in very similar ways to those of many previous emperors.72 Adherence to this tradition probably helped him establish his connection to the Antonine rulers. In the Ludi Saeculares, during which Severus offered a sacrifice to Jupiter for the well-being of the community, his relationship with the deity was highlighted and the ‘Jovian theology’ – established since the reign of Domitian – was brought forth. Obtaining an Antonine-like role in his relation to Jupiter, Severus wished to present himself as the ‘warrior of Jupiter’ and as a ruler who would serve Jupiter in guaranteeing the happiness of mankind. In fact, what the emperor’s ‘warrior’ position indicates is that he was acting as a patronus for the Romans. He was the protector and provider who ensured his people’s safety, but was also as a patron whose duty was to, traditionally, offer benefits, favours and services. This was, in reality, the system upon which Roman society was based; on the network of social relationships between, for example, families (and family members), kinsmen, dependants of all kinds of friends, patrons and clients (both inside and outside the household).73 Septimius Severus’ paternal role in the Ludi Saeculares thus becomes evident as the inscription describes the sacrifice he conducted. Following the example given by Augustus, Severus bound his own destiny (and that of his family) with the city’s, acting as a father for the country, the pater patriae, the provider of peace and continuity. The concept of pater patriae was of course very common in the Roman imperial era. As early as the republican days, it was a title given to individuals in gratitude for great deeds carried out towards the city. Cicero was among those who received the title in 63 bce (on revealing the Catilinan conspiracy). Julius Caesar and most of the Julio-Claudian emperors also received the salutation, and most of the subsequent emperors were similarly granted the title by the senate. It is sometimes even claimed that the title was nothing more than a perfunctory honour from the first century onwards, being part of the normal procedure for the senate’s recognition of a new emperor.74 This explanation, however, may be too simplistic. The importance attached to

76  The opening night and day family values changed in imperial policy from time to time, and it is probable that whenever marriage, ‘proper’ morals and similar ideas were emphasised by emperors, the concept of pater patriae also received more substance. It is very likely that in the Severan period, when imperial policy highlighted the values of families and good moral behaviour, people pondered over their relationship with the emperor by means of family values. For example, monuments such as arch of the argentarii in Rome – which was probably erected in the same year as the celebration of the Secular Games – described Julia Domna as mater Augusti nostra et castrorum et senatus et patriae. Describing an empress as ‘our mother’ probably provoked some thought on family values and on the different roles of the imperial family’s members.75 These monuments created a common language to which the communitas could relate: it (this language) represented the imperial family as the first family in the empire.76 The role of the emperor as a father-figure was thus made quite evident as he performed a sacrifice to the heavenly protector of Rome, Jupiter Optimus Maximus, on behalf of the people. This role was, moreover, evident in the

Figure 4.1  Septimius Severus and Julia performing a sacrifice as a couple in the relief from the Arcus Argentariorum. Originally, prince Geta accompanied the imperial couple, but his image was removed after he was murdered by Caracalla (photo: Jussi Rantala).

The opening night and day  77 nocturnal rituals, when he asked for protection, and for his house and his family. This phenomenon can essentially be interpreted as Septimius Severus’ way of demonstrating that the people of Rome were actually his family, and were under his protection. It must be noted, however, that the theme of the family was not specific to the first day: it, in fact, became even more relevant during the second night and day of the Ludi Saeculares, when 110 respectable Roman matrons, led by the empress Julia Domna herself, took a central role in the celebration. Before further addressing this issue, it is necessary to first discuss the role of the emperor himself as a protector and provider of the community in a wider context, especially that of the imperial cult. Divine Severus? The roots of Roman imperial cult lie in the policies of Julius Caesar. During his reign, Caesar received honours which had never given to a mortal ruler before. The most notable are the statue with an inscription describing him as a demigod (erected in 46 bce, after the battle of Thapsus, by the degree of the senate), the inscription describing him as an ‘invincible god’ (erected a year after the first one in the temple of Quirinalis), and finally, the extraordinary honours he is said to have received from the senate a year before his death. The latter was the title of divus Iulius (normally attributed to gods only) and a personal cult given by the state, including a temple and a priest (flamen), to take care of his cult. The claim that Caesar was considered as an actual god can be disputed, however. Sources describing the process are sometimes ambivalent and are written after Caesar’s time. Moreover, it appears that the honours were first and foremost directed towards Caesar’s ability to rule and benefit his subject. He was honoured as a new founder of the city, and for his divine abilities, but it is quite probable that he was not considered as a living god. Besides, as we have seen, the nature of Roman religion differs heavily from that of Christianity. Indeed, while a question such as ‘what is god’ would, at first glance, appear to be extremely basic one for any religion, it appears that no attempts are made, in Roman religious text, to solve this problem. On the other hand, it appears that no living emperor after Caesar took the title of divus. If this was out of fear of what happened to Caesar, we cannot say; however, it would indicate that Caesar’s status was indeed special compared to those of both his predecessors and descendants.77 Augustus, as the first emperor of Rome, took more steps towards establishing imperial cult practices, although he – or his followers – never declared themselves as living gods.78 However, Augustus did highlight the fact that he was the son of deified Caesar; not a god but at least a son of a divus. Moreover, Augustus was represented as a godlike figure in visual arts and poetry,79 and the strong identification he made to Apollo underlined his godlike appearance.80 The most powerful manifestations of the ruler-cult, however, appeared at the local level. A tradition, which probably dated back as far as Rome’s more ancient days, consisted of celebrating the Ludi Compitales. These were religious

78  The opening night and day feasts held amongst small communities; initially amongst a few farms situated in proximity to each other, and later amongst the different city districts, when Rome had developed into a large capital. During these festivals, the lares were worshipped: they were the spirits of the dead ancestors of the households situated in each district. The festival was banned during the late republic, as it was sometimes considered as a politically dangerous occasion. However, when Augustus restructured the city and created new districts and wards, he revived these local cults, introducing the worshipping of the lares Augusti, the emperor’s ancestors, and the genius Augusti, in each ward.81 It should be noted, however, that these cults, promoted by Augustus, were not directly part of the state cults, even if the Roman state encouraged their performance and treated their leaders with small rewards and privileges.82 The cult of the emperors took off during the reign of the later Julio-Claudian rulers Caligula, Claudius and Nero (in 31–68 ce). It was probably also supported by Claudius, who had initiated the practice of worshipping the genius of the living emperor.83 While it is possible that this practice dwindled during the early Flavian dynasty,84 the cult of the emperors had nevertheless become an important factor in Roman religious life, although ways of worship varied immensely. There was indeed no single imperial ‘cult’; rather the empire hosted was a wide collection of different religious practices. These consisted, for example, of offerings to the health of the living emperor and his family members, of sacrifices honouring the dead, of the deification of rulers, and of the emperors’ birthday celebrations. All these ceremonies involved a great number of different deities. The type and nature of worship also depended on the worshippers’ status. Differences of course existed between the eastern and western parts of the empire, although geographical boundaries are not clear in this case: for example, traditional (‘western’) civic cults were practiced wherever there were Roman citizens, including east. In addition, emperors sometimes identified so heavily with certain gods that worshipping the god could also be seen as a form of worshipping the emperor (Augustus and Apollo being a prime example of this, of course). Although this was not directly a case of imperial worship, it nevertheless highlighted the close relationship of the emperor with divine powers.85 It is important to note, however, that cults of the emperors never replaced traditional state religion and its gods. The Roman pantheon framed the practice of the ruler-cult. Both types of worship existed alongside each other, imperial worship fitting with the traditional gods and goddesses. All in all, the so-called cult of the emperors was a vast ­collection of practices.86 In attempting to understand the development of the imperial cult, some observations can be made. It is, for example, very interesting that the worship of the imperial genius once again received the attention of the state in the late second and early third centuries. The phenomenon appeared during the reign of the last Antonine rulers, Marcus Aurelius and Commodus, as well as the Severans. From the reign of Marcus Aurelius onwards, a sacrifice to the imperial genius is recorded in the acts of the Arval Brothers.87 The acts indicate

The opening night and day  79 that from that point onwards, it became a continuous process for most of the emperors following Aurelius. We can find evidence for it during the reigns of Commodus, Caracalla (211–217), Severus Alexander (222–235) and Gordian III (238–244). Records are not preserved for the reign of Septimius Severus, but it is nonetheless very likely that Severus continued the process. As a result, it can be suggested that imperial cult was boosted immediately before and during the Severan period.88 We can also trace attempts at highlighting imperial cult from the acts of Septimius Severus, and this was expanded to other imperial family members as well. For example, no rulers before the Severans were associated with such a large number of different gods. Empress Julia Domna identified with at least ten different female deities.89 Especially noteworthy are Severus’ actions towards the memory of Pertinax. Severus wanted to act as his avenger, and thus gave the following orders, as Dio records: Upon establishing himself in power he erected a shrine to Pertinax, and commanded that his name should be mentioned at the close of all prayers and all oaths; he also ordered that a golden image of Pertinax should be carried into the Circus on a car drawn by elephants, and that three gilded thrones should be borne into the other amphitheatres in his honour.90 It is hardly insignificant that Severus adopted the name of Pertinax (thus calling himself Severus Pertinax), before the senate even officially granted it to him. Apparently, he had already used the title during his stay in Pannonia in 193, before he left for Rome to fight for the throne against Didius Julianus.91 Having established his connection with the previous emperor, Severus highlighted the divine status of Pertinax by organising a magnificent funeral for him. The significance of these events is demonstrated by Dio, who describes them in extreme detail. The lengthy passage goes as follows: His funeral, in spite of the time that had elapsed since his death, was carried out as follows. In the Roman Forum a wooden platform was constructed hard by the marble rostra, upon which was set a shrine, without walls, but surrounded by columns, cunningly wrought of both ivory and gold. In it there was placed a bier of the same materials, surrounded by heads of both land and sea animals and adorned with coverlets of purple and gold. Upon this rested an effigy of Pertinax in wax, laid out in triumphal garb; and a comely youth was keeping the flies away from it with peacock feathers, as though it were really a person sleeping. While the body lay in state, Severus as well as we senators and our wives approached, wearing mourning; the women sat in the porticos, and we men under the open sky. After this there moved past, first, images of all the famous Romans of old, then choruses of boys and men, singing a dirge-like hymn to Pertinax; there followed all the subject nations, represented by bronze figures attired in native dress, and the guilds of the City itself — those of

80  The opening night and day the lictors, the scribes, the heralds and all the rest. Then came images of other men who had been distinguished for some exploit or invention or manner of life. Behind these were the cavalry and infantry in armour, the race-horses, and all the funeral offerings that the emperor and we senators and our wives, and the corporations of the City, had sent. Following them came an altar gilded all over and adorned with ivory and gems of India. When these had passed by, Severus mounted the rostra and read a eulogy of Pertinax. We shouted our approval many times in the course of his address, now praising and now lamenting Pertinax, but our shouts were loudest when he concluded. Finally, when the bier was about to be moved, we all lamented and wept together. It was brought down from the platform by the high priests and the magistrates, not only those who were actually in office at the time by also those who had been elected for the ensuing year; and they gave it to certain knights to carry. All the rest of us, now, marched ahead of the bier, some beating our breasts and others playing a dirge on the flute, but the emperor followed behind all the rest; and in this order we arrived at the Campus Martius. There a pyre had been built in the form of a tower having three stories and adorned with ivory and gold as well as a number of statues, while on its very summit was placed a gilded chariot that Pertinax had been wont to drive. Inside this pyre the funeral offerings were cast and the bier was placed in it, and then Severus and the relatives of Pertinax kissed the effigy. The emperor then ascended a tribunal, while we, the senate, except the magistrates, took our places on wooden stands in order to view the ceremonies both safely and conveniently. The magistrates and the equestrian order, arrayed in a manner befitting their station, and likewise the cavalry and the infantry, passed in and out around the pyre performing intricate evolutions, both those of peace and those of war. Then at last the consuls applied fire to the structure, and when this had been done, an eagle flew aloft from it. Thus was Pertinax made immortal.92 The completeness of Dio’s account indicates that he was himself present at the funeral. His interest in the occasion is striking, indicating the grand significance of the event for Severus and his reign. This was, actually, the second time that Pertinax had received a funeral. He was initially buried by his successor Didius Julianus, who put his corpse in the tomb of his grandfather’s wife, and organised some rather modest celebrations. This was done for political reasons: Julianus had not had Pertinax killed, and was thus obliged to give his predecessor some form of burial. Simultaneously, however, since funerals were political events, he was afraid to organise large-scale celebrations for fear of conspirators.93 However, as Dio records, Pertinax’ second funeral was a magnificent occasion. The reason for this was, of course, also political. In celebrating the funeral of an emperor who had already been dead for over two months, Severus was probably attempting to appease the Roman senate (among whom Pertinax had

The opening night and day  81 been a popular figure). This act is in accordance with his initial conciliatory attitude towards senators.94 It can, however, hardly be ignored that this act highlighted his own status. By honouring the dead emperor, Severus associated himself with the latter, intending to act as the previous emperor’s logical successor. Therefore, the memory of Pertinax was celebrated during a public ritual before the eyes of the people of Rome (including the highest elements of society, such as senators, as Dio’s lengthy and very detailed record describes).95 Moreover, the fact that Severus had declared himself as a follower of Pertinax, and as his avenger, meant that he was the follower (and avenger) of a god. Highlighting Pertinax’ divine status thus certainly strengthened Severus’ own ‘semi-divine’ position. Some of Severus’ other acts can also be seen in a similar light: his decision to declare himself the son of deified Marcus Aurelius, and to deify his new ‘brother’ Commodus, were naturally tools to connect himself to the Antonine dynasty. These actions also meant that he was now the son and the brother of two divi, which brought him a sacral aura.96 The growing importance of the imperial cult during the Severan era is not just visible in the capital, where the imperial funerals and other events of importance took place, but is also apparent in the provinces as well. Evidence for the existence of this cult can appears in the sanctuary of the Three Gauls (the Tres Galliae), situated in Lugdunum (present-day Lyon in France). Already established by the first century bce, this sanctuary had been an important centre of Roman rule in Gaul. Ancient sources demonstrate it was founded after some discontent in the area.97 Apparently, the cult was supposed to celebrate imperial power through the centuries, but it seems that it eventually combined the cults of Roma and the Augusti (the Augusti including both the living emperor and deified previous rulers).98 However, it seems that Severan period brought some changes to the cult. When Severus had defeated Clodius Albinus in the civil war, the cultic statue of Dea Roma was removed from the altar (most likely in ce 198 or 199). As a result, it appears that Severus wanted to reform the cultic practice by promoting the sole celebration of Caesar (or Caesars). This obviously signifies that emperor wanted to highlight his own position in the centre of the cultic practice. It is, moreover, interesting that the term ‘Caesar’ is a more private and personal trait of the emperor, at least in comparison to title ‘Augustus’. It could therefore be argued that the worshippers who took part in the cult became, with greater ease, symbolic members of the imperial household and especially subjects of the paterfamilias of the community who was the emperor himself. This cult of the ruling Caesar is unique; no other similar case can be found in the western Empire. Of course, the most important reason behind Severan policy in Lugdunum was political: the city had been Albinus’ headquarters during the civil war. The new cultic features imposed by a victorious Septimius Severus should thus be seen as a repressive measure towards a city which bore such strong ties to a defeated opponent.99 However, it can serve as another example of general Severan policy: that of encouraging and highlighting imperial cult, and especially of his own position as a part of it. Severus strengthened his own power against potential and real competitors.

82  The opening night and day If we accept that imperial cult was emphasised during the Severan era, more than it had ever been before, another question arises: what was actually promoted? What was the basic ideology behind the ruler-cult? It seems that the answer to this is the divine status, a position – and as such, it does not differ too much from the cults of the traditional gods, such as that of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. As far as we know, the Romans did not worship gods because they were gods; they were worshipped because of their abilities to help the community. For example, the supreme god of the res publica, Jupiter, was honoured because he was the protector of the commonwealth: because he was able to protect Rome and act in its benefit.100 We might argue that Roman religious thinking was based on this idea: the one who could by his abilities benefit Rome deserved respect and honours. This leads to the conclusion that honouring gods or men did not substantially differ. The worship was based on the same idea: that of the individual’s (be he a god or a man) power and ability to do something. On a micro-level, the father of a Roman household, paterfamilias, could also be considered as ‘god’, because of the power he held over the members of his household. Indeed, it was precisely this status that was worshipped among the families and households, when sacrifices were made to the genius of the head of the family.101 In evaluating the Severan Ludi Saeculares as a manifestation of imperial power, the role of Jupiter becomes obvious: he was the supreme god, the protector of Rome, but he was also strongly associated with Severus in imperial propaganda.102 This attitude is perfectly demonstrated by Herodian, who described the rise to power of the second Severan ruler, Caracalla. According to the writer, Caracalla, after murdering his brother Geta, held a speech in the senate during which he declared that the senators should curb their sectarian feelings and look towards a single emperor, as ‘Jupiter created imperial power for a sole ruler among mankind on the model of his own position among gods’.103 When Severus performed a sacrifice to him in the Ludi Saeculares, he acted on behalf of the communitas, asking Jupiter to protect the emperor’s household (being, in practice, his people). This alone brings certain divinity to Severus’ own position, even more so if we bear the basic feature or imperial worship in mind: the centrality of one’s ability to protect and benefit the whole community. This feature should be remembered as we proceed to the study of the following days of the ludi.

Notes 1 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 26–36. 2 See Hänninen 2000: 101 for discussion. 3 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 38–56; see also Pighi, comm. lud. quint. 92–93 (Augustan sacrifice) and RIC 2 no. 381 (Domitian). 4 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 59–60, 60–64; see also the Augustan inscription in Pighi, comm. lud. quint. 100–102. 5 Sanford 1995: 71. 6 Paus. 2.4.7; 3.11.8; 9.25.4; 5.15.4.

The opening night and day  83 7 Eitrem 1932: 2450–2451. 8 Palmer 1974: 91. 9 Gell. NA 3.16.9–12. 10 Heinrichs 2007: 524–525. 11 Eitrem 1932: 2451. The Diocletian coins: RIC 5 nos. 293, 314, 617 (Diocletian). 12 Feeney 2003: 107–108. 13 Hor. Carm. Saec. 25–29 (transl. N. Rudd). 14 Cass. Dio 77[76].16.4–5. 15 Gorrie 2004: 62; Garnsey 1967: 58. For the Severan moral laws in general, see Birley 1999: 165 and Gorrie 2004: 61–65. 16 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 35–36. 17 Levick 2007: 126–127. 18 Gorrie 2002: 468. 19 Cass. Dio 73[72].24. 20 Herod. 1.14.1. 21 RIC 4.1, p. 89; nos. 390–392 (Julia Domna). 22 McDaniel 1995: 100. 23 Lindner McGlannan 1996: 147–150. The close relationship of the Antonine empresses and the Vestal Virgins can be seen, for example, in the coinage dedicated to imperial women. For a study, see Keltanen 2002.The interest towards the cult of Vesta was not only a policy of Septimius Severus, but of his followers as well. During Caracalla’s reign (in ce 214) a coin was struck, showing the emperor performing a sacrifice in front of the temple of Vesta, with two Vestal Virgins, a child and two men wearing togas. The inclusion of children and the Vestals is an interesting detail, perhaps indicating the continuation of ideas adopted by Septimius Severus, such as moral reforms and family values. Another famous act carried out by Caracalla was the execution of four Vestal Virgins on the basis of unchastity (see Cass. Dio 78[77].16.1–4). This attention towards the Vestal Virgins was continued by Elagabalus, the next Severan emperor, who made an extraordinary act of marrying a Vestal Virgin. His motives behind the marriage are difficult to know. The idea of syncretism might well be the case; his other religious acts at least hint to this. See Levick 2007: 149 for the religious policy of Elagabal, see Pietrzykowsky 1986. 24 Liv. 1.3.1; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1.76.4; Plut. Rom. 3.2–3. 25 Liv. 1.20.3–4; Plut. Num. 1.20.3. 26 Palladium: Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2.66; see also Liv. 26.27.14;Val. Max. 1.4.5. 27 The fire of Vesta: Ov. Fast. 6.297; Plut. Num. 11.1. For the symbolic significance of ignis inexcintus, see Staples 1998: 148–152. 28 Wildfang 2006: 1. 29 Staples 1998: 143–156. 30 For parentalia and fordicidia, see Scullard 1981: 74–76 (parentalia) and 102 ( fordi­ cidia). For the overall view of the ritual tasks of the Vestals, see Mustakallio 2007: 185–191. 31 Wildfang 2006: 7–16; 23–28. 32 Beard, North & Price 1998: 49–50. According to Beard, North & Price, the modern idea of the separation between public and private cults in Rome is based on the thought that Roman religion obeys the same rules and tries to fulfil the same human needs as the religion of our own period. Based on this assumption, many historians have argued that Roman religion must have involved deep personal

84  The opening night and day commitments. As there is little or no sign of this in public cult, it must have been, according to them, found in the private religion of home and family. However, as Beard, North & Price point out, the Roman religious experience was probably very different from our own, and there is perhaps no need to find a context (in this case, family) in which to imagine the ‘real’ religious experience of Romans. 33 Cato Agr. 141; see also Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 53. 34 This part of the inscription is, again, very fragmentary, but the claim can nonetheless be made, based on various other parts of the inscription (Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 59–60, 64–66). 35 Latte 1960: 242–244. 36 For the Greek purificatory rites, see for example, Burkert 1987: 75–84; 107; and 213 for theoxenia. 37 Liv. 5.13. 38 Hänninen 2000: 103. 39 Liv. 22.9–10. 40 Cic. Leg. 2.9.21. 41 Liv. 25.1.6–12. For details, see Beard, North & Price 1998: 91–96. 42 Rives 2010: 56–57. 43 CTh 9.16.7. In fact, the laws given by Christian emperors against magic were at this point often directed towards the old Roman cults. See Kahlos 2002: 51–53; 83–84. 44 Very little is known about Minucius Felix, but apparently he lived and worked during the latter part of the second century (and possibly still lived during the first years of the third century). Dennis 1929: 185–189. See also the introduction to Minucius Felix’ Octavius (Rendall 2003: 304–313). 45 Min. Fel. Oct. 9.4 (transl. G. H. Rendall). 46 See Rendall 2003: 304. A classic case of suspicions directed towards the nocturnal rituals by state authorities is the suppression of Bacchanalia, reported in Liv. 25.1. 6–12. For details, see Beard, North & Price 1998: 91–96. 47 Hänninen 2000: 104; Scheid 2003: 81. 48 Hänninen 2000: 104. 49 Beard, North & Price 1998: 202. 50 As is reported, for example, in App. B. Civ. 5. 132. 548. The memory of the civil war was important precisely because it seemed to be something Augustus wanted to forget; see Gowing 2005: 17–27. The memory of the civil war was influential in later periods as well – as David Potter notes, many acts Severus conducted while in power indicate that the history and memory of the civil war of the late republic and early empire were still clear in his mind. Potter 2004: 116. 51 Takács 2008: 9–10. The accounts of Livy: 1.26 (Horatia); 1.57–60 (Lucretia); 1.34, 1.39, 1.41 (Tanaquil); 1.46–59 (Tullia). 52 Liebecshuetz 1979: 92–93. 53 For Augustan moral reforms in general, see Galinsky 1996: 128–138; for the restoration of religion, 288–312; for Ludi Saeculares as a celebration for moral reforms, 100–106. 54 Gorrie 2004: 62. 55 As I have already mentioned, I follow the idea that Cassius Dio’s history is an introduction to the ‘proper’ Roman thinking of the senatorial class, a guide for the provincial (Greek-speaking) senators regarding the values and customs of the empire. To be a true Roman, one was required to know the city and be familiar

The opening night and day  85 with its buildings, history, religion and culture. Such knowledge could make a foreigner a Roman, but the lack of it could make one less Roman, even if one was an inhabitant of the city. To grant this knowledge was probably one of the main motives behind Dio’s history (see also Hope 2000: 86). 56 It is very interesting that even if some other authors mention the immoral ways of Nero (Suet. Ner. 28–29; Tac. Ann. 15.37), this question seems much more important for Cassius Dio. See Gowing 1997: 257. Dio’s account on Elagabalus can be found in his book 80. 57 Cass. Dio 77[76].16.5 (transl. E. Cary). 58 Scheid 2003: 80. 59 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. III 69–85. 60 Beard, North & Price 1998: 201. 61 In ce 69 the empire was first ruled by Galba, then Otho, then Vitellius and eventually by Vespasian. 62 Le Glay,Voisin, Le Bohec & Cherry 1996: 242. 63 Suet. Vesp. 4.5. 64 For Flavian policies of restoration in general, Le Glay,Voisin, Le Bohec & Cherry 1996: 239–266. 65 Fears 1981: 74–77. 66 Fears 1981: 79. 67 As already mentioned, ‘theology’ is not really an appropriate word to describe the religious thinking of Romans, but this concept created and used by J.R. Fears will be used here when dealing with his article on Jupiter. 68 See Fears 1981: 7–9 for a more detailed account on ‘Jovian theology’. The role of the ruler-cult in Roman religion is a complicated subject – not least because of the question of the divinity of living emperors. See Gradel 2002 for discussion. 69 Plin. Pan. 1.3; 67. See also Fears 1981: 81–82. 70 Fears 1981: 109–112. 71 Fears 1981: 114–115. 72 Lichtenberger 2011: 215–217. 73 Garnsey & Saller 1987: 148. Seneca, for example, described the system of benefits and services exchange as one which binds human society (Sen. Ben. 1.4.2, adapted from Garnsey & Saller). 74 Hammond 1959: 87–89. 75 Bryant 1999: 27. 76 An interesting parallel can in fact be found with the Hellenistic kingdoms. Among the Seleucids, family language was also used to describe the roles of the imperial family members. The father-figure, especially, had a central position in their royal ideology. There were, moreover, other ways of using family terminology; one of the most interesting ones was the description the king and queen as brother and sister – apparently the habit of calling a married couple this way is well attested in Classical Greek sources. See Coloru 2012: 88–90. 77 Gradel 2002: 54–55. 78 It is, of course, possible that worshipping a living emperor as a god did occur at a local level, and this was even probable, especially in the eastern provinces, with a tradition of Hellenistic ruler-cults (see Chamoux 2003: 324–325). 79 However, these were works of individual artists. Roman religion never officially recognised Augustus as a god during his lifetime. Another question is, of course, whether the artists were acting on their own initiatives or not.

86  The opening night and day 80 For Augustus’ identification with Apollo, see Galinsky 1996: 215–219, 314. The title Augustus itself held divine connotations, with meanings such as ‘stately’, ‘­dignified’ and ‘holy’. It perhaps also pointed to augur, a priest whose duty was to interpret omens. Zanker 1988: 98. 81 Ludi Compitales: Scullard 1981: 58–60. Augustan policy: Beard, North & Price 1998: 184–186. 82 Gradel 2002: 128–129. 83 Gradel 2002: 187–188. 84 Gradel 2002: 189–190. 85 Goodman 1997: 299–301. 86 Beard, North & Price 1998: 348–363. 87 The Arval Brothers were an ancient group of priests, dating back to the republican period, but apparently ‘re-founded’ by Augustus.The main focus of the Arvals was on worshipping an obscure deity named Dea Dia; the well-being of the emperor, however, was also an important part of their rituals. Beard, North & Price 1998: 194–196. 88 Gradel 2002: 192–194. 89 Fowden 2005: 553. 90 Cass. Dio 75[74].4.1 (transl. E. Cary). 91 Ando 2012: 27. 92 Cass. Dio 75[74].4.2–5 (trans. E. Cary) 93 Arce 2010: 310. 94 Ando 2012: 27. 95 For an analysis of Pertinax’ funeral, see Arce 2010. 96 Fishwick 1987: 327–328. 97 Cass. Dio 54.32.1; Liv. Per. 139. 98 Fishwick 2002: 199. 99 Fishwick 2002: 199–203. 100 A similar image is painted in Cicero’s famous passage (Nat. D. 3.87) about how Romans do not worship Jupiter because the god makes them wise, but rather because he makes them rich and prosperous. 101 Dealt thoroughly in Gradel 2002 (especially in 25–53). 102 Fishwick 2002: 198. 103 Herod. 4.5.7. (transl. C.R. Whittaker).

Bibliography Ando, C. (2012). Imperial Rome ad 193 to 284. A Critical Century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Arce, J. (2010). Roman imperial funerals in effigie. In: B. Ewald and C. Noreña, eds., The Emperor and Rome. Space, Representation, and Ritual, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 309–323. Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S. (1998). Religions of Rome. Vol. 1: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Birley, A. (1999). Septimius Severus. The African Emperor. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Bryant, C. (1999). Imperial Family Roles. Propaganda & Policy in the Severan Period. In: E. In Dal Covolo and G. Rinaldi, eds., Gli Imperatori Severi, 1st ed. Roma: LAS, pp. 17–29. Burkert, W. (1987). Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical. Oxford: Blackwell. Chamoux, F. (2003). Hellenistic Civilization. Oxford: Blackwell.

The opening night and day  87 Coloru, Omar (2012). The Language of the Oikos and the Language of Power in the Seleucid Kingdom. In: R. Laurence and A. Strömberg, eds., Families in the GrecoRoman World 1st ed. London: Continuum, pp. 84–94. Dennis, H. (1929). The Date of the Octavius. AJP, 50(2), pp. 185–189. Eitrem, S. (1932). Moira. RE, 15, pp. 2449–2497. Fears, J. (1981). The Cult of Jupiter and Roman Imperial Ideology. ANRW, II.17.1, pp. 3–141. Feeney, D. (2003). Ludi Saeculares and Carmen Saeculare. In: C. Ando, ed., Roman Religion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 106–116. Fishwick, D. (1987). The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the Ruler Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire, vol. 1, 1–2. Leiden: Brill. Fishwick, D. (2002). The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the Ruler Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire, vol. 3. 1. Leiden: Brill. Fowden, G. (2005). Public Religion. CAH, XII, pp. 553–572. Galinsky, K. (1996). Augustan Culture: An Interpretive Introduction. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Garnsey, P. (1967). Adultery trials and the survival of the quaestiones in the Severan age. JRS, 57, pp. 56–60. Garnsey, P. and Saller, R. (1987). The Roman Empire. Economy, Society and Culture. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Goodman, M. (1997). The Roman World 44bc–ad 180. London: Routledge. Gorrie, C. (2002). The Severan building programme and the Secular Games. Athenaeum, 90.2, pp. 461–481. Gorrie, C. (2004). Julia Domna’s building patronage, imperial family roles and the Severan revival of moral legislation. Historia, 53, pp. 61–72. Gowing, A. (1997). Cassius Dio on the Reign of Nero. ANRW, II.34.3, pp. 2558–2590. Gowing, A. (2005). Empire and Memory: The Representation of the Roman Republic in Imperial Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gradel, I. (2002). Emperor Worship and Roman Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Hammond, M. (1959). The Antonine Monarchy. Rome: American Academy in Rome. Heinrichs, A. (2007). Parcae. BNP, vol. 10, pp. 524–525. Hope, V. (2000). The City of Rome: capital and symbol. In: J. Huskinson, ed., Experiencing Rome. Culture, Identity and Power in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. London: Routledge, pp. 63–94. Hänninen, M.-L. (2000). Women as Worshippers of Juno. From the Mid-Republican to the Augustan Era. Helsinki: University of Helsinki (unpublished PhD dissertation). Kahlos, M. (2002). Vettius Agorius Praetextatus. A Senatorial Life in Between. Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae. Keltanen, M. (2002). The Public Image of the Four Empresses. Ideal Wifes, Mothers and Regents? In: P. Setälä, R. Berg, R. Hälikkä, M. Keltanen, J. Pölönen and V. Vuolanto, eds., Women, Wealth and Power in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, pp. 105–146. Latte, K. (1960). Römische Religiongeschichte. München: Beck. Le Glay, M., Voisin, J.-L., Le Bohec, Y. and Cherry, D. (1996). A History of Rome. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Levick, B. (2007). Julia Domna. Syrian Empress. New York: Routledge. Lichtenberger, A. (2011). Severus Pius Augustus. Studien zur sakralen Repräsentation und Rezeption der Herrschaft des Septimius Severus und Seiner Familie (193—211 n. Chr.) Leiden: Brill.

88  The opening night and day Liebeschuetz, J. (1979). Continuity and Change in Roman Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Lindner McGlannan, M. (1996). The Vestal Virgins and their Imperial Patrons: Sculptures and Inscriptions from the Atrium Vestae in the Roman Forum. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan, 1996 (unpublished PhD dissertation). McDaniel, M. (1995). Augustus, the Vestals and the signum imperii. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina (unpublished PhD dissertation). Mustakallio, K. (2007). The Changing Role of the Vestal Virgins. In: L. Larsson Lovén and A. Strömberg, eds., Public roles – personal status. Men and women in Antiquity, 1st ed. Sävedalen: Paul Åströms förlag, pp. 185–203. Palmer, R. (1974). Roman Religion and Roman Empire. Five Essays. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Pietrzykowsky, M. (1986). Die Religionspolitik des Kaisers Elagabal. ANRW, II 16.3., pp. 806–1825. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge. Rendall, G. (2003). Introduction. In: Minuncius Felix: Octavius. Translated by G.H. Rendall. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 304–313. Rives, J. (2010). Magus and its Cognates in Classical Latin. In: R. Gordon and S. Marco, eds., Magical Practice in the Latin West, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 53–77. Sanford, J. (1995). Fate, Love, and Ecstasy. Wisdom from the Lesser-Known Goddesses of the Greeks. Wilmette: Chiron Publications. Scheid, J. (2003). An Introduction to Roman Religion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Scullard, H. (1981). Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Staples, A. (1998). From Good Goddess to Vestal Virgins. Sex and Category in Roman Religion. London and New York: Routledge. Takács, S. (2008). Vestal Virgins, Sibyls, and Matrons: Women in Roman Religion. Austin: University of Texas Press. Wildfang, R. (2006). Rome’s Vestal Virgins. A study of Rome’s Vestal Priestesses in the Late Republic and Early Empire. London: Routledge. Zanker, P. (1988). The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

5 Day two Women take the stage

We now proceed to a discussion of the second night and day of the festivals. The record describing the rituals of the second night is extremely fragmentary in this part; as a result, the main focus in this chapter will be on the daytime rituals. The most interesting part of the second day’s rites is the role that women played in the programme. Their importance is highlighted by, for example, the fact that the names of the matronae who took part in the games are included in the inscription. Accordingly, the functions of the different female groups participating in the ritual must be further analysed.

The second night: a prelude? The details of the second night, evident on the inscription’s remaining fragments, mostly describe the rituals taking place after the sacrifices. They were apparently conducted in a similar manner to those of the previous night: theatrical games were held in a theatre without seats, the Ludi Latini took place in a wooden theatre, and the sellisternium was performed by matrons in honour of Juno and Diana.1 However, even if the information is scarce, we do know that the second night was dedicated to the goddess Eileithyia, as her name figures later on in the inscription (when covering the rituals of the third day). She is described as receiving sacrifices on the second night.2 The Severan ludi thus closely follow the Augustan programme; moreover, one of the coins struck by Domitian in celebration of the ce 88 games seems to depict a sacrifice to the goddess.3 The goddess Eileithyia (sometimes called Ilithyia or Eilithyiae) was of Greek origin. Her position in Greek mythology is explained by Hesiod in his Theogonia. According to him, Zeus married Hera and as a result the goddess gave birth to three deities: Hebe, Ares and Eileithyia.4 In the Greek world, Eileithyia was considered as a goddess of childbirth. Legend has it that she assisted when Apollo was born. For Homer, she was the goddess of the pain of birth.5 Eileithyia is, however, mentioned in a less favourable light in the works of Diodorus Siculus, a first-century ce Sicilian author who wrote in Greek. He describes how Eileithyia helped Hera in her plot against Zeus by assisting at the birth of Eurystheus, who was later the king of Argos.6

90  Day two: women take the stage As was the case with the Moirae, it is likely that Eileithyia was not widely worshipped in Roman traditional religion. Apparently, the first time Eileithyia received honours from the Roman state was during Augustus’ Ludi Saeculares.7 Zosimus, a Byzantine historian of a much later period (living in the late fifth/ early sixth century), writes about the inclusion of the goddess in the rituals of the Augustan Secular Games. The historian held a strong anti-Christian agenda; in his view, the decline the Roman Empire, which took place during his lifetime, resulted from the abandonment of traditional state religion. In Zosimus’ eyes, therefore, Constantine and other pro-Christian or Christian emperors were to blame for the troubles.8 As a result, it is not surprising that Zosimus is very interested in the Ludi Saeculares and dedicates considerable attention to the celebration in his work. He interpreted the halting of the games during the Constantinian period as an indication that the neglect of ancient rituals led to the decline of the empire.9 While dealing with the games, Zosimus records how the Sibylline oracle ordered the celebration, and in this part the goddess Eileithyia, appears in a short passage.10 In Rome, Eileithyia was known as Juno Lucina, as Dionysios of Halicarnassus recounts.11 Horace connects Eileithyia (or Ilithyia) to Lucina and to Genitalis, in his Carmen Saeculare.12 Only a few Roman (Latin) sources mention Eileithyia after the occasion of the Augustan Ludi Saeculares.13 However, it can be suggested that Eileithyia was known as a goddess of childbirth in the third century as well; at least Aelian, who wrote contemporaneously during Septimius Severus’ rule of the empire, described Eileithyia as Artemis of the child-bed.14 The Goddess’ Latin counterpart, Juno Lucina, however, was a well-known figure of the Roman pantheon. Legend had it that she was already celebrated in the royal period. The first day of the ‘old’ Roman year, 1 March, was considered as the birthday of the temple of Juno Lucina, situated on the Esquiline hill. A celebration, conducted by women, took place at the temple every year.15 It is known, moreover, that the goddess received attention during the imperial era as well. She appeared in imperial coinage dedicated to empresses. An altar is also known to have been dedicated to Juno Lucina by Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his family, which perhaps refers to the birth of Lucilla, daughter of the emperor.16 It is very likely that rituals dedicated to Eileithyia in ce 204 were quite similar to the Augustan celebrations.17 As a goddess of childbirth, one could suggest that she was celebrated as a protector of mothers, and in this sense the nocturnal rituals were a sort of opening for the celebration of Juno on the following day. After all, both deities were connected with matrons. Respected Roman mothers and matrons both played an extensive role during the second day of the festival, as we shall next see.

The second day: celebrating Juno According to the inscription, the main deity of the second day was Juno Regina. The goddess received the sacrifice of two white cows from the emperor. The emperor’s sons, Caracalla and Geta, and the quindecimviri, were also p­ resent.

Day two: women take the stage  91 The sacrifice was made according to the Greek rite.18 This practice was similar to the more traditional Roman sacrifice, except that the one who performed the sacrifice did it bareheaded, in other words, without wearing the customary toga over the head.19 One of the novelties of the Severan inscription is the sacrifice to Jupiter Optimus Maximus performed during the ceremonies of the second day in ce 204. According to the Severan record, the emperor sacrificed to Jupiter Optimus Maximus after the celebrations honouring Juno and held a banquet with the other members of quindecimviri sacris faciundis. After that, he returned to the cella of Juno Regina.20 The celebration was followed by a supplicatio to Juno. It was conducted by 110 matrons, with the empress Julia Domna among them. Septimius Severus led their prayer to the goddess (apparently this was also done by Marcus Agrippa during the Augustan games). The Vestals Numisia Maximilla and Terentia Flavola were also present during the prayer.21 Even if the supplicatio followed the Augustan example, another interesting innovation appears in the Severan inscription covering this phase of the festival: the names of the matrons who took part in the rituals were added to the inscription, as was mentioned above. Another new feature for the Severan Secular Games, in this part of the inscription, consisted of the emperor’s declaration that the Ludi Honorarii were to be held after the Ludi Saeculares. The Ludi Saeculares would, according to the record, include many kinds of events, such as shows in a wooden theatre and in the theatre of Pompey, as well as performances in the Odeon, spectacles in the Circus Maximus and beast hunts.22 The Ludi Honorarii were celebrated during the Augustan games as well, but their announcement in the Severan record differed considerably: the Ludi Honorarii mentioned in the Severan inscription are much more detailed, and present a wealth of information that cannot be found in earlier records. Overall, as can be seen, the women held a central part in the rituals of the second day. Three different ‘groups’ can be traced among these women: the empress Julia Domna, 109 matrons and the two Vestal Virgins. All of them celebrated Juno Regina during the Ludi Saeculares. Juno Regina had, from a very early period, been one of the most important deities for the Romans, although opinions on her nature have differed, even among Roman writers. According to Varro, for example, who wrote in the late republican period, Juno was connected to the earth.23 In fact, it seems likely that her nature somewhat changed during the centuries of the republic, and it is practically impossible to define her ‘original’ role.24 However, it appears that, since the republican era, Juno Regina had been considered as the goddess most related to Roman mothers – despite the fact that she was not regarded as goddess of childbirth (this role was reserved to Juno Lucina, as was discussed above). According to Roman tradition, she was worshipped by women especially during the Punic Wars; defending Rome did not only require arms, but also fertile women with high moral dignity. It was thus appropriate that Roman matrons worshipped the goddess collectively on behalf of the whole community.25

92  Day two: women take the stage Even if the second day of the Ludi Saeculares was dedicated to Juno, the sacrifice to Jupiter Optimus Maximus performed on the same day is a very interesting detail. In the previous chapter, we examined his role. Jupiter’s position changed from time to time during the imperial period, but by the Severan age, his relationship with the emperor was very close. The emperor was shown as a representative of Jupiter, who acted on behalf of the protector of the communitas. Combining Jupiter Optimus Maximus and Juno Regina in the records of the second day highlights the male-female relationship existing between the leading deities in Roman traditional religion. Both were included in the Capitoline triad (alongside Minerva) and were apparently considered as the royal couple amongst Roman gods.26 Moreover, it is also possible to read a reference to Septimius Severus and Julia Domna in this worship. Indeed, the idea of the ruling couple’s centrality to the communitas was also extended to the emperor and the empress in the games’ records. Support for this claim can be found in the rituals and descriptions of the further events taking place during the second day, and especially in an analysis of the role of Julia Domna, to which we turn next. Mother(s) of the Golden Age The prayer to Juno in the inscription begins with a passage in which the emperor and the empress, and the matrons taking part in the prayer and the senior Vestal Virgins, are associated. According to the inscription, Septimius Severus, along with his sons Caracalla and Geta, the quidecimviri and the Praetorian Prefect, went to the Capitolium on the second day to sacrifice to Jupiter.27 Many interesting details can be found from the passage describing the event. Julia Domna and Septimius Severus are clearly represented as a married couple: Julia is mentioned as the coniunx of Severus (coniugi imp.). The noun was used, for example, in sepulchral inscriptions, but especially in poetry. It is not, however, usually found in more ordinary language (such as in private letters). The word was used to describe a wife (sometimes, but not that often, a husband too), and is related to the verb coniungere, ‘to join together’. In other words, it described a joining in marriage.28 Julia Domna’s role, not only as a wife, but also as a mother, is emphasised in the inscription. She was the wife of the emperor, but also the ‘mother of the camps’ (mater castrorum). She received the title in ce 195. Its primary purpose was possibly to highlight the close relationship maintained between the new dynasty and the army. After all, ancient authors saw that Severus relied heavily on his legions when securing his own position against any challengers, real or potential. Cassius Dio describes, disapprovingly, how Severus, in attempting to stabilise his power, relied more on his troops than on the goodwill of his associates (this is obviously a reference to the senatorial class, of which Dio was himself a part). Dio also reports that this policy was continued by Caracalla, as he describes how the emperor was eager to spend money on soldiers.29 Herodian gives a very detailed picture of the privileges that the emperors gave

Day two: women take the stage  93 the army: an increase in pay, the permission to wear a golden ring and the right to live with their wives at home. The historian adds that Severus practically bought the loyalty of his troops by teaching them to be greedy and by seducing them with a luxurious life.30 It is, of course, obvious that in the period in which Julia Domna received her title, Septimius Severus was constantly fighting. This makes Severus’ will to please the army very understandable. Pescennius Niger had only recently been defeated, and the military campaigns in the east were about to begin, and thus Severus had a good reason to be in friendly terms with his soldiers.31 However, we should also pay attention to the wider picture. Rome had been in a real danger during Marcus Aurelius’ reign. The Parthians had attacked from the east in ce 161 and were beaten back by co-ruler Lucius Verus, though with great difficulty; the war took five years. Eastern provinces, where the actual fighting took place, however, were not the only parts of the empire to suffer the consequences of war: soldiers returning home brought the plague with them. This plague, accompanied by a famine, is sometimes referred to as an Antonine plague, a catastrophic event which eventually led the empire into major difficulties.32 An even greater threat came from the north. As the Romans fought the Parthians in the east, the northern defences became weaker. As a result, Germanic peoples attacked the empire: tribes such as the Chatti, Marcomanni and Quadi carried out destructive raids which reached northern Italy and stretched close to Athens in Greece. Verus had died on the northern front in ce 169. Aurelius, who was more accustomed to court life than warfare, had to take over leadership of the defence. Even if he preferred intellectual pursuits, such as philosophy, over military glory, he nonetheless wished to be at the front in person (an action which Cassius Dio much aspired to). Aurelius indeed expressed a strong sense of duty when the empire was in danger and thus did not hesitate to advertise his military deeds (as is indicated by his famous column in the capital).33 Six years later, more troubles occurred: false reports circulated that the emperor had died, and consequently, a usurper named Avidius Cassius, declared himself a new emperor in the east. Marcus Aurelius, who had had some success against the German tribes, then had to leave the northern frontier for the east. Luckily for Aurelius, Cassius was assassinated before major any civil struggle broke out. He was eventually able to suppress the northern threat.34 Even if the empire survived this extremely dangerous period, the vulnerability of the Roman defences had become obvious. From the early empire onwards, the system was based on the permanent positioning of armies on the frontiers, which were ready to move, when necessary, whenever a crisis occurred. This system was a defensive one by nature, with a purpose to maintain the existing borders rather than expand them. It was based on the notion that troubles would be exceptional occurrences, and that enemies would not take advantage of some parts of the border’s temporary weakening, following the troops’ displacements to places of trouble.35 The military crises of the 160s and 170s, however, exposed the flaws of this system. Romans realised that from

94  Day two: women take the stage that point onwards, any weakening in troops at border was an opportunity for enemies to attack. The situation in the 160s was so bad that Aurelius had to recruit two legions from Italy. This was an extraordinary act for those days, as Italians had not been recruited by the army to such a scale in a long time. The emperor also tried to find a long-term solution by extending the empire to the Carpathians; apparently he was trying to create more easily-defended borders for the empire. Marcus Aurelius never achieved this aim, however, and after his death, Commodus abandoned the plan. As a result, the problem of defence was not solved.36 Septimius Severus, a general himself, was probably very aware these problems when he took power. He had acted as a governor in Pannonia, one of the most important frontiers of the empire (Britain and Syria were the only provinces in which governors commanded larger armies than the leader of Pannonia). When Severus became emperor, he had to deal with two major military questions: how to find a suitable strategy to secure his frontiers, and how to make sure that there were enough men in his possession to conduct this strategy. His solution to the first matter was to concentrate on defence, not offence. As was also the case during Augustan times, Severus strove to create a system in which defending the borders was as easy as it was flexible, and for which adding new territories to the empire was not a primary objective. He attempted to develop a system in which local attacks were confronted with reinforcements from other parts of the border without substantially weakening other parts of the frontier. During his reign, he strengthened the fortifications in key frontiers, such as in those along the Rhine, the Danube and in Africa. The east proved to be a challenge, however. Of all of Rome’s enemies, Parthia was the strongest, and lengthy struggles in the east could easily lead to the dangerous situations in the north (which had been the case during the reign of Marcus Aurelius). This was probably Severus’ main motive in attacking Parthia in the late 190s. His aim was to achieve borders that would be easier to defend in the future. After a relatively successful campaign, the new province of Mesopotamia was created, new legions raised and the province of Syria was reorganised for better use during defence operations.37 All in all, it can be safely claimed that the difficult situation to which the empire was exposed was one of the main reasons for Severus’ close relationship with the legions. It does not exclude the claim of ancient authors, that the emperor wished to secure his own position by staying in good terms with the army. It is, in fact, very likely that this was the case as well, as there was no shortage of usurpers in late second century. However, Severus, having been a soldier himself, knew that keeping soldiers happy was essential for protecting the empire against both internal and external enemies. How exactly he tried to appease soldiers, we will discuss later. However, at this point it is sufficient to state that external (and internal) military pressure was strong enough for the imperial family to highlight its close relationship with the army. Hence, it is no wonder that Julia Domna carried the title mater castrorum, the Mother of the Camps.38

Day two: women take the stage  95 This particular title, however, was not the only one that Julia could have carried during Ludi Saeculares. After all, from ce 196 onwards, Julia had been known as the mater caesaris, and in ce 198, she had received the title of mater augusti et caesaris.39 Later, her full title was mater augusti/imperatoris et castrorum et senatus et patriae – the mother of the emperor, of the camps as well as of the senate and the fatherland. Later still, she was also known as mater populi Romani – the mother of the Roman people – although these titles were apparently given to Julia Domna much later, probably after the death of Septimius Severus in ce 211. The title itself was an extremely rare one, and we must rewind Augustus’ reign to trace its use before the Severan dynasty. The senate had tried to give the honorary title of mater patriae to the empress Livia when Augustus, her husband, died; however, this was not approved by the new emperor Tiberius. The first empress to actually take the title was therefore Julia Domna, and she was later followed by her relatives, the future empresses Julia Maesa and Julia Mamaea. The latter was also known as mater universi humani generis.40 More explanation is therefore perhaps necessary for understanding why Julia Domna was described as the ‘Mother of the Camps’ in the Ludi Saeculares inscription, since her title as the mother of the augusti et caesaris was already available. Given that the imperial family, including Princes Caracalla and Geta, took a prominent position during the ritual, would another title than mater castrorum not be more fitting for the occasion of the Ludi Saeculares? One possible explanation for her title as mater castrorum on this particular occasion could be that it was the best title she could use to connect herself to the Antonine empresses, thus creating an impression of continuity between the Antonine and the Severan dynasties. The term mater castrorum was first given to Faustina the younger, wife of Marcus Aurelius (she received the title in ce 174 or 175).41 The relationship maintained by Marcus Aurelius with his dynasty was extremely important for Severus, as is demonstrated by many of his actions. Severus’ most famous such deed was his inclusion to Aurelius’ family, which he achieved through himself declaring his adoption. Severus thus became Marcus Aurelius’ son and Commodus’ brother.42 Adoption, however, was not the only manner in which Septimius Severus likened himself to the gens Aurelia (and to the emperor Marcus Aurelius in particular). For example, he changed the name of his first-born son (Caracalla) to Marcus Aurelius Antoninus.43 Contemporary writers also mention other prodigies and occasions which can be seen as imitative of Marcus Aurelius’. Inscriptions, numismatic evidence and portraits describe similarities between Septimius Severus and his Antonine ‘father’.44 Taking all this into consideration, it is perhaps not so surprising that Julia Domna was named in a manner connecting her to the Antonine tradition in the Ludi Saeculares, which was an occasion of extreme importance to the new dynasty’s legitimisation of power. The inscription very clearly portrays Julia Domna as the chief of mothers. The record states that the ‘wife of the emperor and 109 matrons’ were present.45 As the number of matrons participating in the ritual amounted to 110,

96  Day two: women take the stage Julia Domna was thus included as one of them. The number 110 probably referred to the saeculum: Sibylline Books, which ordered the performance of the games, describe it as a period of 110 years. This passage of the Books is related in Zosimus’ history.46 The matrons who took part in the games came from the most prominent ranks of society. Of the 109, 91 were the wives of senators and eighteen were the wives of equites. Both groups are presented separately in the inscription, in which the senators’ wives receive mention first.47 It seems that members of the same family could take part in the games: the daughters of women participating in the ritual could perform in the children’s chorus which held during the last day of the festival.48 Unfortunately, more specific details about the matrons’ backgrounds cannot be provided, as the part of the inscription which lists the names is extremely fragmentary. Only a couple of full names are left and seem to represent provincial rather than Italian families (for comparison, the amount of provincials in the senatorial class during the Severan period has been estimated to about fifty-seven per cent).49 One detail of Severan dynastic aspirations can nonetheless be traced from the list of matrons, as one of the matronae is Julia Soaemias (the niece of empress Julia Domna), who led the group of women coming from the equites class.50 A question might be raised regarding this: why were the names of Julia Domna, Julia Soaemias and mothers from the senatorial and equites classes preserved in public memory through the means of inscription? As I argued in the previous chapter, the prominent role of women in the inscription was probably not connected to the Augustan idea that married women were guilty of provoking civil war (although women did conduct rituals of purification). Rather, its reason may be of a much more practical nature: as the inscription associates Julia Domna so clearly with the matrons who represented the highest classes of Rome, the inscription (and the ritual itself) was a method to publicly tie Julia Domna to the ruling groups of the empire. It should be remembered that Julia, a Syrian princess from Emesa (a city that no Roman emperor had ever visited before Septimius Severus, it seems), was an outsider where the highest social circle of the capital is concerned. Even if her family in Emesa did have some connections to Rome (it had apparently received citizenship generations prior to her birth), it is very probable that her status required strengthening among the ruling classes.51 In this light, the grandiose rituals of the Ludi Saeculares were a perfect way to associate her with the senatorial circles, and the inscription ensured that this association was remembered. Obviously, the most prominent role, amongst the matrons, was reserved for the empress. As the chief of Roman matrons, Julia Domna was portrayed as the first among exemplary mothers. Julia’s role as the leader of Roman matrons was her most important one in the Ludi Saeculares – out of the five times she is mentioned in the inscription, she appears as one of the matronae four times. Numismatic sources also strengthen Julia Domna’s image as such. In her article about the types and images employed in coinage dedicated to Julia Domna, Susann Sowers Lusnia (1995) identifies five different phases. It seems that during

Day two: women take the stage  97 in the second phase especially, occurring in the years ce 200–202, imagery emphasised her imperial lineage and its continuity. During this, period Caracalla and Geta were nominated as Augustus and Caesar, and the grand building process in Rome began. Coins were issued for all the members of the imperial family (Septimius Severus, Julia Domna, Caracalla and Geta, as well as Plautilla, Caracalla’s wife). Five different themes were emphasised in Julia Domna’s coinage: motherhood, female virtue, domestic harmony, the continuity of the imperial family and, finally, individual members of the imperial family (particularly Caracalla and Geta). The theme of motherhood can be seen in coinage representing Venus Genetrix, Mater Deum and Ceres Frugifera. Venus was Aeneas’ mother and was traditionally associated with imperial women; Ceres Frugifera symbolised fertility and thus was an ideal example of motherhood. Mater Deum is another deity often connected to the women of the imperial family. Female virtues were celebrated by pietas and pudicitia – common ­associations for the imperial women.52 This group of coins is perhaps the most interesting for our study of the Ludi Saeculares. This is, indeed, the period in which the capital’s great building programme started – a process which culminated in ce 204, with the celebration of the Secular Games. One of the major themes, domestic harmony and continuity was particularly important during this phase – perhaps symbolising a peaceful period during which the difficulties of civil war were left behind. Some coins also indicated the coming of the new age, which was celebrated a couple of years later in the Ludi Saeculares. These included coins dedicated to concordia aeterna, aeternitas imperi and saeculi felicitas. Of these three, only concordia aeterna and aeternitas imperii appear during this period (years ce 200–202). Concordia appears in the empresses’ coins from late first century, but only as concordia avg/augusta or just as concordia.53 Imperial concordia The concept of concordia deserves some attention in the context of the Ludi Saeculares, since it seems to have been an important part of Severan iconography in the period leading up to the celebrations. Moreover, concordia as a concept is closely connected to the ideology of the Ludi Saeculares, as the numismatic evidence indicates. A coin, struck under the auspices of Septimius Severus, includes the text saecularia sacra and depicts Septimius Severus performing a sacrifice by an altar, with Caracalla and the goddess Concordia present. The scene also includes the personification of Tiber, a harpist and a flute-player, with a temple in the background.54 This coin seems to symbolise the values that Severus wanted to emphasise during his reign: harmony and continuity between father and son, and respect of the traditional gods. This is demonstrated by the sacrifice in front of the temple and the presence of the goddess and Tiber. Apparently, this type of coin had never been struck before Septimius Severus’ reign.55 The image essentially describes the Severan age (saecularia) – the period celebrated in the Ludi Saeculares – as a sacred age.

98  Day two: women take the stage The deity symbolising this great period is Concordia. The inclusion of Tiber is perhaps a reference to the nocturnal celebrations of the Ludi Saeculares held in the Tarentum, by the river. Julia Domna’s roles as wife and Roman mother in the games also points to the traditional idea of concordia. This concept was, after all, deeply connected to Roman marriage: it could even be claimed that an ideal Roman marriage was directly identified with concordia. For the Romans, a harmonious marriage was composed of a balance of forces, male and female. According to the law, a paterfamilias was forbidden from breaking a harmonious marriage. The presence of concordia in marriage was indicated by the married couple getting on well and thus through an impression of affection.56 Even if Roman marriages were often arranged and were not, at least initially, based on love, lots of examples from literature, inscriptions and statues (especially funerary monuments) demonstrate that feelings of care and affection between family members were truly present. These records portray dedicated married couples sharing their feelings, comfort and providing each other with companionship. As a result, we have here a strong case to claim that the ideal Roman marriage included warm feelings between husband and wife. Concordia precisely represented this kind of ideal. It seems that the concept was quite popular among all social groups of the empire, at least according to evidence such as legal texts and obituaries.57 Traditionally, however, the significance of concordia was wider. In Roman religion, concordia represented harmonious agreement. This concept was already common in Rome during the republican period and had often been addressed in relation to the republic’s political struggles.58 The concept was widely used during the imperial period too, especially in coinage. As numismatic evidence dating from the late second century demonstrates, it usually celebrates harmony within the provinces, amongst soldiers or rulers. For example, a coin dating from ce 161 celebrates the concordia of Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his co-ruler Lucius Verus, with the text concordiae Augustor(um).59 Concordia was also used to celebrate the emperors’ marriages, especially in coins dedicated to empresses.60 Moreover, images of empresses and concordia were often connected to ideas of fertility, continuity and harmony. This concept is especially visible in the symbol of the cornucopia, often found on coins celebrating the goddess and the empress (Figure 5.1).61 Generally, it seems that concordia, and especially its use as a symbol of harmony between the genders, became even more important during the Severan era. Harmony between men and women was of particular interest in visual arts, as emphasis was placed on proper gender roles. This can be seen, for example, in the funerary monuments of the period. Mythological figures, often depicted on reliefs, were often presented as protagonists acting as male-female pairs. This created a balance between men and women, thus celebrating proper gender behaviours. They can, however, also be seen as a warning example: a woman behaving like a man was considered as a freak, an aberration of nature. Moreover, her masculinity endangered the masculinity of males associated to her.62

Day two: women take the stage  99

Figure 5.1  A typical figure of goddess Concordia in Roman imperial coinage: the goddess is sitting and holds a libation bowl and cornucopia. This example (RIC 4.1, no. 275) dates from the reign of Severus Alexander, probably minted in ce 223 (photo: Jussi Rantala).

Funerary monuments were not the only artefacts to draw attention to concordia. Imperial iconography of the early third century also placed heavy emphasis on the concept, and even included new aspects that in earlier years. As we have already noted, Concordia was depicted as uniting the members of the Severan family in the relief of the great triumphal arch of the Lepcis Magna (Figure 3.1). Furthermore, the growing importance of concordia is demonstrated by the numismatic iconography of the period. The Severan reign used concordia more widely in coins than in the previous periods. Some novelties are also noticeable: in addition to the aforementioned saecularia sacra, the titles perpetua concordia and concordia aeterna were also new types. In addition, the title concordia felix was also used; although it was not a novelty it was extremely rare – it seems that it only appeared a couple of times during the Antonine period, to honour Lucilla, Marcus Aurelius’ daughter.63 Another feature characteristic of the Severan period was concordia’s increasing association to the members of the imperial family rather than to the goddess herself. It is also very interesting that, from the Severan period onwards, concordia became associated to imperial marriage more than it had been previously. During the relatively short period of ce 193–217 (the reigns of Septimius Severus,

100  Day two: women take the stage Caracalla and Geta), about twenty different types of coins presenting the title were produced, with the goddess only appearing in five of them.64 One such example dates from ce 201. The coin can be interpreted as an example of the ideal family, the imperial family, in which the future emperor Caracalla was depicted on one side and his parents, emperor Septimius Severus and empress Julia Domna, on the other.65 The harmonious relationship of husband and wife is obvious, and is highlighted by the portrayal of the emperor as the sun and empress as the moon. The depiction of the emperor wearing the sun god’s crown and the empress the moon goddess’ crescent in coinage began in the Severan period.66 It has been argued that it demonstrated how the power of the empress was related to the power of the emperor, but how it was also dependent on it.67 In this particular case, however, I consider the word concordia as signifying harmony, rather than dependency, which guarantees continuity. As the ideal family (with a very youthful prince, Caracalla, who perhaps symbolises the future of the empire) is described under title concordiae aeternae, it seems that the coin essentially demonstrates how harmony between husband and wife, a ‘cosmic couple’, can produce continuity for the whole empire. Since the idea of concordia and harmonious family life were closely connected, it is probable that concordia could – and should – be found in the rituals of the Ludi Saeculares. The Severan games were indeed an occasion celebrating, among other important deeds, Severus’ moral legislation.68 It is worth noting that both the Severan policy on marriage and public morals and the senatorial response to the new moral legislation seem to follow the Augustan pattern. During his reign, Augustus was opposed by the senate (especially in the early days of his reign) where three major points were concerned: his will to reduce the number of senators, the exceptional amount of power he received and, finally, the moral laws applied to the upper classes especially.69 The senatorial class apparently remembered the legislation as an unpleasant occasion even long after Augustus’ reign, as is demonstrated by Tacitus’ negative perspective on the laws (writing perhaps 100 years after the emperor’s reign).70 The Augustan idea of highlighting family values among the upper classes was apparently one that Severus tried to continue in his own policy. The senatorial class was, however, very reluctant to do so, as Dio’s rather unenthusiastic view on the acts of Severus as a judge of moral issues reports.71 This was not all, however. The emperor also decided to extend his ‘family revolution’ to the army, as soldiers became legally allowed marry while on service (this law was one of Severus’ two most important military reforms; the other was to increase military pay). Apparently, his wish was not only to highlight the relationship between soldiers and their wives, but to highlight the family life of the soldiers in general, since the new law also gave the soldiers’ children the right of inheritance.72 The importance of moral issues for the Severans is furthermore stressed by the fact that the dynasty’s following rulers maintained the policy. Dio reports on Caracalla’s very strict moral attitude and notes an incident during which he condemned a Roman knight to death for bringing a coin presenting the emperor’s image to a brothel (although, according to Dio, the knight was

Day two: women take the stage  101 later released as Caracalla died before the execution could take place). Dio also writes about how Caracalla took tough measures against adulterers and, how he famously had four Vestal Virgins executed for unchastity.73 It is also worth noting that one of the few surviving documents on legal issues during the reign of the third Severan emperor, Elagabalus, is about the rights of soldiers’ c­ hildren; it seems that he granted the same rights to children born from a Roman soldier and a foreign woman as to those born from Roman parents.74 The strong emphasis Severus placed on these laws is interesting, as it is well known that jurists, such as Ulpian,75 received important roles in imperial administration during the late second/early third century ce (it has been suggested that the rise of jurists can be connected to Commodus’ and Severus’ dependence on the a libellis to answer their correspondence, and to Caracalla’s lack of interest to detail).76 As one characteristic feature of Severan culture was the inclusion of jurists in the government, it is perhaps not surprising that the beginning of the ‘new era’ was accompanied by a number of new laws and regulations. Moreover, the jurists’ knowledge of previous Roman laws played a part in the policies of the Severan dynasty. For example, over two-fifths of the Digesta – one of the most important sources on Roman law and its history recording laws from the early first century bce until the age of Constantine – come from Ulpian’s writings.77 This means that Augustan moral laws, among others, were well known by Severan administrators. Their knowledge, combined with their influence on legal matters, perhaps considerably affected the imperial policy. The matrons’ participation is perhaps the clearest evidence of celebrating Severan moral laws as part of his Secular Games, as the respected Roman mothers took a part of extreme importance in the grand purification ritual on behalf of the whole communitas. Their status as Roman mothers was highlighted by the fact that some of them had their own children taking part in the important closing stages of the celebration (see Chapter Six). I would also suggest that the idea of concordia can be found in the whole royal family’s roles in the ritual. Septimius Severus led the sacrifices and placated the gods. Moreover, he declared himself by prayer as a pater of the whole community, as seen in Chapter Three. The empress, on the other hand, led the group of respected mothers; her position as a wife and a mother was also emphasised in the inscription. The roles of the imperial couple reflected the Roman concept of pater familias and mater familias very clearly in the sense that, in Roman discourse, the good pater familias was first and foremost a good estate owner, a master, who took care of his household. Accordingly, the good mater familias was considered as a woman who was chaste and sexually respectable, married or widowed (but not unmarried).78 In addition, Caracalla, the future emperor, and his younger brother Geta were the visible evidence of the blessings of imperial concordia. Praying together for the gods on behalf of the community, they were symbols of security and continuation for the empire. Moreover, the unique combination of Jupiter and Juno (compared to the earlier games) appearing on the second day could be explained as an attempt at highlighting

102  Day two: women take the stage the different roles of the emperor and the empress. The special relationship existing between Septimius Severus and Jupiter Optimus Maximus, alongside Julia Domna’s role as the chief of Roman mothers celebrating Juno, can also be seen as a relationship of between husband and wife; the pater patriae and the first Roman matron. Both are connected to one individual of the most important couple in the traditional Roman pantheon: Jupiter Optimus Maximus and Juno Regina. In this sense, the importance of marriage for the communitas was also highlighted. Only from this harmonious co-operation could the success of the commonwealth be guaranteed. The Vestals stand still The third female group alongside the empress and the matrons appearing on the second day was that of the Vestal Virgins. They attended the praying of the matrons and Septimius Severus, although the inscription clarifies that they did not take part in the prayer, but that just were present.79 In that sense, their role was similar to the one they played during to the opening prayer, in which they also participated, but in which they first and foremost simply attended. The Vestal Virgins’ participation in Roman religion can be divided to two different groups: to rites of purification and their duty as the guardians of the symbolic food storage of Rome. Generally, their role in the rituals of Roman traditional religion was remarkable; nine rituals in which the Vestals were involved are known. Of these, six can be considered more or less as rites of purification (including the New Year rituals of 1 March, the vestalia, the fordicidia, the rites of the October Horse, the parilia and, finally, the argei).80 As the Vestal Virgins were heavily involved in these kind of rites, their participation in the Secular Games could be explained by the fact that the Ludi Saeculares were also a purificationary celebration – at least in the sense that they celebrated the passing of the old era and the coming of the new Golden Age for the Roman communitas. Therefore, it could be argued that the inclusion of the Vestal Virgins was probably at least partly connected to their role in many purificationary rites in Roman religion. The question remains, however, of why the Vestals were included in the inscription of ce 204, since this breaks the tradition of the Augustan record. Why was it considered so important to preserve their participation in the memory of the games, even if their presence can be explained by their generally regular role in the purificatory rituals in Roman civic cults? I would suggest that the reasons I gave previously applies also to the second-day r­ ituals. The Vestal Virgins were a group who symbolised Rome itself; when they accompanied the emperor in the prayer, their connection with the imperial family demonstrated the close relationship (or perhaps even dependency) of the emperor and Rome. Moreover, what made the Vestals so special in Roman religion was their all-embracing status. As Adrian Staples (1998: 86) mentions, ‘at the core of the Vestals’ gender construction was binary opposites. The priestess’ definition arose from correlations such as man to woman, virgin to

Day two: women take the stage  103 matron and wife to daughter.’ The Vestals were considered as sacral precisely because of the ambiguity of their status: they both were and were not virgins and matrons. The importance of their position possibly also rose from the ambiguity existing between men and women.81 As they appear again in the Ludi Saeculares of the second day, when the Roman matrons participated under the supervision of Septimius Severus and Julia Domna, their role was again to demonstrate the power of the imperial couple, who ruled even over the sphere of ambiguity, over the categories that could not easily be defined.82 Honouring the new age The second day of the festival was perhaps the most crucial moment of the celebration, when the Vestals and the matronae purified the community and thus ended the old saeculum. Perhaps that is why the end of the second day included the declaration that the Ludi Honorarii, games including different kind of shows, would be celebrated after the actual Secular Games.83 The combination of entertainment and competitions and religious rituals was a traditional part of the Roman ludi. The shows usually took place over several days; in the beginning, they included races around the circus, but later on, events such as animal combats and theatrical performances were added to the programme. The oldest known ludi were the Ludi Romani in September and the Ludi Plebeii in November. The first occasion of which we can be quite certain of their performance was from fourth/third century bce (although they might be even older). Both were held to honour Jupiter Optimus Maximus, and also included several days of shows: apparently the Roman Games took ten days during the late republican era, and by the time of Julius Caesar fifteen. The Ludi Plebeii took place over twelve days, of which nine days were dedicated to stage performances and three to circus games. During the imperial era, the number of days dedicated to the ludi increased, and it has been suggested that in the first century 77 days were dedicated to them; by mid-fourth century, the time allocated to the ludi amounted to as much as 177 days. The games were a major event in the city, open not just to Roman citizens, but also to foreigners and slaves; their importance for the city as a social occasion was remarkable.84 The Ludi Honorarii, mentioned in the Severan inscription, were celebrated in the Augustan Secular Games as well; they were cited at the very end of the Augustan programme. They consisted of the Ludi Latini which took place in a wooden theatre on the bank of Tiber, the Ludi Graeci, which happened in the theatre of Pompeius and the Ludi Astici, performed in the Circus Flaminius. The games also included hunting, fighting games and horse races.85 In the Severan record, the inscription seems to underline the fact that the Ludi Honorarii were provided by Septimius Severus and his sons Caracalla and Geta. They highlighted the rulers’ central role in organising the event in a much stronger manner than in the Augustan source. The actual programme of the honorary games was probably very similar to the Augustan one, but,

104  Day two: women take the stage as mentioned earlier, more information is provided in this Severan case. The theatrical performances and their places, for example, are mentioned in much more detail than in the Augustan inscription. One very interesting detail is the declaration of the beast-hunting. The inscription gives a rather exact description of what kinds of animals were included in the show, and explains how they were provided by the generosity of the emperor and his sons (munificentia nostra).86 The animals had a very important role in imperial propaganda, especially in the triumphal processions. During the republic and early empire, the variety of animals displayed in the victory ceremonies was quite small; elephants were probably most common, or at least, they were well represented in the literature describing the triumphal processions of the earlier period, although horses were apparently quite common as well.87 The use of more exotic animals became more regular in the later period. The Historia Augusta reports how Gordian III (emperor from ce 238 to 244) planned a procession of animals including thirty-two elephants, ten elks, ten tigers, thirty leopards, ten hyenas, six hippopotami, one rhinoceros, ten lions, ten giraffes, twenty wild asses and forty wild horses, amongst others, for the celebration of his victory over the Persians.88 Unfortunately, he died before the triumph, and the animals were passed down to his successor, Philip the Arab. Interestingly enough, it seems that these animals were used in the celebration of the thousandth birthday of Rome (in ce 248), sometimes also considered as Ludi Saeculares: All of these Philip presented or slew at the secular games. All these animals, wild, tame, and savage, Gordian intended for a Persian triumph; but his official vow proved of no avail, for Philip presented all of them at the secular games, consisting of both gladiatorial spectacles and races in the Circus, that were celebrated on the thousandth anniversary of the founding of the City, when he and his son were consuls.89 In taking a closer look at the reign of Septimius Severus, one interesting detail in Cassius Dio’s texts regarding the animal shows he witnessed himself, is noteworthy. Although he is unfortunately silent about the Severan Ludi Saeculares, he does mention the celebrations of Septimius Severus’ tenth year of power, which he saw in person, and gives a very detailed description of the animals present on that occasion. Dio mentions how: At these spectacles sixty wild boars of Plautianus fought together at a signal, and among many other wild beasts that were slain were an elephant and a corocotta. This last animal is an Indian species, and was then introduced into Rome for the first time, so far as I am aware. It has the color of a lioness and tiger combined, and the general appearance of those animals, as also of a dog and fox, curiously blended. The entire receptacle in the amphitheater had been constructed so as to resemble a boat in shape, and was capable of receiving or discharging four hundred beasts at once;

Day two: women take the stage  105 and then, as it suddenly fell apart, there came rushing forth bears, lionesses, panthers, lions, ostriches, wild asses, bison (this is a kind of cattle foreign in species and appearance), so that seven hundred beasts in all, both wild and domesticated, at one and the same time were seen running about and were slaughtered.90 It seems that the reason for Dio’s interest in these animals is not only ‘scientific’: the animals were an important symbol of ‘the other’ in Roman culture, especially in triumphal processions. Wild beasts symbolised Roman control over nature; the victory of (Roman) civilization over wilderness. The display of wild animals in Rome thus gave form to the Roman order of the world.91 Accordingly, it could even be argued that wild beasts, as ‘the other’, were an emphasis upon Roman identity: of the Romans as a communitas, whose duty was to civilise the world by conquering. The animals’ roles in triumphal processions could also explain their inclusion in the inscription on the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204. Septimius Severus and his sons, showed their superiority over ‘the other’, which was represented as a group of wild animals. He controlled the nature and brought order to chaos; just as he brought peace to the empire after the civil war. He had the ability to take control, and as such legitimised his power. On the other hand, the emperor and his sons were also seen as providers of public property: in this case, the beasts for the public games. In other words, they arranged a spectacle for the community. Moreover, the animals used in public spectacles could also be employed as indicators public wealth, a very important issue in public celebrations like triumphs. Rome’s wealth (obtained through conquering, that is) was paraded in the triumphal processions and served to demonstrate her power. Even if some war spoils were distributed to allies who had helped Romans to achieve the victory, for example, the main part of the booty was reserved for the city of Rome. The riches taken from the enemy, paraded through the streets in front of the spectators, were intended to demonstrate the common wealth of the very people, the audience. Even if the money and other riches were not actually distributed to all those who saw them, they were still, in principal, the property of the Roman people, the populus Romanus. Hence, the property that was publicly paraded was, in theory, also subject to civic control. The border between the property of the state and that of the emperor became less clear in the imperial period, and sources indicate that some of the publicly paraded spoils of war did become the emperor’s property. However, the idea of publicly displayed wealth as a communal property, and not that of an individual, remained through the centuries. The idea of a common wealth was in fact an important way for the audience to identify themselves as members of the Roman communitas.92 Thus, as Severus, Caracalla and Geta showed their generosity towards the public by providing beasts for the games (and organising the Ludi Honorarii overall), they created a relationship between the community and themselves; they provided a public spectacle, which was ‘common property’, like the riches that were displayed in the triumphal processions.

106  Day two: women take the stage This means that they provided public wealth so important for the Roman identity. In other words, the very precise list of animals did not only record the types of beasts included in the Ludi Saeculares, but was also meant to demonstrate the power of the emperor and his sons, as well as point out the special bond between the ruler and his subjects.93 Generally, it could be argued that the period between the second day and third night was the most crucial one for the Ludi Saeculares – and for the whole community. We have already noted that the second day was quite extraordinary in two aspects: the participation of the Roman matrons and the declaration of the Ludi Honorarii were conducted during this point. It could perhaps be argued that this was precisely the moment when the community was actually stepping from the old saeculum to the new Golden Age, as the purification on behalf of the communitas was conducted by the matrons, while the declaration of the Ludi Honorarii, a declaration of celebration of a new age, was simultaneously made. In this sense, in proceeding to the next chapter to discuss the third night and day of the festival, we are moving from the old saeculum to the new one.

Notes 1 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 1–4. 2 Pighi, comm.lud.sept.Va 57. 3 RIC 2 no. 383 (Domitian) shows the emperor giving a victimless sacrifice – during the earlier, Augustan games the sacrifice to Eileithyia was bloodless (27 sacrificial cakes) as well – in front of a tripartite structure with a reclining personification of Tiber. See Sobocinski 2006: 585. 4 Hes. Theog. 921–923. 5 Hymn. Hom. Ap. 3.101–122; Hom. Il. 11.270; 16.187; 19.103. 6 The whole story can be found in Diod. 4.9. 7 Feeney 2003: 107; for Eileithyia in Rome in general, see Jessen 1905: 2109. 8 Goffart 1971: 414–416. 9 Zos. 2.7. 10 Zos. 2.6.9–10. 11 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 4.15.5. 12 Hor. Car, Saec. 13–16. 13 See Ov. Am. 2.13.7 and following; 20 and following. For the complete list of the literary sources regarding Eileithyia, see Pingiatoglou 1981: 144–153. 14 Ael. NA 7.15. Aelian, even though he wrote in Greek, came from Italy, as he was a native of Praeneste. Trapp 2003: 18. 15 Scullard 1981: 86–87. March was considered to be the first month of the year in Rome until perhaps 153 bce (see Scullard 1981: 84–85. 16 Keltanen 2002: 130, 133–134. 17 Augustan sacrifices to Eileithyia: Pighi, comm.lud.quint. 115–118. 18 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 4–9. 19 Beard, North & Price 1998: 2; 27; 70–71; 173–174. For a complete study, see Scheid 1995. 20 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 4–9.

Day two: women take the stage  107 21 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 9–13. 22 Pighi. comm.lud.sept.Va 30–46. 23 Varro, Ling. 5.65. 24 Hänninen 2000: 23–25 for an account on Juno and her ‘original’ role as seen in the studies of ancient religion. However, as Hänninen mentions, it is perhaps more sensible to accept many aspects in a deity than to attempt to find the one and only original function for the goddess. 25 Hänninen 1999: 39, 52. 26 For the history and development of the Capitoline triad in Roman religion, see, for example, Scheid 2003: 159 and the classic study of Dumézil 1979: 155. 27 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 9–10. 28 Treggiari 1991: 6. 29 Cass. Dio 78[77].9.1. 30 Cass. Dio 75[74].2.3; Herod. 3.8.5. 31 Kettenhofen 1979: 79. 32 Freeman 1996: 467. For the Antonine plague, see Bruun 2007: 201–217. 33 Campbell 1984: 49. Freeman 1996: 467. 34 Freeman 1996: 467. 35 Smith 1972: 481–482. 36 Smith 1972: 482–484. 37 Smith 1972: 484–486. 38 Roman military inscriptions seem to refer to the strong, even emotional attachment of soldiers to the imperial family, and they also seem to underline the extraordinary status of Julia Domna among the legions. See Fishwick 1992: 63–72. 39 Kettenhofen 1979: 83–85; Levick 2007: 82. 40 Levick 2007: 93; Kosmetatou 2002: 411–412. 41 Keltanen 2002: 137–138. 42 He had already started the adoption process in ce 195, proclaiming himself son of Marcus as is indicated by epigraphic and numismatic evidence. The actual adoption took place in ce 197. 43 Herod. 3.10.5; Aur.Vict. Caes. 20.30; Eutr. 8.19.2. 44 For Septimius Severus and his identification with the Antonines in his deeds and propaganda, see Baharal 1996: 20–42. The idea of Marcus Aurelius and Augustus as role models for the emperors was so powerful that even Elagabalus, when taking power as the third Severan ruler, declared that he wanted to be a new Augustus and Marcus Aurelius, if we believe Cassius Dio (79.1.3). 45 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 9. 46 Zos. 2.6. The question regarding the ‘proper’ length of a saeculum is not that simple, though; for example, it is possible that the part of the Sibylline Books claiming the length as 110 years was an Augustan forgery. See Appendix Four for details. 47 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. IV 12–Va 30. See also Birley 1999: 160. 48 Hänninen 2000: 99. The chorus of children will be dealt in Chapter Seven. 49 The names that can more or less be reconstructed completely are Iulia Taria Stratonice Laberi, Domitia Flaccilla Ulpi Antonini, Cl. Dryantilla Platonis Corneli Optati, Iulia Suemia Vari Marcelli, Caesennia Tusidiana Livi Rogati, Claudia Valentina Aquili Agrestis, Octavia Athenais Flavi Clementis, Sempronia Spoletina Corneli Felicis, Aelia Gemellina Armeni Iuliani and Antonia Tironilla Iuli Maximi. The names and fragments are collected in Pighi 1965: 241–243. See also Birley 1999: 160. The number of provincial senators is suggested in Hopkins 1983: 200.

108  Day two: women take the stage 50 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 26. Julia Soaemias was the mother of the third emperor of the Severan dynasty, Elagabalus. Her reputation is not very good; she is described as an immoral woman by ancient authors (Cass. Dio 79[78].6.2; Herod. 5.3.10; SHA Heliog. 2.1). However, the stories might reflect the reputation of her son, who became infamous for his obscure sexual behaviour. For Julia Soaemias see Cleve 1982. 51 For the background of Julia Domna, see Levick 2007: 6–22. 52 Lusnia 1995: 119–124. 53 Lusnia 1995: 127. 54 RIC 4.1 no. 816 (Septimius Severus). 55 Zanzarri 1997: 81. 56 Treggiari 1991: 251–252. 57 Dixon 1992: 99–108. 58 Lobur 2008: 40–58; Price & Kearns 2003: 128–129. 59 RIC 3 nos. 1276–1296 (Marcus Aurelius). 60 RIC 3 no. 381 (Antoninus Pius) is a typical example. 61 See, for example, BMC IV 85 (Faustina II); 333 (Lucilla); 406 (Crispina). For the empresses’ coins during the second century more generally, see Keltanen 2002: 105–147. 62 Hansen 2007: 114–118. 63 Zanzarri 1997: 79–80. 64 Zanzarri 1997: 117. 65 RIC 4.1, no. 52 (Caracalla). 66 Alexandridis 2004: 50. 67 Bleckmann 2002: 339. 68 For the Severan moral laws see Birley 1999: 165 and Gorrie 2004: 61–65. 69 Raaflaub & Samons 1990: 443–435. 70 Tac. Ann. 3.28. 71 Cass. Dio 77[76].16.4–5. 72 Bryant 1999: 26. 73 Cass. Dio 78[77].16.1–5. 74 Halsberghe 1972: 71. For the imperial administration of the period in general, see De Arrizabalaga y Prado 2010: 278–280. 75 Ulpian (Domitius Ulpianus) was a lawyer and a high-ranking official during the Severan period. He served in various high positions under every Severan emperor, and eventually acted as praetorian prefect during the reign of Alexander Severus. He was eventually murdered in ce 223 by mutinying praetorians. Ulpian’s commentaries and works on Roman laws had already become famous in his own lifetime. Honoré 2003: 492–493. 76 Potter 2004: 158–162. 77 Honoré 2003: 493. 78 Saller 1999: 196. 79 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 9–10. 80 Wildfang 2006: 22. For details on the rituals, see Scullard 1981: 85–87; 102–105; 120–121; 149–150; 193–194. 81 Beard 1995: 167–168. 82 In her classic study, Mary Douglas argued that matters considered out of place were also considered as ‘dirty’, or at least extremely dangerous.Thus, crisis as an ­‘unnatural’ period was considered as some kind of inter-state, in which known categories become unclear or ‘blurred’ (see Douglas 2002).

Day two: women take the stage  109 83 Pighi, comm.lud.sept. IV 33–46. 84 Beard, North & Price 1998: 66–67, 262–263; Scullard 1981: 183–186, 196–197. 85 See Hänninen 2000: 97. 86 Pighi, comm.lud.sept.Va 43. 87 Östenberg 2003: 165–166. 88 SHA Gord. 33.1. See also Östenberg 2003: 165. 89 SHA Gord. 33.1–3 (transl. D. Magie). 90 Cass. Dio 77[76].1.3–4 (transl. E. Cary). 91 Östenberg 2003: 277. The animals were obviously not the only representatives of the ‘other’ in the triumphal procession – prisoners of war, statues, paintings and other art objects also demonstrated Roman power. 92 Östenberg 2003: 275–276.We already saw Cassius Dio’s cynical comments (77.16.3) on Severus who put his name to the already existing public buildings after having them repaired with the use of state money, ‘just as he had done this by his private funds’: an indication that the separation of public and imperial property remained an issue during early third century ce. 93 The generosity of the emperor (and his son) is also highlighted by giving very detailed information about the prizes offered to those competitors who do well in the Ludi Honorarii (Pighi, comm. lud. sept. Va 36–41). Obviously, this money given by the emperor was not going directly to the public, but it was nevertheless used for the entertainment of the people. As a result, it also demonstrates the will and ability of imperial power to take care of its subjects.

Bibliography Alexandridis, A. (2004). Die Frauen des Römischen Kaiserhauses. Eine Untersuchung ihrer bildlichen Darstellung von Livia bis Iulia Domna. Mainz an Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Baharal, D. (1996). Victory of Propaganda. The Dynastic Aspect of the Imperial Propaganda of the Severi: The Literary and Archaeological Evidence ad 194–235. Oxford: Tempvs Repratvm. Beard, M. (1995). Re-Reading (Vestal) Virginity. In: R. Hawley and B. Levick, B., eds., Women in Antiquity. New Assessments, 1st ed. London: Routledge, pp. 166–177. Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S. (1998). Religions of Rome. Vol. 1: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Birley, A. (1999). Septimius Severus. The African Emperor. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Bleckmann., B. (2002). Die severische Familie und die Soldatenkaiser. In: H. TemporiniGräfin Vitzthum, ed., Die Kaiserinnen Roms. Von Livia bis Theodora, 1st ed. München: Beck, pp. 265–339. Bruun, C. (2007). The Antonine Plague and the Third-Century Crisis. In: O. Hekster, G. De Kleijn and D. Slootjes, eds., Crises and the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 201–217. Bryant, C. (1999). Imperial Family Roles. Propaganda & Policy in the Severan Period. In: E. Dal Covolo and G. Rinaldi, eds., Gli Imperatori Severi, 1st ed. Roma: LAS, pp. 17–29. Campbell, J. (1984). The Emperor and the Roman Army 31 bc – ad 235. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cleve, R. (1982). Severus Alexander and the Severan Women. Los Angeles: University of California (unpublished PhD dissertation).

110  Day two: women take the stage De Arrizabalaga y Prado, L. (2010). The Emperor Elagabalus: Fact of Fiction? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dixon, S. (1992). The Roman Family. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Douglas, M. (2002). Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. 7th ed. New York: Routledge. Dumézil, G. (1969). Ideés romaines. Gallimard: Paris. Feeney, D. (2003). Ludi Saeculares and Carmen Saeculare. In: C. Ando, ed., Roman Religion, 1st ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 106–116. Fishwick, D. (1992). Soldier and Emperor. AHB, 6, pp. 63–72. Freeman, C. (1996). Egypt, Greece and Rome. Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Goffart, W. (1971). Zosimus, The First Historian of Rome’s Fall. Amer. Hist. Rev., 76.2, pp. 412–441. Gorrie, C. (2004). Julia Domna’s building patronage, imperial family roles and the Severan revival of moral legislation. Historia, 53, pp. 61–72. Halsberghe, G. (1972). The Cult of Sol Invictus. Leiden: Brill. Hansen, I. (2007). Gendered Identities and the Conformity of Male-Female Virtues on Roman Mythological Sarcophagi. In: L. Larsson Lovén ans A. Strömberg, eds., Public Roles and Personal Status. Men and Women in Antiquity, 1st ed. Sävedalen: Paul Åströms Förlag, pp. 107–121. Honoré, T. (2003). Domitius Ulpianus. OCD, p.493. Hopkins, K. (1983). Death and Renewal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hänninen. M.-L. (1999). Juno Regina and the Roman Matrons. In: P. Setälä and L. Savunen, eds., Female Networks and the Public Sphere in Roman Society, 1st ed. Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, pp. 39–52. Hänninen, M.-L. (2000). Women as Worshippers of Juno. From the Mid-Republican to the Augustan Era. Helsinki: University of Helsinki (unpublished PhD dissertation). Jessen, O. (1905). Eileithyia. RE, 5, pp. 2102–2110. Keltanen, M. (2002). The Public Image of the Four Empresses. Ideal Wifes, Mothers and Regents? In: P. Setälä, R. Berg, R. Hälikkä, M. Keltanen, J. Pölönen and V. Vuolanto, eds., Women, Wealth and Power in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, pp. 105–146. Kettenhofen, E. (1979). Die syrischen Augustae in der historischen Überlieferung. Ein Beitrag zum Problem der Orientalisierung. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt Verlag. Kosmetatou, E. (2002). The Public Image of Julia Mamaea. Latomus, 61.2, pp. 398–416. Levick, B. (2007). Julia Domna. Syrian Empress. New York: Routledge. Lobur, J. (2008). Consensus, Concordia, and the Formation of Roman Imperial Ideology. London: Routledge. Lusnia, S. (1995). Julia Domna’s Coinage and Severan Dynastic Propaganda. Latomus, 54, pp. 119–140. Pighi, G. (1965). De ludi saecularibus populi Romani Quiritum libri sex. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Verlag P. Schippers N.V. Pingiatoglou, S. (1981). Eileithyia. Bamberg: Königshausen und Neumann. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge. Price, S. and Kearns, E. (2003). The Oxford Dictionary of Classical Myth & Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Raaflaub, K. and Samons, L. (1990). Opposition to Augustus. In: K. Raaflaub and M. Toher, eds., Between Republic and Empire. Interpretations of Augustus and His Principate, 1st ed. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, pp. 423–451.

Day two: women take the stage  111 Saller, R. (1999). Pater Familias, Mater Familias and the gendered semantics of the Roman household. CPh, 94.2, pp. 183–197. Scheid, J. (1995). Graeco Ritu: a typically Roman way of honouring the gods. HSCP, 97, pp. 15–31. Scheid, J. (2003). An Introduction to Roman Religion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Scullard, H. (1981). Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic. New York: Cornell University Press. Smith, R. (1972). The Army Reforms of Septimius Severus. Historia, 21, pp. 481–499. Sobocinski, M. (2006). Visualizing Ceremony: The Design and Audience of the Ludi Saeculares Coinage of Domitian. AJA, 110.4, pp. 581–602. Staples, A. (1998). From Good Goddess to Vestal Virgins. Sex and Category in Roman Religion. London and New York: Routledge. Trapp, M. (2003). Aelian. OCD, p. 18. Treggiari, S. (1991). Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Wildfang, R. (2006). Rome’s Vestal Virgins. A study of Rome’s Vestal priestesses in the Late Republic and Early Empire. London: Routledge. Zanzarri, P. (1997). La Concordia Romana. Politica e ideologia nemma monetazione della tarda repubblica ai Severi. Roma: Gangemi Editore. Östenberg, I. (2003). Staging the World. Rome and the other in triumphal procession. Lund: Department of Archaeology and Ancient History.

6 The third night and day The empire of the sun and the moon

This chapter proceeds to the third, and final, night and day of the festival, which were dedicated to Tellus, Apollo and Diana. Tellus received the nocturnal sacrifices; Apollo and Diana were celebrated during the daytime rituals. The very last rituals of the third day (singing of the Carmen Saeculare by young boys and girls), are however, dealt with in the next chapter. This arrangement is due to their very different nature. The sacrifices to Tellus, Apollo and Diana closely follow the pattern of the two earlier days. The Carmen Saeculare, however, can be seen as a separate closing act for the whole three-day ritual rather than as part of the third day rituals only.1

A night of abundance The third night followed the formula of the previous nights. The worshipped goddess was Terra Mater, to whom the emperor sacrificed a pregnant sow and prayed according to the Greek rite. The prayer also followed the same formula as for the previous sacrifices. Princes Caracalla and Geta also took part in the sacrifice, and the quindecimviri and Praetorian Prefect were present as well.2 The Praetorian Prefect was in fact present at most of the sacrificial rituals. Usually he accompanied the emperor, his sons and the quindecimviri.3 The Praetorian Prefect in question was of course Plautianus, a kinsman of Severus, native of Lepcis Magna. Over the years, he became a close ally of Severus and an extremely powerful figure in Rome. His contacts with the imperial family further increased when his daughter was married to Caracalla. He eventually became so integrated into the imperial family that his name was included in the oaths of loyalty sworn to the emperor and his house every year.4 The description of the rituals of the third night is very short, but does mention that they were conducted in a similar manner to the first night, when sacrifices were made to the Moirae.5 The empress and the matrons again performed a sellisternium for Juno and Diana, as they did during the earlier rituals.6 The third night is perhaps the most interesting of the three nocturnal rituals. Terra Mater appeared from time to time in the imperial propaganda, although she was known by her Latin name Tellus. As a goddess identified with the riches of the earth, she symbolises the New Golden Age

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  113 perfectly. As a result, we should first evaluate her nature and the different aspects attributed to her. Goddess of cultivation Tellus’ nature is explained by Ovid, amongst others. He describes Tellus as the patroness of the place of cultivation, who should not be confused with Ceres, the goddess of the origins of cultivation.7 The goddess had no festival named after her in the Roman ritual calendar, but she was included in the ritual of the fordicidia in April. The fordicidia was one of the most ancient rituals of Rome, and was celebrated to promote the fertility of the land and flocks. Tellus/Terra Mater was perhaps, in an earlier period, regarded as a spirit living in the farmer’s fields, but was later considered more as an Earth-Mother, like Demeter in Greece.8 Tellus appeared from time to time in Roman iconography during the imperial period.9 She was involved in the Augustan Ludi Saeculares and in Horace’s Carmen Saeculare, which was on that same occasion.10 Of the emperors following Augustus, Hadrian appears to have used her quite significantly in his propaganda. During this period, Tellus was usually attributed to peaceful working in the fields and agriculture in general, as well as to ideas of the Golden Age. The birth of Rome was also connected to her.11 After Hadrian, Tellus can be found in the coinage of Antoninus Pius, Commodus and Septimius Severus. The Severan Tellus appears in about ce 200 or 201, and is depicted as resting an arm on a globe and holding a cornucopia. On the globe, the four seasons appear, and Autumn holds a basket of fruit.12 This is not the only example of the Severan Tellus, however. We possess at least one example of a coin presenting Tellus with Bacchus and Hercules, who were gods heavily connected with the imperial family. Even if these two deities are not mentioned in actual rituals of the Ludi Saeculares (although Bacchus is named in the Carmen Saeculare which was performed at the end of the festival; see Chapter Seven), they nonetheless possibly had a very important role in the games of ce 204: the coin in question seems to depict a sacrifice conducted during the Secular Games. In this scene, Bacchus and Hercules are standing with Septimius Severus, a­ longside a goddess identified as Tellus.13 Food and imperial paternalism In examining the Severan period, and the significance of Tellus for the era, we must bear in mind that Severus’ reign resulted from civil war, the first one in Rome for over 100 years. If we take a closer look at texts describing civil wars in Roman history, a kind of ‘pattern’ in the civil response to these wars appears: a fear, among the people of the city, that the capital’s grain supply could be in danger. After all, wars, and especially civil wars, often meant troubles for grain transportation if the key provinces or supply routes were in hostile hands. In addition, food problems were sometimes generated by natural causes, like

114  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon harvest failures, epidemic diseases, or were generated by corruption among the officials responsible for grain distribution.14 Peter Garnsey counts twenty-two cases of food crisis during the imperial era, from Augustus to Septimius Severus. Most of these occurred during the early empire, and, for example, during the civil war of ce 68–70. During that period, control of North Africa was crucial, and the situation was the same during the Severan civil wars over 100 years later. Reports about famine or food shortages become rarer in the second century, but a few cases were mentioned during the reigns of Domitian, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius.15 Even if the food shortages of the second century were apparently not too bad, it seems that during Commodus’ reign, specifically in ce 189, a very serious food crisis occurred. This was reported by both Cassius Dio and Herodian. At the same time, the city suffered an epidemic, but the policy of Cleander (a freedman of Commodus) only made things worse, as Herodian notes.16 In Cassius Dio’s version, the main reason for the famine was also Cleander, but the prefect of the grain supply made things worse, as he tried to get Cleander into troubles (although Dio reports the occurrence of pestilence as well).17 The Historia Augusta also claims that the problems with food supplies had something to do with the officials’ bad policies: And because he was so careless, moreover, a great famine arose in Rome, not because there was any real shortage of crops, but merely because those who then ruled the state were plundering the food supply.18 The people’s response to shortage was, according to the authors, a violent one. Protests against Cleander grew to the point that he sent soldiers to crush the angry crowds. The fighting was so fierce that Herodian even describes it as a state of a civil war. The riots were targeted at Cleander, not Commodus, but for the emperor the situation was threatening as well. Eventually, he had to give in to the demands of the crowd, and had Cleander killed. Herodian reports how Commodus was very afraid of the possibility of a new uprising when he entered the city after the riots.19 Mass protests broke out in imperial Rome from time to time, but seldom turned to violence. In fact, it was customary for the emperors to witness protests in person. It was considered the emperor’s duty to practice the virtue of civilitas: that is, to take part in public shows and to share the pleasures of the ordinary people. The shows thus created a platform for popular protests as well, although it should be noted that, despite occasional protests, they were generally safe environments for the ruler. The emperor’s presence in the audience was controlled, and did not usually pose a threat to the regime. As Peter Garnsey suggests, it at most reminded the emperor of his obligation to feed the people.20 However, the protests of ce 189, just a couple of years before the Severan reign, seem to have been exceptionally fierce. The only reported food riot to which this one could be compared is the incident of ce 51 when, according to Tacitus, an angry mob surrounded

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  115 Emperor Claudius in the Forum and soldiers had to rescue him (it was claimed that there were food supplies in the city for only fifteen days).21 Even if famine was apparently avoided in ce 189, it is very likely that people feared it again when civil war broke out a few years later, and Septimius Severus took power. After all, as the internal struggles affected the food supply, they also created uncertainty in the people’s minds. There are signs in literature, as well as in numismatic sources, that Septimius Severus did indeed dedicate a lot of attention to grain distribution, especially during the first years of his reign. According to the Historia Augusta, when Severus took over the power from his short-lived predecessor Julianus (in ce 193), one of his first acts was to take care of this matter. The same source mentions how Severus fought to secure North Africa, a place central for food supplies. The emperor sent troops to Africa and to Egypt to prevent the provinces from falling to his enemy, Pescennius Niger, who could then distress the Romans by halting food imports.22 Later, it is mentioned that Severus again fought in North Africa, freeing Tripolis by conquering local warmongering tribes.23 According to the information provided by the Historia Augusta, his actions were successful – the emperor apparently managed to organise the food supply so well that when a shortage occurred at the beginning of his reign, there was a surplus in the amount of seven years’ tribute.24 In another passage, it is mentioned that there was enough grain not only for the people of the city, but also for the whole populace of Italy for five years.25 More examples of the importance of grain distribution in Severan policy appear on coins, especially those on which Annona, a personification of the food supply, is represented. The goddess was a creation of imperial propaganda: she first appeared in coinage during the imperial period, but can also be found in cult practice. She was considered to be a figure symbolising the emperor’s ability to take care for his subjects by securing food supply and grain. She does not appear in Roman mythology, and we do not possess any evidence for her presence in Roman religion during the republican period. However, being part of the imperial cult, she was worshipped by private individuals expressing their gratitude or seeking favours. Overall, Annona cannot be seen as an ­independent deity, but rather a figure closely related to imperial policies.26 In coinage, Annona first appears during the reign of Nero, as part of the creation of the so-called Cult of Virtues.27 From the very beginning, it was common to see Annona accompanied by Ceres, the goddess of cultivation, and Abundantia, the personification of prosperity. Annona became an important part of Severus’ imperial iconography from very early on. In ce 194, the goddess was already regularly depicted in coinage, and this lasted until ce 201 (the year ce 200 being an exception). A little later, she again appeared in ce 206–207.28 The first images of Annona presented her standing, with her foot on a prow and holding corn-ears and a cornucopia.29 Another Severan image of Annona presented the goddess standing and holding corn-ears, a modius and a cornucopia.30 The third variant depicted her seated, with corn-ears on her lap.31 It is obvious that the prow pointed

116  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon to the grain supply; corn-ears and cornucopia were typical symbols of prosperity, as well as the modius, a Roman unit for dry measures. These symbols did not only appear with Annona, but with many other gods throughout the centuries, reminding people that food supply was secure and that the grain stores were full.32 As Annona was quite a common figure on coinage throughout the imperial period, her appearance did not necessarily indicate famine of even food shortage as such. Rather, her presence was perhaps more of a statement on the part of the emperor that food supplies were being taken care of. In the period between the civil war of ce 69 and the reign of Commodus (ce 180s), reports of famine become rarer, but the figure of Annona kept appearing on coinage. It seems that Annona simply manifested the emperor’s general concern for the food supply. However, as literary sources (Historia Augusta) and numismatic sources do record the occurrence of food-related troubles in the late ce 190s, it appears that famine or food shortage were nonetheless issues of concern.33 The problem is, though, that more reliable historians, such as Cassius Dio and Herodian, do not mention the occurrence of such troubles during this period. Garnsey explains this because of the (low) quality of their history, their patchy and narrowly focused coverage of the civil war period.34 This may be so, but it also seems possible that the food shortage was somewhat exaggerated by Septimius Severus himself, to help establish his power. As Severus’ life in the Historia Augusta possibly drew quite heavily on the emperor’s self-made biography, it is quite likely that the story of the emperor receiving a city with no food but which he saved through his wise policy came from this very source. At least the tone of the passage would imply this.35 Therefore, it seems that the images of Annona appearing during this period were also made to propagate the impression of a caring emperor who kept the grain distribution working, and who showed generosity towards the people of Rome. Whether there really was a food shortage or not, we cannot know for sure. However, it is important to note that the internal crisis nevertheless gave Severus an opportunity to show himself as a saviour of the Roman people. Wars were indeed one of the major causes for food shortages and famine in the Roman world, and the city of Rome (and the whole of Italy) was especially dependent on grain transportation from the provinces.36 Egypt had been the most important source of grain from the Augustan reign, when it was brought under the control of Rome. During the same period, the Romans also advanced in North Africa, which became the other province of great importance for food supply. According to some ancient authors, the amount of grain exported from North Africa was enough to supply the city of Rome for eight months.37 Was the image of the emperor as a ‘saviour’ celebrated in the Secular Games? The Ludi Saeculares were, as we have seen, a celebration of the communitas moving from one age (saeculum) to another. Moreover, the new age was, at least from the time of Augustus onwards, propagated as a Golden Age; a period of

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  117 peace and prosperity. Indeed, it is obvious that the most concrete mark of this prosperity for the people of Rome was a secure and functional food supply. Accordingly, it seems logical that when Severus legitimised his power after the civil wars, and justified his position among the people of the capital (including the senate and other members of the nobility), he portrayed himself as a ruler caring for his subjects and securing their prosperity. This created an image of a ruler leading the community to a Golden Age. In placing the emperor (and his family) in the central role in the new, reborn communitas, the remarkable event of the Ludi Saeculares conveyed a clear message to the audience. Indeed, in evaluating this message – which eventually must be seen in the light of Severus’ public image – some details ought to be remembered. Perhaps most importantly, as we have seen, there is firm basis to believe that food supplies and their distribution indeed were very important factors for Severus in the creation of his image as a ruler. We have already noted his actions in securing North Africa, a central province for food supply, and the pride he took in this action, as is demonstrated by the Historia Augusta (apparently citing the lost biography of Severus). Moreover, numismatic evidence celebrating Annona hints towards this direction. More evidence, however, can be found from literature. The reports on Severus’ distribution of grain and other food supplies to the people of Rome are very interesting. The Historia Augusta describes how the emperor ‘bestowed upon the Roman people, without cost, a most generous daily allowance of oil in perpetuity’.38 Imperial generosity, however, went even beyond that. Cassius Dio describes how Severus celebrated the tenth anniversary of his coming to power with a gift to the people of Rome: On the occasion of the tenth anniversary of his coming to power Severus presented to the entire populace that received the grain dole and to the soldiers of the praetorian guard gold pieces equal in number to the years of his reign. He prided himself especially on this largess, and, in fact, no emperor had ever before given so much to the whole population at once; the total amount spent for the purpose was two hundred million sesterces.39 In this passage, the emperor’s role as a patronus showing generosity to his subjects is quite evident. Patronage can be described as a lasting relationship between individuals of unequal wealth or power, which involved an asymmetrical exchange of goods and services. The duty of the patron was to provide essential goods to the client, such as money, food, farming equipment, legal assistance, protection and so on. In return, the patron also received something beneficial, such as labour, political support or social prestige. If the relationship was only economic, or if it was a question of charity in which the relationship was one-sided (that is, only the benefactor was active and the beneficiary remained passive), it was not a question of patronage. In the studied case, the relationship was not one-sided, but benefitted both sides: it is noteworthy that the right to receive the gold was ‘tied’ to the grain doles. It seems that those (alongside soldiers) who received grain doles from the

118  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon emperor were ‘worthy’ of receiving money as well. The two groups who maintained a special relationship with the emperor were soldiers and those whom he ‘fed’. They were thus almost like children, or at least clients, to Septimius Severus – in other words, the relationship maintained between the emperor and his subjects was akin to that of a patron and his clients. The people received wealth and the emperor received social prestige. Septimius Severus was thus able to present himself as a generous figure, who not only had brought peace but also prosperity after the civil war. The number of people entitled to grain distribution in the early third century amounted to about 200,000,40 so the vast majority of the habitants of the city did not receive free grain.41 However, the number was still very impressive, and represented an act of significant generosity. The same can be said for Septimius Severus’ decision to include oil to the grain doles. Grain had already been distributed for centuries before Severus – the practice began in republican era and was maintained by Augustus and later emperors. Soldiers were probably included amongst those to whom grain doles were granted during the reign of Nero. However, it was Septimius Severus who started to distribute oil.42 When evaluating the importance of the food distribution on the part of emperors, and in this case Septimius Severus specifically, it is interesting to observe that food was not just for consumption, but also consisted of an important cultural symbol. Food was one way to make a difference between the ‘us’ and the ‘other’ in the Greco-Roman world. When the ancient authors described barbarian customs, diet often formed an important part of their reports. The writers created stereotypes of uncivilised barbarians, who were nomadic pastoralists, preferring meat and milk to agricultural products – although there are some different categories for barbarians as well. The most savage people were, for example, the inhabitants of Iernee for Strabo,43 the Fenni for Tacitus44 and the Huns for Ammianus Marcellinus.45 The products which, on the other hand, signified a civilised world, were of agricultural nature and consisted not only of grain but also of olive oil. The people living near the Roman Empire, or those belonging to it, used the Romans’ trading mark of civilisation: wine and oil. These products symbolised these peoples’ relationship with the superior and civilised Roman culture. Oil, which was a product distributed, for the first time in Roman history, by Septimius Severus, thus seemed to be a very important mark of civilisation. Taking this into consideration, it could be said that descriptions of food and the diets of different peoples were ideological constructs in Roman (and Greek) literature, in the sense that they separated the civilised peoples from the barbarians, the outsiders. In other words, they created identities. Ancient authors such as Strabo, Ammianus and many others, used food and consuming habits as tools for creating polarities between peoples and for separating different nations from each other. Dietary habits and customs marked peoples’ positions.46 It is unclear, of course, whether oil, being a symbol of one’s superiority, or a symbol of the civilised state of the Romans, bore significance for the ordinary

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  119 people who actually received it. However, the distribution of food itself did have a communal value. As Peter Garnsey (1999: 6–7) points out: Food involves commensality, that is, sharing the table, with companions or sharers of bread. Food assembles and binds together those linked by blood, class, religion and citizenship. Food . . . stands out as a pointer to distinctions of status, power and wealth, of group-separateness and – belonging, and of cultural differences in general. In other words, the food has not only use as a biological necessity, but is much more. As such, the inclusion of oil strengthened Septimius Severus’ status as a generous father-figure or patron. It bonded him with his subjects and demonstrated his wealth which helped legitimise his power during the difficult situation after the civil war. When the emperor succeeded in demonstrating his wealth and his ability to provide a product that had not been provided before, he showed the people that he could continue in his role as a bringer of prosperity and peace. Taking the centrality of the food supply for the Severan ruler-image into consideration, it would seem appropriate that the role of Tellus/Terra Mater, the goddess of cultivation and of agriculture more generally, was extremely important in the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204. First of all, if we accept that the Golden Age actually ‘began’ between the second and the third day of the festival, as I have suggested, the sacrifice to Tellus/Terra Mater was in fact the first act of the new saeculum. The Severan coin depicting Tellus in the Ludi Saeculares also hints to her importance in the new Severan Golden Age, as she is the only deity of those worshipped in the nocturnal rites to be portrayed on coinage dedicated to the occasion (in any case, there are no known examples of coinage commemorating the Secular Games dedicated to Eileithyia or Moirae). In addition, the connection existing between the images dedicated to Tellus/Terra Mater in general and the Golden Age celebrated in the Secular Games is rather obvious. Images of fertility, such as grain, fruits, herds and so on, which can easily be attributed to the goddess, were also part of the Golden Age imagery during both the republican and the imperial ages.47 The most famous of such depictions comes from Augustan imagery, which highlighted the blessings which had come to the communitas. Images of plenty, richness and abundance were combined with those of children and the happiness they brought to society. The best known image depicting these subjects is probably the figure of a female goddess on the Ara Pacis, the Altar of Peace, erected in year ce 9 (Figure 6.1). The deity has been identified as many goddesses: Ceres, Pax, Venus and Tellus, to mention just a few. Regardless, her appearance captures the ideas of fertility and the Golden Age perfectly.48 As Severus was also keen to show his people how well he had taken care of the capital’s food supply, and of the distribution of food to the people, the use of Tellus as a goddess of harvest represented his goodwill and signified that his power guaranteed better times.

120  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon

Figure 6.1  A goddess of plenty, richness and abundance depicted on the Altar of Peace of Augustus (Ara Pacis Augustae), erected in ce 9. The identity of the goddess remains unknown, but she has been widely suggested to be Tellus. Other possibilities include Ceres, Pax and Venus (photo: Jussi Rantala).

Guardians of storage In examining Septimius Severus’ role in the Ludi Saeculares, we have already noted that the Vestal Virgins were involved in the first night and second day of the festivals, and that they were closely connected to the emperor. Since it appears that the role, or the image, of the emperor in the ludi was that of a sort of father-figure, a provider who took care of his subjects and guaranteed the well-being of the communitas, we should also consider whether the role of the Vestals can be connected to this idea. The traditional Roman state religion rites, in which the Vestals were included, often dealt with purification. However, it seems that the Vestals also had another task. This is at least true for the five out of the nine public rituals in which the Vestals took part: the fordicidia, the rites of the October Horse, the parilia, the consualia and the opsconsivia. The fordicidia was probably one of the most ancient religious ceremonies of Rome. It was celebrated to ensure the fertility of the cattle and the land. The deity worshipped in this occasion was indeed Tellus; she received a sacrifice of pregnant cows – one on the Capitoline hill and one in thirty different parts of the city. The role of the senior Vestal Virgins was to take the unborn calf from the womb of the sacrificed cow and to burn it. The ashes were later used in the parilia.49 The rituals of the October Horse were also connected to the parilia: after a horse-race was held, one of the horses was sacrificed. Its tail

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  121 (and possibly some of its blood as well) was kept by the Vestals to be used with the ashes in the parilia.50 The parilia was celebrated on 21 April. It was held for the purification of the flocks, but was also considered as the birthday of Rome. Ovid gives a long description of the rituals. The latter included the throwing of ashes (of the calf sacrificed in the fordicidia) and blood (from the October Horse festival), kept by the Vestals, onto burning bean-straws.51 The Vestalia was a ceremony connected to the bakers and to the milling of grain. It was celebrated on 9 June. The best source for this occasion is again Ovid, who writes about the festival in his Fasti. Even if he does not describe the actual rites very thoroughly, it seems clear that the goddess Vesta was connected to flour and bread, manufactured from grain.52 This was also an occasion (one of three, it seems) on which the Vestal Virgins made the mola salsa, a ritual purificatory substance. Servius writes that the three senior Vestals collected spelt during the second week of May, then dried, crushed and stored it. From the spelt (to which boiled and hard salt was added), they made the mola during the festivals of the Lupercalia, the Vestalia and those of 13 September.53 It was also the Vestal Virgins’ duty to manufacture a type of brine named the muries. Festus provides a quite detailed account on how this was prepared and used in sacrifices.54 The mola and muries were stored in the temple of Vesta. They were used in rituals connected to purification, but they can also be seen as symbols of the most essential food supplies for Rome. The mola symbolises a type of flour that was used in Rome to bake bread, and the muries recalls the most common Romans preservative. As Wildfang (2006: 16–17) mentions, ‘the Vestals’ preparation and storage of substances symbolic of these two most basic foodstuffs within the aedes Vestae suggests that one of their religious roles was the assurance of Rome’s finished food supplies and their appropriate storage’. Ovid’s records of Roman religious festivals only cover the first half of the year, so the two remaining festivals mentioned above, the consualia and the opsconsivia, are less known. Nevertheless, we do possess the sources of Tertullian, a contemporary of the Severan period, who wrote a few lines about the consualia. It is, however, uncertain whether the festival was actually celebrated in his own time or not, as Tertullian drew much of his material from previous authors. However, the author describes the occasion as follows: And now the altar to Consus is buried under the earth in the circus at the first turning posts with an inscription of this sort: CONSUS CONSILIO MARS DUELLO LARES COILLO POTENTES. The public priests sacrifice at this altar on 7 July, and on 21 August the Flamen Quirinalis and the virgins.55 Most ancient writers agreed that Consus was the god of storage and not that of counsel (as a few have suggested). It seems that the consualia was celebrated to secure the successful storage of the new harvest, as it was held in August, the period of harvesting for the Romans. The opsconsivia was celebrated a week

122  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon later. Ops Consiva was probably a goddess of plenty, connected to Consus. It is probable that the feasts mentioned here were thus also connected to each other. Varro mentions that the Vestal Virgins were also involved in the rituals of the opsconsivia.56 All in all, the Vestals Virgins’ rituals, as a part of Roman traditional religion, were thus not only connected to purification but also to the (symbolic) storage of grain. In the light of their role in the Secular Games, their role as priestesses in purificatory rites was probably related to their appearance on the second day of the festival, with the matrons, as we saw above. However, it seems that their role as guardians of the grain storage was also important in the Severan Ludi Saeculares. As the Vestals attended the emperor in various parts of the celebration, it is possible that Septimius Severus wanted to provide a reminder that the food supply was secured by him, as he was, by these rituals, closely connected to the priestesses associated with grain storage. We have already seen that grain had an important role in the policy of Septimius Severus. This is noticeable in both his more ‘practical’ policies (like securing the import from North Africa) and in his more symbolic acts. In this sense, the role of the Vestals as protectors of the city’s grain storage fit Severus’ general policy perfectly. The close connection existing between the Vestals and the imperial family strengthened the image of emperor as a generous figure providing for the people, and as a bringer of the new Golden Age. If the first part of the inscription, which describes Septimius Severus’ permission to organise the games, could be seen as an act of goodwill, the description of his relationship with the Vestal Virgins, carried out later in the inscription, was perhaps another proof of Septimius Severus’ generosity. Some of the most important religious figures of Rome, whose religious duties were closely associated to the city’s grain storage, were practically submitted to the acts of the emperor in the records of the ritual. That indicated that it is the emperor himself (and to some extent the whole imperial family) who ultimately guaranteed grain storage in Rome. In other words, the inclusion of the Vestal Virgins in the programme was another sign that the emperor was able, and ready, to take care of the needs of his subjects.

The third day: final sacrifices The third and final day was dedicated to Apollo and Diana. Rituals were conducted in the Augustan manner, with the sacrifice of a bloodless victim (in this case, sacrificial cakes) to the deities on the Palatine hill. The inscription describes how Severus, Caracalla, Geta, the quindecimviri and the Praetorian Prefect advanced to the altar of Apollo on the Palatine. There, they conducted the sacrifice and prayed, first to Apollo and then to Diana. The rituals closely followed the examples of the previous days.57 After that, however, a unique act for the third day occurred: the Carmen Saeculare was sung by twenty-seven boys and girls. This was first performed on the Palatine, but then the officials moved in a procession to the Capitoline, where the hymn was sung again.58

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  123 Apollo, the god of many roles By the Severan period, Apollo, the god celebrated on the third day of the rituals, had been known in Rome for centuries. Unfortunately, there is not much evidence on how popular his cult was during the third century, but it is very likely that he was still well-known and held an important role in the Roman pantheon. For example, it is certain that the old festivals of the Ludi Apollinares, a celebration dedicated to the god, were still held in the early third century and were apparently a very popular event. This is demonstrated by Tertullian, who wrote about the games in one of his earliest works, probably composed in ce 196 or early in 197.59 Tertullian, as a Christian writer, heavily criticises traditional Roman religion and mentions the games of Apollo; in this context he refers to the origins of different games and tries to demonstrate their close relationship with religion.60 One target of his attack, among other public festivals, are the so called historical games – for Tertullian, the festivals’ names were proofs of their idolatrous nature, as they were connected to the gods.61 Apollo was a god of multiple roles. As was the case with Jupiter, moreover, these and his importance varied from time to time. He was a god of Greek origin, but was already worshipped in Rome in the early republic (Livy reports that he was known even during the regal period).62 As many as twenty-three different duties can be attributed to Apollo in the Greco-Roman world. He was connected with youth, music, poetry, the arts and prophecy, to mention just a few.63 In the eastern part of the empire, particularly, Apollo had an important role as the god of oracles. Some oracles of Apollo even spoke of some kind of monotheism, claiming that there was a supreme god who ruled over all others.64 This kind of idea has often been described as henotheism, although the concept itself is a very difficult one; no universally accepted definition can be found. It has been claimed, for example, that three phenomena can be considered as henotheism: the exaltation of one god above the others, the reductio ad unum of many different divinities, and the assumption by a single god of the roles of many others. Another explanation for the concept of henotheism is that of a temporary worship of a single god (contra monolatrism, worshipping one god continuously).65 Even if the concept is difficult to define, the idea itself was significant in the late Roman world. Perhaps the most famous example is senator Praetextatus’ speech, recorded in Macrobius’ Saturnalia in ce 430, in which claims that many gods of the Roman world were, in fact, aspects of the sun. The list of gods includes Apollo, Ares/Mars, Hermes/Mercury, Minerva/Athena, Aesculapius, Heracles/Hercules and Zeus/Jupiter. It also includes various eastern gods, mystery cults and some lesser gods from the Greco-Roman tradition. The speech can be seen as a part of the ‘solar theology’, which grew stronger in the Roman world from the third century onwards.66 During the Roman republican period, Apollo was apparently best known as a god of healing, as is recorded by the first lecisternium held in 399 bce. It is reported that, in that year, Rome had suffered from pestilence and as a result

124  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon celebrations were dedicated to Apollo, Latona, Diana, Hercules, Mercury and Neptune.67 Apollo also received fixed games: the Ludi Apollinares which were celebrated from very early period. When the Romans faced difficulties in the war against Carthage, in the late third century bce, the games were held for the first time (following the advice of the oracle). A few years later, a plague occurred, so the games were held again, in order to receive help from Apollo. In his history, Livy relates the lines with which the oracle ordered the games: If you wish, Romans, to drive out enemies, the sore which has come from afar, I propose that a festival be vowed to Apollo, to be observed with good cheer in honor of Apollo every year. When the people shall have given a part of their treasury, private citizens shall contribute on their own behalf and that of their families. In charge of the conduct of that festival shall be the praetor who is then chief judge for the people and the commons. The decemvirs shall offer the victims according to Greek rite. If you will do this rightly you shall forever rejoice, and your state will change for the better. For that god who graciously nurtures your meadows will destroy your enemies.68 In his history, Livy’s describes the rituals of the Ludi Apollinares held in 212 bce. The official responsible for the games was the praetor urbanus, who received money and two victims for sacrifice. As in the case of the Ludi Saeculares, the priestly group of the decemviri sacris faciundis (later known as the quindecimviri sacris faciundis) observed the rituals. The rituals were performed according to the Greek rite – another similarity with the Ludi Saeculares. An ox was sacrificed to Apollo, a cow to Latona and apparently two she-goats to Diana.69 In addition to the public festival, the people feasted in their own homes. Livy stresses that the festivals were held to gain victory in war, and not for public health (even though Apollo was known in Rome as a god of healing from a very early period). The games became quite popular, and during the late republic ­eventually expanded into eight days of celebration.70 Apollo’s role in Rome changed quite dramatically with the beginning of the imperial period and the reign of Augustus. The works of some ancient authors would indicate that Apollo was already used by powerful individuals who rose during the last century of the republic.71 In fact Brutus and Cassius, the adversaries of Augustus during the civil war, associated themselves with Apollo as well.72 However, when Augustus won the civil war and the imperial period began, he adopted the god and gave him – and Diana too – a crucial role in his policy. Despite Apollo’s many roles, one of the most important in the early imperial period was that of the god of the sun. This seems to be the case in the Augustan Ludi Saeculares, according to the opening words of the Carmen Saeculare of Horace.73 The invocation of the poem describes how the brother (Apollo/ Phoebus) shines as the sun, and the sister (Diana) as the moon in the night time.74

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  125 The idea of Apollo as a sun-god lived on for centuries after Augustus. For example, Macrobius dedicates a long chapter in his Saturnalia to Apollo the sun-god. He also writes about the origins of the Ludi Apollinares.75 Apollo and Diana’s roles as the most important gods in Roman state cult did not last long after Augustus, however. It has been already noted that Jupiter Optimus Maximus regained his central role as supreme god after the Augustan period.76 In fact, it has sometimes even been claimed that the cult of Apollo was, by the early third century, in a state of stagnation. The lack of engagement with the Sibylline Books (as the cult of Apollo was very much connected to the oracle and the quindecimviri sacris faciundis), for example, is seen as a mark of the decline of the cult.77 This does not, however, necessarily indicate that the cult of Apollo lost its significance. The lack of innovation or even activity in Roman religious life did not automatically mean decline. As was explained above, Roman religion did not have dogmas or a theology, unlike Christianity, for instance. The idea of decline in certain aspects of Roman traditional religion, due to a lack of visible activity, is significant especially from a Christian perspective, but it was not necessarily the case for the followers of old state religion. Diana, the goddess of many roles Diana, sometimes known by her Greek name Artemis, was Apollo’s counterpart in the Ludi Saeculares. Similarly, she also was a deity of many roles. Most importantly, perhaps, she was very regularly called the goddess of the moon.78 The name Diana was used as a synonym for the moon by Varro, and Cicero counted her as one of the planets.79 However, her appearance as a goddess of hunting was also an important one. As C. Green states: when men thought of Diana in relationship to their more personal, daily concerns, in their hunt for love and their need for help or assistance in other pursuits, they approached her as the huntress. This was inevitable, as hunt is, in and of itself, a metaphor for the pursuit of anything one wants or needs.80 The goddess of the moon and the huntress were, in fact, inseparable; they were two aspects of the same deity. From this identity followed all of her other worshipped aspects: she was also regarded as the goddess of culture and civilisation, of roads and paths, of the young and their education, of life and death, of growth and decay, and of both men and women in their disasters.81 In addition, Diana was considered as a goddess of childbirth. According to Cicero (Nat.D. 2.69, transl. H. Rackham), ‘she is invoked at childbirth because the period of gestation is sometimes seven or, as more often, nine revolutions of the moon which, because they complete measured spaces are called months’. In the Severan Carmen Saeculare, Diana appears with Apollo, as the whole poem begins with an invocation to both deities.82 Although the role of the poem is further discussed in the next chapter, it should here be

126  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon noted that the poem is remarkably different to Horace’s Carmen Saeculare, and as a result there was no need to include these deities in the poem. Indeed, the Carmen was in many ways reshaped. Some completely new details were added to it in ce 204. Despite this, Apollo and Diana were still given an extremely important place at the very beginning of the text, pointing to their importance for Severus, and indicating that their role was far from m ­ eaningless in the games. It appears that Diana was considered as the goddess of the moon during the sacrifices of the third day in the Severan Ludi Saeculares, as she appeared as a counterpart to Apollo (following the Augustan example, although it is likely that she took another role when the matrons celebrated the sellisternium to honour her with Juno – this can be seen as an example of her multiple roles in Roman religion). Generally, the goddess of the moon appears to have been a significant deity for the Severan family. She was, for example, sometimes associated with Julia Domna as Diana Lucifera, although this was not a Severan novelty as such: the deity of the moon was already traditionally connected to empresses before the Severans (alongside Juno Lucina and Luna Lucifera). Even if Luna Lucifera is believed to be most identified with Julia Domna, Diana as a moon-goddess can be seen on Domna’s coinage too.83 This is, however, not the only connection existing between the moon and the Severan dynasty. For example, when Caracalla was killed by his own soldiers in ce 217, he was on a journey to visit the temples of the moon in the city of Carrhae, in Mesopotamia.84 Written in the stars The central role of the moon (and the sun) in astrological thinking should not be forgotten either, as Severus’ close relationship with astrology is well known. Indeed, a noteworthy aspect of the rituals of the Ludi Saeculares is the combination of both daytime and nocturnal rituals. Denis Feeney notes the presence of ten different oppositions in the Augustan programme: night/day, without/ with civic cult, Greek/Roman, un-iconic/iconic, personifications/individuals, un-Olympian/Olympian, chthonic/heavenly, outside/inside the pomerium,85 plain/hilltop and single/paired sacrifices.86 Even if all these oppositions possibly did not have as much significance for the Romans in ce 204 as they may have had in 17 bce (when the programme was apparently at least partly invented for Augustus’ purposes), there is no reason to refute Feeney’s basic suggestion for the Severan Ludi Saeculares as well. That all these sharp binarisms demonstrated the emperor’s ability to dominate the greatest possible range of religious power is quite possible.87 The daytime/night-time demarcation, for its own part, highlighted the role of the sun and the moon and, speaking more generally, astrological themes in the Secular Games. This could be suggested in the light of Censorinus’ writings, which discuss different ways of dividing the ages, such as years, months, days, hours, calendars, the length of life, and the use of the Secular Games as

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  127 a mark of a saeculum. Censorinus’ works seem to indicate that all theories on ages, including the ideas residing behind the Roman Ludi Saeculares, are related to astrology; and that it is astrology which explains the harmony in the universe, and on which the different ages are based.88 He also verifies the old idea about the prominent position of the sun in astrological theories. As Censorinus (8.3, transl. H.N. Parker) writes: ‘and so the sun moves the stars by which we are moved in turn; it gives us the spirit by which we are ruled; it is most ­powerful over us and controls how long after conception we are born.’ In the early third century ce, astrology had a firm position in Roman imperial circles. Septimius Severus’ personal preferences and beliefs – his interest in astrology – are well attested in written sources. So well, in fact, that Severus has been considered as an ‘addict’ of astrology.89 Most of the ancient reports come from the Historia Augusta, and some of the stories were clearly written with the benefit of hindsight. Moreover, the book often uses stereotypes and satire, and is not too concerned about various facts. The stories, however, as exaggerated as they might be, are most likely still based on common knowledge, and in Severus’ case, at least partially on his own biography. Furthermore, stories about Severus’ interest in astrology can also be found in the writings of more reliable historians, such as Cassius Dio. We can therefore consider the Historia Augusta as a source of evidence which strengthens the picture of Septimius Severus’ close relationship with astrology. First of all, the Historia Augusta reports how Severus consulted an astrologer in Africa before becoming an emperor, and that his future was revealed to him then. As the story goes, Septimius Severus had to swear an oath to the astrologer that he had told the truth about his own origin. When Severus made the oath, the astrologer revealed him his glorious future.90 Perhaps the most famous story about Septimius Severus’ relation with astrology is about his marriage with Julia Domna. Severus’ first wife, Paccia Marciana, had died and consequently Severus was looking for a new spouse. Julia Domna, a Syrian princess, was a woman whose horoscope predicted that she would marry a king. Severus carried out research on several marriageable women’s horoscopes and chose Julia on this basis. The biographies in the Historia Augusta note that Severus was, at this time, only a subject of the emperor (although in a very good position, of course). Thus, it seems that Severus placed a lot of emphasis on astrology in the career plans for his future.91 Another report on his early dealings with astrology situates a particular occasion in Sicily, where he was acting as a proconsul. There he consulted astrologers and seers regarding the happenings of the (then) emperor Commodus. Severus was then put on trial for this, but was released because Commodus’ power had already begun weaken during that time.92 Later, when he ruled the empire, he committed a similar act when getting rid of the last supporters of his rival to the throne, Pescennius Niger: He put numerous other to death on the charge of having asked Chaldeans or soothsayers how long he was destined to live; and he was especially

128  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon suspicious of anyone who seemed qualified for the imperial power, for his sons were still very young, and he believed or had heard that this fact was being observed by those who were seeking omens regarding their own prospects to the throne.93 Learning about the destiny of imperial power through astrology was considered a severe crime. Ulpian, a lawyer and a writer contemporary to Septimius Severus, wrote that individuals making inquiries (through astrology) about the emperor’s health ought to receive the penalty of death or an even more severe punishment. He adds how individuals should also receive milder punishments for seeking information on their own life or the life of their relatives.94 Punishing people for enquiring about the emperor’s reign was not the only sign of Severus’ interest in astrology. When his youngest son Geta was born, Severus was astonished to not find any imperial traces in the young prince’s in horoscope.95 Moreover, Cassius Dio reports how Septimius Severus had his horoscope painted on the ceiling of the imperial palace. As Dio states, about the happenings of the year ce 208, Severus was worried about his sons and the legions. Caracalla and Geta were ‘changing their modes of life’, and legions were enjoying too much idleness. Because of that, Severus decided to conduct a military operation in Britain. Dio claims that Severus made this decision even if he knew that he would not return alive. This was, Dio argues, because the emperor could read it from the ceiling of his court.96 Astrology was, as such, not a new phenomenon in in the early third century. Although it was considered as somewhat dangerous, and was thus regulated by laws, Augustus himself had already been very interested in it. His follower, Tiberius, was the first emperor to have, according to sources, a court astrologer (called Thrasyllus). Tiberius practiced astrological skills himself, as did Hadrian after him. It seems, however, that Septimius Severus was the first emperor after Augustus to give such great importance to astrology. In addition to the elements mentioned above, he also published the dreams, oracles, omens and other kind of predictions which indicated his rise to power in his autobiography and represented them in his public images, both through sculptures and paintings.97 The growing importance of the sun god (and astrology) is sometimes connected to the rise of the so-called eastern cults, which are especially attributed to the Severan period.98 The role of eastern religions during the Severan dynasty has, however, at times been somewhat exaggerated: Severan rulers, with the possible exception of Elagabalus, can be seen as quite conservative emperors regarding state cult.99 Eastern cults did nevertheless expand during this period. They gained more importance in the regions in which they already existed and spread to countries in which they had not previously been very present.100 In other words, the growing significance of eastern cults was not directly connected to imperial policy, but was more likely the production of the spirit of the times. Empress Julia Domna belonged to a family who practiced the cult of the sun god El’Gabal. Severus himself showed interest in different cults of sun.

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  129 The epithet invictus – related to the god Sol Invictus – was added to coinage depicting Severus. It is claimed that if there was a god in the Roman pantheon with whom Severus associated himself, it was the sun god. Moreover, inscriptions of the early third century seem to indicate that the cult of Sol was indeed spreading in Rome,101 even if the cult of Sol Invictus had been known in Rome long before Severus’ reign. It might be that the sun and the moon were among the oldest deities in Roman religion, going back to the republican and regal eras. Nevertheless, the popularity of the cult of Sol Invictus, which considerably grew during the first century, was especially spread by soldiers from the east.102 Other eastern cults which appeared in the city of Rome during the Severan period include, for example, the cults of Cybele and Attis, Isis, Serapis, Atargatis, Christianity, Judaism and Mithraism.103 Of these, the most important cult concerning the sun, moon and astrology was probably the cult of Mithras. It is reported that Commodus was the first Roman emperor whom we know to have taken part in the cult. According to the Historia Augusta, Commodus, when initiated to the mysteries of Mithra, actually killed a man.104 The Severans were also involved in the cult. During their reign, Rome became the most important place for Mithraism in the western part of the empire, and Mithraic dedications for the safety of the emperors are most numerous in the Severan period.105 Astrology was an extremely important part of the cult; the iconography of Mithraism is full of astronomical symbols, like zodiacs, and the sun and the moon are especially prominent.106 In examining the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204, and in bearing the significant role of astrology during this period in mind, it is of course difficult to say for sure if the people witnessing the games associated the ‘astrological’ solar deities appearing in the celebration with the ruling couple, Septimius Severus and Julia Domna. As we saw in the previous chapter, however, the iconography of the sun and the moon was used to propagate an impression of harmony within the imperial family, the imperial concordia. Perhaps the idea was, hence, not so alien to the audience.107 After all, the blessing of harmonious imperial family relations for the communitas was an idea propagated throughout the festival, especially during the second day, as we saw earlier. Moreover, it seems that the astrological themes were visible to the people of the city (and to the audience of the Ludi Saeculares) on one of the most famous monuments built by Severus, the Septizodium: a grand nymphaeum, which also played a role in the Secular Games. According to the Historia Augusta, the Septizodium was one of the most striking structures, alongside the baths of Severus, of which the main purpose was to be noticed by those who arrived to the capital from Africa. The author of the Historia Augusta also claims that Severus intended it to function as a new entrance to the imperial palace on the Palatine hill. Apparently, the entrance was never actualised because the city’s prefect placed a statue of Severus in the middle of the complex while the emperor was away.108 The Historia Augusta also mentions that, when Geta was murdered by Caracalla, he was laid in his ancestor’s tomb which had been constructed in the same manner as the Septizodium.109 Ammianus Marcellinus, writing in the

130  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon fourth century, describes the Septizodium as a ‘much frequented spot, where the emperor Marcus Aurelius erected a Nymphaeum of pretentious style.’110 The historian confuses Marcus Aurelius and Septimius Severus in his reference: the Septizodium was built during the Severan building programme and was finished in ce 203, just before the ludi of ce 204. It had a similar propagandistic value as the new and restored temples and public buildings: it highlighted the role of the emperor as the restorer and protector of the empire. Moreover, the Septizodium and the other new monuments were used as stages for the Secular Games, as they were built right next to the locations in which the rituals were conducted. In the case of the Septizodium, these locations were the Palatine hill and the Circus Maximus. It has been estimated that the Septizodium measured about 95 metres long, with a depth of 35 metres and a height of about 30 metres.111 It had a facade filled with elaborate ornaments and statues. These statues probably represented Severan rulers, but also their predecessors (probably the Antonines), thus emphasising the continuity in reign from the previous dynasty. As Susann Lusnia describes, it ‘must have been a stunning sight to behold, a monument that forcefully and ostentatiously proclaimed the presence of the Severans in Rome’.112 Little is known about the exact appearance of the monument, as virtually nothing of it remains today on the Palatine, but scholars tend to agree that ideas connected to astrology did have an important part in it. The name, Septizodium, possibly refers to the seven planetary deities: Sol/Helios/Apollo, Luna/Selene/Diana, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus and Saturn. Some have even argued that Septimius Severus and Julia Domna were depicted on the monument as the deities of the sun and the moon, Sol and Luna, but evidence for this is very scarce. Remains of an Apollo-type figure were discovered near the foundations of the Septizodium, and thus it is likely that the sun god, among other solar deities, was depicted as a ‘traditional’ Apollo, the one who was worshipped during the Ludi Saeculares.113 The number seven was also present in the inscription of the Severan Ludi Saeculares. The very beginning of the record declares that the games in question were the seventh ones.114 It is a very interesting detail, as Censorinus, an author writing only about thirty years later (in ce 238), mentioned that the Severan games were the eighth ones. This could indicate that Severus deliberately skipped one of the previous games, discounting them as genuine Ludi Saeculares. He most probably counted the Augustan games as the fifth games (the number of the republican games was considered as amounting to four, as is recorded by Censorinus), skipping the Claudian games of ce 47, and again considering the games of Domitian (in ce 88) as the sixth. Furthermore, in skipping Antoninus Pius’ ludi of ce 148 (these are also missing from Censorinus’ account), he reached the conclusion that the games of ce 204 were the seventh.115 Perhaps the most obvious explanation for this is that Severus wanted to connect himself to the Augustan tradition strictly and to the Augustan cycle of the games. However, given Septimius Severus’ interest in astrology, recording the games as the seventh could also have had some significance, as this would

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  131 perhaps mark the games as an occasion which was celebrated under the seven planetary deities.116 The importance of the Septizodium in the Severan ludi appears when we evaluate the site on which it was constructed. It was built in front of the Palatine hill, thus also right next to the Circus Maximus. The area was an important crossroad, where many vital routes to the city, like the Via Appia, met (that is, between the Circus Maximus and the Palatine hill).117 It is therefore very likely that the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204 were borne in mind when the Septizodium was built. The audience of the games came from various parts of the empire, including Africa, and the site on which the Septizodium stood was a crucial traffic-point for those entering the city. When people came to see the games ‘no one has ever seen, and will not see again,’118 the impressive monument must have been an effective way of demonstrating the emperor’s power.119 Moreover, the Septizodium highlighted the close relationship of the emperor with the Palatine. The hill had been an object of extensive construction and repair for Severus; apparently the Palatine had suffered considerably during the fire of 191 (Dio mentions how the fire spread to the palace and destroyed the state archives).120 Severus repaired and expanded the whole palace complex of the area, including the Palace of Domitian and its Hippodromos (including a construction of a new bath complex). In many ways, the repairs and constructions carried out on the Palatine hill symbolised the stability and continuity of Severus’ reign: the Palatine had been associated with the emperor since the Augustan period. Obviously, the Palatine hill was one of the central places of worship during the Ludi Saeculares as well, and new decorations and constructions were also visible from the Circus Maximus, another area that was used during the Ludi Saeculares.121 All in all, the Septizodium, a magnificent construction situated right next to the Palatine and the reconstructed imperial palaces, demonstrated Septimius Severus’ influence and power. The emperor’s personal interest in astrology, and the presence of astral subjects on the Septizodium perhaps underline the importance of Apollo and Diana, the deities of the sun and the moon, for Septimius Severus in his manifestation of power in the Secular Games. Based on the occurrence of the day/night dichotomy in the celebration, the all-embracing status of the imperial couple in the celebrations, and perhaps of the number seven, it can be believed that the role of Apollo and Diana was not just a manifestation of the continuation of the Augustan tradition. Rather, it appears that their significance bore its roots in contemporary ideas as well. The early third-century practice of identifying the emperor and the empress as the sun and the moon in imperial propaganda could, for its own part, strengthen this idea. However, it appears that generally the sacrifices of the third day, as recorded in the inscription, followed the Augustan model rather closely. Where the Severan ludi really took a direction of their own was in the later activities of the third and final day: the performance of the Carmen Saeculare and the Trojan Games. To these we turn next.

132  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon

Notes 1 Here I follow Feeney 2003: 115. 2 Pighi, comm.lud.sept.Va 46–52. 3 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. I 5; IV 5, 8;Va 48, 53–54, 74, 77, 92;VIIIa 14. 4 Potter 2004: 116–119. For the family of the Fulvii, see Birley 1999: 220–221. In ce 204, Plautianus was, however, very near to his end: He was executed for plotting to kill Caracalla the following January (Potter 2004: 119). 5 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 51. 6 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 52. 7 Ov. Fast. 1.657 and following, 1.671 and following; 4.629 and following. According to Augustine (quoting Varro), Tellus was sometimes associated with other deities of the earth, including Magna Mater, as well as Ops, Proserpina and even Vesta. It should be noted, though, that this association gave Augustine, an eager Christian and a critic of traditional religion, a reason to attack Tellus, because he could combine the goddess with the ‘immoral’ rituals and worship of Magna Mater. August. De civ. De. 7.23–24. 8 Scullard 1981: 102. 9 For Tellus/Terra Mater in imperial Rome, see Gesztelyi 1981: 429–456. 10 Hor. Carm. Saec. 29. It is interesting to note that Horace has used the name Tellus, whereas she is called Terra Mater in the inscription. 11 Gesztelyi 1981: 442–445. 12 RIC 4.1 no. 758 (Septimius Severus). 13 RIC 4.1 no. 761 (Septimius Severus).Tellus as a part of the sacrificial scene: Cooley 2007: 392. The traditional connection between Tellus and the Golden Age is still apparent later in ce 248, when the personification of Tellus as a woman sitting on the globe, with a cornucopia, a cob and two children, is accompanied by the text fecunditas temporum. It apparently commemorated the thousandth birthday of Rome, celebrated by Philip the Arab (see Gesztelyi 1981: 445). For Philip’s games as part of the tradition of the Ludi Saeculares, see Appendix Four. 14 Garnsey 1988: 227–229. 15 Garnsey 1988: 218–225. 16 Herod. 1.12.2–4. 17 Cass. Dio 73[72].13–14. 18 SHA Comm. 14.1 (transl. D. Magie). 19 Cass. Dio 73[72].13.4–6; Herod. 1.12.5–9; 1.13.1–7. 20 Garnsey 1988: 240–242. 21 Tac. Ann. 12.43; see also Suet. Claud. 18.2. 22 SHA Sev. 8.6. 23 SHA Sev. 18.3. 24 SHA Sev. 8.4. 25 SHA Sev. 23.2. 26 Fears 1981: 936. 27 The cult was created in the aftermath of so called Pisonian conspiracy against Nero, taking place in 65 ce. Eventually the plan failed and nineteen people were executed or forced to commit suicide, including most notably Seneca the Younger. Tac. Ann 15.48–74 records the events. 28 Garnsey 1988, 225–226. 29 See for example RIC 4.1 nos. 57, 75, 107, 123 and 135 (Septimius Severus).

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  133 30 RIC 4.1 nos. 677, 681, 748 and 751 (Septimius Severus). 31 RIC 4.1 no. 156. 32 For Annona in Severan propaganda, see Rantala 2016: 67–71. 33 Garnsey 1988: 225–226. 34 Garnsey 1988: 226. 35 Perhaps one can see some kind of an analogy with Augustus, who, according to Suetonius, claimed that he had ‘founded Rome a city of bricks and left it a city of marble’ (Suet. Aug. 28.3).The biography of Septimius Severus is mentioned in Aur. Vict. Caes. 20; SHA Sev. 3.2; SHA Clod. 7.1; Cass. Dio 76[75].7.3; Herod. 2.9.4. 36 Tacitus, for example, strongly criticised the situation in which the empire has put itself, and wrote how Italy used to export grain to distant countries, but was now cultivating the fields of Africa and Egypt, and was thus dependent on the uncertainties of sea transporting; Tac. Ann. 12.43. For the food supply in Rome see Garnsey 1988: 178–191; 208–217; 231–239; 251–266. 37 Garnsey 1988: 231–232. 38 SHA Sev. 18.3. Severus Alexander’s biography reports how Alexander Severus continued Septimius’ policy by restoring the grain and oil distribution to its former status after Elagabalus’ disastrous politics (who had apparently placed a barber, called Claudius, in charge of the distribution of food supplies). As Alexander Severus’ biography is often considered as an unreliable source, it might well be that the writer of the biographies just wanted to make a clear difference between the ‘bad’ emperor Elagabalus and the ‘wise’ Alexander Severus. See SHA Alex. 22.2; SHA Heliog.12.1. 39 Cass. Dio 77[76].1.1 (transl. E. Cary). 40 Garnsey 1988: 58. 41 The number of people living in the capital during the early third century is difficult to estimate. It is suggested that in the beginning of the imperial era the number of inhabitants amounted to about one million, and it apparently remained so until at least the mid-second century (see Garnsey & Saller 1987: 6, 62). It is possible that the Antonine plague in the mid-second century decreased the number, although this is far from certain – see Bruun 2007: 207–214; Corbier 2005: 398. 42 Garnsey 1988: 236–238. Historia Augusta claims that in 270, Emperor Aurelian started to distribute pork and cheap wine too: see SHA Aurel. 35.2, 48.1. 43 Strabo 4.5.4. 44 Tac. Ger. 31.2.3. 45 Amm. Marc. 31.2. 46 Garnsey 1999: 68–69. For example, as Garnsey notes a custom very typical to the Gauls (the barbarians) was their preference of butter over oil. 47 For the Golden Age ideology before Augustus, see Alföldi 1997: 33–46. 48 Zanker 1988: 172–179.The leading study on claiming that the identity of the goddess was Tellus is still Moretti 1948. 49 Scullard 1981: 102.The main ancient account of the festival is Ov. Fast. 4.629–672. 50 Wildfang 2006: 10; Scullard 1981: 193–194. 51 Scullard 1981: 103–105; for Ovid’s account, see Fast. 4.721–862. 52 Ov. Fast. 6.309–318. 53 Serv. Comm. in Verg. Buc. 8.82. 54 Fest. 152 L. 55 Tert. De spect. 5.7 (adapted from Wildfang 2006: 14–15). 56 Varro, Ling. 6.21.

134  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon 57 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 52–57. 58 Pighi. comm. lud. sept.Va 59–60; 71–75. 59 Barnes 1971: 54–55. 60 Tert. De spect. 6.2–3. 61 For Tertullian and his views on traditional Roman religion, see Ames 2007: 457–471. 62 Liv. 1.56. 63 Wernicke 1895: 7–21. 64 Busine 2005: 202–210. 65 For discussion, see Van Nuffelen 2010: 18–19. 66 Liebeschuetz 1999: 185–189; see also Kahlos 2002: 193–194. 67 Liv. 5.13. 68 Liv. 25.12 (transl. F.G. Moore). 69 Livy claims that the she-goats were offered to Apollo as well, but he is probably mistaken, as a female victim was most likely meant for a female deity. Scullard 1981: 160. 70 Liv. 25.12. For the sources on the origin of the games, see Scullard 1981: 159–160. 71 For example, Plut. Sull. 22.3. 72 Galinsky 1996: 216. 73 Hor. Carm. Saec. 1–4. 74 For the Carmen Saeculare (and Apollo and Diana as the sun and the moon in the poem), see Feeney 2003: 109–115. 75 Macr. Sat. 1.17 deals with Apollo; the Ludi Apollinares are described in 1.17.25–30. Macrobius gives quite a lot attention to the origins of Apollo as a sun-god, going back to Plato and other Greek authors. 76 After Augustus’ reign, it seems that no Roman emperor identified with Apollo as much as he did. See Ahl 1994: 127. 77 Gagé 1981: 582–586. 78 For example, Catull. 34.16; Cic. Nat. D. 2.68–9, 3.51, 3.58;Verg. Aen. 9.404–5; Hor. Carm. Saec. 1–2, 4.6.38, 33–6; Ov. Met. 15.196, Ov. Her. 12.69. Diana Caelestis, possibly as a result of syncretism with the Carthaginian moon-goddess, can be found in CIL 5.5765, 8.999, 14.3536. 79 Varro, Ling. 5.68; Cicero, Nat. D. 2.68–9, 3.51, 3.58. 80 Green 2007: 123. Artemis/Diana as a goddess of hunting was a very popular deity until late antiquity. For the worship the hunter-goddess in the Roman world, see Poulsen 2009: 401–425. 81 Green 2007: 144. For Diana’s different roles, see 117–119. 82 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 60. The opening phrases are otherwise very fragmentary. 83 See Levick 2007: 142. Furthermore, see Keltanen 2002: 146 for the use of moongoddess in the coinage of the empresses before Julia Domna (in the Antonine period). For Diana/Artemis and Luna/Selene associated with Julia Domna in Roman iconography, see Mikocki 1995: 71, 74. 84 SHA Car. 6.6.; see also Herod. 4.13.1., who describes the moon goddess as Selene. Even if it is possible that one of the moon gods Caracalla worshipped in Mesopotamia was a male deity, the moon was usually considered as a female goddess in Rome, like Diana or Luna Lucifera. On the other hand, the name or even the gender of the moon deity was perhaps not of such importance to Caracalla – the eclectic and syncretic attitude of the period probably caused the local gods or goddesses of the moon to be considered as more or less the ‘same’ as Diana.

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  135 85 The Pomerium was an ancient religious boundary, outside of which auspices could not be taken. Dating back to republican (or even royal) times when it consisted as only a small part of the city centre, it was later extended several times – according to legend, this was done for the first time by King Servius Tullius. After him, the border was extended by Sulla, and later by several emperors during the imperial period. There is no source indicating that this was done by Severus, but the last emperor who is reported to have done this was Aurelian in ce 270’s (although the report in the Historia Augusta in Aurel. 21 is considered somewhat unreliable). For the Pomerium see Andreussi 1999: 97–105. 86 Feeney 2003: 107. 87 Feeney 2003: 107–108. 88 In Censorinus’ work, book eight especially deals with astrology. 89 Birley 1999: 41; Buraselis 2007: 36–37. 90 SHA Sev. 2.8. 91 SHA Sev. 3.9; Get. 3.1; Sev. Alex. 5.4. 92 SHA Sev. 4.3. 93 SHA Sev. 15.5 (transl. D. Magie). 94 Dig. 11.4.3. 95 SHA Get. 2.6–7.The author of the Historia Augusta mentions that Septimius Severus was very proficient in the study of horoscopes, ‘like most Africans’ (although this phrase comes across as a hindsight as well, considering the overall nature of the Historia Augusta). 96 Cass. Dio 77[76].11. Septimius Severus was not the only emperor of the Severan dynasty who was interested in astrology. Caracalla was also very keen on the subject. Herodian (4.12.3) reports how Caracalla, during his final years, gathered all the astrologers, prophets and entrails examiners, and consulted all possible oracles. This was because he was very interested in all things, both profane and divine, but also because he was very suspicious and saw plots against him everywhere. 97 Barton 1994: 45–46. 98 The Sun-god, originally known as Sol Indiges, was an old Italian deity but remained more or less marginal. The importance of the sun-god started to grow in the first century, with the rise of Sol Invictus. Pfeiffer 2004: 4–5.Whether the new sun-god had any connection to the old Sol Indiges is debatable. 99 Gorrie 2004: 66–67. As Levick 2007 (124–144) points out, oriental tendencies grew during the Severan era, but they mostly came from the lower part, not from the upper part of the empire. For Julia Domna’s role in the ‘orientalising’ process, see Mundle 1961: 228–237; Ghedini 1984: 136–140. Even the famous incident of the introduction of the sun-god Elagabal by emperor Elagabalus was perhaps not as radical a policy as some scholars believe (that is, an attempt at bringing monotheism to the Roman empire). See Icks 2009: 112–113. 100 Le Glay, Voisin, Le Bohec & Cherry 1996 (364–365) list five examples of the growing importance of eastern cults: Cybele’s return to favour, the imperial favour towards the cult of Isis and Serapis, the importance of Jupiter Dolichenus during the Severan period, the Mithraic cult and the promotion of local gods connected to the imperial family, like Aziz of Emesa and the two Semitic gods, Shadrafa and Milkashtart, whose Latin versions were known as Liber Pater and Hercules, the protectors of Severus’ home city Lepcis Magna. 101 Barton 1994: 204–205; Lichtenberger 2011: 382.

136  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon 102 Halsberghe 1972: 26–37. Halsberghe makes a clear separation between the traditional Roman cult of the sun and the alien eastern cult of Sol Invictus. Some observations by Halsberghe are now somewhat outdated, like his claim that the spread of the cult of Sol Invictus in Rome during the second century was due to the fact that the emperors started to consider themselves as eastern despots, and thus that they saw Sol Invictus as a proper symbol of their power. 103 See Krill 1978: 27–44 regarding the various eastern cults in Rome during the second and early third century. 104 The passage goes on to explain that it was common for those initiated to the mysteries of Mithras to pretend that something evil happened but that they did not actually kill anybody: SHA Comm. 9.6.The story of Commodus in the Historia Augusta should be addressed critically: it is more likely that the Historia Augusta tries to portray Caracalla in as bad a light as possible – after all, even if there are couple stories on human sacrifice from the republican era (Liv. 22.55–57; 22.57.4; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 83), the practice generally horrified the Romans. During the imperial period, it was considered to be part of magic, a perversion of legitimate animal sacrifice, and typical of uncivilised foreign peoples (see Beard, North & Price 1998: 233–234). It is perhaps not a coincidence that an extremely ‘alien’ emperor, Elagabalus, is also recorded by the Historia Augusta as having practiced human sacrifice (HA Heliogab. 8.1). 105 Krill 1978: 38; Le Glay, Voisin, Le Bohec & Cherry 1996: 365. 106 On the other hand, even if Mithraism is full of astral symbols, its message, if it can be reconstructed at all, is much more complicated and will not be dealt with here. See, for example, Beck 2006: 30–40 for problems concerning Mithras’ astral iconography. Of the other so-called eastern cults, Serapis especially, has often been considered as a god of major importance to Septimius Severus.The Historia Augusta (SHA Sev. 17.4) describes the emperor’s interest in this cult. There have even been suggestions that Severus wished to identify himself with Serapis in his portraits. These claims are now quite widely disputed. See Tacács 1995: 115–116; Baharal 1989: 579–580. 107 There have been suggestions that the night-sky itself was an important factor in nocturnal religious rituals in the ancient world. Efrosyni Boutsikas, for example, has argued that, in the festival of Panathenaia, celebrated in ancient Greece, the night sky and its stars were a crucial part of the ritual held on the Athenian Acropolis. The night-sky provided an astronomical surrounding crucial to the occasion; so, it is possible that this was true in the Roman Ludi Saeculares as well, during the nocturnal celebrations. See Boutsikas 2011: 303–309. See also Boutsikas & Ruggles 2011: 55–68. 108 SHA Sev. 19.5; 24.3. 109 SHA Get. 7.2. There seems to be a confusion on the part of the biographer between the tomb of Hadrian, where the Severan and Antonine emperors were buried, and the Septizodium; see the biography of Geta in the Loeb edition, note 4 (page 45). 110 Amm. Marc. 15.7.3. Interestingly enough, Ammianus connects the food supply and the Septizodium with each other, when he records that, during the food riots in ce 350s, people gathered at the Septizodium to protest against the scarcity of supplies (in this case wine). 111 For measurements, see Lusnia 2004: 521. 112 Lusnia 2004: 541.

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  137 113 Lusnia 2004: 524–526. Even if we do not know if it was the case with the Septizodium, there are other examples representing Septimius Severus with the planetary deities – see Lichtenberger 2011: 260–261. 114 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. I 1. 115 See Appendix Four for the chronology of the games. Some chronological information is also provided in the very first part of the inscription, but unfortunately the source for that part is both very short and fragmented, and thus no proper observations about the chronology can be made based on that. 116 Seven was also a number of great significance for the birth and growth of children, as is recorded by Censorinus (7.2–5). 117 Gorrie, 2001: 662–669. 118 Herod. 3.8.6. 119 Gorrie 2001: 662–669; Thomas 2007: 328–334. In his article, Thomas underlines the African nature of the Septizodium; he does not claim that Septimius Severus was an emperor with an African or Punic programme as such, but he does consider the Septizodium as an example of regionalist tendencies in architecture. 120 Cass. Dio 73[72].24. 121 Gorrie 2002: 472.

Bibliography Ahl, F. (1994). Cult and Prophesy in Ovid, Lucan, and Statius. In: J. Solomon, ed., Apollo. Origins and Influences, 1st ed. Tucson and London: The University of Arizona Press, pp. 113–134. Alföldi, A. (1997). Redeunt Saturnia Regna. Bonn: Habelt. Ames, C. (2007). Roman Religion in the Vision of Tertullian. In: J. Rüpke, ed., A Companion to Roman Religion, 1st ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 457–471. Andreussi, M. (1999). Pomerium. LTUR, vol. 4, pp. 97–105. Baharal, D. (1989). Portraits of the Emperor L. Septimius Severus (193–211 ad) as an Expression of his Propaganda. Latomus, 48, pp. 566–580. Barnes, T. (1971). Tertullian. A Historical and Literary Study. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Barton, T. (1994). Ancient Astrology. London: Routledge. Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S. (1998). Religions of Rome. Vol. 1: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Beck, R. (2006). The Religion of the Mithras Cult in the Roman Empire. Mysteries of the Unconquered Sun. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Birley, A. (1999). Septimius Severus. The African Emperor. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Boutsikas, E. (2011). Astronomical Evidence for the Timing of Panathenaia. AJA, 115.2, pp. 303–309. Boutsikas, E. and Ruggles, C. (2011). Temples, Stars and Ritual Landscapes: The Potential for Archaeoastronomy in Ancient Greece. AJA, 115.1, pp. 55–68. Bruun, C. (2007). The Antonine Plague and the Third-Century Crisis. In: O. Hekster, G. De Kleijn and D. Slootjes, eds., Crises and the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 201–217. Buraselis, K. (2007). Theia Dorea. Das Göttlich-Kaiserliche Geschenk. Studien zur Politik der Severer und zur Constitutio Antoniana. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Busine, A. (2005). Paroles d’Apollon. Practiques et traditions oraculaires dans l’Antiquité ­tardive (IIe—VIe siècles). Leiden: Brill.

138  Third night and day: empire of sun and moon Cooley, A. (2007). Septimius Severus: The Augustan emperor. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 385–400. Corbier, M. (2005). Coinage, Society and Economy. CAH XII, pp. 393–439. Fears, J. (1981). The Cult of Virtues and Roman Imperial Ideology. ANRW, II.17.2, pp. 827–948. Feeney, D. (2003). Ludi Saeculares and Carmen Saeculare. In: C. Ando, ed., Roman Religion, 1st ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 106–116. Gagé, J. (1981). Apollon impérial, Garant des Fata Romana. ANRW, II.17.2, pp. 561–630. Galinsky, K. (1996). Augustan Culture: An Interpretive Introduction. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Garnsey, P. (1988). Famine and Food Supply. Responses to Risks and Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Garnsey, P. (1999). Food and Society in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Garnsey, P. and Saller, R. (1987). The Roman Empire. Economy, Society and Culture. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Gesztelyi, T. (1981). Tellus-Terra Mater in der Zeit des Prinzipats. ANRW, II.17.1, pp. 429–456. Ghedini, F. (1984). Giulia Domna tra oriente e occidente. Le fonti archeologiche. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Gorrie, C. (2001). The Septizodium of Septimius Severus Revisited: The Monument in its Historical and Urban Context. Latomus, 60.3, pp. 653–670. Gorrie, C. (2002). The Severan building programme and the Secular Games. Athenaeum, 90.2, pp. 461–481. Gorrie, C. (2004). Julia Domna’s building patronage, imperial family roles and the Severan revival of moral legislation. Historia, 53, pp. 61–72. Green, C. (2007). Roman Religion and the Cult of Diana at Aricia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Halsberghe, G. (1972). The Cult of Sol Invictus. Leiden: Brill. Icks, M. (2009). Empire of the Sun? Civic Responses to the Rise and Fall of Sol Elagabal in the Roman Empire. In: O. Hekster, S. Schmidt-Hofner and C. Witschnel, eds., Ritual Dynamics and Religious Change in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 111–120. Kahlos, M. (2002). Vettius Agorius Praetextatus. A Senatorial Life in Between. Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae. Keltanen, M. (2002). The Public Image of the Four Empresses. Ideal Wifes, Mothers and Regents? In: P. Setälä, R. Berg, R. Hälikkä, M. Keltanen, J. Pölönen and V. Vuolanto, eds., Women, Wealth and Power in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, pp. 105–146. Krill, R. (1978). Roman Paganism under the Antonines and Severans. ANRW, II.16.1, pp. 27–44. Le Glay, M., Voisin, J.-L.- Le Bohec, Y. and Cherry, D. (1996). A History of Rome. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Levick, B. (2007). Julia Domna. Syrian Empress. New York: Routledge. Lichtenberger, A. (2011). Severus Pius Augustus. Studien zur sakralen Repräsentation und Rezeption der Herrschaft des Septimius Severus und Seiner Familie (193–211 n. Chr.) Leiden: Brill.

Third night and day: empire of sun and moon  139 Liebeschuetz, W. (1999). The Speech of Praetextatus. In: Athanassiadi, P. and Frede, M., eds., Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity, 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 185–205. Lusnia, S. (2004). Urban Planning and Sculptural Display in Severan Rome: Reconstru­ cting the Septizodium and Its Role in Dynastic Politics. AJA, 108, pp. 517–544. Mikocki, T. (1995). Sub Specie Deae. Les Impératrices et Princesses Romaines Assimilées à des Déesses. Étude Iconologique. Roma : Giorgio Bretschneider Editore. Moretti, G. (1948). Ara Pacis Augustae. Roma: La Libreria Dello Stato. Mundle, I. (1961). Dea Caelestis in der Religionspolitik des Septimius Severus und Julia Domna. Historia, 10, pp. 228–237. Pfeiffer, M. (2004). Sol Invictus – Die Ausbreitung orientalischer Religionen im Römischen Kaiserreich. München: Grin Verlag. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge. Poulsen, B. (2009). The Sanctuaries of the Goddess of the Hunt. In: T. Fischer-Hansen and B. Poulsen, eds., From Artemis to Diana. The Goddess of Man and Beast, 1st ed. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, pp. 401–427. Rantala, J. (2016). Gods of Cultivation and Food Supply in the Imperical Iconography of Septimius Severus. In: M. Kahlos, ed., Emperors and the Divine – Rome and its Influence, 1st ed., [online] pp. 64–83. Available at: http://www.helsinki.fi/colle gium/journal/volumes/volume_20/index_20.htm [Accessed 28 Apr. 2016]. Scullard, H. (1981). Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic. New York: Cornell University Press 1981. Thomas, E. (2007). Metaphor and identity in Severan architecture: the Septizodium at Rome between ‘reality’ and ‘fantasy’. In: S. Swain, S. Harrison and J. Elsner, eds., Severan Culture, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 327–367. Van Nuffelen, P. (2010). Pagan monotheism as a religious phenomenon. In: S. Mitchell and P. Van Nuffelen, eds., One God. Pagan Monotheism in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 16–33. Wernicke, K. (1895). Apollon. RE, 2, pp. 1–111. Wildfang, R. (2006). Rome’s Vestal Virgins. A study of Rome’s Vestal Priestesses in the Late Republic and Early Empire. London: Routledge. Zanker, P. (1988). The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

7 The closing acts The Carmen Saeculare and the Trojan Games

Pressing on with the programme, we now address the final activities described in the inscription of the Severan Secular Games: the ritual poem (Carmen Saeculare) and the Trojan Games (Lusus Troiae). Our first step is the examination of the Severan Carmen. The poem is very interesting, for two reasons, in particular. First, it differs significantly from the earlier Augustan Carmen Saeculare (written by Horace). Horace’s poem reflects the Augustan rituals described in the inscription very closely; thus the hymn begins with an invocation to Apollo and Diana,1 and offers prayers to the other gods present in the games ( Juno, Fates, Terra Mater and Eileithyia).2 Jupiter Optimus Maximus only receives a short mention at the end of the poem.3 The Augustan Carmen also celebrates the birth of Rome and connects Augustus with its foundation by underlining the link between Aeneas and Augustus.4 Only fragments of the Severan poem remain, but there is enough evidence to demonstrate that major modifications were made. Second, an interesting detail is that the Severan poem is actually included in the inscription itself. This was not the case in the Augustan games – the inscription of the 17 bce only mentions that Horace composed the poem for the occasion.5 The Trojan Games were also conducted in the Augustan ludi and were not, as such, a Severan novelty. The Severan inscription nevertheless provides some unique details about this occasion.

A hymn for the Golden Age The Severan poem and its performers The Carmen Saeculare of the third day was first performed on the Palatine hill and then on the Capitoline. As for the earlier games, the hymn was sung by twentyseven girls and twenty-seven boys.6 The children taking part in the Secular Games traditionally had to be patrimi et matrimi – with both parents still living. These children were more desirable for religious duties in Roman traditional religion in general, not just in the Ludi Saeculares. This was because they were not yet polluted by death and were therefore considered as integri (‘whole’).7 The practice of using twenty-seven children in Roman religious rituals was very old, dating back to the republican period. Livy tells us how, in 207 bce,

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  141 reports were received of a new-born who was the size of a four-year-old child. The most frightening factor surrounded the uncertainty regarding the child’s gender. As a result, the pontiffs decided that twenty-seven maidens (virgines) should march through the city and sing a hymn. A similar occasion arose in 200 bce, when portents demonstrated a confusing natural species: a lamb with a pig’s head and a pig with a man’s head. However, the most terrifying omen was the discovery of two hermaphrodites.8 They were dealt with in a same manner as the child seven years earlier – drowned in the sea. Similarly, the Sibylline Books ordered twenty-seven maidens to march through the city, to sing a hymn and make an offering to Juno.9 The examples given above of twenty-seven young maidens participating in Roman religious rites are connected with the expiatory ceremonies conducted after bad omens. The omens were part of the tradition of the Ludi Saeculares as well – it was traditionally thought that whenever an age (saeculum) was changing, the gods would indicate it with signs. Ancient authors from many periods provide examples of this. For instance, Plutarch, writing about the situation of the beginning of the first century bce (the years of civil disturbances between Sulla and Marius), explains: And when Sulla had set out for his camp on unfinished business, he himself kept at home and contrived that most fatal sedition, which wrought Rome more harm than all her wars together had done, as indeed the heavenly powers foreshowed to them. For fire broke forth of its own accord from the staves which supported the ensigns, and was with difficulty extinguished; and three ravens brought their young forth into the street and devoured them, and then carried the remains back again into their nest; and after mice had gnawed consecrated gold in a temple, the keepers caught one of them, a female, in a trap, and in the very trap she brought forth five young ones and ate up three of them. But most important of all, out of a cloudless and clear air there rang out the voice of a trumpet, prolonging a shrill and dismal note, so that all were amazed and terrified at its loudness. The Tuscan wise men declared that the prodigy foretokened a change of conditions and the advent of a new age. For according to them there are eight ages in all, differing from one another in the lives and customs of men, and to each of these God has appointed a definite number of times and seasons, which is completed by the circuit of a great year. And whenever this circuit has run out, and another begins, some wonderful sign is sent from earth or heaven, so that it is at once clear to those who have studied such subjects and are versed in them, that men of other habits and modes of life have come into the world, who are either more or less of concern to the gods than their predecessors were. All things, they say, undergo great changes, as one again succeeds another, and especially the art of divination; at one period it rises in esteem and is successful in its predictions, because manifest and genuine signs are sent forth from the Deity; and again, in another age, it is in small repute, being off-hand, for the most

142  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games part, and seeking to grasp the future by means of faint and blind senses. Such, at any rate, was the tale told by the wisest of the Tuscans, who were thought to know much more about it than the rest.10 Censorinus, writing during the Severan period, cites Varro when describing the events in the early (republican) games. He recalls how the quindecimviri announced the Tarentine Games (referring to the Secular Games) after many portents had occurred.11 Even Zosimus, writing in the early sixth century ce, claims that the Ludi Saeculares of 17 bce were organised by the emperor because of troubles (of which the author does not give a more specific account).12 Of course, we do not know if Augustus based his celebration on omens or signs, but, in any case, Zosimus’ passage indicates that the tradition of perceiving the Ludi Saeculares as an expiatory rite performed after disturbances was still alive in the sixth century. We cannot decisively conclude what the number of children involved, twenty-seven, stands for. One possible explanation is that the number was connected to numeral magic: apparently three times nine was considered as a number with a mystical significance for the Romans (as well as for Greeks).13 Another possibility, relevant to the tradition of Ludi Saeculares especially, is that the number refers to the twenty-seven shrines of the city of Rome, which were located evenly throughout the capital. These shrines were places of worship in the ancient purificatory ritual of argei; in these rites the city was symbolically purified by throwing twenty-seven effigies (one from each shrine) into the Tiber. Thus, the whole city, with all of its regions, was purified. This ‘completeness’ could have been what Augustus had in his mind when he (apparently) reformed the programme of the Secular Games. As a result, it is possible that the number twenty-seven in the Ludi Saeculares, at least from the Augustan period onwards, referred to the city’s rebirth.14 The important role of children in the Secular Games can be traced back to the myth of the origin of the Ludi Saeculares, as is recorded by both Valerius Maximus in the first century, and by Zosimus in a later age. According to the story, the three children15 of a peasant named Valesius fell ill. When he sought help from the gods they advised him to hold nocturnal sacrifices in the Tarentum. After these were conducted, the children were healed.16 Even if both authors’ accounts of the story differ slightly, they nevertheless contain a similar message. The main theme seems to concern survival during a period of crisis: by following the will of the gods (by making purification and sacrifice), Valesius successfully solved his problems and saved his children. The story underlines that by honouring the gods properly, the future of one’s family (which is here represented by the children) is guaranteed. The healed children can be associated, not only with the gens of Valesius (or Valerius), but with Rome itself. Rome’s continuity and safe future could therefore be secured if acts carried out in the favour of the gods were performed, following the example of Valesius. The myth is connected to the Ludi Saeculares in the latter part of Valerius Maximus’ text, where he mentions that Valesius’ example was later replicated

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  143 by the first consul of Rome, Valerius Publicola. When the last king, Tarquinius Superbus, was expelled from Rome, the city experienced some disturbances. According to Valerius Maximus, Publicola therefore performed sacrifices in a similar manner to Valesius. The sacrifice is also recorded by Plutarch: In the following year Publicola was consul again, for the fourth time, when there was expectation of a war with the Sabines and Latins combined. At the same time also a sort of superstitious terror seized upon the city because all the women who were pregnant were delivered of imperfect offspring, and all births were premature. Wherefore, by direction of the Sibylline books, Publicola made propitiatory sacrifices to Pluto, and renewed certain games that had been recommended by Apollo, and after he had thus made the city more careful in its hopes and expectations from the gods, he turned his attention to what it feared from men. For their enemies were plainly making great preparations and a powerful league against them. 17 The story of Valesius and his children was not part of the rituals recorded in the inscription, but it is possible that the story was performed during the theatrical performances which were conducted during the nights, after the nocturnal sacrifices and prayers.18 Moreover, the very last part of the inscription very briefly describes an ‘extra ritual’, including a ritual dance conducted by the empress and the matrons as part of the final sellisternium performed in honour of Juno and Diana. It can be suggested it had something to do with the myth, as Zosimus’ account of it includes description of dances which were held during Valesius’ ludi. However, as the inscription does not give any such details, but just mentions the ritual, it is impossible to tell whether it was the case or not, although the inscription does mention that when the carmen was performed on the Capitoline hill, it was accompanied by a choral dance. As children had such a prominent part in this part of the ludi, a connection with the rituals of the myth of Valesius may exist.19 The names of the children who took part in the Ludi Saeculares held before the Severan games are not known. The Augustan inscription, for example, remains silent on this topic. From the Severan inscription, however, many of the boys’ and girls’ names are known to us.20 In ce 204, the children came from the same social groups as the 110 matrons who took part in the rituals: some of the girls were the daughters of these matrons. The inscription describes the members of the choir as pueri senatores, puellae matronae;21 in other words, the children were the offspring of the highest social class of Rome. This seems to follow the common practice in Roman religion of associating the religious status of children with their social status.22 Even if the carmen described in the Severan inscription is very fragmentary, the surviving lines nonetheless offer some very interesting details which significantly differ from the hymn of 17 bce. It could be claimed that the inclusion of the hymn was an attempt at adding some details which were not part

144  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games of the traditional Augustan ritual, but which were most likely celebrated in the Severan games to preserve them in public memoria. Septimius Severus was keen to imitate Augustus wherever possible, and the inscription thus gave him an occasion to once again follow in his footsteps. The fact that the Augustan inscription did not contain the carmen, however, gave Severus an opportunity to add some innovations of his own; in other words, he could claim that Augustus’ rituals were generally identical to his own, but he also managed to add some elements which were important to himself. The new leaders of the commonwealth The first verses of the poem are dedicated to Apollo and Diana. Their roles are clearly described as the deities of the sun and moon, as they are named Phoebe dies, Phoebeia noctes.23 The first part of the poem contains some very traditional themes. There are verses dedicated to the Sibyl of Cumae, a fragmentary text mentioning Cynthia – an alternative name for Diana – and probably something related to the ‘Aeneian’ tradition, with the name Ausonia and the Latins appearing in the text. This part seems to describe the ancient roots of the games: the rituals and the celebrations of the games were, as was mentioned earlier in this volume, written in the Sibylline Books. These were consulted by the quindecimviri sacris faciundis and were kept in the temple of Apollo on the Palatine hill. Ausonia, moreover, was an ancient name for Italy which appears, for example, in Virgil’s Aeneid. With the use of this name, the poem apparently describes the birth of Rome in Ancient Italy, the land of Latins.24 From few remaining fragments of the first part of the poem, it is possible to tell that at least Apollo and Diana kept their prominent roles in the carmen. Their role was thus similar to the ones in the Augustan hymn. This is worth noting, since many changes were otherwise made to the poem. It seems that the roles of the god of the sun and the goddess of the moon were considered as central to the ce 204 games. It is thus possible that the references to astrological themes and the sacrifice performed in honour of these two deities highlighted the emperor and the empress as the couple controlling wholeness, in other words, the complete rituals of the Ludi Saeculares. The middle section of the poem is the least preserved part. However, some interesting details can nonetheless be found. Perhaps the most noteworthy is the inclusion of the god Bacchus in the text.25 Traditionally, Bacchus was not known to be involved in the games, and is also absent from the Severan inscription recording the rituals (apart from the carmen). However, it is possible that Bacchus’ role in the games was quite important, as he appears on Severan coinage. On a denarius, struck to celebrate the Secular Games, Bacchus is depicted as standing next to Hercules (the other side of the coin shows the portrait of the emperor).26 Hercules does not feature in the preserved parts of the carmen, but based on numismatic evidence it is possible that he was also included in the lost part of the poem.

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  145 Bacchus (also known as Liber) and Hercules were well known in Rome long before the Severans. Hercules, in particular, was a god of importance to all the Antonine rulers (with a possible exception of Marcus Aurelius).27 Ancient authors report that Commodus was almost obsessed with the god.28 The emperor also appears as Hercules on Commodian coinage, and statues of Commodus dressed as Hercules have also been found. For Septimius Severus, however, Bacchus and Hercules appear to have been most significant as a pair. In addition to the coin celebrating the Ludi Saeculares, Cassius Dio records that Severus spent a lot of money on repairing old temples and on building new ones, and mentions the temple of Hercules and Bacchus as an example of a new building.29 It is sometimes suggested that the attention given to these two gods was a sign of Septimius Severus’ African identity, and that the gods received an important position in the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204, particularly as they were the guardian deities of Lepcis Magna.30 Indeed, even if Hercules appears alone on the Severan triumphal arch in Rome, both gods are represented in the arch of Lepcis Magna, built in honour of Severus and his family.31 However, given the context of the Secular Games, it is perhaps uncertain whether Severus wanted to highlight his African roots in a highly traditional ritual such as the Ludi Saeculares, especially as he is known to be generally quite conservative regarding state cult and its gods. As a result, we should perhaps look for other explanations for the role of Bacchus/Liber and Hercules in the Severan Ludi. We have already seen how Septimius Severus formed a close bond with Jupiter Optimus Maximus, when he took power in the ce 190s. He later highlighted this bond during the sacrifices of the Ludi Saeculares. However, at the same time (in ce 196), imperial propaganda began to link Caracalla and Geta with Bacchus/Liber and Hercules, as Jupiter was reserved for the emperor.32 Accordingly, it seems plausible that when these two gods are used to commemorate the Severan Ludi, they are connected to Severus’ two sons. After all, it is noticeable that the poem was dedicated to ‘our leaders’ (nostrosque duces). Thus, the children singing the carmen not only asked for protection for Septimius Severus, but for other rulers too. This of course refers to the other members of the dynasty who held a visible role in the ludi: Caracalla, Geta and probably also Julia Domna. Taking the princes’ role in the games into consideration, I would accordingly perceive the role of the two gods as one guaranteeing continuity. Being associated to the young princes, the deities represented the future of the dynasty and the continuation of the empire through coinage (and in the Carmen Saeculare as well). It is therefore appropriate that they were included in a hymn sung by a chorus of noble youngsters, who were a concrete symbol of the golden future of Rome. Cities, shores and golden fields In the last part of the poem, new themes can also be found. A common subject in these last verses is ‘geography’. The poem celebrates the cities and the shores

146  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games of the empire, as well as Neptune, the god of the sea who, guaranteed the safe sailing of ships. I have already made reference to the last part of the poem with the god Bacchus and his ‘golden fields’. Moreover, I have noted that the poem ends with a wish of protection to ‘our leaders’.33 In order to evaluate these aspects of the poem, I will now briefly depart from the inscription itself and take a closer look at the relationship existing between Septimius Severus and two areas of major importance: Italy and Carthage. Italy, on the one hand, had become an extremely important part of Romanness in imperial ideology and an almost irreplaceable symbol of Roman self-representation. Carthage, on the other hand, was the centre of Roman Africa, the home province of the emperor and a province of extreme importance for Rome’s food supply. These observations help us understand the message Septimius Severus wished to convey through the final lines of the Carmen Saeculare. By the first century, Italy had become one of the central symbols of Romanness. The importance of Italia can be found both in literature and in numismatic evidence. The attitude towards Italy as a leading region of the empire is evident in a passage of Pliny’s Naturalis Historia, written at the end of the first century. He describes Italy as the: . . . nursing and mother of all other lands, chosen by the providence of the gods to make heaven itself more glorious, to unite scattered empires, to make manners gentle, to draw together in converse by community of language the jarring and uncouth tongues of so many nations, to give mankind a civilization, and in a word to become throughout the world the single fatherland of all the races.34 For Pliny, Italy was the land of the Romans, who had brought peace and civilisation to the world. The idea contained in Pliny’s text has its roots in Augustan tradition (if not earlier), even if it was written almost 100 years later after the works of Virgil and other Augustan writers, who celebrated Italia.35 Another example is the Vestal Virgins: the priestesses – while maintaining a very close relationship to Roman identity – were also traditionally connected to Italy. Aulus Gellius, a grammarian writing in the second part of the second century, provides a list of requirements for a girl to be chosen as a Vestal. One such requirement was that the girl’s father owned a residence in Italy.36 Italy’s special status can also be noted when we take a closer look at second-century imperial policy. Trajan introduced the policy of raising poor Italian children for ‘the legions and assemblies’, and declared that all the senators should own at least one-third of their lands in Italy.37 Hadrian also treated Italy as a special case, when he remitted the money he had received for celebrating his triumph: he returned most of the money to Italy and only a part of it to the provinces.38 According to numismatic evidence, Italia, as the mistress of the globe, had become an extremely important for Roman identity by the mid-­ second century. Before that period, Italy was traditionally seen as a standing

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  147 woman-figure holding a sceptre and a cornucopia, but Italia’s depiction as a leader of the whole world seems to be an Antonine innovation.39 Older types from the late first century, moreover, often described the city of Rome, and not Italy, as the mistress of the world. It thus seems that from Antoninius Pius’ reign onwards, the images of Rome and Italy as a woman-figure were united and known as Italia. According to Dench (2005: 219), Italy had become ‘an essential part of the language of traditionalism and continuity, of the political, republican roots of Roman monarchy and empire, as well as of imperial self-legislation’. At the same time, we can also note some similarities with the images of Rome and Italy. The Severan use of Italy on coinage is an interesting topic, especially in the light of the appearance of some slight changes indicated by two coins probably originating from the first years of the third century. One is dedicated to Septimius Severus and the other to Caracalla, but both are essentially identical. Both portray Italia as a woman sitting on a globe, holding a cornucopia and a sceptre, surrounded by the text Indulgentia Avgg in Italiam.40 Indulgentia itself was a concept connected to a paternalistic function; it represented the relationship between the emperor and his subjects. The concept simultaneously highlighted the fact that it was the emperor who had the real power to show generosity if he wished. In other words, it demonstrated dependency on the part of the subjects. The key to understanding the significance of imperial indulgentia can be found in a series of letters exchanged between Pliny the Younger and Emperor Trajan, written in the early second century ce. In his letters, Pliny constantly uses the term indulgentia. Generally, it is related to imperial favours. It deals, for example, with appointments in the public offices. Moreover, indulgentia in Pliny’s letters does not directly deal with money (paid by the emperor, for example), but rather with granting the right to use public funds. This is evident in a letter in which Pliny reports how an ancient bath in the city of Prusa was falling to ruins and how the people wanted to repair it. Pliny suggests that the emperor grants them the right to rebuild the whole bath. The point here is that the question is not about the money provided by the emperor, but rather about the people’s right to use public funds. In his answer, Trajan shows indulgentia by granting this right, if it did not require new tax levies or money taken from necessary public services.41 Even if the Severan figure of Italia is similar to the Antonine model, it is interesting that Septimius Severus’ and Caracalla’s coins do not really celebrate Italy as such, but rather celebrate the blessings of imperial generosity towards Italy. The exact reason for the ‘blessing’ is not certain, but as they date to around ce 202, it is possible that simply celebrated the fact that the emperor’s more permanent residence in Rome and, the building process that took place at that time.42 However, it is also interesting to note the existence of a hierarchy in these images, in which Italy is submitted to the will of the emperors (the present and the future ones). Italy is a dependent subject, and the rulers show goodwill towards her. Another instance in which Italia is represented is on a coin dedicated to Geta. She is draped, sits on a low seat and holds a vertical

148  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games sceptre in her right hand and a cornucopia in her left hand. At her feet is a draped and seated figure holding a cornucopia and another figure, naked to the waist, resting one hand on an urn and holding reeds in the other.43 Geta’s coin is even more problematic than those of Severus and Caracalla. If the first figure indeed represents Italy, the transformation of the role of the province would be very radical. It would mean that Italy had lost her role as the mistress of the world, since she sits on a seat, not on a globe. This example would strengthen the idea of the changing role of Italy in imperial propaganda. There is at least one another example from the early Severan period of imperial indulgentia towards a particular part of the empire. Coinage was issued to celebrate the imperial favours dedicated to Carthage, the central area of the Province of Africa, and the second largest city of the western part of the empire (second to Rome only). It should be noted that the whole Province of Africa, not only Carthage, was also celebrated by Septimius Severus through coinage. This was done in a more traditional manner (without indulgentia) by just portraying Africa as a woman-figure with a dress symbolising the province.44 The coins celebrating imperial indulgentia towards Carthage depict the goddess Dea Caelestis riding on a lion, holding a sceptre and a thunderbolt. The coins were issued for all the main members of the imperial family: Septimius Severus, Julia Domna and Caracalla.45 Dea Caelestis was the patron deity of Carthage, and was identified with Juno by the Romans. She was, according to the stories, persuaded by the Romans to change sides during the Punic war during the republican period. From that point onwards, she was adopted by the Romans, but nevertheless remained a part of local Carthaginian culture after the wars. The fact that Empress Julia Domna was often connected to the cults of Dea Syria (the Syrian Goddess) and Dea Caelestis (her cult was apparently originally Syrian but travelled to North Africa), has been considered as a sign of the fall of Roman religion to ‘oriental decay’.46 However, these theories are challenged among scholars today. In fact, even if there are some signs that the empress was identified with Dea Caelestis, there is no evidence that Julia Domna herself promoted it.47 The appearance of the goddess in coinage rather refers to the region/city of Carthage. As in the case of coins dedicated to imperial generosity towards Italy, the exact reason for the issuing of these coins is not certain,48 although it is well known that Septimius Severus gave much attention to his home province. Indeed, Lepcis Magna received many honours during his visit in 202–203 ce.49 The city was filled with statues and other honours for Septimius Severus and his family (not only Julia Domna, Caracalla and Geta, but also his parents, his grandfather and his first wife Paccia Marciana).50 As the indulgentia expressed towards Italy can be read in as not only demonstrating the emperor’s goodwill to the region, but as also indicating his control over it, the same understanding can perhaps also be applied to the case of Carthage. The message on the coin depicting Carthage can be read as a reminder for the Roman public that the emperor was the guarantor of North Africa’s security, which was a province crucial to Rome’s food supply.51 In other words, it highlights the important

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  149 roles that Septimius Severus, Julia Domna and Caracalla held in guaranteeing the community’s well-being. Their rule ensured that the shipping of grain from Africa to Italy remained stable. It is probably no coincidence that all the coins discussed here were apparently struck in the first years of the third century, approximately contemporaneously to the Ludi Saeculares. Indeed, they served to strengthen the imperial family’s image as a provider of security, continuity and stability. The celebration of the shores and cities of the empire, as well as the golden fields and ships sailing the seas in the Carmen Saeculare, therefore possibly also refer to the emperor and his sons’ major importance in securing a reliable food supply. Ships (and the god Neptune who protected them) can be understood as references to the transportation of grain, the product of the ‘golden fields of Bacchus’. What is more, the celebration of the ‘shores and cities’ in the carmen indicates that the poem does not only refer to one city (the capital), but rather to the whole empire and thus to the emperor’s role towards it. If we compare the poems about the Augustan and the Severan games, it appears that the role of the emperor in the carmen of 17 bce is particularly remarkable. The reason for his importance was that he was so strongly connected with the foundation of the city itself.52 However, when the role of the leaders (duces) is brought forth in the Severan poem, it seems that the ‘cities’, ‘shores’ and ‘fields’, and not the capital, play the main role in legitimising the power of the emperor and his family. Blessings for the army The Severan carmen continues with an inclusion of soldiers in the poem. The text indeed asks for blessings for the empire’s military camps.53 As we have already noted, other details also point to the military. The Praetorian Prefect was present during some of the sacrifices, and in the inscription recording the rituals, Julia Domna was described as mater castrorum, or mother of the camps. In other words, the army also played a role in the Severan, but not in the Augustan, Ludi. Where Julia Domna is concerned, we have already dealt with the question of her title in the games. Mater castrorum was a powerful epithet which stood as a reminder that she was the protector of the soldiers, but which also functioned as an indicator of her connection to the Antonine dynasty. The title was first used by Faustina the younger, wife of Marcus Aurelius. We also noted that the office of Praetorian Prefect was, at the time, held by Plautianus, the cousin of Severus, who was practically considered as a family member. Not only was he Severus’ kinsman, but his daughter was married to Caracalla. Moreover, the addition of his figure to the Severan family portrait on the triumphal arch of Lepcis Magna (Fig. 3.1) further demonstrates his position as a member of the new dynasty. The close relationship the Severans maintained with the army was obvious to Cassius Dio. He ended his account on the reign of Septimius Severus

150  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games with the emperor lying on his death-bed. According to Dio, Severus addressed Princes Caracalla and Geta and told them to get along, to enrich the soldiers and to not care about anything else.54 The passage is almost certainly Dio’s own fabrication (even if he tries in the same passage to assure the reader that this was not the case). However, there is no doubt that the emperor’s relationship with the soldiers was important during the Severan dynasty, and especially for Septimius Severus and Caracalla. The civil war is the most obvious reason: the army helped Severus claim the throne. Moreover, for many years after his rise to power, he needed his troops’ loyalty to secure his reign by fighting two usurpers. As a result, it is worth taking a closer look at the role of the army during Septimius Severus’ reign. It will help us understand the role of the army in the Carmen Saeculare and in Severan imperial ideology. The first sign of the army’s growing importance can be found in numismatic sources. The military had been present in Roman coinage during the whole imperial period. The army was an essential part of the empire, even in the days of the early emperors when it was not directly involved in politics. The emperor had to buy the loyalty of the legions somehow, and even in the most peaceful of times, the borders needed to be thoroughly secured. As a result, military subjects were an important part of Roman iconography. One of the most important themes of military-related coins was Victoria, the goddess of Victory. She was depicted in many ways in imperial coinage, and in some cases she was represented as crowning the emperor after a victorious campaign. Victory as a theme (not directly as a goddess) was a popular subject as well: this included images of a victorious emperor on a horse surrounded by soldiers, or an emperor giving a speech to his victorious troops. Variants of this kind were many. Sometimes the coinage celebrated the good discipline of the legions. In these cases, legends such as concordia, diciplina or fides exercituum were used. Even if these types were also issued during peaceful times, they may hint to the fears of troubles erupting with the army.55 There is, however, one distinctive type of coinage that appeared only a few times in Roman history. During the troubled times of the late republic, Mark Antony had a range of coins dedicated to individual legions struck. These coins depicted an eagle, standards and a galley, as well as the names of individual legions.56 After Antony, such coins were only extremely occasionally issued. Before Severus, this was done only by Clodius Macer. Macer had been a legatus in the province of Africa during the reign of Nero, but revolted in the year 68 (as part of the major disturbances that led to the civil war) and was eventually murdered by Galba.57 After the late 60s ce, Severus was the first to dedicate coinage to individual legions. He did this at the very beginning of his reign, in ce 193. After Severus, similar decisions were undertaken by Gallenius in ce 261–262, by Victorinus in ce 268 (or 269), and by Carausius in ce 288–299. It is noticeable that all these occasions represent periods in which leaders heavily relied on their legions while struggling for power.58 Severus issued coins celebrating fifteen different legions, thus honouring every unit that supported him during his struggle against Pescennius Niger.

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  151 These include almost all the legions from the Rhine and Danube region (apart from one, legion number ten, which had apparently displeased Severus). Some of the western legions, three in Britain and one in Spain, did not receive honours however. It is probable that these were troops of Clodius Albinus, who was still an ally of Severus in ce 193. Eastern legions are also missing altogether. They were of course part of Niger’s forces, when he declared himself as the emperor in Antioch. Since the whole eastern part of the empire supported Niger he had ten legions at his disposal.59 It therefore appears that coins were issued as a reward for legions loyal to the Severan cause alone. It is also a well-known fact that Severus and Caracalla both gave soldiers pay rises. These acts are recorded by both Herodian and the Historia Augusta. According to these sources, Severus made this decision in the late 190s. The Historia Augusta seems to connect the pay rise with the Severan campaign in Parthia as well as with other dynastic aspirations, such as making Caracalla the co-ruler of the empire and giving Geta the title of Caesar. Herodian, however, describes this change as taking place upon Severus’ return to Rome following his defeat of Clodius Albinus.60 It is difficult to estimate the exact date of the actual event, as both the sources have their own chronological problems. However, there is little doubt that the pay rise actually took place. We unfortunately do not possess any details regarding how the soldiers’ pay was increased, but it is quite obvious that Severus needed to reward the troops for their loyalty after the civil war period. In foreign campaigns, when successful, the solution was rather simple: in Parthia, for example, Severus gave his troops permission to loot the Parthian capital of Ctesiphon in ce 198.61 However, looting during the civil war, inside the borders of the empire, would have been a much more problematic act, and would not have sufficed to keep the entire army happy anyway (although sackings of Roman cities did of course occur during civil wars, one famous case being the fall of Byzantium to the troops of Severus in ce 196. The city had been Pescennius Niger’s headquarters).62 As a result, Severus needed money to pay for his troops. The task was indeed a problematic one, especially during the first years of his reign and during the first civil war, as he had to find money from the West, while his opponent Niger held the riches of the eastern part of the empire. A couple of solutions were available to the emperor for obtaining the necessary funds. One was to reduce the silver contents of the coinage. This was conducted in two phases: first during the war against Niger, and second during the second civil war fought against Albinus.63 The successful campaign against Niger also gave Severus the means to secure funds: the rich eastern provinces fell to Severan control. The victory provided another possibility as well, as Niger’s defeat gave Severus a great opportunity to confiscate large sums of property from his supporters (or even just suspected supporters). As Dio reports: As for the various cities and private citizens, Severus punished some and rewarded others; of the Roman senators he slew none, but deprived most

152  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games of them of their property and confined them on islands. He was merciless in his raising of funds; thus, for example, he exacted four times the amount that any individuals or peoples had given to Niger, whether they had done so voluntarily or under compulsion. He himself doubtless perceived that he was ill spoken of because of this, but, as he required large sums of money, he paid no attention to what people said . . . Many who had never even seen Niger and had not joined his faction were dealt with harshly on the ground that they had favoured his cause.64 Despite all these measures, it has still been estimated that Severus did not have enough money at his disposal in ce 198/199, when the pay rise of the soldiers took place. As a result, it is possible that Severan pay rises were partly achieved by the means of annona militaris, in other words, through the provision of free food and other supplies to the legions. This would have left the soldiers with more money, as they did not spend their salaries on for food. The amount of this pay rise is very difficult to tell, but according to estimations, it could have been of 150 denarii per year, of which 100 denarii were given towards supplies. This would have been a significant sum of money. The last emperor to have conducted an army pay rise before Severus’ reign was Domitian, who raised the ordinary soldier’s yearly salary from 225 denarii to 300.65 Caracalla followed in his father’s steps: in killing his brother Geta in ce 211, he secured the backing of the army by promising a pay raise for each soldier. This promise was partly held through the confiscation of Geta’s alleged supporters’ properties, and partly through the further reduction of the amounts of silver contained in coinage. It has been estimated that during Caracalla’s reign, the percentage of silver in coinage dropped to about fifty per cent.66 Favours directed towards the army continued during the later Severan era, too. The sole surviving legal document issued by the third Severan emperor, Elagabalus, deals with the rights of soldiers’ children; it seems that he granted the same rights to children born to a Roman soldier and a foreign woman to those born to Roman citizen-parents.67 One might suggest that this also highlights the heavy influence the army had in the formulation of imperial decisions. However, it could also perhaps indicate that Elagabalus continued the Severan tradition of placing marriage as a central part of imperial ideology. After all, two marriages of high profile took place during his reign. The first was his decision to take the Vestal Virgin Aquilia Severa as his wife and the second was to arrange the marriage of the sun-god El’Gabal and the goddess Urania.68 This was perhaps bad policy on the part of the emperor (which might have precipitated his downfall), but these decisions nonetheless point to his use of a Severan ideal to further emphasise his bond with the army and the latter’s adherence to the imperial ideology more generally. In the light of our examination of army’s role, we might, however, argue that defining Septimius Severus as a military emperor is perhaps an exaggeration. Severus did not demonstrate a preference for soldiers in his administrative decisions, nor did he try to militarise any part of the government. Even if he

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  153 took measures such as raising the soldiers’ pay, and giving them new rights, these were hardly unreasonable reforms. An increase in military pay was in fact long overdue: before Severus, the last pay rise had been conducted by Domitian, over 100 years earlier.69 It had, moreover, already been a well-­ established custom for soldiers to form unofficial ‘marriages’ with women living around the military camps. The new marriage law thus simply allowed them to make their existing relationships official.70 As a result, the inclusion of soldiers in the Carmen Saeculare is perhaps a bit more problematic than it first appears. It is true that the army had been an important part of Severan propaganda, especially during his early years as an emperor. Accordingly, there is no doubt that the lines in the Severan Carmen Saeculare praising the army were partly added for the obvious reason of honouring the military. Nonetheless, the great impact of the army in Severus’ rise to power leads to the question of why its mention in the carmen is actually very minor. Why were soldiers not celebrated more lavishly? One possible explanation is simple: Severus wished to appear as a new Augustus, as a bringer of a Golden Age and peace during the Ludi Saeculares. After all, one of the main goals of the Ludi Saeculares was to erase the memory of the civil war, as had been the case with the Augustan ones. After all, the Ludi Saeculares consisted of a great communal purificatory ritual in which the troubles of the previous generation were left behind. If their aim was to purge the ‘pollution’ caused by the civil wars, the inclusion of the army, when celebrating the new age would seem rather odd. Another answer to this question may be connected to the changing role of Italy in imperial thought. One of Severus’ most famous decisions was to extend the imperial bodyguard for people living outside Italy, in Spain, Macedonia and Noricum.71 Epigraphic evidence of the period seems to strengthen Dio’s and Herodian’s reports: it indicates that the soldiers honourably discharged from the praetorian guard were, in majority, Italians until the end of the second century. However, none of the honourably discharged praetorians during the reign of Severus actually came from Italy.72 For Cassius Dio, the decision to replace the Italian praetorians was an outrageous act; according to him, the Roman guard was robbed of ‘more respectable people with simpler habits’. In Dio’s opinion, Severus thus ‘incidentally ruined the youth of Italy’. When describing Severus as a ruler, Dio considered this as one of his greatest mistakes, a decision that some senators found particularly bad. The capital was consequently filled with soldiers who were ‘most savage in appearance, most terrifying in speech and most boorish in conversation’.73 On the one hand, Cassius Dio’s negative attitude could be explained by the fact that he felt threatened by this new guard – after all, Severus’ purge of the senate was surely still fresh in the minds of senators such as Dio. On the other hand, it is also possible that Dio simply did not accept the new nature of the guard, as it had become a body formed of soldiers originating from outside Italy and other ‘respectable’ regions. The basis for Dio’s attitude can perhaps be explained by studying his Roman history, and especially by examining the role he gave the Italians in

154  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games his writings. There have been arguments that Italy was ‘just another region’ for Cassius Dio. It has been suggested, for example, that Dio’s main idea was to highlight the importance of the city of Rome itself, and that the rest of Italy was not special as such, but just an area in which the capital was situated. Moreover, it appears that the socio-political situation in Italy was declining during the Severan era. Its economic importance considerably decreased, it was no longer a country which provided the Roman army with the majority of its soldiers, and by the early third century, was overall a poorly organised administratively.74 Arguments regarding Italy’s poor administration and the preference for Rome over Italy in governmental issues might be right, yet Dio’s history does nevertheless seem to emphasise that Italians did have a special role in their relation to Rome and to Romanness. For example, when Dio discusses the qualities of true Romans, he seems to emphasise that these qualities essentially belong mostly to Italians by nature.75 The idea that the Italians were a ‘chosen people’, or perhaps even ‘true Romans’ (of the past, at least), was an old topos in Roman historiography. Italy’s, and the Italians’, special status in the history of Rome can be found in the works of many writers of the imperial era,76 and it is evident that Dio followed this idea. In evaluating the significance of his viewpoint, we must bear the purpose and audience of his work in mind. Dio most likely composed a handbook of Roman identity for high officials coming from the eastern provinces. Thus, it may be argued that idea of the importance of Italians and Italy was an essential part of the Roman identity for Dio. In this light, the fact that the rulers then built their power on the new, non-Italian guard, and even displayed this new policy in the Ludi Saeculares, might have appeared too radical a shift for a senatorial traditionalist such as Dio. As a result, we may read the lines of the Severan Carmen celebrating the army as closely tied to the other parts of the poem. This poem celebrating cities, shores and golden fields honoured, as I argued, the whole empire. Accordingly, we might suggest that even if the poem celebrates the army as an entity close to Severus, it possibly refers especially to the Praetorian Guard, which was, to Dio’s horror – and to that of other conservative senators – now built upon outsiders to Italy and other areas from which the praetorians were traditionally drawn from. In this sense, the passage complements the general theme of the poem: that of the existence of a direct relationship between the leaders (the imperial family) and the empire.

The Trojan Games Seven days of games followed the rituals, including both stage performances and races. Boys from senatorial families participated in the so-called Trojan Games (Lusus Troiae). The last part of the Severan inscription states that after this occasion, the emperor and Caracalla personally congratulated the young nobles – a detail which is another Severan novelty. The boys who were part of the choir of twenty-seven (but did not take part in the Trojan Games) also received honours.77 The games were apparently a rather rare occasion, only organised from

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  155 time to time. Some information remains about the games taking place from the first century bce to the third century ce. The first games we know of are those organised by Sulla and reported by Plutarch. According to the latter, Sulla gathered boys of ‘good birth’ to participate in the games.78 It is possible that they were already celebrated before that occasion, but it seems that they were rather forgotten until Sulla revived them.79 More reports on the Trojan Games exist from the reigns of Caesar and Augustus. Caesar organised the Lusus Troiae in 46 bce. They were conducted in order to celebrate his triumph and the dedication of the temple of Venus in the Forum.80 Cassius Dio writes about the Trojan Games held during the Augustan reign, and usually connects them to the dedication of temples. Obviously, the Ludi Saeculares of 17 bce are also one of the Augustan occasions.81 Later, Caligula and Claudius continued the tradition: Caligula held the games at least three times, including the occasion of his sister Drusilla’s funeral,82 and Claudius held them as part of his own Ludi Saeculares.83After these occasions, however, there appear to be no sources on the Trojan Games (which, of course, does not mean that they were not held) until the Severan Secular Games in ce 204. A description of the Lusus Troiae appears in Virgil’s Aeneid. The participants were divided to two teams, which then fought each other on horseback. Apparently, this battle was more like an act, or a show, than a violent contest. The young nobles’ fathers also held the important role of supervisors of the games.84 Even if the participants were not literally fighting each other, these games were very rough, and we know that some participants did sustain severe injuries.85 We may thus consider the lusus as a war-ritual reserved to youths of the upper class. The inscription of the Severan Ludi Saeculares indicates that about thirty young nobles took part in the game, although only eight names are properly preserved. Of these eight, at least six were also members of the choir that performed the Carmen Saeculare.86 The Trojan Games were an occasion for the young nobles to be presented to the community. Suetonius reports that Tiberius took part in Trojan Games as a very young child: At the age of nine he delivered a eulogy of his dead father from the rostra. Then, just as he was arriving at puberty, he accompanied the chariot of Augustus in his triumph after Actium, riding the left trace-horse, while Marcellus, son of Octavia, rode the one on the right. He presided, too, at the city festival, and took part in the game of Troy during the ­performances in the circus, leading the band of older boys.87 A similar situation is known from the Claudian Ludi Saeculares in ce 47, when he also organised Trojan Games. On this occasion: . . . when a cavalcade of boys from the great families opened the mimic battle of Troy, among them being the emperor’s son, Britannicus, and Lucius Domitius – soon to be adopted as heir to the throne and to the

156  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games designation of Nero – the livelier applause given by the populace to Domitius was accepted as prophetic.88 The Lusus Troiae were thus a channel for introducing young nobles to public political life and introducing them to the audience. In other words, they were visually presented to the communitas. Tonio Hölscher deals with the different aspects of war imagery in Greek and Roman cultures and their importance for the community. His views can be applied to the Trojan Games: after all, the Lusus Troiae were both a public, visual show as well as some kind of a warritual (at least symbolically, if not in the actual fighting sense) where young people performed in a contest between two teams. As Hölscher observes, military success was disseminated to the community in three different ways in Classical antiquity: through rituals, monuments and ideological concepts. Rituals included triumphal processions, sacrifices to the gods of victory, celebrations and ceremonial departures and arrivals to and from military campaigns. Moreover, these rituals were very effective in encouraging the emotional participation of the people.89 In many cases, the Ludi Saeculares included these three elements. During the imperial era, it was common practice for emperors to combine many different celebrations in one festival – in other words, the celebrations developed from specific feasts in the republican era to more universal ones in the imperial period.90 Monuments, such as Severus’ triumphal arch, which glorified his and his sons’ military victory, were part of the ritual, as the celebration was held around the places in which the monuments stood. As Hölscher explains, Roman war rituals led those who were involved (both as participants and onlookers) to another world, and were thus connected with space, time and community. He mainly discusses the war rituals shown in artistic monuments, referring to the reliefs from the column of Marcus Aurelius: the ritual starts with the departure from Rome, is followed by the purification of the army, a speech by the emperor to his troops and finishes with the subjugation of the enemy which demonstrates the emperor’s clementia and justitia. At the end, the emperor returns to Rome, performs a sacrifice to Jupiter, and distributes the money collected as war booty.91 The Trojan Games, however, connect us to a more concrete type of ritual, because they were actually conducted in front of people’s eyes. The games perhaps reminded its audience of the history of Rome (the Trojan myth) while presenting it with the young nobility, the future of the communitas. In ce 204, however, the emperor’s role was also displayed to the audience. If we understand the games as a visual act, we can perhaps compare the image of the Trojan Games to the visions on public monuments and the emperor’s role in them. On Roman monuments depicting wars, the emperor was not often represented in the heat of the battle; physical vigour did not exclusively demonstrate the power and might of the emperor. Rather, it was the small gestures that were important. Hölscher mentions the famous statues of Augustus at the Prima Porta and the Via Labicana as examples: the paraphernalia of the statues, such as the cuirasses and the togas, demonstrate the imperial qualities of auctoritas,

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  157 dignitas, virtus and pietas. The recognisable gestures, such as the raised hand or gestures of sacrifice, had the same kind of function as the elaborate paraphernalia seen on the statues.92 Severus’ gesture, following the performance of the Trojan Games after the occasion, was to congratulate and reward the participants before the public, as is recorded in the inscription of the Ludi Saeculares.93 It can be considered as a gesture of indulgentia, a visible act of paternal generosity, towards the young nobles. However, we should remember that paternalism of this kind is not only an expression of goodwill; indulgentia is also a reference to the hierarchy of power and social position of different groups. The action showed that those who received the gesture and prizes from Septimius Severus and Caracalla were under their control, In fact, the emperor and Caracalla acted as the participants’ fathers (as was mentioned earlier, the participants’ fathers traditionally supervised the Trojan Games).94 The message was naturally meant for the audience witnessing the occasion, but it was also preserved in the inscription standing on the Campus Martius. Recorded on the monument, it remained in the community’s memoria, reminding the people about the hierarchy existing between the emperor and the upper-class youth. The inscription ends with a very fragmented conclusion of the games, as well as a list of officials who took part in concluding them. In the actual games, the Ludi Honorarii followed and closed the celebrations. However, one last interesting detail must be noted: following the other celebrations, the matrons apparently held a final sellisternium for Juno and Diana. This would have included sacrifices and a feast in honour of the goddesses, led by the empress.95 This ritual might have been a Severan innovation, as no traces of it can be found in earlier sources, although it should again be noted that we do not possess inscriptions for the Domitian or Claudian Games. Although the extensive numismatic evidence remaining from the Domitian ludi does not describe these kinds of rituals, which would indicate that they were only celebrated for the first time during the Severan Ludi, no conclusive statements can be made with full certainly. Returning to the passage, it is short, but very interesting. It is one of the very few sources in Roman public art or monuments in which women are portrayed as actual performers of sacrifices; the literary sources are rather silent on the subject. Generally, the passage is a piece of evidence against the idea of the ‘sacrificial incapacity’ of women. As Emily Hemelrijk argues, the less prominent role of women in Roman sacrifice results from the fact that female priests represented a minority in Roman history, rather than from the idea that women were unsuitable for the performance of sacrifices.96

Notes 1 Hor. Carm. Saec. 1–12. 2 Hor. Carm. Saec. 13–28. 3 Hor. Carm. Saec. 73.This probably reflects the shift of balance from Jupiter to Apollo as the most important god in the reign of Augustus. For Jupiter’s role in the Augustan Carmen, see Putnam 2001: 66–69, 78, 85, 87, 91.

158  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games 4 Hor. Carm. Saec.49–52. 5 Pighi, comm. lud. quint 149. The author of the Severan Carmen is unknown. 6 The hymn: Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 60–71. 7 Mantle 2002: 105. 8 Hermaphrodites, as well as other ‘unnatural’ omens, were seen as dangerous because they did not fit into any strict categories. This observation is especially based on the famous anthropological theory of Mary Douglas, who claimed that societies often tend to categorise and give roles to different groups, and that the breakage of these categories leads to a certain ‘inter-state’ and to crisis (see Douglas 2002). On ­hermaphrodites in classical antiquity in general, see Brisson 2002. 9 Liv. 27.37; Liv. 31.12. In addition, there were two more similar occasions in 119 and 117 bce; in both cases hermaphrodites were found and again carried to the sea, after which twenty-seven maidens purified the city. Jul.Obs. 34; 36. 10 Plut. Sull. 7.2–5 (transl. B. Perrin). Apparently, the Etruscan view of the saeculum was very influential in the Roman understanding of the passing of the ages.The Tuscans, in Plutarch’s passage, obviously refer to the Etruscans (see also Cens. 17.5–6). See also Hall 1986: 2567–2569. 11 Cens. 17.5.8 (translated by H.N. Parker). 12 Zos. 2.4.2. 13 Scullard 1981: 120. 14 Rantala 2011: 245–251. The main sources for argei are Ovid (Fast. 5.603–24) Dionysios of Halicarnassus (1.38),Varro (Ling. 5.45–54) and Plutarch (Quaest. Rom. 86). For an overview of the ritual, see Scullard 1981: 120–121 and Ziolkowsky 1998–1999: 214–215. 15 The three children seem to refer to the three days and nights of the rituals. Religious celebrations lasting for three nights and days in Roman traditional religion were not restricted to the Ludi Saeculares, but can be found in the rituals dedicated to Dea Dia, for example. See Scheid 2011: 11–24. 16 Val. Max. 2.4.5; Zos. 2.1–4. See Appendix Four for the origin of the games. The connection of the story with the ancient family of the Valerii is an interesting detail. The Valerii were part of the ritual in Augustan times, when two of them, M. Messalla Messalinus and M. Pototus Messalla, were members of the quindecimveri. In the Severan celebrations, no Valerius can be found from the priestly college. Even if most of the noble families from the republican era had died by the first centuries of the imperial rule, we know that at least two members of the gens of Valerius were alive in the early Severan period: L.Valerius Messalla Thrasea Priscus and L.Valerius Messalla. Both are absent from the Severan Ludi Saeculares, however. Other living members of the republican nobility are also missing from the records. Both Valerii held a consulship during their careers, L.Valerius Messalla Thrasea Priscus in ce 196 and L.Valerius Messalla.in ce 214. See L’Albo, nos. 510–511. 17 Plut. Publ. 21.1 (transl. B. Perrin). 18 See Scheid 1993: 111–113. 19 The final selllisternium: Pighi, comm. lud sept. Va 83–84; children performing the carmen on the Capitoline hill:Va 71–75. The dance as a part of the myth: Zos. 2.2.3. 20 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. Va 85–90. Of the fifty-four boys and girls (pueri and puellae) we know twenty-four names. Pueri include: Iunius Faustinus, Iulius Crescens, Iulius Cassius Paulinus, Clodius Marcellinus, Alfius Avitus, Opratius Titianus, Flavius Iulius Latronianus, Umblius Maximinus, Claudius Pacatianus, Iulius Satyrus Dryans, Ulpius Attianus, Laberius Pompeianus, Cattius Clementinus, Baebius Marcellinus,

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  159 Aelius Antipater, Corfinius Felixs and Licinius Aemilianus. Puellae include: Manilia Lucana, Rufia Vestina Maxima, Flavia Postuma Varia, Aemilia Iunia Clementina, Flavia Romana, Cornelia Claudia Pia and Domitia Diotima. In addition, a few names are almost (but not completely) preserved. 21 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. Va 84. It is noteworthy that matronae seems to indicate to the senatorial rank – see Hänninen 2000: 99. 22 Mantle 2002: 105. 23 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 60. Phoebe and Phoebeia were alternative names for Apollo and Diana. 24 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. Va 60–63. See Verg. Aen., for example 3.170, 378, 477, 496; 4.236, 349. There are many other examples as well. 25 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 67. 26 RIC 4.1, no. 257 (Septimius Severus). 27 Hekster 2005: 205–209. 28 See Cass. Dio 73[72].7.2, 73[72].15.2–6, 73[72].20.2, 73[72].22.3; Herod. 1.14.7–9; SHA Comm. 8.5, 8.9, 9.2, 10.9, 16.5; SHA Car. 5.5. Herodian reports how Commodus changed his name again from Hercules to that of a famous, dead gladiator (1.15.7). There is an interesting passage in the Historia Augusta, in the life of Diadumenianus (young son of Macrinus, the short-lived emperor between Caracalla and Elagabalus). According to the writer of the Historia Augusta, it was a poem against Caracalla, composed by an ‘unknown Greek’ (SHA Diad. 7.2–3). In addition, there is at least one known inscription, found from Trevi (Treba Augusta), in which Hercules is attributed to the imperial titles of Commodus – see CIL 14.3449. 29 Cass. Dio 72[71].16.3. For Hercules and Bacchus/Liber in Severan propaganda, see Palmer 1978: 1094–1095. 30 Birley 1999: 159; Cadotte 2007: 15 (see also 253–305); Palmer 1978: 1094. 31 Fishwick 1987: 338–339. 32 Fears 1981: 115; Ghedini 1984: 70–72. Ghedini discusses the many roles of Bacchus/ Liber and Hercules during the Severan reign: as guardians of Lepcis Magna, tutelary deities of Caracalla and Geta, and Hercules as a god who was still strongly associated with Commodus. The rehabilitation of Commodus and Severus’ declaration that they were, in fact, brothers, could thus also explain the important role of Hercules in Severan propaganda. 33 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va, 66–71. 34 Plin. HN 3.5.39 (transl. H. Rackham). 35 Although the idea of tota Italia is much older than the Augustan era, it was during the reign of Augustus that Italy, as an essential concept for Romanness, was truly brought forward (for Augustan writers on Italy, see Dench 2005: 193–217). On the other hand, the certain Italian particularism – the role of the Sabines, Etruscans and others in constructing Italy – was an important idea as well. It seems that these two thoughts, unifying tota Italia and its different peoples, were actually both present in the imperial ideology that underlined the role of Italy for Roman identity. See Laurence 1998: 108–109. 36 Gell. 1.12.8. 37 Plin. Ep. 6.19; SHA M. Ant. 11.8. 38 SHA Hadr. 6.5. 39 For example RIC 3 no. 73 (Antoninus Pius). 40 BMC V 282 (Severus); BMC V 339 (Caracalla). 41 Plin. Ep. 34. This kind of idea on indulgentia is a recurring theme in Roman literature, as is demonstrated, for example, by the exchange of letters between Marcus

160  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games Cornelius Fronto and Emperor Marcus Aurelius. From their correspondence, traces of the paternalistic flavour of indulgentia can be found, even if the concept is mentioned only a couple of times – the reason is the different nature of their correspondence to that of Pliny and Trajan. While the latter deal with governmental issues, of which imperial goodwill seems to be a large part, the letters written between Fronto and Marcus deal with more personal matters. However, in one letter, written probably in ce 149 or 150, Fronto asks Marcus Aurelius to speak favourably of Saenius Pompeianus, a farmer of public revenues in Africa, to the (then) emperor, Antoninus Pius. In his answer, Marcus Aurelius promises to do so and praises ‘the Lord my father’s indulgent ways’ (indulgentia Domini mei).The passage clearly draws together the ideas of paternalism, indulgentia and imperial goodwill. Another element which seems to be connected to the concept of indulgentia is the giving of honours, not only of public offices, but of citizenship too. In one of his letters, Pliny asks Hadrian to grant Harpocras, his Egyptian physician, civil rights in both Alexandria and Rome. Pliny writes to the emperor that he has sent the required information about Harpocras to the emperor’s freedman, so that Trajan’s ‘gracious intentions’ would not face any obstacles (Plin. Ep. 10.6.3.) For the concept of ­imperial indulgentia, see Cotton 1984: 245– 266. 42 It has been suggested, for example, that imperial favour could deal with the war against brigands in Italy that Septimius Severus maybe conducted during that time – see BMC V p. cli. 43 BMC 5 p. 428 no. 45 (where it has been suggested that the figure is indeed Italia). 44 RIC 4.1 no. 207. Even if Severus came from Africa and thus honoured his own home province, Africa itself appeared many times in the Roman coinage of the imperial period. Coins depicting Africa can be found in the coinage of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Commodus. 45 RIC 4.1, nos. 193, 266–267, 759–760, 763 (Septimius Severus); 594 (Julia Domna); 415, 418a, 471 (Caracalla). 46 See, for example, Brauer 1967: 26–27. Brauer considers the role of Julia Domna and her relatives as significant for the orientalisation of Roman religion (which, according to him, started in the Severan period, although he admits that they were probably unaware of it themselves). 47 There are also a few inscriptions which connect Julia Domna to Dea Caelestis: see CIL 5.5768; 8.999; 14.3536. For a discussion about Dea Caelestis, the imperial family and Roman religion, see Levick 2007: 133–135. 48 Levick (2007: 133), for example, suggests that generosity here implies the grant of ius Italicum to Carthage; this may well be the case, but does not exclude other possible messages that Septimius Severus wanted to convey. 49 The visit is mentioned in Philostr. V. Soph. 2.20.2. 50 For Severus’ activities in North Africa, see Birley 1999: 146–154. Paccia Marciana, Severus’ first wife, is virtually unknown. The only literary source mentioning her is the Historia Augusta (SHA Sev. 3.1), which recounts that Severus married her, but he does not mention her in his autobiography. Severus did, however, erect statues in her memory after her death (probably around ce 185, after ten years of marriage). They apparently had no children, at least Severus does not mention them anywhere, although the Historia Augusta reports two daughters (SHA Sev. 8.1). However, this story is considered as somewhat unreliable. For the little we know about Paccia Marciana, see Birley 1999: 52. 51 For the role of grain supply in Severus’ imperial propaganda, see Rantala 2016.

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  161 52 As is demonstrated by Hor. Carm. Saec. 49–52. 53 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 69. 54 Cass. Dio 77[76].15.2. 55 Mattingly 1960: 153–154. 56 See, for example, RSC vol 1, 27–60; there are other examples as well. 57 Stockton 1986: 175. The main ancient source for Macer is Tac. Hist. 1.7; 1.11; 1.73. 58 Mattingly 1960: 154. 59 Birley 1999: 98. For the military subjects in Severan coinage, see Handy 2009: 232–234. 60 SHA Sev. 17.1; Herod. 3.8.4–5. 61 Herod. 3.9.10–11. 62 Potter 2004: 104. 63 Crawford 1975: 562. 64 Cass. Dio 75[74].8.4, 75[74].9.4 (transl. E. Cary). 65 Develin 1971: 687, 694–695. 66 Potter 2004: 137. 67 Halsberghe 1972: 71. 68 Cass. Dio 80[79].9.3; 80[79].12.1. 69 Develin 1971: 687. The Roman monetary system had been more or less the same from the period of Augustus: an aureus was worth twenty-five denarii, one denarius was worth four sesterii, eight dupondii or sixteen asses. Even if there had been some changes with, for example, the silver percentages of some coin types, the basis of the system had remained the same. Crawford 1975: 560. Golden coins were mainly meant for high officials, silver coins, such as denarii, to pay for governmental expenses, while the ordinary people used bronze coins such as sesterii (although some even lower coin types made of copper were also used). Potter 2004: 137. 70 For the marriage of soldiers in general, see Campbell 1978. 71 Cass. Dio 74[73].2.5; Herod. 2.13. 72 Murphy 1947: 60–61. 73 Cass. Dio 74[73].2.5–6 (all translations by E. Cary). 74 De Blois 1998: 3407–3409. 75 This is especially evident when Dio describes the civil war periods of the late republic (books 41–43 and 45–51). He emphasises, on many occasions, that one of the main reasons behind Pompey the Great’s defeat was his possession of more Asian troops, while Caesar used more westerners, especially Italians (and Greeks). The same attitude appears in his description of the war between Augustus and Marcus Antonius. In these books, Dio emphasises that being a ‘true Roman’ means being a Roman citizen – and during that point of history Roman citizenship was still quite limited to the Italian peninsula. Dio’s attitude can perhaps be seen as a support for numismatic evidence which, as we saw, indicates that Italy and Rome were in many ways inseparable from at least the Antonine period. 76 This is most explicitly mentioned by Pliny (HN 3.5.39), but the same spirit can be found in other ancient texts as well, although their message is often more implicit. One example is the description of the battle of Cannae by Silius Italicus.The author describes all the tribes of Italy who are present in this defining moment (Sil. Pun. 8. 356–617). 77 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 76. 78 Plut. Cat. min. 3.1. 79 Weinstock 1971: 88.

162  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games 80 Suet. Caes. 39. The family of the Iulii maintained a close relationship with Troy, as they claimed that Aeneas, the son of Venus and the Trojan hero who brought the last Trojans to Rome, was their ancestor. It is therefore no surprise that Caesar organised the Lusus Troiae while celebrating Venus. Accordingly, for Augustus, Aeneas was an important figure throughout his reign. Erskine 2001: 15–20. 81 Cass. Dio 51.22.4; 54.26.1.Trojan Games of the Ludi Saeculares in 17 ce: Pighi, comm. lud. quint. 164. 82 Cass. Dio 59.7; 59.11; Suet. Calig. 18. 83 Suet. Claud. 21; Suet. Nero 7; Tac. Ann. 11.11.2. 84 Verg. Aen. 5.545–602. 85 Birley 1999: 159. See PIR² C 295 and L’Albo 111 for Calpurnius Piso, a boy who apparently got injured in the Trojan Games. 86 Cassius Dio also calls the participants children of patricians (43.23.6). The six who took part in both the lusus and carmen were Iunius Faustinus, Clodius Marcellinus, Opratius Titianus, Claudius Pacatianus, Iulius Satyrus Dryans and Baebius Mar­ cellinus. Two more, Alfius Maximus and Neratius Priscus, took part in the Trojan Games as well, but whether they participated in the carmen or not remains unknown. All eight were sons of senators. The prosopographic evidence is collected in Pighi 1965: 243–263. 87 Suet. Tib. 6.4 (transl. J. C. Rolfe). 88 Tac. Ann. 11.11.2 (transl. J. Jackson). 89 Hölscher 2003: 13. 90 McCormick 1986: 20. 91 Hölscher 2003: 14–15. 92 Hölscher 2003: 12. 93 Pighi, comm. lud. sept.Va 76. 94 Verg. Aen. 5.545–602. 95 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. Va 83–84. 96 Hemeljrik 2009: 260–267.

Bibliography Birley, A. (1999). Septimius Severus. The African Emperor. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Brauer, G. (1995). The Decadent Emperors: Power and Depravity in Third-century Rome. 2nd ed. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1995. Brisson, L. (2002). Sexual Ambivalence. Androgyny and Hermaphrodites in Greco-Roman Antiquity. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press. Cadotte, A. (2007). La romanisation des dieux. L’ interpretatio romana en Afrique du Nord sous le Haut-Empire. Leiden: Brill. Campbell, J.B. (1978). The marriage of Roman soldiers under the empire. JRS, 68, pp. 153–166. Cotton, H. (1984). The Concept of Indulgentia under Trajan’. Chiron, 14, pp. 245–266. Crawford, M. (1975). Finance, Coinage and Money from the Severans to Constantine. ANRW, II.2, pp. 560–593. De Blois, L. (1998). Emperor and Empire in the Works of Greek-speaking Authors of the Third Century ad. ANRW, II.34.4, pp. 3391–3443. Dench, E. (2005). Romulus’ Asylum. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Develin, R. (1971). The Army Pay Rises under Severus and Caracalla and the question of the annona militaris. Latomus, 30, pp. 687–695.

Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games  163 Douglas, M. (2002). Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. 7th ed. New York: Routledge. Erskine, A. (2001). Troy Between Greece and Rome. Local Tradition and Imperial Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Fears, J. (1981). The Cult of Jupiter and Roman Imperial Ideology. ANRW, II.17.1, pp. 3–141. Fishwick, D. (1987). The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the Ruler Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire, vol. 1, 1–2. Leiden: Brill. Ghedini, F. (1984). Giulia Domna tra oriente e occidente. Le fonti archeologiche. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Hall, J. (1986). The Saeculum Novum of Augustus and its Etruscan Antecedents. ANRW, II.16.3, pp. 2567–2569. Halsberghe, G. (1972). The Cult of Sol Invictus. Leiden: Brill. Handy, M. (2009). Die Severer und das Heer. Heidelberg: Verlag Antike. Hekster, O. (2005). Propagating power: Hercules as an Example for SecondCentury Emperors. In: L. Rawlings and H. Bowden, eds., Herakles and Hercules. Exploring a Graeco-Roman Divinity, 1st ed. Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, pp.203–217. Hemeljrik, E. (2009). Women and Sacrifice in the Roman Empire. In: O. Hekster, S. Schmidt-Hofner and C. Witschnel, eds., Ritual Dynamics and Religious Change in the Roman Empire, 1st ed. Leiden: Brill, pp. 253–267. Hänninen, M.-L. (2000). Women as Worshippers of Juno. From the Mid-Republican to the Augustan Era. Helsinki: University of Helsinki (unpublished PhD dissertation). Hölscher, T. (2003). Images of War in Greece and Rome: Between Military Practice, Public Memory, and Cultural Symbolism. JRS, 93, pp. 1–17. Laurence, R. (1998). Territory, Ethnonyms and Geography. In: R. Laurence and J. Berry, eds., Cultural Identity in the Roman Empire. London: Routledge, pp. 95–110. Levick, B. (2007). Julia Domna. Syrian Empress. New York: Routledge. Mantle, I. (2002). The Roles of Children in Roman Religion. GR, 49.1, pp. 85–106. Mattingly, H. (1960). Roman Coins. London: Methuen & Co. McCormick, M. (1986). Eternal Victory. Triumphal Rulership in Late Antiquity, Byzantium, and the Early Medieval West. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Murphy, G. (1947). The Reign of the Emperor L. Septimius Severus from the Evidence of the Inscriptions. New Jersey: St. Peters College Press. Palmer, R.E. (1978). Severan Ruler-Cult and the Moon in the City of Rome. ANRW II.16.2, pp. 1085–1120. Pighi, G. (1965). De ludi saecularibus populi Romani Quiritum libri sex. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Verlag P. Schippers N.V. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge. Putnam, M. (2001). Horace’s Carmen Saeculare: Ritual Magic and the Poet’s Art. New Haven: Yale University Press. Rantala, J. (2011). No Place for the Dead: Ludi Saeculares of 17 bc and the Purificatory Cults of May as Part of the Roman Ritual Year. In: C. Krötzl and K. Mustakallio, eds., On Old Age. Approaching Death in Antiquity and the Middle Ages 1st ed. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, pp. 235–251. Rantala, J. (2016). Gods of Cultivation and Food Supply in the Imperical Iconography of Septimius Severus. In: M. Kahlos, ed., Emperors and the Divine – Rome and its Influence, 1st ed., [online] pp. 64–83. Available at: http://www.helsinki.fi/colle gium/journal/volumes/volume_20/index_20.htm [Accessed 28 Apr. 2016].

164  Closing acts: Carmen Saeculare and Trojan Games Scheid, J. (1993). Cultes, mythes et politique au début de l´Empiré. In: F. Graf, ed., Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft. Das Paradigma Roms, 1st ed. Stuttgart: Teubner, pp. 109–127. Scheid, J. (2011). Quando fare è credere. I riti sacrificali dei Romani.Bari: Editiori Laterza. Scullard, H. (1981). Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic. New York: Cornell University Press. Stockton, D. (1986). The Founding of the Empire. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin and O. Murray, eds., The Oxford History of the Roman World, 1st ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1986, pp. 146–179. Weinstock, S. (1971). Divus Julius. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Ziolkowsky, A. (1998–99). Ritual Cleaning-Up of the City: From the Lupercalia to the Argei. Anc. Soc., 29, pp. 191–218.

8 Conclusion

The Severan celebration of the Ludi Saeculares highlighted the emperor’s power in two ways: through tradition and innovation. In the Severan ludi, traditionalism appears in the actual programme, which quite closely followed the Augustan example. All the major components were indeed left in place. An even more powerful statement of traditionalism was, of course, expressed by the erection of the inscription on the Campus Martius, set up alongside the previous records of the Ludi Saeculares. This act indicated that the Severan games had become a link in a chain of hundreds of years, initiated by Augustus himself. Located next to the earlier monuments in one of the most important and most holy places of the capital, the inscription recording the games and preserving them in public memoria sent the message to all its onlookers, even to those who could not read, that Septimius Severus was a legitimate follower in the lineage of Roman emperors. Many of the themes in the Severan ludi followed the tradition of previous imperial Secular Games. These consisted of the completion of the purification rites by the community (conducted by women during the night time) and of sacrifices made to the deities most central to the Roman commonwealth in the day-time rituals. These all closely followed the Augustan example. The chorus of children held during the last day of the ludi symbolised continuity and the beginning of a new, youthful Golden Age for the empire, as was probably also the case in the previous ludi. However, as I argued in the beginning of my work, all rituals are related to the particular place and period in which they are performed. Accordingly, the people who witnessed the occasion understood it and attributed its significance in their own context. As a result, the stability and similarity in the forms of sacrificial practices did not indicate that they had become meaningless – quite the contrary. The importance of traditionalism and memory in Roman society and religion meant that when the emperor recognised the tradition in his actions, and placed himself as part of it, his power also conformed to the established rules. This is one of the most important factors in the process of legitimising one’s power. For Severus, celebrating the Ludi Saeculares was precisely a chance to be part of the timeless tradition and thus to highlight the beliefs shared by society. Obviously, when we deal with these so-called shared beliefs,

166 Conclusion we understand that Rome was not a system like modern democracy. In practice, subordinates did not have much chance of affecting the ‘shared beliefs’. Therefore, when we talk about shared beliefs, we talk about ideas dictated from above. However, even if this was a case of a tradition made by emperors, it still was an ancient tradition. In the beginning of my study, I addressed the question of what kind of messages Severus intended to convey through his programme, and which values he wanted to use to strengthen his position as a ruler. Even if the messages and themes central to him can also be understood by evaluating the more traditional rituals in the context of the third century ce, it is still obvious that the novelties in the programme are precisely the most interesting details in this aspect. After all, they can be considered as the most ‘genuine’ Severan ideas, so to speak. What kind of messages and values have we found? The most important relate to details highlighting the rulers’ family roles which were most likely, in turn, related to campaigns for moral reforms and the promotion of family values. The inclusion of Julia Domna as the leader of Roman mothers is perhaps one of the most striking family themes in the Ludi Saeculares. It is significant that her name, as well as the names of all the matronae taking part in the rituals, was included in the inscription. Rather than symbolising the ‘impure’ Roman mothers, as might have been the case in the Augustan inscription, the Severan record presents the power relations maintained between the empress and other leading women in Rome. Originally possibly an outsider, Julia Domna was now not only described as firmly belonging to the upper-class of the capital, but was also even portrayed as superior to the other members. As the leader of the respected mothers of the high nobility, Julia Domna appears as the first mother of all Romans. The second-day celebrations, in particular, emphasise the relationship of the imperial couple. Not only is this quite clearly indicated in the inscription (in which Julia is presented as Septimius Severus’ coniux), but the inclusion of both Jupiter and Juno in the programme also points to this: the king and the queen of the Roman pantheon were celebrated on the same occasion by the emperor and the empress of Rome. The result of the royal marriage was also evident in the record, as well as in the actual event, through the presence of the royal princes, Caracalla and Geta, who symbolised the secure future for the empire and were the proof of the blessings of harmonious family relations among imperial couples. Simultaneously, they set an example for those witnessing the games – and to those who later read the lines of the inscription on the Campus Martius. Family themes continued even further: the role of Septimius Severus as a father-figure for the Romans can be traced both from the traditional role he played in the celebration of the Ludi Saeculares and from the novelties in the inscription of ce 204. The prayers conducted by the emperor were similar to the Augustan model, and as such strengthened his position as a pater patriae, as he prayed for the protection of his household (which basically signified the whole commonwealth). Moreover,

Conclusion  167 the performance of a sacrifice to Jupiter Optimus Maximus, in particular, was an act which underlined the paternalistic duties of the emperor: that of acting as a mediator between the supreme god of the commonwealth and the people. However, new features also strengthened this picture. A concept describing these details is indulgentia, or generosity. In the inscription, Severus showed generosity to the senate when granting it the permission to celebrate the games and when he congratulated the young nobles taking part in the Trojan Games. These were significant acts. As we noted above, these were gestures of paternal generosity, which were not only indications of goodwill but which also indicated hierarchical positioning.1 Septimius Severus’ generosity, indulgentia, towards his people might also be a reason for the inclusion of the Vestal Virgins in the games’ records. It is, of course, possible that they had already been present in the earlier games as they were traditionally involved in public purifications, which is essentially what the Ludi Saeculares consisted of. However, including their names in the Severan record might have conveyed another message about the emperor’s indulgentia towards his subjects. As the Vestals were not only associated to the rites of purification, but were also associated to the city’s food storage, the emperor demonstrated that this aspect was also under his control. After all, food distribution was one of the central concepts in Severan imperial propaganda (and practical policies as well). An even more dramatic act of generosity was the announcement of the celebration of Ludi Honorarii after the actual Secular Games. The races, beasthunts and other shows were surely the most popular part of the games, gathering joyous crowds to enjoy the goodwill of the emperor and his family. In this way, Severus distributed wealth to his subjects. The major significance of public property such as war-booty in Roman identity should be remembered: as was mentioned earlier, it could even be argued that public wealth of that sort was in fact a way for the people to identify themselves as part of the Roman communitas. The inscription’s description of how Severus declared the Ludi Honorarii, and provided the beast-hunt and other shows, was a way of demonstrating that they were displayed to the public as a gift from the emperor, and that from that point onwards, they were now ‘common property’. In other words, the emperor basically provided the people of Rome with wealth and by doing this, also provided a tool for his subjects to define themselves as Romans. Indeed, the audience’s significance should not be underestimated: no public event would have been complete without people witnessing the events. Indeed, in the case of the Severan ludi, it is noticeable that even if the Ludi Saeculares was traditionally a highly city-orientated festival, the organisers actively attempted to gather as big an audience as possible, not only from the city, but also from the other parts of Italy and possibly from the provinces too. The interactions between the ruler and the ruled recorded in the inscription are an important aspect of the confirmation of one’s power. They indicate that the subjects were supposed to consent to this situation: this is one of the crucial

168 Conclusion preconditions for legitimation of power. However, a more important group to that of ordinary people – that of the senators – also had to show consent, especially since their relationship with Severus had been troublesome. The description of the interaction between Severus and the senate during the organisation of the Ludi Saeculares highlights this: the senators submitted willingly (officially at least) to the imperial power. This is the message conveyed by the inscription, but whether this was the case is another question. Some parts of Cassius Dio’s history seem indicate that it was not. A clue about Dio’s attitude might, in fact, be his complete silence over the Severan ludi (while Herodian, on the other hand, is very interested in the occasion). This lack of interest on the part of Dio might be explained by the nature of the Ludi Saeculares as a festival celebrating marriage, family life and Septimius Severus’ new moral laws. Cassius Dio accepted ideas of proper moral behaviour for men and women, and believed that it was crucial that the emperor especially should maintain a manly gender-role – as is demonstrated by his description of the reign of Nero,2 for example. The senators were, however, apparently not so keen on the moral laws (perhaps intended to control the nobility especially), as is demonstrated by Dio’s somewhat cynical attitude on the subject. This would perhaps explain why Dio, as a senatorial historian, chose to be silent about the Ludi Saeculares, a celebration promoting Severan moral policy. Besides the notions of family values and generosity, the third theme rising from the Severan Ludi Saeculares is universalism. The Carmen Saeculare is the part of the programme that highlights this aspect the most, and it is also the part of the inscription which most strongly departs from Augustan tradition. As the poem was missing from the Augustan source altogether, Severus’ inclusion of it in his record was a perfect opportunity for him to highlight themes he considered important. The soldiers’ inclusion, as well as the ‘shores, cities and fields’ embraced universalism; they celebrated the whole empire, not just the city of Rome, and underlined the position of the imperial family as the rulers of this wholeness. This was in fact quite a revolutionary idea, as Ludi Saeculares were traditionally celebrations oriented mainly towards the capital. This is especially demonstrated by the fact that we do not possess any evidence for the occurrence other similar celebrations to the Secular Games of the capital. Moreover, when the previous emperors (Claudian and Antoninus Pius) celebrated the birthday of Rome, they chose the rituals of the Ludi Saeculares to be used for this occasion (see Appendix Four for details). The tendencies can be considered as even more striking if we remember the great importance of Italy in the imperial ideology before the Severans, and in the Antonine policy of co-operation between the emperor, senate and other leading families. Contrary to these themes, dominant in the second century, the concept of universalism celebrated in the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204 seems to rather indicate the uniqueness of the emperor (and the royal family), and his direct control over the entire empire. This meant that there was in fact no more space for other users of power. In this sense, the Severan Ludi can perhaps be considered

Conclusion  169 as one of the starting points of the new imperial ideology of ‘deliberate insecurity’, an idea which did not allow for the distribution of much power to other actors than the emperor.3 However, if Severus indeed wanted to highlight universalism and the importance of the whole empire (and not only of the capital or Italy), we should ask what his motives were. The fact that Severus himself was an African is probably an irrelevant factor here: we possess no evidence that ‘Africanness’ was a significant factor in his policy-making, or that his cultural programme intentionally included anything particularly ‘African’ or ‘Punic’. He did issue some coins depicting the symbol of the province Africa, but given the strong emphasis he placed on securing food supplies for the capital, it is likely that the image functioned as a reminder that the province of such importance to Rome’s grain stocks was firmly in the emperor’s hands. Of course, as a provincial emperor, he never forgot where he came from. However, this was mainly highlighted to the people of Severus’ home province by means of lavish building projects. This kind of attitude was by no means non-Roman or ‘provincial’ as such. Cicero had already written how he, and Romans in general, had two fatherlands: the place where he was born was one, and the whole Roman commonwealth another.4 In fact, some of the features of the Severan Ludi indicate that Severus did promote a new kind of identity combining the notions of universalism and the direct relationship the emperor (or, to be more precise, the imperial family) had with subjects. As we saw above, his subjects were those of the whole empire, not just those living in the city of Rome. The empires ‘cities, fields and shores’ were a one big family living under the imperial ‘father’ and ‘mother’. In fact, the position of the imperial couple as the one controlling the whole empire can perhaps be associated with their near-cosmic appearances on coinage and on public monuments such as the Septizodium, indicating their ‘power to protect’. They were indeed a couple who rose above the ordinary. Consequently, the Ludi Saeculares strengthened the aura of mystical authority around them, making Septimius Severus and Julia Domna symbols of the whole communitas, and portraying them as an ideal family to which their subjects could relate. The family thus rose above all others. The magnificent occasion which celebrated the birth of the Golden Age, and which simultaneously defined the concept of Romanness, encouraged subjects to consider their relationship with the top of the empire in family terms and, accordingly, encouraged the people to base its Roman identity on these principles. If we look at the Severan imperial policy on a wider scale, the above suggestions could perhaps be taken even further. In 212 ce, Caracalla, who was the sole emperor by then, passed his famous act of constitutio antoniniana, which was a law granting citizenship to all free people of the empire. Caracalla’s edict is a much-debated issue, of course, and its motives are not entirely clear. The two purposes mentioned in ancient sources are, first, an attempt at increasing the number of tax-payers in the empire (and, as a consequence, get more money

170 Conclusion for government, of course), and second, Caracalla’s will to appease gods who had saved him from conspiracy (referring obviously to his struggle against his brother Geta).5 However, other reasons behind this famous law have been suggested as well, one of them being Caracalla’s will to promote some kind of Roman identity. The act was, for the emperor, a convenient way to forge a bond between himself and a large number of his subjects. It was indeed an old Roman practice that new citizens be named after the person who promoted their citizenship. Moreover, this created a significant difference between ‘true’ Romans (namesakes of the emperor himself) and the ‘others’ in the north and the east who were causing troubles behind the borders of the empire.6 If we accept that this idea existed behind Caracalla’s policy, it might be suggested that the Severan Ludi Saeculares, and their universalistic flavour, were part of the same ideology that gave birth to the constitutio antoniniana eight years later. After all, the Severan emperor had good reasons to include eastern provinces in the Roman ‘family’ as tightly as possible. The East was rich and becoming even richer. At the same time, it was constantly under the threat of Parthia, the only neighboring empire that could seriously challenge the power of Rome – indeed, much of Severus’ reign was spent in wars in the eastern part of the empire. As a result, this notion, the importance of provinces instead of that of the capital, can perhaps be traced even in the Secular Games, traditionally a very capital-orientated occasion. The games highlighted the direct connection between the imperial family and their symbolic ‘children’ scattered throughout the empire, as well as the universal nature of Roman identity as Severus wanted to see it. However, this also meant that there was no more room for others, such as the senate, to wield power, as had been the case in Antonine tradition. In this sense, the Severan Secular Games were indeed a beginning of a new age.

Notes 1 Highlighting the role of the imperial family was not, of course, a Severan innovation as such. Many, if not most, emperors stressed the importance of royal family members.The late Antonine era, especially, saw the growing importance of the imperial family, with the construction of the temple of Faustina in 141 ce (and later of Antoninus Pius) being a kind of turning point. Erected by senatorial decree in the Forum Romanum, this apparently marked the beginning of an ideology that further emphasised the importance of the royal family in comparison to earlier times (see Boatwright 2010: 177–181 and 196–197 for discussion). However, it seems that Severus took this to a new level, as is demonstrated, for example, by his legislation on moral values and the new honorary titles of Julia Domna. 2 Gowing 1997: 2580–2583. 3 The idea of ‘deliberate insecurity’ was discussed in Chapter One. 4 Cic. Leg. 2.3–5. 5 Hekster 2008: 47–48. 6 Hekster 2008: 49. The idea of Roman identity behind the constitutio antoniana is suggested in Potter 2004: 139. For a more cautious approach, see Honoré 2004: 114.

Conclusion  171

Bibliography Boatwright, M. (2010). Antonine Rome. Security in the homeland. In: B. Ewald and C. Noreña, eds., The Emperor and Rome. Space, Representation, and Ritual, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 169–198. Gowing, A. (1997). Cassius Dio on the Reign of Nero. ANRW, II.34.3, pp. 2558–2590. Hekster, O. (2008). Rome and its Empire, ad 193–284. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Honoré, A. (2004). Roman law ad 200–400: from cosmopolis to Rechtstaat? In: S. Swain and M. Edwards, eds., Approaching Late Antiquity: The Transformation from Early to Late Empire, 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 109–132. Potter, D. (2004). The Roman Empire at Bay 180–395 ad. London: Routledge.

Appendix 1 The inscription commemorating Septimius Severus’ Ludi Saeculares

[Comme]ntarium [ludorum saecu]lar[iu]m [se]ptim[orum qui facti sunt] / [Imp(eratore) Caes(are) L(ucio) S]eptimio Sev[ero Pio] Pertina[ce] Aug(usto) Arabico A[d]iabenico Parthico [max(imo) pont(ifice) max(imo)] / tri[b(unicia) p]otest(ate) XII et / [Imp(eratore) Ca]es(are) M(arco) Aurel{l}i[o Anto]nino Pio Aug(usto) [[3]] / [[3]] prid(ie) [3]ias in comitio in curia Iulia XVv[ir]i s(acris) f(aciundis) an[te] suggestum a[m]plissim[orum consulum] / [3 consti]terunt ex q[uibus Maniliu]s Fus[cu]s mag(ister) collegii ex libello [l]egit / [cum denu]o tempore sa[e]cul[i veteris elapso] admon[eat] vos celebritatis feste annus pro[vi]dentia principalis est p[atru]m cu[ra or]igo lu[dorum quomodo cum debet religio] / [saecula]rium adi[m]pleri per [eos sollemnita] temque pu[blicam m]onitu vetustissimae v[ati]s instituta sit pervig[ili] cura patrare p[rovisu]m est u[t recte f]ieri p[ossint collegium nostrum] / [3] in [3]r et deorum [3]i cultus s[ollem]nibus impleatur [si]n merito et immortale [q]uae aliis [3]erm[3]us bon[3]cu[3] / [3 imp]artierit uberi[3 i]n hoc saecu[lum cura maxi]morum p[rincipum no]strorum contulerunt [3] memin[isse debem]us quom[odo 3] / [3] fructum felicita[tis 3] erant I[3]ID[3] frequentandum d[3 t] ribuerun[t 3]as vindici [3] / [3]gum tempestates I[3 a]nnalium [3] auspicia ci[3]tatis [s]aeculariu[m 3]que decoru[m 3] / diligenti[ssime 3]rnata est ut ad fi[3]bus adpetere a[b] urbe condita nungentensimus quinquagensimus s[extus] ann[u]s sit ex [3 ludorum] / saeculariu[m post an]nos urbi[s CCL]XXXXVII e[3] vetustum FII[3] magistros collegi(i) M(arco) Valerio Spurio Ve[rg]in[io co(n)s(ulibus) i]nst[itutu]m sit non ali[ter 3] / adiacta in [3]riae edi[3] festin[a 3]eni [3]o temporibus [ab] origine sescenten[simi et s]exagensimi an[ni 3] / temporis c[3] est fact[a saec]uli n[3]egent fac[3]io [3] gratum superius patefecit [3 c]ur auspicii[s] IIV[3] / celebrabi[t opti]mus im[p(erator) cum A]nton[ino Aug]usto [[3]]ptimos saeculares [3] numin[i 3 cu]m propagi[ne] / subsidia V[3]V et A[3] veri[3 te]mpus adolesce[ntiae 3 q]uae sunt saecu[lares(?) 3]D Iuno Lucina et(?) [3] H[3 suo preca]tu advocabunt / piis vocib[us 3]tum [sac] erd[3] Imperator sup[plicabit 3]am nos devotioni[s qu]os d[ii volent] adder[e] felici numero / rectoru[m nn(ostrorum) culmen a]ugebit [publicae fel]icitatis teneo [memoria quod cecinit Sibylla longissimum i]nquit humanae vi[tae te] mpu[s centesi]mus et d[ec]imus annus e[st] / et ideo te[stor saecul]ares ag[ant] ur T[[3]]ivi ergo Antonino fili[o 3] futurorum [3] inter l[aetitias] et ga[ud]ia

The inscription  173 generis / huma[ni ad gratias agendas prae]sentium bonorum et ad spem futur[orum curandum vobis e]st p(ost) c(onsulatum) utei saeculari[a nunc] temporis ratione poscente im[minentia t]ot gen[it]alibus prosper[a] / com[3] S[3 sollem]nia in annum decernatis sumptusque communi e[xpensa f]ieri iubeatis omnique cultu adq[ue] veneratione immor[talium pro secu]rita[te] adque aeterni/t[ate] [imperii sa]nctissimo[s loco]s ag[endis habe[n]disque gratia frequentetis ut p[osteris dii] immortales referant quae maior[e]s nostri condiderunt qu[aeque cum maior]ibu[s ante]a contulerint / [etiam temporib]us no[s]tris [concesse]runt adque ita Calpurnius Maximus [v(ir) c(larissimus)] ex manuario legit / [cum XVviri s(acris) f(aciundis)] cc(larissimi) vv(iri) pro temporum laetitia et felicitate sanctissimorum piissimorumque p[rincipu]m nn(ostrorum) de ludibus saecularib[us] verba fe(ce)ri[nt et 3 videatur iam petend]um ad optim[is] / [piissimisq]ue prin[ci]pibus nostris Imp(eratore) Caes(are) L(ucio) Septimio Severo Pio Pertinace Aug(usto) Arabico Adiabenico Parthico maximo fortissimo felicissimo p(atre) p(atriae) [et Imp(eratore) Caes(are) M(arco) Aurellio Anton]ino Pio / [Aug(usto)] [[3]] uti ludi saeculares qui so[li]ti sunt inter centum et decem an[nos] fieri faciant sequenti anno iis diebu[s quibus eos edere convenit imperat]orum / [nn(ostrorum) decreto] et X[Vv]irorum s(acris) f(aciundis) cc(larissimorum) vv(irorum) inque eos ludos sacrificiaqu[e sumptu]s ex aerario populi Romani fiant feriaeque serventur iis diebus quibus t[am clari ludi celebrab]untur / [nomina quoque reo]ru[m] aboleantur luctus[que] feminarum [item fi]at quo [minus populi felicita]ti opsit memoria tantae religionis con[tinuo t]ridu[o 3 ma]rmor / [3]era in a[3] optime [3] ludi futuri [3] adfueri[3] / [3]mess G[3]istr[3]r quietus qu[3] / [3]I c() v[3]r serva[t] us [3] / [3]I fortissimi f[elicissimi 3] / [3]turi pro orbis [3]qi[qui 3] / [3]e correxerit [3]ius [3] / [3]bus n[ost]ris [3 Ro]manum imperiu[m] / [[6]] / [3 h]oc quoque contu / [3 Imp(eratori) Caesari L(ucio) Septimio Severo Pio Pertinaci A]ug(usto) Arabico Adiab(enico) / [Pa]rthico maximo [et Imp(eratori) Caesari M(arco) Aurelio Antonino Pio Aug(usto) 3 fier]i soliti sunt int[er] / [c]entum et decem [annos 3 om]nia collegia sacerd[otum] / [e]t senatores qui quo[3 fer] iasque servandas / [iis] diebus quibus tam sol[lemni 3]a occupaverit accus[ato]/ [ri]bus repetendi reos su[os 3] / [ce]nseo commentarium lud[orum 3] sunt consecrent[ur et in] / eas quoque res pecuniam [3] / Idibus Novembribus in Palat[io 3]rom[3] / Crescens Calpurnianus C[3] quin m[3] / Atulenus Rufinus [3]umo an[3] / administrationem tempor[3] prius p[3] / fieri conveniret esset fi[3] / Imp(erator) Caes(ar) divi Marci Antonini [Pii Germanici Sarmatici f(ilius) divi Commodi frater divi Antonini Pii nep(os) divi Hadriani pronep(os) divi Traiani Parthici abn(epos) divi Nervae adn(epos)] L(ucius) Sep[timius Severus Pius Pertinax] / Aug(ustus) Arab(icus) Adiab(enicus) Parthi[cus max(imus) et Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aurellius Antoninus Pius Aug(ustus) 3 Imp(erator) Caes(ar)] L(uci) Sep[timi Severi Pii Pertinacis Aug(usti)] / Arab(ici) Adiab(enici) Parth(ici) m[aximi filii ]]ivi / [3 a(nte) d(iem)] XVII Kal(endas) Ma[ias 3 de epistula] ab Impp(eratoribus) missa act(a) in haec verb[a 3] Im[p(erator) Caes(ar)] / [L(ucius) Septimius Severus et Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aurellius Ant]oninus Pii

174  The inscription Augg(usti) XVvir(i) co[llegi]is sa[lutem] si vobis videtur VIII Kal(endas) Iun(ias) pro[xi]mas conven[ite in Palatio in aede Apollinis] / [ad sortiendum qui quibus locis in tribunalibus suffime]nta populo distribuere debeant valete c[oll]egae carissimi nobis Pompeius Rusonianus ma[g(ister) legit Imp(erator) Caes(ar)] / [L(ucius) Septimius Severus et Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aurellius Anto] ninus Pii Augg(usti) XVvir(i) collegi(i)s salutem si de is diebus ac noctibus consulitis quibus ludos saeculares ed[i oportebit 3] / [3 simul quib]us odoribus supplicare matronae debeant statuemus valete collegae carissimi nobis Pompeius Ruson[ianus mag(ister) legit] / I[3 a(nte) d(iem) VIII K(alendas)] Iun(ias) in Palatio in aede Apollinis collegium convenit ad sortiendum qui quibus locis in tribunalibus su[ffimenta populo distribuere deberent] / sub [3 adfuerunt Imp(erator) Caes(ar) L(ucius) Sep]timius Severus Pius Pertinax Aug(ustus) Arab(icus) Adiab(enicus) Parth(icus) max(imus) et Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aurellius Antoninus Pius Aug(ustus) [Noni]/us M[ucianus(?) 3 Poll] ienus Auspex Manilius Fuscus Cocceius Vibianus Atulenus Rufinus Aiacius Modestus Fabius Magnu[s 3 Pompeius] / Rusonianus mag(ister) [3 Crescens Calpu]rnianus Cassius Pius Marcellinus quaestor desig(natus) Ulpius Soter co(n) s(ul) desig(natus) Venidius Rufus [curat(or)] alei [Tiberis Fulvius] / Granianus q(uaestor) Augg(ustorum) [3 sorticulis] inspectis et in urnam missis sors habita est in Palatio in tribunali Aug(g)ustorum nn(ostrorum) quod [est in area aedis Apollinis] / [3] Salvius Tuscus applicit[3 quod es]t ad Romam quadratam Nonius Mucianus Aiacius Modestus Atul[e]nus [Ru]f[i]nus [3] / [Of] ilius Macedo ante aedem [3] F[ulvius] Fuscus Vetina Mamertinus ante ae[dem 3 Coccei]/us Vibianus sortib[us ductis eodem die edictum propositum est in haec verba Imp(erator) Caes(ar) divi Marci Antonini Pii Germanici Sarmatici filius divi Com]/modi frater divi Antonin[i Pii nepos divi Hadriani pronepos divi T] raiani Parthic(i) ab[nepos divi Nervae adnepos L(ucius) Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Aug(ustus) Arab(icus) Adiab(enicus) Parthicus max(imus) pont(ifex) max(imus) trib(unicia) pot(estate) XII imp(erator) III co(n)s(ul) III] / pat(er) patr(iae) et Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aure[llius Antoninus Pius Aug(ustus) tr(ibunicia) pot(estate)] VII co(n)s(ul) [[3]] [3 Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) L(uci) Septimi Severi Pii Pertinacis Aug(usti) Arab(ici) Adiab(enici) Parth(ici) maximi filii divi Marci Antonini Pii Germanici Sarmatici nepotes] / divi Antonini Pii pronepotes [divi Hadriani abnepotes divi] Traiani Parthici et divi Ne[rvae adnepotes cum ceteris XVviris s(acris) f(aciundis) dicunt ludos saeculares septimos] / celebraturi admonemus quir[ites] M[3]MA conveniatis quo diebus quoque [noctibus tribus ad ea sollemnia conveniendum erit 3] / quo laetitiae publicae fructus a[d un]iversos [cives perveniat l]udis saecularibus quos edituri sumus placere [3 reorum] / nomina abolenda ita uti pos[t d]iem tricensimu[m accusatoribus eo]s re[p]etendi ius sit edicendum existima[vimus 3] / sit ratio admonemus quirit[es d]ominos urbano[s et 3 eos quoq]ue qui mercede habitant in noctibu[s feriarum illarum ut una cum 3 mili]/tibus nostris circumeuntibus [reg]ionum tutelam [diligenter admistrent a(nte) d(iem)] VII Kal(endas) Iun(ias) Impp(eratores) Severus et A[ntoninus Augg(usti) 3 in Palatio] / in area aedis Apollinis ubi cu[m a]dscendissen[t in tribunal 3] suffimenta dederunt

The inscription  175 [3 equestri ordi]/ni et plebei populoque Roma[no i]bi relictis [3 Ulpio Sote]re co(n)s(ule) designato Pollieno [Auspice 3] / ceteri XVviri praetextati [que]m quisq[ue locum sortitus est 3 ibi in tribunal ascenderu]nt et suffimenta populo div[iserunt 3] / [S]everus et Antoninus Au[gg(usti) nn(ostri)] [[3]] eoru[m 3] et suff[imenta populo diviserunt 3] / III aut suffimenta divi[serunt 3] / [L(ucius) Sep]timius Severus Piu[s 3] / [3 Nonius Mu]cianus Ai[ [Fulvius] Gran[ianus 3] / Pompeius Rus[onianus mag(ister) 3]o m[3] / a VIIII in XII C[3 C]assius M[arcell]inus [3]/nes Ulpius Sot[er co(n)s(ul) desig(natus) 3]manus [3]omis cum [p]opu/lo plebeiq[ue 3]us aebornis religi­onis / causa in ea [3] no[3] applicasset Severus / tunc pra[eit in haec verba 3 Iuppit] er [Optime M]axime Iuno Regina / bone pulch[er] Apo[llo 3]iqu[3 pie]ntissimosque / habeatis et libent[er 3] [[6]] [Iuliae] Aug(ustae) matri castror(um) / reique publicae [3]o [3 procu]raverunt / inde ad tribunal proc[esserunt 3] ca[3 in tri]bunali ad/scenderun[t] et [3]aris m[3 magist]ratibus eques/tre ordin [3 3] in coru[3]ositis / inde XVvir m[3 trib]unali ad[sc]en[so f]ruges quae a po/pulo plebe m[3 Pompei]us Ru[so]nian[us] magister Tarentum / l­ustravit s[3 lus]trandi piandique saecularis sacri / ludorumqu[e causa qui edentur Imp(eratore) Caes(are) L(ucio) Septimio Severo Pio Pertinace Aug(usto) Arab(ico) Adiab(enico) Parthico maximo et Imp(eratore) Cae]s(are) M(arco) Aurellio Antonino Pio Aug(usto) [[3]] / [[3]] [quod faus]t(um) felix salutaraeque sit / Imp(eratore) Caes(are) L(ucio) Septim[io Severo Pio Pertinaci Aug(usto) Arab(ico) Adiab(enico) Parthico maximo et Imp(eratore) Caes(are) M(arco) Aurellio Antonino Pio Aug(usto)] [[3]] quorum iussu mandatuque hanc / rem divina[m 3]i possent lustre[ti]s pie[t]is purgetis / quam optim[e 3][[3]] imper[io eiu]s m[ih]ique / eorum lus[tr() 3]us ius [f]as meliusque fuit h[unc] locum / lustrari p[3 o]ptimoque ritu ab omni conta/mination[e] [3]mo Aug(usto) [[3]] / imperio [3] / Imp(erator) Caes(ar) divi [Marci Antonini Pii Germanici Sarmatici f(ilius) divi Commodi frater divi Antonini Pii nepos divi Hadriani pronepos divi Traiani Parthici abnepos divi Nervae adnepos L(ucius) Septimi]us Severus Pius Pertinax / Aug(ustus) Ar[ab(icus) Adiab(enicus) Parthic(us) max(imus) et Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aurellius Antoninus Pius Aug(ustus)] [[3]] [Imp(erator) Caes(aris) L(uci) Septimi Seve]ri Pii Pertinacis Aug(usti) Arab(ici) / Adia[b(enici) Parthici maximi filii divi Marci Antonini Pii Germanici Sarmatici n(epotis) divi Antonini Pii pron(epotis) divi Hadriani abn(epotis) divi Traiani et divi Nervae adn(epotis) cum ceter]is [3 XVvir]is [s(acris)] f(aciundis) dicunt / ordinem [3 c]ommu[3] pasioc(?) et populi / Rom[ani 3] qui praece [3]o susce/per[unt] [3 in tribunali]bus suis dist[r]ibu[3] prae/tex[tat 3]ctis secunda pe[3]am / sacr[3 M]arcelli porticum / tio[3 rip]am Tiberis laurum / cii[3 virginibus Vesta]libus Numisia Ma[ximilla et Terentia Flavola 3] / an [3] / Iuppiter [Optime Maxime 3] / da [3] Aug(ustus) / po[nt(ifex) max(imus) 3] motor/um [3 uti] vobis / in i[llis libris 3 i]mpe/riu[m] [3]ate / ta[3 imperium maiestatemque p(opuli) R(omani) duelli domique au]/x(er)it[is(?)] [et uti huius sacrifici accep]/tric[es sitis] [3] / haru[m rerum ergo 3] / et in [3] / tri[3]/tiae [3] / in omni[3] Moerae uti v[obis illis libris scriptum est 3] / p(opulo) R(omano) Q(uiritibus) XVv[iris

176  The inscription mihi domo familiae 3] / additis in [3 uti huius] / sacrifici [acceptrices sitis harum rerum ergo macte hac 3 immolanda estote] / fitote vo[lentes propitiae p(opuli) R(omani) 3 Pom]/peius Rus[onianus magister 3 Ulpi]/us Soter c[o(n)s(ul) desig(natus) 3] / Severus m[3] / non erat [3] / structi [3]/vem quae [3]/rum arg[3] / haec verba [3 per]/vigilium c[3 Iulia Aug(usta)] / coniuge Im[p(eratoris) 3] / isdem verbi[s 3] / prout quis [3] / in ara lignea [3] / Aug(usta) sumpta [3]/catione ita pr[ecatus est 3 imperi]/um maiestat[emque populi R(omani) Q(uiritum) 3] / dexteram hos [3] / acceptor sis bo[3]/tiam iussit qu[3] / et in secundo [3 quindeci]mvir pura[3 preca]/tus est Iup[piter O(ptimus) M(aximus) uti tibi in il]lis libris scrip[tum est 3]i libi[3] / mihi domui f[amiliaeque 3]ius obtemper [3] mox haruspicatione ili[3] / pulchr[o] rum [3]ro pilum de fron[te] hos[tiae] secavit [et ac]cita corona praeeunte Antonino A[ug(usto)] / [3]onis dandis esto fito volens propi[t]ius p(opuli) R(omani) Q(uiritum) XVvir collegio mihi domui fa[miliae 3] / [3]ibus per publicos collegi(i) suscepit ternaque aram adspersit deinde inc[3] / [3] re imperavit his verbis impero vobis aquam integram petatis qua divis [3] / [3] boum pulchrorum immola[ndorum 3]tu coronis [3] / [3]o splanchna redder[e 3 i]ta pr[ecatus est 3] / [3 spla]nchna I(uppiter) O(ptime) M(axime) [3] / e[3] / se[3] / qua [3] / vo[3] / f[ dq[3] / [3]A in ara M(?)[3] / [3] aqua sparsa [3] non erat adscenderu[nt 3] / [3] sellisternia sua o[3] praetextis sumptis et coronis [3] / [praeeun]te Antonino Aug(usto) filio [3]sque rem divinam fece[ru]nt ad [3]br() exta asistentibus G[[eta Caes(are)]] et pr(aefecto) pr(aetorio) et ceteris v(iris) [3] / [3]iva cultrum op[3 p]otorium et pateram cum vino retinente praecatione [[3]] immol[avit I]unoni Reginae vaccam alb(am) Graeco achivo rit[u 3] / [3 u]ti tibi bove femina pulchra sacrum fiat te quaeso precor[que] uti [3] / [postquam] Iovi O(ptimo) M(aximo) inter [lucos(?) sac]rificaverunt cum Auggg(ustis) Fabius Magnus Aiacius Modestus ib[i religio]nis causa epul[ati sunt 3] / [XV]viris ante cellam Iunon[is Regin]ae venerunt ibique Severus Aug(ustus) Iuliae Aug(ustae) matri castror(um) con[iugi Aug(usti) et] matronis CX [3 astantibus Numisia] / Maximilla et Terentia F[la]vola [v] irg(inibus) Vest(alibus) praeit in haec verba Iuno Regina ast quid est [quod melius] siet p(opulo) R(omano) [Q(uiritium) permitte uti oremus te matres familiae CX p(opuli) R(omani)] Q(uiritium) nupt[ae obse]/cremusqu{a} e uti tu im[peri]um maiestatem[que p(opuli) R(omani) Q(uiritium) du]elli domique auxis utique semper Latinu[m nomen tueare faveasque] p(opulo) R(omano) Q(uiritium) legionibu[sque 3] / p(opuli) R(omani) Q(uiritium) remque publicam p(opuli) R(omani) Q(uiritium) salvam serve[s 3] faxis sisque volens propitia p(opuli) [R(omani) Q(uiritium) XVviris s(acris) f(aciundis) nobis domibus familiis haec matres familiae CX] p(opuli) R(omani) nuptae genib[us nixae] / precamur o[r]amus obsecramusque [3 m]atronae Fl(avia) Pollitta Manili[3] Atili Severi Rufria[3 Cal]/purn[i] [3]mi Statilia M[3]a Pu[3] nia Laeta Enni Marcian[i 3 C]aecili Aristonis Ve[3] / tu[3]ia Pia Tibe[3 A] viti Lu[3]elia [3 P]onti Paulini Magia[3] / [3 Ma]urici Fufid[ia 3 D]emetri Crepere[ia 3] / [3] Pontia Paulina [3] / [3]nis Cl(audiam) Eudaem[3] / [3]

The inscription  177 ia Atti Rufin[i 3] / [3] Festi Postumia [3] / [3]a Calpurni Front[3] / [3]ensia Polla Ci[3] / [3]a Ca[3]iu[3] / [ali[3]P[3] / [3]lla Valeri C[res]c[e]ntis Vicenn[3] / [3] Iulia Taria Strat[o] nice Laber[i 3]mana[3] / [3]nia [3]ana Ulpi Pompeia[ni] Domitia Flaccill[a] Ulpi Antonin[i 3] / [3]vellia Caesenni Servili [3] / [3]ta [3]a Cornelia Asiana Nummi Faustiniani C[l(audia) D]ryantilla Platonis Corneli Optat[i 3 e]questres Iulia Suem[ia Vari Marcelli 3] / [3] Virbiana [F]lavi Drusiani Caesennia Tusidiana Livi Rogati Claudia [Val]entina Aquili Agre[stis 3]elia Flaviana Tarroni [3] / [3] Campani trib(uni) Octavia Athenais Flavi Clementis trib(uni) Semproni[a Sp]oletina Corneli Fel[icis 3]ati trib(uni) Maria Passen[ia 3] / [3]i primi pil(i) Aelia Gemellina Armeni Iuliani Antonia Tironilla Iuli Max[imi A] elia Marciana Cossin[i 3]tri [[3]]tern[3] / [3]a eodem more per easdem matronas habita item XVviri s[ortiti] sunt de praesessio[ne ludorum 3 tes]seris in urnam co[mmissis 3] / [3]anus pr(aetor) Aiacius Modestus Ofilius Macedo Nonius Arriu[s M]ucianus [3] Pompeius Rusonianu[s mag(ister) 3] Cassius Pius Marc[ellinus q(uaestor) d(esignatus) 3] / [3 Sae]vinius Proculus Fulvius Granianus q(uaestor) Augg(ustorum) Gargil[ius] Antiq[uus Manil]ius Fuscus Venidiu[s Rufus cur(ator) alvei Tiberis 3] tunc a[3] / [3]erun[3] interfuerunt [edictum propositum est de ludorum ho]norariorum in[dictione Imp(erator) Caes(ar) divi Marci Antonini P]ii Germ(anici) Sar[m(atici) filius divi Commodi frater] / [divi Pii] nep(os) divi Hadriani p[r]onep(os) [divi Tr]aiani [Parthic(i) abnep(os) divi Nervae] adnep(os) L(ucius) [Septimius Sev]erus Pius Pert[inax Aug(ustus) Arab(icus) Adiab(enicus) Parth(icus) max(imus) pont(ifex) max(imus) t]rib(unicia) pot(estate) XII imp(erator) [III co(n)s(ul) III et Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aureli]/[us Anto]ninus Pius Aug(ustus) trib(unicia) p[o]t(estate) VIII co(n)s(ul) [[3]] Imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) L(uci) Septimi Sever[i Pii Pertinacis A]ug(usti) Arab(ici) Adia[b(enici) Parth(ici) max(imi) filii divi Marci Pii Ger]manici Sarm(atici) nepo[tes divi Antonini Pii pronep(otes)] / [divi H]adriani abnepotes divi Tra(ia)ni Parth(ici) et divi Nervae adnep(otes) cum ceteris XVvir[is s(acris) f(aciundis) dicunt pera]ctis ludis [sollemnibus ludos honor]arios quoque per[3 dies adiciemus prid(ie) Non(as)] / [easde]m item Nonarum die et VIII Id(us) easdem theatris tribus ligneo Pompeiano odi[o 3 spect]acula quae s[u]mus [edituri 3]is fr[3] / [3] VII Iduum earumde[m] circ[ens]ium spectacula in circo maximo dabimus [ordo missuu]m miss(u) primo quad[rigas exhibebimus 3 qui vicerit accipiet HS [3] n(ummum) secundo HS [3] n(ummum) / [3 tert]io HS IIII(milia) n(ummum) secun[d]o quoque missu quadrigarum eadem praemia dabuntur m[issu tertio q] ui bigam vicerit [a]ccipiet [HS 3 quarto missu ac]/[cipiet] qui vicerit HS VI(milia) n(ummum) secund(o) HS II(milia) n(ummum) tertio HS |(mille) n(ummum) post meridie quinto missu bigas m[3] ad HS X(milia) n(ummum) serva[t]a policit[atione 3 se]x[to mi]ssu desult[ores 3 accipiet qui vi]/[cerit HS] VI(milia) n(ummum) secundo HS II(milia) n(ummum) tertio HS [|(mille)] n(ummum) septimo quadr[ig]as exhibebimus perceptu [3 primo pa]ri ac secundo tertioque [3] d[aturos 3 polli]citi sumus postqu[am circenses erunt perfecti] / [venati]onem parabimus fer[a]rum septingentarum cupiente[s]

178  The inscription machinarum eventum provi[dere q]uamquam securit[a]ti vestrae p[rovi]derimus [alacr]i manu ubique vos[3] / [3 se]ctemini munificen[tia] nostra leones lea[e] leopardi ursi bison(t)es onagri str[uthiones] centeni erunt proponi volumus [o]rdo ludorum honor[ariorum pridie Non(as) Iun(ias) die pri]/[mo in th] eatro ligneo commis[s]io nova in qua p[ant]om[imus P]ylades item die primo in odi[o commissi]o nova in qua pa[nt]omimus Apolaustus item [die primo i] n theatro Pompei co[mmissio nova in qua pantomi]/[mus Ma]rcus Nonis Iun(iis) die secundo in theatro ligneo pantomimus Marcus item [die secund]o in odio pantomimus Pylades item in th[eatro Pompe]i pantomimus Apo[laustus VIII Id(us) Iun(ias) die tertio] / [in the]atro ligneo pantomimus Apolaustus item die tertio i[n] odio pantomimus Marcus it[em die te]rtio in theatro Pom[p]ei pantomimus [Pyl]ades nocte terti[a 3]oc [Impp(eratores) Severus et An]/[toni]nus Aug[g(usti) [[3]]] cum pr(aefecto) pr(aetorio) et ceteris XVvir(is) praetextati coronatique de Pal[atio in T]erentum venerunt ibique Severu[s Au] g(ustus) apud [aram] tertiam ligneam [te]mporalem [3 sacrum pr]/[aee]unte Imp(eratore) Antonino [Aug(usto)] filio suo ture vinoque fecit dein posita praetexta sum(p)ta tun[ica fimb]rata adsistenti[bus [[3]] 3]isp[3]atus per publicos XVvirum m[3] / [l]aeva retinens cu[ltrum potor(i)] dicatum et pateram cum vino retinente precatione [[[3]] immol]avit Terra matri [suem] pl[enam] Graeco a(chivo) r(itu) prodigavam hac pr[e]c(atione) Ter[ra mater uti tibi in] / [illi]s libris scriptum es[t qu]arumque {rerumque} rerum er[go] quodq(ue) melius siet p(opuli) R(omani) Q(uiritibus) uti [tibi s]u(e) plena propria [prodi] giva sa[crum f]iat te quaeso precorque uti tu imp[e]rium maiestate[mque p(opuli) R(omani) Q(uiritium) duel]/[li d]omique auxis utiqu{a}e [sem]per Latinus optemperassit cetera ut supra ordinem sacrifici [secutus e]odem modo sicut [prima] nocte Moeris sacrificioque perfec[to] posita tuni[c]a fimbriata su[mpta 3] / [3]is et ceteris XVvir(is) ludis nocturnis interfuerunt Iulia Aug(usta) mater castr[or]um et matronae CVIIII sel[lister]nia habuerunt Iunoni ac Dianae III N[on(as) Iun(ias) Impp(eratores) Se]/[ver]us et Antoninus Aug[g(usti) cum [[3]]] et pr(aefecto) pr(aetorio) et ceteris X[Vvir(is) 3 ad aede]m Apollinis Pa[l] atini praete[xtati co]ronatique processerunt ibique Severu[s A]ug(ustus) [apud a]ram ligneam tempor[alem 3] / [3]u tam in area Apollinis ante tetrastylum Aug(ustus) qui [3 praeeunte] Antonino Aug(usto) filio suo a[ssistent]ibus Geta Caes(are) et pr(aefecto) pr(aetorio) et ceteris X[Vvir(is)] ture et vino honorario rem divinam f[ecit] / [Se]verus Aug(ustus) [Apo]llini ac [D]ianae libis novenis po[pan(is) novenis pthoib(us) noven(is) dein sac]rificavit hac prec[a]tion[e quam 3 le]git ipse Apollo uti tibi in illis libris scriptum est cuiusq(ue) rei ergo quodq(ue) meliu[s siet] / [p(opuli) R(omano) Q(uiritibus) u]ti t[ibi novem libis n]ovem popanis n[ovem pthoib(us) sacrum fiat te quaeso pre]corque uti tu [imperium maiestat]emque p(opuli) R(omani) Q(uiritum) [d]uelli domique auxis utiqu{a}e semper Latinus obtemperassit cetera [ut su]/[pra 3 ordinem sacrifici] secutus [eo]d[em modo sicut prima die Iovi 3] similite[r 3 Diana]e sacrificavit perfectoque sacrificio ludos Augg(usti) in scaena cui theatrum adiect[um non] / [est 3]ntt[3]nt aquas p[3] tunc aliis coronis sumptis in pronao aedis Apollinis adscenderunt ibique clar[issi]/[mi pueri 3] puellae [3]t

The inscription  179 praetex[tati 3 et puel]lae palliolatae cum discriminalibus manibus contexis ca[rm]en [cecinerunt id c]ompo[suit] / [3]ibus tibicinibus [3 Ph]oebe dies P(h) oebeia noctes reddite cymaeo signantur s[3]ro quae doc[3] / [3]a laurigeri procer[3]us canimus mulcent[es] inlice cantu numina pro[3]i dum pro gentis hon[o]re [3] / [3]um votisque [3]re superbo de grege natoru[m u]estrae cos[3 C]ynthia mitis adest puer[i]s [3] / [3]arvi colas[3]tuque Latin[e se]u Lucin[a 3] quae Romam nuper caelo [3] / [3]tqua ce[3 c]erudent [3]a[3]er[3] / [3] omtex[3] primaeve vocem turmae [3] / [3]a[3]fando [3]mina nosset imperiique oras urbesq[ue 3] / [3]nda [3] aede [3]ras auratis fundere campis Bacchum pa[3] / [3]imitum ioa[3]ne terras [et] Neptunia glauca cavis findantur aratris e[3] / [3]ant spirantia [3]m castrisque Mart[e q]uieto condat secretis victricia postibus [3] / [3]iter aeriaqu[e 3]as nostrosque duces[qu]e sos[pi]te dextra protege et armigerum vic[3] / [3]borem occup[3]et tibi [3 cornic]inum aeneatorum et tubicin[u]m translatum et togatorum [3] / [3 a]sinariorum [3]et tiro[n] umque ludionum quadr[igarum 3 et bi]garum binarum item desultorum cu[rsor]umque factionu[m 3] / [3] publicis et [3 i]ntercede [3]o per [via]m sacram forumque Romanu[m] arcum Seve[ri et Antoni]ni Aug[g(ustorum) [[3]]] pueros pue[llas]que [fr]equentes [3] / [3]des praece[debant 3]raiatuaque tegebant Impp(eratores) Sever[us] et Antoninus Aug[g(usti) [[3]]] cum pr(aefecto) pr(aetorio) sub[3]s pueros puellasque sustinente [pom]pa in Capitolio cum [3] / [3 ve]neru[nt 3 ad aedem Iovi]s [O(ptimi)] M(aximi) an[t] e cuius pronaum ut in Palat[i]o carm[e]n conte[x]is manibu[s pue]ri puellaeque dix[erunt ch]orosque hab(u)erunt quos perfe[cto] sacrificio Augg(usti) hon[oraverunt] / [3]n VIIII lances arge[nteas 3] reliquis [c]um Troiam lusissent item puell[i]s 3 v]ela s[e]rica et pra[emium] sollemne{m} acc[eptis dati]sque omnibus se receper[unt i]nde Severus et Antoni[nus Augg(usti) 3] / [3 cum] pr(aefecto) p[r(aetorio) e]t o[3 process]erun[t] ad ludos saeculares consummando[s] in thea[trum 3]eo pompa [3 sac]rificalis in tri[bunal in cir]co temporal[i] circu[m Mur]cia(e) est ludisque saecularibus [3] / [3 ]in [3 p]almatis sump[t]is et scipionibus aebornei[s] ad circum [temp]oralem [3 c]arceres se me[3] consedit Imp(erator) Antoninus Aug(ustus) [3] / [3]oit m[3] Severus Aug(ustus) missu primo quadrigas singul[a]s e factioni[bus 3]s[3]i cursor[e]sque [e]metis murciis misit Ulpius So[ter 3] / [3]leno [3]e similibus antiqui moris spectaculi co[nc]urrentibus 3]busque [3]esu[3]ulenta pete[2]ium Severus et Antoninus Augg(usti) [3] / [3]um co[3]ores et solens fearsiis tunc Severu[s 3] mse [3]dit ant[e 3 car]ceres sedit et post [3]pi[3]nos missus misit m[i]ssu V misit bigas si[3] / [3] miss[u 3 qu]adrigas praemia autem consecutis [3]pin[3]undo act[3]rant ex i(i)s frugibus quas [popul]us Romanus contulerat [id] est quadrigae [3] / [3]em [fru]gibus d[edera]nt reliquiae frugum apparitioni[bus] secun[dum 3 pe]rpetua [3 e]adem die Iulia Aug(usta) m[ater] castrorum et matro[nae ce]ntum nove[m habuerunt se]/[llistern]ia sua sicut praec[eden]ti biduo porcilias immolaverunt [et] eisdem cena[verunt 3]vav[3 pueri] senatores item puellae mat[ro]nae carmen cecinerunt quorum no[mina infra s(cripta) s(unt) 3] / [3]s Maximus I[ul]iu[s F]austinus Iulius Crescens Iul(ius) Ca[s]sius Paulinus Clo[dius 3]m[3] Alfius Avitus Opratius Ta[ti]anus Flavius Iulius Latro

180  The inscription N[3] / [3]anus Umbilius [Ma]ximinus Claudius Pacatianus Iulius Sa[ty]rus Dryan[s 3]r Maxim[us 3]us Ulpius Attianus Iun(ior) Laberius Pompeianus Cattius Cleme[ns 3] / [3 ]ulanius Baebius M[a]rcellinus Aelius Antipater Corfin[iu]s Felix Cor[nelius 3] eq(ues) R(omanus) Licinius Aemil[ia]nus ingen(uae) puellae Manilia Lucana P[3] / [3]lia Crispina Arrian[a Ru]fia Vesti[na] Maxi[ma Fla]via Poss[essa] Varia Non[3 V]aleriana Aemilia Iunia C[lemen]tina Flavia Romana Antonia [3] / [3] Maxima Iuniana Flavia [A] ntonia [3]ynic[3]ia Casta Si[3]nilla Arria [3]r[3] Clementina Cor[neli]a Claudia Pia[3]nia Pacata [B]aburia V[3] / [3] Nepotiana Domitia Diotim[a G]r(a)ecina Au[g]urina [pr(idie)] Non(as) Iun(ias) Impp(eratores) [Se]verus Antoninus Augg(usti) [[3]] p(raefecto) p(raetorio) et ceter(is) [X]Vv(iris) pr[3] / [3 processe]runt in theatro ligneo lu[dis] Latin[is comm]issis in odio se tra[ns]tuleruut ibique [lu]dis Graecis commissis in theatro Pompeian[o veneru]nt ibiq[ue 3] / [3] Augg(usti) nn(ostri) et cet[eri 3]bus suis [3 ibi]que ludos pers[pect]averunt XVvir(i) autem tribunali praet[orio 3]urst[ // ]s] // [3]ibus de[3] / [3]e[3] / [3] ntibus ae[3] / [3 a]usoniis m[ // ]vae[3] / [3]sm[ cur(ator)] alv(ei) Tiberis Saevin[ius Proc]ulus Fulvius Fusc[us Grani]anus q(uaestor) Aug[g(ustorum) 3] / [3 Ulpius Sote]r co(n)s(ul) desig(natus) in odeo P[ompeius] Rusonianus magist[er Vetin]a Mamertin[us 3] / [3 Cassius Piu]s Marcellinus q(uaestor) d[esignatu]s Crescens Calpur[nianus i]n theatro [3] / [3]s pr(aetor) Aiacius Modest[us Ofilius] Macedo Nonius Arri[us Mucia] nus / [edictum pr]opositum est in ha[ec verba] Imp(erator) Caes(ar) di[vi Marci Antoni]ni Pii Ge[rm(anici) Sarm(atici)] / [filius divi Commodi frate] r divi Antonini Pi[i nep(os) di]vi Hadriani pronep[os divi Traia]ni Parthi [ci] / [abnepos divi Nervae adnep]os L(ucius) Septimius [Severus Pi]us Pertinax Aug(ustus) [Arab(icus) Adia]b(enicus) Parth(icus) m[ax(imus)] / [pont(ifex) maximus trib(unicia) potesta]t(e) XII imp(erator) XI co(n)s(ul) II [I p(ater) p(atriae) et Im]p(erator) Caes(ar) M(arcus) Aurel{l}i[us Antoni]nus Pius Au[g(ustus)] / [trib(unicia) pot(estate) VII co(n)s(ul) 3 Imp(eratoris) Ca] es(aris) L(uci) [Septimii Severi] Pii Pertinacis Au[g(usti) Arabici A]diab(enici) Part(hici) [max(imi) f(ilii)] / [divi M(arci) Antonini Pii Germ(anici) Sarm(atici) n]epot(is) divi Antonini Pii pr[onep(otis) d]ivi Hadriani a[bnepot(is) div]i Traiani / [Parthici et divi Nervae adn(epotis) c]um ceteris XVvir(is) s(acris) f(aciundis) dic(undo) cum [3] Iun(ias) proximas [3 p]orcum n(umero) / [3] die ne quis dissignator eu[m 3]r ea loca duxi[sse velit pr]oponi v[3] / [3] idem theatris ludi honor[ari pr]aeside [3] sicut supr[a 3] / [3] [[3]] cum pr(aefecto) pr(aetorio) [3] XVvir(is) [3]e e Palatio [3] / [3 p]ulvinar prae[3] [[3]] [3]sistente IMP[3] / [3] ver f[3]a pa[3]ra pulvinari [3] / [3] is [3]icu[3 Iunoni] Reginae vac[am 3] / [3]m porcum [3] / [3]molavit Im[p(erator) 3] / [3 aeb]orneos r[3] / [3]fex [3] / [3]e sa[3] / [3] puer [3] / [3] idem [3] / [3]mfius [3] / [3 si]cuti ti[3] / [3] Fuscu[s 3] / [3] men[3] / [3] isi [3] / [3] t [ ]lian[3] / [3 Ma]rcelli[nus 3] / [3] Vetina Mamer[tinus 3] / S[3]es aebornei[s 3] / q[3] circum vener[3] / so[3 ex]uvias in pulvinari LAI[3] / [3]D[3]cus mediis pulvin[

The inscription  181 ]slpi[3] / [3]emi[3 S]atyrus Do[3] / [3]s Regu[3] Marcius Vic[3] / [3] Virius [3] musiarcus Iunius Vir[3] / [3] Rosc[us 3] Cornelianus Clodius Mar[3] / [3]rus Numit[3]ius Aper Ocratius Titianus [3] / [3]us Bassaeu[s 3]anus Alfius Maximus Sue[3] / [3]s Silianus Cu[3]atianus Flav[3] ce[3] / [3] Placidus [3 Ma] rcellinus M[3] / [3]ominu[3 Ne]ratius Priscu[s 3] / [3]i Ba[3]us Vettiu[s 3] / [3] Licini[3] eq(uitis) R(omani) fil(ius) C[ (A few minor fragments are missing).

Appendix 2 Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares

The translation is based on G. Pighi’s edition (1965, pp. 140–175). Commentary of the seventh Secular Games conducted by the Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus maximus, pontifex maximus, holder of XII tribuneship, and the emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, the nobel L. Septimius Geta Caesar, and Praetorian Prefect C. Plautianus . . . Before . . . in the assembly in Curia Iulia the Council of Fifteen appeared in front of the platform, and of them Manilius Fuscus, leader of the Council, read: as you notice again the festal year after the previous age (saeculum) has passed, the leader should foresee, and the Fathers conduct the games. The opening of the games, decreed according to the advice of the oldest oracle, has been decided to be carried out with extreme accuracy, so that the rites may be properly conducted as the rituals of the Secular Games must be fulfilled according to custom. (Twelve fragmentary lines: general information about the tradition of the Secular Games, on which the Septimius Severus’, Caracalla’s and Geta’s decision to organise new ones by, is based. The inscription singles out the legendary games of 456 bce and states that Septimius Severus and his sons’ games are the seventh such occasion in history). Remember the memory of the prophecy of Sibylla, the sacred prophet: The longest life-span of a human is one hundred and ten years; and therefore it is noticed: because of the passing age, the Antonine . . . of the future. For the joy and happiness of the human race, to give thanks for the present happiness and to see that there will be hope for the future for all of you, Conscript Fathers, and now when you . . . The Secular Games as the time-span demands, and impose the rituals for the coming year, necessary for so many things related to creation and birth, you should use public funds for the costs and, with all worship and veneration of the immortal gods, for the security and eternity of the empire, visit the most sacred shrines, for the rendering and thanks giving, so that the immortal gods may pass on to the future generations what our ancestors built and the things that, after previously conferring them on our ancestors, they granted to our own times as well. And so the most eminent Calpurnius Maximus

Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares  183 read out: the most noble Council of Fifteen discussed about the Secular Games, supervised by our most pious emperors, and about asking the noble, our most eminent and pious leader, the Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthimus, great, brave and auspicious Father of the Fatherland, and the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, as well as the most noble Caesar Lucius Septimius Geta . . . to put forth the Secular Games, which should be celebrated after each period of a hundred and ten years, during this same time next year, by the decree of our emperors and the most eminent Council of Fifteen. And let the costs of the games be covered by public funds, let the games take place during the days on which they used to be conducted, let the names of the names of those accused be removed from public lists, and let the mourning period of women also be such that it does not disturb the joy of the people; and let the memory of this precious sacred ritual be celebrated on three contiguous days. (Twenty-fourfragmentary lines: a discussion on organising the ludi and preserving their memory by erecting a commentary on them, and the role of the Council of Fifteen as well as the senators in the process). Emperor Caesar, son of the divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, brother of divine Commodus, grandson of divine Antoninus Pius, great-grandson of divine Hadrianus, great-great-grandson of divine Trajanus Parthicus, great-great-great-grandson of Divine Nerva, Lucius Septimus Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Particus Maximus, with Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurellius Antoninus Pius Augustus and Lucius Septimius Geta, the most noble Caesar, sons of Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus, grandsons of divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, great-grandsons of divine Antoninus Pius, great-great-grandsons of divine Hadrianus, descendants of divine Trajanus Parthicus and divine Nerva, pronounced with the rest of the Council of Fifteen . . .  (Two lines are missing). . . . seven days before the Calends of May . . . took action on a letter sent by the emperors, by these words: Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Augustus and Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, members of the Council of Fifteen, salute their colleagues. If you find it appropriate, assemble eight days before the Calends of June on the Palatine at the Temple of Apollo in order to choose by lot the places in which the various members, seated on tribunals, are to distribute the means of purification to the people. Goodbye, our dear colleagues. The director, Pompeius Rusonianus, read it. The Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Augustus and the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, members of the Council of Fifteen, salute their colleagues.

184  Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares If you agree on a decision concerning the days and nights on which the Secular Games should be held . . . likewise, those on which the matrons should offer prayers and incense, we shall so decree. Goodbye, dear colleagues. The director, Pompeius Rusonianus, read it. On the eighth day before the Calends of June on the Palatine, at the Temple of Apollo, the council assembled to choose by lot the places in which the various members, seated on tribunals, were to distribute means of purification to the people . . . Present were Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus, Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, Nonius Mucianus, Pollienus Auspex, Manilius Fuscus, Cocceius Vibianus, Atulenus Rufinus, Ajacius Modestus, Fabius Magnus, the director Pompeius Rusonianus, Crescens Calpurnianus, quaestor Cassius Pius Marcellinus, consul Ulpinus Soter, guardian of Tiber Venidius Rufus, quaestor Fulvius Granianus. When the lots were inspected and put into an urn, a drawing was held: on the Palatine, on the tribunal of the most noble emperors which is in the district of the Temple of Apollo Salvius Tuscus . . . the tribunal attached to . . . which is near Roma Quadrata, Nonius Mucianus, Ajacius Modestus, Atulenus Rufinus . . . Ofilius Macedo, before the temple . . . Fulvius Fuscus, Vetina Mamertinus; before the temple . . . Cocceius Vibianus. After the lots were drawn, an edict was proposed, on the same day, in these words: The Emperor, Caesar, son of the divine Marcus Aurelius Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, brother of the divine Commodus, grandson of divine Antoninus Pius, great-grandson of divine Hadrianus, great-great-grandson of divine Trajanus Parthicus, greatgreat-great-grandson of Divine Nerva, Lucius Septimus Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Particus Maximus, Lucius Septimius Severus, pontifex maximus, tribune for XII times, imperator for XI times, consul for III times, Father of the Fatherland, and the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, tribune for VII times, consul and Lucius Septimius Geta, the most noble Caesar, sons of the Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Particus Maximus, grandsons of the divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, great-grandsons of the divine Antoninus Pius, descendants of the divine Hadrianus, Trajanus Parthicus and Nerva, with the rest of the Council of Fifteen pronounced: We advise the seventh Secular Games to be celebrated, Quirites . . . to assemble so that there will be celebrations for three days and nights. Therefore, let joy reach all the people. Because of the Secular Games, which we declare, it is fitting to remove names of the accused from public lists in such manner that after thirty days the prosecutor can bring them to trial again. We have decided that this edict is appropriate. We remind the masters living in the city as well as in the countryside, as well as tenants, to take care of the security of their own districts together with our soldiers who patrol everywhere. Seven days before the Calends of June the Emperors Severus Augustus and Antoninus Augustus . . . on the Palatine in the district of the Temple of Apollo. Once they had ascended . . . they distributed incense . . . to the equestrian order and to the plebs and to the Roman people. Then left . . . consul Ulpinus Soter,

Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares  185 Pollienus Auspex . . . the rest of the Council of Fifteen wearing togas fringed with purple . . . to the places as was drawn, where they ascended and distributed incense to the people . . . emperors Severus and Antoninus with Geta . . . to them . . . provided incense . . . The Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Augustus . . . Nonius Mucianus . . .  (Sixteen fragmentary lines: description of the games to come, including a sacrifice to Jupiter Optimus Maximus, Juno Regina and Apollo. In addition, the Council of Fifteen received offerings from the people (fruits) and Pompeius Rusonianus, director of the council, purified the Tarentum). . . . put forward by The Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Particus Maximus and Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus and Lucius Septimius Geta, noble Caesar . . . to be auspicious, successful and healthy. The Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Particus Maximus and The Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus and Lucius Septimius Geta, noble Caesar by whose order and command this divine cause . . .  (Six fragmentary lines: discussion on the purification of places in which the games are to be conducted). . . . the proposed edict in these words: Emperor Caesar, son of divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, brother of divine Commodus, grandson of divine Antoninus Pius, great-grandson of divine Hadrianus, great-greatgrandson of divine Trajanus Parthicus, great-great-great-grandson of Divine Nerva, Lucius Septimus Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus, pontifex maximus, tribune for XII times, imperator for XI times, consul for III times, Father of the Fatherland, and Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, as well as Lucius Septimius Geta, noble Caesar, sons of Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus, grandsons of divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, great-grandsons of divine Antoninus Pius, descendants of the divine Hadrianus, Trajanus Parthicus and Nerva, with the rest of the Council of Fifteen pronounced: (Sixty-four very fragmentary lines describe the rituals of the first night, first day and second night. These include an opening prayer, a sacrifice and a prayer to the Moirae on the Campus Martius (nine female lambs, nine she-goats, all black), the theatrical spectacles and the sellisternia held by 110 matrons in honour of Juno and Diana during the first night. The first day rituals include a prayer and the sacrifice of a white bull in honour of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline, and the second night a prayer and a sacrifice to Eileithyia (twenty-seven sacrificial cakes), the Ludi Latini in a wooden theatre as well as a sellisternia conducted by matrons in honour of Juno and Diana).

186  Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares . . . at the altar by the Tiber . . . sprinkled water . . . and having observed a ludi on a stage to which no theatre was attached, proceeded up to Capitolium. Julia Augusta . . . sellisternia . . . Three days before Nones of June Severus and Antoninus Augustus and Geta Caesar with the Praetorian Prefect as well as the rest of the Council of Fifteen summoned, wearing purple-fringed togas and laureates, and went from Palatium to Capitolium. There Severus Augustus and his son Antoninus Augustus, with the Praetorian Perfect and others, conducted the sacred rites at the altar of Juno. There, with a purple-fringed toga and laureate in place, stood Geta Caesar with the Praetorian Prefect and other noble members, holding in hands the ceremonial knife in a diagonal position, made out of stone, as well as the wine bowl, ceremonially purified by the Council of Fifteen. Geta Caesar restrained from the prayer. A white cow was sacrificed according to a Greek rite to Juno Regina, with the following prayer: Juno Regina! As it is written to you in those books – and because of this may good fortune come to the Roman people, the Quirites – let a sacrifice be made to you with a perfect white cow as a whole burnt offering. I beg you and pray that the empire and majesty of the Roman people Quirites in war and peace will be increased by you, and that the Latins will always be obedient. The rest as above. After that a sacrifice to Jupiter Optimus Maximus was made and a banquet was held for religious reasons by the emperors, Fabius Magnus and Aiacius Modestus. Then, wearing purple-fringed togas, the emperors Severus and Antoninus, as well as Geta Caesar with the Praetorian Prefect and the rest of the Council of Fifteen went to the altar of Juno. There Severus Augustus and Julia Augusta, Mother of the Camps and wife of the emperor, as well as the 109 matrons, who were announced, with the Vestal Virgins Numisia Maximilla and Terentia Flavola present, gave a following prayer: Juno Regina! For the good of the Roman people Quirites, let the 110 mothers and wives of Roman people Quirites pray and supplicate you, so that the empire and majesty of the Roman people Quirites in war and peace will be increased by you, and that the Latins will always be obedient; we pray for eternal security, victory and good health for the Roman people Quirites, and that you bless both the Roman people Quirites as well as the legions of Roman people Quirites. Keep the state of the Roman people Quirites from harm, make it stronger and be favourable to your own to the Roman people Quirites, the Council of Fifteen, us, our households and families. The following matrons and wives of the Roman people Quirites gave prayer and supplication . . .  (Eighteen fragmentary lines contain the names of the matrons participating in the ritual. Of the 110 names, only ten can be completely reconstructed: Iulia Taria Stratonice Laberi, Domitia Flaccilla Ulpi Antonini, Cl. Dryantilla Platonis Corneli Optati, Iulia Suemia Vari Marcelli, Caesennia Tusidiana Livi Rogati, Claudia Valentina Aquili Agrestis, Octavia Athenais Flavi Clementis, Sempronia Spoletina Corneli Felicis, Aelia Gemellina Armeni Iuliani and Antonia Tironilla Iuli Maximi. The list of names is divided in two parts: senatorial women are mentioned first, and those belonging to the equestrian class next).

Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares  187 Then a sellisternium was held to Juno. After that Diana received a sellisternium in a similar manner also with the members of the Council of Fifteen who presided the draw of lots of the games from the urn . . . Aiacius Modestus, Ofilius Macedo, Nonius Arrius Mucianus, director Iulius Pompeius Rusonianus, consul Ulpius Soter, quaestor Cassius Pius Marcellinus, Vetina Mamertinus, Crescens Calpurnianus, Saevinius Proculus, Fulvius Granianus, Gargilius Antiquus, Manilius Fuscus, overseer of Tiber Venidius Rufus. Then, between the games, they proceeded to the theatre on the Campus Martius. At that place the proposition of the Honorary Games was declared with these words: Emperor Caesar, son of divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, brother of divine Commodus, grandson of divine Antoninus Pius, great-grandson of divine Hadrianus, great-great-grandson of divine Trajanus Parthicus, greatgreat-great-grandson of Divine Nerva, Lucius Septimus Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus, pontifex maximus, tribune for XII times, imperator for III times, consul for III times and Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, tribune for seven times, a consul, as well as Lucius Septimius Geta, noble Caesar, grandsons of divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, great-grandsons of divine Antoninus Pius, descendants of the divine Hadrianus, Trajanus Parthicus and Nerva, with the rest of the Council of Fifteen pronounced: After the games are conducted on the third day before Nones of June, we will put forward the Honorary Games which will take seven days. On the day before Nones, as was the case on the ninth end eighth days before the Ides, in three theatres: in the wooden theatre, in the Theatre of Pompey, and in the Odeon, spectacles which had put forth . . . then on the seventh day before the Ides circus performances will be delivered at the Circus Maximus. The prizes: at the first lift-off we deliver to each four-horse team out of the four factions the following: who wins will receive 24 sesterces, the second eight sesterces, the third four sesterces. At the second lift-off four-horse teams will be honoured with similar awards. The chariot that wins the third lift-off receives . . . sesterces, the second . . . sesterces, the third . . . sesterces. To the riders and competitors of the fourth lift-off we provide following: He who wins receives six sesterces, the second receives two sesterces, the third . . . sesterces. After midday, at the fifth lift-off, we promise to receive ten sesterces to the chariots, as was the case in the third lift-off. At the sixth lift-off we provide to the riders following: he who wins receives six sesterces, the second receives two, the third . . . sesterces. At the seventh lift-off we present to the first three four-horse teams the same number of sesterces as was the case in the first lift-off. When the circus races are finished, we provide hunting-games of wild beasts, value of seven hundred sesterces. Even if you are eager to witness the spectacle and we have taken all measures to secure your safety, we encourage you to strictly follow the guards. We generously provide a hundred lions, lionesses, leopards, bears, bison, wild assess and ostriches. We wish to put forth the following: Orders of the Honorary Games. On the day before the Nones of June, at the wooden theatre a new contest of the pantomimes of Pylades; then during the first day

188  Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares at Odeon a new contest of the pantomimes of Apolaustus; and furthermore on the first day at Theatre of Pompey a new contest of the pantomimes of Marcus. On the second day, Nones of June, pantomimes of Marcus in the wooden theatre; likewise, on the second day, pantomimes of Pylades in the Odeon; furthermore, on the second day, pantomimes of Apolaustus in the Theatre of Pompey. On the eighth day before the Ides of June, the third day, pantomimes of Apolaustus at the wooden theatre; likewise, on the third day, pantomimes of Marcus in the Odeon. Furthermore, on the third day, pantomimes of Pylades at the Theatre of Pompeo the third night . . . emperors Severus and Antoninus as well as Geta the most noble Caesar, with Praetorian Prefect and rest of the Council of Fifteen, with laureates and purple-fringed togas in place, came from Palatine to Tarentum. There Severus Augustus gave a sacrifice of incense and wine at the temporary wooden altar together with his son, emperor Antoninus Augustus. Then, with purple-fringed togas in place, stood Geta Caesar with the Praetorian Prefect and other noble members, holding in their hands the ceremonial knife in diagonal position, made out of stone, as well as the wine bowl, ceremonially purified by the Council of Fifteen. Geta Caesar restrained from the prayer. A sacrifice of a pregnant sow as a whole burnt offering was made to Terra Mater according to the Greek rite, with the following prayer: Terra Mater! As it is written for you in those books – and because of this, may good fortune come to the Roman people, the Quirites – let sacrifice be made to you with a perfect pregnant sow as a whole burnt offering. I beg of you and pray that the empire and majesty of the Roman people Quirites in war and peace will be increased by you, and that the Latins will always be obedient. The rest as above. He followed the order of the sacrifice in the same manner as on the first night to the Moirae, and having completed the sacrifice, placed aside his toga fringed with purple, with his sons and rest of the Council of Fifteen also present during the nocturnal games. Julia Augusta, Mother of the Camps and the 109 matrons held a sellisternia for Juno and Diana. Three days before Nones of June Emperor Severus and Antoninus Augustus with Geta Caesar, the Praetorian Prefects, and the other members of the Council of Fifteen . . . proceeded to the Temple of Apollo on the Palatine, wearing purple-bordered toga and wreaths. There Severus Augustus at the temporary wooden altar . . . in the district of Apollo, before the tetra style . . . in terms preceded by his son Antoninus Augustus, assisted by Geta Caesar, the Praetorian Prefects and the other members of the College of Fifteen, made it sacred with incense and honorary wine. Then Severus Augustus made a sacrifice to Apollo and Diana of nine sacrificial cakes, nine popana and nine phthoes, with the following prayer which he himself read: Apollo! As it is written for you in those books – and because of this, may good fortune come to the Roman people, the Quirites – let sacrifice be made to you with nine sacrificial cakes, nine popana and nine phthoes. I beg you and pray that the empire and majesty of the Roman people Quirites in war and peace will be increased by you, and that the Latins will always be obedient. The rest as above. A sacrifice was performed in a similar manner on the second night

Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares  189 when a sacrifice was made to Eileithyia. Diana received a sacrifice as well, with a similar description, performed by Augustus, at the stage towards a theatre with no . . . then the others climbed up to the portico of the altar of Apollo, where distinguished twenty-seven senatorial sons and twenty-seven daughters of the matrons had ordered to come together; the boys with wreaths and wearing the toga praetexta, the girls wearing hooded mantles, hand in hand. They sang a newly-composed hymn with flute-players and musicians. (Twelve fragmentary lines: The new Carmen Saeculare, which begins with an invocation to Apollo and Diana. The lines also mention the shores and cities of the empire, as well as ships sailing the seas, army camps and the god Bacchus and his golden fields. The end of the poem contains a prayer devoted in protection of ‘our leaders’). From that place the Council of Fifteen led the flute-players, lute players, hornblowers and trumpeters, and wearing toga . . . and recruits, stage-players, fourhorse teams in pairs, two-horse teams in pairs, as well circus-riders and racers in a solemn procession, which was arranged by officials and witnessed by the people, and walked through the Sacred Road at Forum Romanum, and through the triumphal arch of Severus, Antoninus Augustus and Geta Caesar. Boys and girls took lead of a public procession. Emperors Severus and Antoninus, as well as Geta Caesar and the Praetorian Prefect, followed the boys and girls and rest of the procession to the Capitoline, where they gathered with the rest of the Council of Fifteen. There, in the same manner as on the Palatine, the boys and girls sung the hymn, and a choral dance was performed at the altar of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. After carrying out of a sacrifice, the emperors rewarded with nine silver plates the boys who had taken part in the Trojan games, as well as girls veiled with three silk garments and boys wearing a toga. All the distributed prizes were accepted and received. From that place Severus Augustus and Antoninus Augustus with Geta Caesar proceeded with Praetorian Prefect and the rest to the wooden theatre to ­conclude the Secular Games. (About six fragmentary lines describing the supervision of the horse races by Septimius Severus and other members of the Council of Fifteen). During the same day Julia Augusta, Mother of the Camps, and the 109 matrons held a two-day sellisternium in a similar manner to those held previously, sacrificing pigs, dining and conducting a dance. Thence the hymn was performed by senatorial boys and girls of the matrons whose names are presented below . . . Maximus, Iunius Faustinus, Iulius Crescens, Iul. Cassius Paulinus, Clodius Marcellinus . . . Alfius Avitus, Opratius Titianus, Flavius Iulius Latronianus  .  .  .  Umbilius Maximinus, Claudius Pacatianus, Iulius Satyrus Dryans . . . Ulpius Attianus iunior, Laberius Pompeianus, Cattius Clementinus . . . Baebius Marcellinus, Aelius Antipater, Corfinius Felixs . . . noble Licinius Aemilianus. Girls: Manilia Lucana . . . Crispina Arriana, Rufia Vestina Maxima, Flavia Postuma Varia . . . Valeriana, Aemilia Iulia . . . Clementina

190  Records of the Severan Ludi Saeculares Flavia Romana, Antonia . . . Maxima Iuniana, Flavia Antonia . . . Clementina, Cornelia Claudia Pia . . . Pacata, Baburia . . . Nepotiana, Domitia Diotimia . . .  Augurina. Before the Nones of June, the emperors Augustus Severus and Augustus Antoninus, with Geta Caesar, the Praetorian Prefect and the rest of the Council of Fifteen, wearing togas, proceeded in concluding the games. They held the Latin Games in the wooden theatre, and went to the Odeon where Greek Games were organised, as well as to the Theatre of Pompey, where stage games where held. Then the most noble emperors and Geta Caesar examined the games. At the tribunal stood the Council of Fifteen but also the Praetorian Prefect . . . at the wooden theatre, the guardian of the Tiber Venidius Rufus, Saevinius Proculus, quaestor Fulvius Fuscus Granianus, Gargilius Antiquus, consul Ulpius Soter; at the Odeon director Pompeius Rusonianus, Vetina Mamertinus, Manilius Fuscus, quaestor Cassius Pius Marcellinus, Crescens Calpurnianus; at the Theatre of Pompey . . . Aiacius Modestus, Ofilius Macedo, Nonius Arrius Mucianus . . . gave an announcement with these words: Emperor Caesar, son of divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, brother of divine Commodus, grandson of divine Antoninus Pius, great-grandson of divine Hadrianus, great-great-grandson of divine Trajanus Parthicus, great-great-great-grandson of Divine Nerva, Lucius Septimus Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus, pontifex maximus, tribune for XII times, imperator for XI times, consul for III times, Father of the Fatherland, as well as Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus, tribune for VII times, consul, and noble Caesar Lucius Septimius Geta; sons of Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus, son of divine Marcus Antoninus Pius Germanicus Sarmaticus, grandson of divine Antoninus Pius, great-grandson of divine Hadrianus, great-great-grandson of divine Trajanus Parthicus, great-great-great-grandson of Divine Nerva, with the rest of the Council of Fifteen declare . . .  (The rest of the text contains thirty-nine fragmentary lines, describing the conclusion of the rituals and the games, as well as names of the officials who conducted them).

Appendix 3 The rituals of the Ludi Saeculares of ce 204

Date

Time

Ritual

Location

31 May

Night

Tarentum (Campus Martius)

1 June

Day

1 June

Night

2 June

Day

2 June

Night

3 June

Day

Opening prayer, a sacrifice and a prayer to the Moirae (nine female lambs, nine she-goats, all black); theatrical spectacles, sellisternium conducted in honour of Juno and Diana by 110 matrons. Prayer and the sacrifice (two white bulls) to Jupiter Optimus Maximus. Prayer and a sacrifice to Eileithyia (twenty-seven sacrificial cakes), Ludi Latini in a wooden theatre. Sellisternium by matrons in honour of Juno and Diana. Prayer and the sacrifice (two white cows) to Juno Regina, a sacrifice to Jupiter Optimus Maximus and a banquet (by the emperor and other quindecemviri). Supplicatio held by 110 matrons to Juno Regina. Prayer and the sacrifice of a black pregnant sow to Terra Mater, theatrical spectacles, sellisternium by 110 matrons in honour of Juno and Diana. Prayer and a sacrifice (27 sacrificial cakes) to Apollo and Diana, Carmen Saeculare performed by twenty-seven 27 boys and girls, a procession to Capitoline hill. Carmen Saeculare repeated. Sellisternium and a banquet offered by matrons in honour of Juno and Diana, a sacrifice of pigs and a ritual dance.

Capitoline Hill Tarentum (Campus Martius) Capitoline Hill

Tarentum (Campus Martius) Palatine Hill

Capitoline Hill

Appendix 4 The history of the Ludi Saeculares

The Ludi Saeculares were an ancient religious tradition, believed by the Romans to date back to the times when the kings were expelled and the republic was born. Information about the manner in which the chronology of the Secular Games was understood during the Severan period exists from the Roman scholar Censorinus’s records, composed in ce 238, just after the reign of Alexander Severus.1 Valerius Maximus’ and Zosimus’ accounts on the myths on which the games were based are of interest. Valerius Maximus included the myth in his book Facta et dicta memorabilia – a collection of memorable stories from Roman history – which he wrote in the early first century ce (during the reign of Tiberian). Another version of the story is told by the Byzantine historian Zosimus, who wrote his Roman history much later (in the late fifth or early sixth century ce). According to Valerius Maximus, a rich man called Valesius had two sons and a daughter.2 The children became sick when Rome was devastated by pestilence. Valesius was advised by the gods to go to the Tarentum (or Terentum), to collect water from the Tiber and to heat it on the altar of Dis and Proserpina. Valesius, who thought that the gods were describing the Greek colony of that name (in southern Italy), started his with his children. They spent a night by the Tiber and Valesius took some water from the river, heated it and gave it to his thirsty children. They fell asleep and, by the next morning, were cured. It turned out that the place they were in, a spot on the Campus Martius, was also called Tarentum, and that there was an altar of Dis and Proserpina, buried underground in the same place as Valesius made his offering. The gods appeared to the children during their sleep and ordered that black victims should be sacrificed. Valesius complied and held games for three consecutive nights. Valerius Maximus mentions that Valesius’s example was later followed by the first consul of the republic, Valerius Publicola, who took public vows, sacrificed black oxen and held games for three nights.3 The details put forth by Zosimus are slightly different. According to him, Valesius’ children fell ill after lightning damaged the sacred grove situated near his house. Valesius and his wife gave a prayer to Vesta and offered their own life in exchange for the survival of their children. They heard a voice advising them to go to Tarentum, to heat some water on the altar of Dis and Proserpina

The history of the Ludi Saeculares  193 and to let the children drink it. Grateful for the help, Valesius sacrificed black victims to Dis and Proserpina on three succeeding nights. In addition to ­sacrifices, choral songs and dances were performed.4 Censorinus’ list of games from the republican period starts from those of Valerius Publicola and were, according to the author, held in 509 bce (although Censorinus also mentions that some records date the first games to the year 456 bce). The second games were subsequently organised in 346 or 344 bce, and the third in 249 or 236 bce. For the fourth games, three dates exist: 149, 146 and 126 bce.5 The reason for this uncertainty may derive from the Augustan age, when the celebrations were officially held for the fifth time (in 17 bce). Augustus perceived the games as a powerful tool for his imperial propaganda; therefore, it seems likely that the chronology of the games was part of an Augustan innovation, allowing them to chronologically fit with earlier games. The celebration of the games in 126 bce is therefore highly doubtful.6 Very little is known about the details of the republican ludi. Censorinus only provides dates and names for the consuls who were in office when the games were held. Plutarch briefly mentions how, during the first legendary games, an offering was made to the gods of the underworld when Rome suffered from terrible pestilence.7 Written sources also provide a little information about other republican celebrations, especially those of 249 bce and 146 bce (or 149). These accounts indicate that the games were organised by the quindecimviri sacris faciundis, which was also the case for the imperial Ludi Saeculares. In addition, some details remain on how the rituals which honoured Dis and Proserpina, the gods of the underworld were conducted in the Tarentum (in the Campus Martius). The sacrifice was held on an underground altar, which was unearthed for the period of the celebration. The sacrificial victims had to be black, a custom among when sacrificing to the chthonic deities.8 Even if the information about the earliest Secular Games is scarce, it is safe to assume that the republican games were expiatory rites performed in honour of the deities of the underworld. However, when the games were celebrated by Augustus in 17 bce, their nature seems to have considerably differed from the republican ones. From that point onwards, the festival’s new main themes consisted of a public purification and the celebration of the beginning of a new Golden Age. After Augustus gained power, he established a cultural policy in which concepts he considered as traditional Roman values were celebrated. These included proper morals, piety (pietas) and a correct relationship with the gods (pax deorum). Augustan propaganda implied that, prior to the civil war, the Romans had neglected the correct way of worshipping the gods. It argued that it was time to renew a proper relationship. The message was brought forward in many ways. First, through an extensive building programme which – with the building and repairing of temples demonstrated that the gods were once again honoured correctly. Second, through moral legislation, which emphasised the primacy of marriage and family, and third, through literature

194  The history of the Ludi Saeculares and other arts. The great poets of the period, such as Horace and Virgil, dealt with these questions in their works and celebrated the coming of the new Golden Age.9 Augustus’ Ludi Saeculares were an extremely important manifestation of these values in the Augustan regime. As for the republican celebrations, the games were organised by the quindecimviri sacris faciundis, a board of fifteen priests. The quindecimviri already existed in Rome in the early fourth century bce, as some changes were apparently made to the priesthood’s regulations in 367 bce (from that year on, the office was open to plebs as well; before that, only nobility was allowed membership).10 Their main responsibility was to consult the Sibylline oracles and control foreign cults in Rome. According to tradition, the Sibylline Books were introduced to Rome during the regal period, when an old woman offered to sell nine oracle books to Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome. When the king refused, she burned three of them and offered the remaining six books at the same price. After the king’s second refusal, she again burned three of the books. When the king saw that, he was assured that the woman was serious and bought the remaining three.11 The books – containing orders and advice from the gods – were given to the responsibility of the quindecimviri. The three books were burnt during the civil war in 83 bce, but seven years later, the senate began to collect new books from Greece. This ‘second edition’ was used in Rome from the 50s bce onwards.12 The passage of the Sibylline Books ordering the Augustan games is reproduced in Zosimus’ history. The change of ideas from the republican games is obvious in this work. The dark deities of the underworld are absent from the text; the Tarentum and the nocturnal rites were still present, but the gods for this occasion were changed from Dis and Proserpina to Parcae, Lucina and Tellus (the Moirae, Eileithyia and Terra Mater, as they appeared in the inscription). Moreover, the main focus was on the daytime rituals, where white victims were sacrificed to the heavenly deities. Furthermore, the place of daytime was not in the Campus Martius, but on the Palatine and Capitoline hills. Thus, even if some of the rituals possibly had roots in the republican tradition, it is nevertheless probable that the gloomy republican celebration, marking a passing of an era, was replaced by a more positive approach, the celebration of the birth of a new age.13 But how are these changes possible, as it is very likely that the republican games were also based on the Sibylline Books? After all, they were organised by the quindecimviri, the priests who took care of the oracular texts. One possible answer is that the books used in the Augustan period were not that old: the Sibylline Books were burnt during the civil war held between Sulla and Marius, and new books were obtained from Greece a few years later. More importantly, when Augustus took power, he transferred the books from the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, where they were traditionally held, to the temple of Apollo. During this time, he apparently also carried out a variety of modifications to the books to suit his own purposes better.14

The history of the Ludi Saeculares  195 The ludi which took place after Augustus’ reign probably followed his example quite closely. However, to make the chronology of the ludi more complicated, the next celebrations were organised by Claudius in 47, only sixty-four years after Augustus.15 Suetonius reports how Claudius tried to prove that Augustus had in fact celebrated the games too early and that the proper time for the games was in ce 47.16 By celebrating the Ludi Saeculares, Claudius apparently wanted to celebrate the eighth hundredth birthday of Rome. For the emperor, it was obvious that the proper way of honouring the birthday was to use the rituals of the Ludi Saeculares; after all, they were supposed to celebrate a new age. We do not know a lot about the festivals of Claudius. The only remaining contemporary source is the short passage of the inscription, which was most likely erected in the Augustan style after the games.17 It could be argued that Claudius started a new cycle for the games, since in ce 88 Domitian held the games again, thus following the Augustan tradition, and in ce 148 Antoninus Pius followed the games of Claudius.18 It is easy to see that Domitian celebrated the games a bit too early. If he had been loyal to the Augustan tradition, he would have only celebrated them in ce 94, when the 110-year span was complete. However, Zosimus (2.4.3) mentions how ‘Domitian decided to respect the rule that had been transmitted from the start’. This was for a long time explained with the theory that Augustus intended to hold his games as early as 23 bce, but decided to postpone them for political reasons. Had he stuck to his original plan, the next proper date would have been ce 88. However, this theory was abandoned decades ago, and the question of how Domitian justified the date of his celebration remains unanswered.19 What we do know, however, is that Domitian tried to explain his decision, as is noticeable in the aforementioned comment of Zosimus, as well as from a few lines in Tacitus’ Annales in which the author briefly comments on the subject. Tacitus mentions, when describing Claudius’ ce 47 games, that he had no need to comment on the chronological calculations of Augustus or Claudius, as he had already discussed the problem in his other writings (unfortunately lost to us). He also writes that he himself was part of the quindecimviri sacris faciundis and therefore took part in organising the games of ce 88.20 Many ‘city-oriented’ images, such as Aeneas leaving Troy with Ascanius and Anchises, can be found in coinage issued by Antoninus Pius in ce 148 to celebrate the occasion. The white sow with thirty piglets signified that Aeneas that had reached the site of Alba Longa, and Mars visiting the sleeping Vestal Virgin Rhea Silvia signified the conception of Romulus and Remus. As the iconography of the coinage celebrating Antoninus Pius’ ludi is very much connected to Rome’ founding stories, it is obvious that the games consciously followed the ‘birthday-cycle’ initiated by Claudius.21 In addition, it is possible that the Tarentum, one of the central areas of celebration, was moved near the temple of Rome and Venus during the Claudian and Antoninian festivals. This further highlights the importance of the city, as the temple was also known as the Temple of the City.22

196  The history of the Ludi Saeculares The themes celebrating the foundation of the city of Rome which were possibly present in the games of ce 148 do not occur that much in the documents of the Severan games of ce 204. In fact, it is possible that Antoninus Pius’ celebrations were not even considered as Ludi Saeculares during the third century, since Censorinus, in his account of the secular games, does not mention them at all. Moreover, the Severan inscription mentions that the games of ce 204 games were the seventh ones.23 As we saw from the account of Censorinus, it was traditionally assumed that the number of games carried out during the republican period amounted to four. As Augustus held the fifth games, it would seem logical that Severus considered the ludi of Domitian in ce 88 as the sixth and his own as the seventh, thus omitting both the Claudian and Antoninian celebrations. Therefore, it is plausible that, by the Severan period, a separation between two cycles, the Augustan and the Claudian ones, was acknowledged, although the account of Censorinus does generate some confusion: the author counts the Claudian games as the sixth, Domitian’s as the seventh and those of Septimius Severus as the eighth.24 The Severan games were the last of the Augustan cycle. However, one more set of games was celebrated after Severus. This was organised by Philip the Arab in ce 248, who followed Claudius’ and Antoninus Pius’ cycle. They were apparently regarded as a celebration of Rome’s thousandth birthday, but were also considered as Ludi Saeculares. This is suggested by coinage, as the city’s anniversary is celebrated as both a saeculum novum and a saeculum Augusti, with images similar to those of the Antonine celebrations. In ce 248, the history of the Ludi Saeculares concludes. The next ludi were supposed to be celebrated in the early fourth century, but they never happened. The reason which Emperors Constantine and Licinius did not hold them remains unknown. The hypothesis of Constantine’s sympathies towards Christianity for refuting the games is not a plausible explanation. He was indeed a follower of the traditional cults (although with monotheistic tendencies) until at least ce 312. Even after that, he was generally tolerant towards followers of traditional religion.25 The memory of the celebrations, however, survived. Poet Claudian, who worked in the court of Emperor Honorius and his magister militum Stilicho during late fourth and early fifth century ce, returned to the subject in his Panegyricus de Sexto Consulato Honorii Augusti. In the poem, Claudian (possibly a pagan himself) appears to remind the emperor of the tradition of the ludi,26 and it is sometimes suggested that Honorius indeed gave permission to those who practiced traditional religion to celebrate the Secular Games.27 Whether these games actually took place in ce 404, when the poem was written, we do not know. However, bearing the wider religious context of the period in mind, it would seem unlikely. The turn of the fourth and fifth centuries is characterised by strong anti-pagan legislations advanced by Emperors Theodosius and his son Honorius. Although pagan sacrifices had been banned by Constantine at the end of his reign, they were still tolerated until ce 391, after which traditional cults were banned by Theodosius. Honorius renewed these laws several times

The history of the Ludi Saeculares  197 during his reign, and excluded practitioners of traditional religion from governmental posts.28 In addition, it was Stilicho who burned the Sibylline Books which, as we have seen, traditionally bore a close connection to the celebration of Ludi Saeculares (although it is questionable that this was a religiously motivated act).29 As a result, if Honorius did indeed give permission to organise the ludi, their nature must have been strictly unofficial: for example, no coinage celebrating Secular Games, or a new saeculum, is known from this period. The last known words on the subject were recorded by the Byzantine historian Zosimus. In his history, written about 100 years after the age of Claudian, Honorius and Stilicho, he accused the Emperors Constantine and Licinius of neglecting the games in the beginning of the fourth century, and considered this as one of the main reason for the later downfall of the Roman Empire. Zosimus reminded his readers that the empire was secure as long as performances were made according to the advice of oracles, but when Diocletian resigned and new games were never conducted, Rome fell to decay and barbarism.30

Notes 1 Censorinus’ account on the Ludi Saeculares was part of his work De die natali liber (‘The Birthday Book’), which was written as a birthday present to his friend Quintus Caerellius. The book included topics related to birthdays and birth in general, such as the spirit of the birthday, pregnancy and growth in the womb. It nonetheless also contained wider subjects such as discussions on longevity, ­calendars, ages and centuries. 2 The story on the origins of the Ludi Saeculares is heavily linked to the family of the Valerii; for their relationship to the cult of the Tarentum, see Aronen 1989: 19–39. 3 Val. Max. 2.4.5; Plut. Publ. 21. 4 Zos 2.1–4. 5 Cens. 17.10–11. 6 Palmer 1974: 102–103. 7 Plut. Publ. 21; Plutarch mentions only one god of the underworld, Dis (or Pluto). 8 See Liv. Per. 49; Zos. 2.4; August. De civ. D. 3.18. A complete list of sources on the republican ludi is provided by Nilsson 1920: 1699–1700. 9 Galinsky 1996: 80–140; Zanker 1988: 101–166. 10 Beard 1990: 19–23. Originally, the council consisted of two priests, and was accordingly named the duoviri sacris faciundis. Later the number of priests increased to ten (the name changed to decemviri s.f.) and eventually to fifteen. In fact, Julius Caesar had added a sixteenth member to the group, but it retained its name as quindecimviri sacris faciundis. 11 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 4.62; Gell. NA 1.19. 12 Parke 1988: 206–207. 13 For comparing the nature of the republican games with those of Augustus, see Beard, North & Price 1998: pp. 201–206. 14 Parke 1988: 140. 15 Tac. Ann. 11.11. 16 Suet. Claud. 21.2.

198  The history of the Ludi Saeculares 17 See Pighi 1965: 131–136. 18 Aurel.Vict. Caes. 15. 19 Barnes 2008: 265–266. 20 Tac. Ann. 11.11; Zos. 2.4.3. 21 The coins: RIC 3 nos. 627, 629 and 694a. Other examples and similar subjects can also be found from this period. The story of Aeneas leaving Troy: Verg. Aen. 2.707–744; sow and piglets as a sign of Alba Longa: Verg. Aen. 8.42–49; Mars and Rhea Silvia: Liv. 1.4. 22 Beard, North & Price 1998: 206. 23 Pighi, comm. lud. sept. I, 1: [Comme]ntarium [ludorum saecu]lar[iu]m [se]ptim[orum. 24 Cens. 17.10. Zosimus does not include the games of Antoninus Pius either. 25 Even if Constantine’s attitude perhaps became more critical towards paganism from ce 324 on, old cults were tolerated and apparently he kept the office of pontifex maximus, high priest of the traditional religion, until the end of his reign. Lee 2006: 168–176. 26 Claud. VI Cons. Hon. 388–391. 27 Bunson 1994: 246–247. Honorius’ permission to celebrate the Ludi Saeculares was already suggested in 1558 by Onofrio Panvinio in his De Ludis Saecularibus Liber (this was apparently the first extensive study of the Secular Games). 28 Jones 1966: 323. 29 Alan Cameron claims that Stilicho’s decision was based on the intention to politically, and not religiously, destroy unsuitable material. He apparently otherwise treated pagan aristocrats respectfully. It is possible that Stilicho destroyed an ‘unofficial’ copy of the Sibylline Books, in other words, one of the many that had been circulating around Rome and the provinces for many centuries. Cameron 2011: 213–217. 30 Zos. 2.7.

Bibliography Aronen, J. (1989). Il culto arcaico nel Tarentum a Roma e la gens Valeria. Arctos, 23, pp. 19–39. Barnes, T. (2008). Aspects of the Severan Empire, Part I: Severus as a New Augustus. NECJ, 35.4, pp. 251–267. Beard, M. (1990). Priesthood in the Roman Republic. In: M. Beard, and J. North, eds., Pagan Priests. Religion and Power in the Ancient World, 1st ed. London: Duckworth, pp. 17–48. Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S. (1998). Religions of Rome. Vol. 1: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bunson, M. (1994). Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire. New York: Facts on File. Cameron, A. (2011). The Last Pagans of Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Galinsky, K. (1996). Augustan Culture: An Interpretive Introduction. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Jones, A. (1966). The Decline of the Ancient World. London : Longman. Lee, A. (2006). Traditional Religions. In: N. Lenski, ed., The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.159–179. Nilsson, N. (1920). Saeculares ludi. RE, 1 A2, pp. 1696–1720. Palmer, R. (1974). Roman Religion and Roman Empire. Five Essays. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

The history of the Ludi Saeculares  199 Panvinio, O. (1558). De Ludis Saecularibus Liber. Venice. Parke, H. (1988). Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity. London: Routledge. Pighi, G. (1965). De ludi saecularibus populi Romani Quiritum libri sex. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Verlag P. Schippers N.V. Zanker, P. (1988). The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Index

Africa 9, 28, 43, 94, 127, 129, 131, 160 n41, 160 n50; as birthplace of Severus 17, 31; in coinage 160 n44, 169; importance for food supply 114–17, 122, 133 n36, 146, 148–50; Roman officials from 46, 58 n28 Alexander Severus 6, 20 n30, 22 n91, 99, 108 n75, 192; and imperial cult 79; and Roman historiography 9, 11, 21 n54, 133 n38 Antonine dynasty 1, 64, 67, 74–5, 83 n23, 136 n109, 145; coinage of 134 n83, 147, 161 n75; imperial ideology of 18, 27–30, 47–50, 168, 170, 170 n1; and Severans 47, 75, 81, 95, 107 n44, 130, 149 Antoninus Pius (see also Ludi Saeculares) 29–30, 49, 114, 160 n41, 170 n1; coinage of 29, 38 n13, 113, 147, 160 n44 Apollo 69–70, 89, 123–4, 130–1, 134 n76; and Augustus 73, 77–8, 86 n80; in coinage 14; in Ludi Saeculares 33, 112, 122, 126, 134 n74, 140, 143–4; role in Roman religion 123–5, 134 n69, 134 n75, 157 n3; temple of 53, 57 n1, 194 army 36–7, 71, 73, 80, 114–15, 128–9; and Antonines 93–4, 98, 146, 152; in civil war 31, 33, 151–2; improvement of position 15, 65, 100–1, 151–2; relationship with Severan dynasty 48–9, 92–4, 100–1, 107 n38, 117–18, 149–54; role in Ludi Saeculares 149, 168 astrology 126–31, 135 n88, 135 n96, 144 Augustus (see also Ludi Saeculares) 9, 14, 43, 45–7, 54, 71, 74, 77–8, 95, 113–14, 118, 161 n75, 165; and Apollo 53, 57 n1, 78, 86 n80, 125, 157n3; and astrology 128; building programme of 33, 45, 56, 193; coinage of 14, 33, 161 n69; cultural programme of 16, 34, 39 n36, 71; Elagabalus and 107 n44; and

imperial cult 77–8, 85 n79, 86 n87; and Jupiter Optimus Maximus 73, 157n3; reign of 16, 34; Septimius Severus and 34, 42, 45, 59 n56, 60 n59, 75, 84 n50, 100–1, 133 n35, 165; and Trojan Games 155, 162 n80 Bacchus 113, 144–6, 149 Campus Martius 80, 157; development of 6, 20 n30, 60 n86, 73; as a site for inscription 2, 8, 20 n27, 34, 42, 45, 157, 165–6; Ludi Saeculares conducted on 33, 193–4; purification rites conducted on 41, 46, 55; significance of 56–7 Capitoline Hill 60 n72; and Ludi Saeculares 6, 33, 41, 73, 92, 120, 122, 140, 158 n19, 194; and Severan building policy 53–5 Caracalla 11–12, 17, 52, 92–3, 112, 126, 128, 132 n4, 148, 166, 169–70; and Antonines 95; and the army 150–2; coinage of 97, 100–1, 147–9; expanding citizenship 169–70; imperial cult and 79; interested in astrology 135 n96; marriage with Plautilla 43, 149; and moral legislation 72, 83 n23, 100–1; and murder of Geta 7–8, 76, 82, 129; nominated as Augustus 97; nominated as Caesar 31; organising Ludi Honorarii 103, 105; organising Ludi Saeculares 45–6; participating in Ludi Saeculares 63, 90, 92, 101, 112, 145, 166; and religion 82, 126, 134 n84, 145; Syrian identity of 22 n91; in Trojan Games 154, 157 Carmen Saeculare 43, 65, 140, 143–5, 154–5, 168; Apollo and Diana in 124–6, 134 n74, 144; and army 149–50, 153–4; in Augustan Ludi Saeculares 33, 157 n3; Bacchus and Hercules in 144–6;

Index  201 children as performers of 143, 145, 162 n86; as a closing act 112–13, 122, 131 Carthage 69, 124, 134 n78, 146, 148, 160 n48 Cassius Dio 9–12, 14, 21 n48, 21 n52, 44, 54, 107 n44, 162 n86; on Antonine dynasty 49–50, 93, 114, 116, 131; on astrology 127–8; audience of 48, 84 n55; on civil war 39 n37, 50–1, 60 n64, 151, 161 n75; criticises Severus 45, 48–50, 59 n48, 92; general attitude towards Severus 10, 43–5; on imperial building policy 45, 55, 109 n92, 145 ; on Ludi Saeculares 11, 168; and morality 72, 85 n56, 100; Pertinax’ funerals described by 79–81; pessimism of 27, 31–2; on public festivals 36, 43, 104–5, 117; on religion 58 n29; Roman identity of 47, 153–4; as a senatorial historian 47–8, 153–4, 168; and Severus’ African origins 17, 22 n87; on Severus and the army 149–50, 153 Censorinus 38 n30, 126–7, 135 n88, 137 n116; on Ludi Saeculares 12, 130, 142, 192–3, 196, 197 n1 Ceres 70, 97, 113, 115, 119–20 children 67, 79, 137 n116, 142, 146, 160 n50, 165, 170, 192; boys in Trojan Games 154–5, 162 n86; in coinage 83 n23, 132 n13; performing Carmen Saeculare 33, 42, 96, 112, 122, 140, 143, 145, 158 n19, 158 n20; republican Ludi Saeculares and 38 n31; in Roman religion 140–3, 158 n15; and Severan moral laws 100–1, 152; significance in Severan Ludi Saeculares 65–6, 165, 170 Circus Maximus 53, 91, 130–1 citizenship 11, 34–5, 71; Antonine dynasty and 27–8, 160 n41; in Aristotelian tradition 48–9; and extension by Caracalla 169–70, 170 n1; identity 19 n15, 67, 161 n75, 170; and religion 78, 103, 124; and Severans 96, 151–2, 169–70 civil war 1, 3–4, 13, 39 n37, 42, 55, 71–4, 97, 105, 151, 194; against Clodius Albinus 1, 31, 34, 36, 81, 151; against Pescennius Niger 1, 31, 34, 150–1; Augustan 34, 42, 71, 84 n50, 96, 124; Cassius Dio on 10, 31–2, 51, 60 n64; Flavian 39 n39, 55, 73–4, 150; and food supply 113–19; Herodian on 32; Ludi Saeculares and 153; republican 51, 60 n64, 84 n50

Claudius (see also Ludi Saeculares) 78, 115, 155, 195 clementia 50, 59 n56, 156 Clodius Albinus 1, 31, 36, 43, 49–50, 81; support of 49, 59 n56 Commodus 9, 36, 94, 101, 114, 116; coinage of 145, 160 n44; and great fire of Rome 5, 53, 66; and imperial cult 78–9; relationship with the senate 30–2, 38 n22, 50; religious policy of 74, 113, 129, 136 n104, 145; and Severus 81, 95, 127 concordia 97–101, 129; as goddess 44, 97, 99 Constantine (the Great) 14, 90, 101, 196, 198 n25 Dea Caelestis 148, 160 n47 Diana 70, 124, 126, 130, 134 n78, 144; in coinage 134 n83; honoured in sellisternium 64, 69, 89, 112, 143, 157; in Ludi Saeculares 33, 112, 122, 124, 130, 134 n74, 140; role in Roman religion 24–6, 134 n80, 134 n84 Didius Julianus 31, 36, 43, 79–80, 115 Dis and Proserpina 33, 55, 192–4, 197 n7 Domitian (see also Ludi Saeculares) 35, 48, 73, 75, 114, 152–3; coinage of 33, 64, 74; and imperial cult 74; palace of 53, 131; relationship with the senate 28 Eileithyia 89, 106 n13; in Augustan Ludi Saeculares 33, 106 n17, 140, 194; as Lucina 90; in Roman coinage 106 n3, 119; in Severan Ludi Saeculares 89–90; worship in Rome 90, 106 n7 Elagabalus 22 n91, 101, 107 n44, 133 n38, 152; religious views of 83 n23, 128, 135 n99; in Roman historiography 11, 72, 85 n56, 136 n104 equites 29, 73, 80, 96, 100 Flavian dynasty 1, 60 n80, 85 n61, 73, 75, 85 n64; building policy of 39 n39, 73–4; and imperial cult 78; and Severans 39 n39, 55 Forum Romanum 43, 53–5, 79, 115, 170 n1 Fulvia Plautilla 7–8, 43, 97 Fulvius Plautianus 7–8, 43–4, 104, 112, 132 n4; role in Ludi Saeculares 92, 112, 149 gender 17, 102, 141, 168; and identity 4, 20 n18, 20 n21

202 Index Geta 12, 17, 97, 101, 128, 145, 150; coinage of 100, 148; murder of 7–8, 76, 82, 129, 152; organising Ludi Honorarii 103, 105; organising Ludi Saeculares 45–6; performing in Ludi Saeculares 63, 90, 92, 112, 122, 166; and the senate 52 Golden Age 28, 57, 117, 122, 133 n47, 140, 165, 169; Augustan concept of 45, 71, 116–17; and Carmen Saeculare 165; in coinage 74, 132 n13; Ludi Honorarii and 106; Ludi Saeculares as a beginning of 3, 5, 34, 42, 68, 102, 153, 169, 193–4; Tellus and 112–13, 119, 132 n13 Hadrian 113–14, 136 n109, 146, 160 n41; and astrology 128; coinage of 113, 160 n44; relationship with the senate 29–30, 48–50 Hercules 17, 56, 69, 123–4, 135 n100; in coinage 113, 144–5; and Severan family 113, 145; temple of 145 Herodian 9–11, 17, 21 n52, 36, 66, 151; audience of 10–11, 36; on Caracalla 82, 135 n96; on Commodus 114; on Ludi Saeculares 168; pessimism of 32; on Septimius Severus 47, 49, 54, 92–3, 116, 151 Historia Augusta 36, 43–4, 129, 133 n42, 135 n85, 151; on Commodus 114, 136 n104; and food shortages in Rome 115–17; on Gordian III 104; on Paccia Marciana 160 n50; and senators executed by Severus 49; on Severus’ African identity 17, 22 n90; Severus’ astrological beliefs in 127, 135 n95, 136 n106; as a source 9–11, 21 n52, 21 n54, 127 Horace 34, 71, 194; as the author of Carmen Saeculare 65, 90, 113, 124, 126, 140 identity 67, 118, 125; definition of 3–5, 20 n18; Greek 12, 47; and memory 7; and ritual 1, 4; Roman 19 n14, 19 n15, 20 n18, 20 n21, 47–8, 57, 68, 72, 105, 146, 154, 167, 169–70, 170 n6; of Septimius Severus 58 n28, 17 indulgentia 147–8, 157, 160 n41, 167 Italy 49, 69, 93–4, 106 n14, 160 n42; Antonine policy and 29–30, 168; audience from 13–14, 37, 167; in Carmen Saeculare 144; food supply of 115–16, 133 n36, 148–9; in imperial coinage 147–8, 160 n43; matrons from 96; members of the quindecimviri from

46; and Roman identity 146–8, 153–4, 159 n35, 161 n75, 168; senators from 47–8 Julia Domna 17–18, 72, 79, 91–3, 96–8, 100, 103, 166, 169; and army 107 n38; and astrology 127, 129, 170 n1; building patronage of 16, 33, 66; and Carmen Saeculare 145; circle of 9–10, 12, 21 n45, 21 n62; coinage of 66, 96–7, 100, 148; identity of 22 n91; in imperial iconography 17, 44, 54, 56, 60 n76, 76, 79, 126, 130, 134 n83, 148–9; as the leader of Roman women 77, 91; as mother 76, 92, 94–8, 102, 166; participating in sellisternium 64, 69, 112, 143, 157; and public memory 9; and religion 128, 135 n99, 148, 160 n46, 160 n47; and Vestal Virgins 66–7 Julia Maesa 95 Julia Mamaea 95 Julia Soaemias 96, 108 n50 Juno 53, 90–2, 101–2, 107 n24, 141; and childbirth 90–1; as goddess of moon 126; honoured in sellisternium 64, 69–70, 89, 112, 143, 157; identified with Dea Caelestis 148; and Ludi Saeculares 33, 90–2, 140, 166 Jupiter Optimus Maximus 70, 123, 130; in Ludi Saeculares 33, 72–3, 91–2, 101–2, 140, 166–7; role in Roman religion 73–6, 82, 85 n67, 86 n100, 103, 125, 145, 157 n3; temple of 53, 57 n1, 73, 194 lectisternium 69–70, 123 Lepcis Magna 17, 31, 112, 135 n100, 145; arch of 43–4, 75, 99, 149; culture of 22 n87; visit of Severus 43, 148 Liber Pater 17, 135 n100, 145 Livia 9, 72, 95 Livy 71, 124, 134 n69, 140; on Campus Martius 6, 56; on Palatine 52 Ludi Honorarii 55; celebrated by Severus 91, 103, 105–6, 109 n93, 157, 167 Ludi Saeculares (Secular Games) 1–4, 6–9, 13–16, 19 n14, 22 n82, 33–4, 36–7, 39 n36, 113, 124, 126, 129–31, 136 n107, 149, 153–7, 158 n15, 162 n81, 165–70; of Antoninus Pius 29, 39 n34, 41, 130, 168, 195–6, 198 n24; attributed to Honorius 196–7, 198 n27; of Augustus 2, 6, 15–16, 19 n12, 20 n27, 33–4, 38 n31, 41–2, 46, 65, 71, 90, 103,

Index  203 106 n3 113, 124, 126, 130, 140, 142, 149, 168, 193–6, 197 n13; celebrated by Valesius 142–3, 192–3; celebrating Severan moral laws 100–2; chronology of 192–7; of Claudius 2, 20 n27, 37, 39 n34, 41, 130, 155, 157, 168, 195–6; coinage celebrating 144–5; of Domitian 20 n27, 37, 39 n34, 41–2, 63, 89, 130, 157, 195–6; first day rituals of 72–3, 75–6, 82, 145; first night rituals of 63–6, 69–72, 77; Golden Age and 3, 5, 34, 42, 68, 102, 116–17, 153, 169, 193–4; history of 12, 33–4, 36–7, 39 n34, 41–2, 137 n115, 141–3, 158 n16, 192–7, 197 n2; organisation of 41, 45–6, 50–7, 58 n17, 122, 168; of Philip the Arab 132 n13, 196; republican 33, 38 n31, 42, 55, 124, 130, 142, 193–4, 197 n13; second day rituals of 89–92, 95–8, 102–6; second night rituals of 89–90; Severan authors on 11–12, 127, 192–3, 196, 197 n1; Severan building policy and 16, 43–5, 52–7, 130–1; third day rituals of 112, 122, 126, 131, 140, 143–4; third night rituals of 112–13, 119; tradition of 2–3, 14, 16, 142; Vestal Virgins and 54, 63–4, 66, 68–9, 102–3, 120–2 Marcus Aurelius 1, 28, 93–5, 114, 130, 149, 156; Cassius Dio on 27, 31, 49–50, 93; coinage of 98; Elagabalus and 107 n44; Herodian on 32, 38 n22; and imperial cult 78–9; imperial ideology of 17–18, 160 n41; relationship with the senate 30; religious policy of 90, 145; Septimius Severus and 48, 50, 81, 95, 107 n42 marriage 48, 71, 85 n76, 96–9, 166, 168; and imperial policy 76, 152–3; legislation on 65, 100, 193; of Septimius Severus and Julia Domna 92, 101–2, 127, 166; and Vestal Virgins 83 n23, 152 memory 5, 22, 55–6, 70, 81, 84 n50, 160 n50; damnatio memoriae 7–8, 21 n38; 79, 81; and Severan Ludi Saeculares 64, 68, 96, 102, 144, 157, 165; significance of 7–9, 15, 21 n32 Moirae 33, 64–6, 72, 90, 112, 194; in coinage 119; as Parcae 64–5, 140, 194 moon, moon–goddess 112, 129, 131, 134 n84, 144; and Antonines 134 n83; in coinage 100, 134 n83; Diana as 124–6,

131, 134 n74, 134 n78, 144; Luna as 126, 130, 134 n83, 134 n84; and Severans 126, 134 n83 morality 4, 91, 168; immorality of women 34, 71–2; legislation concerning 65, 72, 83 n15, 100–1, 168, 170 n1; moral reforms 39 n36, 71, 76, 83 n23, 84 n53, 166, 193; as a virtue 20 n21, 34 mother, motherhood 67, 90, 94–5, 101, 166; in coinage 97; Julia Domna as 54, 76, 92, 94–5, 98, 149, 166, 169 Nero 72–4, 85 n56, 118, 132 n27, 150, 156, 168; coinage of 14, 115; and imperial cult 78 Paccia Marciana 127, 148, 160 n50 Palatine Hill 73, 144; and Ludi Saeculares 6, 33, 41, 122, 140, 194; and Severan building policy 52–5, 129–31 Parthia 13, 34, 43, 93–4, 151, 170 Pertinax 31, 54, 79–81, 86 n95 Pescennius Niger 1, 13, 31, 75, 93, 115, 150; support of 127, 151–2 Philip the Arab 10, 104, 132 n13, 196 quindecimviri sacris faciundis 16, 69, 124–5, 142, 144, 158 n16, 193–4; composition of 46, 58 n28; organising Ludi Saeculares 41–2, 45–6, 58 n17, 193–5; originally as duoviri and decemviri sacris faciundis 124, 197 n10; participating in Ludi Saeculares 63–4, 66, 73, 90–2, 112, 122 religion 2, 4, 18, 65, 70, 73, 82, 90, 102, 115, 120, 122–9, 132 n7, 134 n61, 136 n102, 158 n15; anti-pagan legislation 196–7; Capitoline triad 92, 107 n26; children and 140, 143; Christianity 2, 18, 23 n94, 70–1, 77, 84 n43, 90, 123, 125, 132 n7, 196; and Constantine the Great 196, 198 n25; eastern cults 18, 123, 128–9, 135 n99, 135 n100, 136 n102, 136 n103, 136 n106, 160 n46; imperial cult 29, 77–82, 85 n79; ‘Jovian theology’ 73–7, 85 n68; monotheism 123, 135 n99, 196; Mithraism 18, 129, 135 n100, 136 n104, 136 n106; and senate 46; Septimius Severus and traditional cults 145 saeculum 33, 38 n30, 127, 141, 158 n10, 196–7; celebrated in Ludi Saeculares 42, 66, 68, 72, 116, 119; and Ludi Honorarii

204 Index 103, 106; saecularia sacra 97; and Sibylline Books 45, 96, 107 n46 sellisternium 64, 66, 69–70; held in Ludi Saeculares 33, 69, 71–2, 89, 112, 126, 143, 157 senate, senatorial class 9–10, 37, 37 n10, 58 n21, 84 n 55, 146, 168, 170; and Antonine dynasty 28–31, 38 n13, 48–50, 170 n1; Caracalla and 82; composition of 46–8; duties of 69, 75; in Ludi Saeculares 37, 96, 107 n49, 154; moral laws and 100, 168; organising Ludi Saeculares 45–6, 168; purge in 31, 49; relationship with Severus 4, 31, 43, 47–52, 54, 59 n56, 79–81, 92, 117, 151, 168 Septimius Severus (see also Ludi Saeculares) 1, 4–5, 16–18, 19 n3, 36, 38 n24, 44, 76–7, 79–81, 83 n23, 96–7, 126, 135 n85, 145–6, 148–52, 156–7, 160 n42, 160 n48, 160 n50, 165–7, 169, 170 n1, 196; in Africa 43, 127, 148; African identity of 17, 22 n87, 22 n90, 22 n91, 58 n28, 137 n119, 145, 160 n44, 169; and the Antonine dynasty 27, 47, 50–1, 59 n53, 75, 81, 95, 107 n44; and the army 48–9, 92–4, 117–18, 149–53; and astrology 126–31, 135 n95, 135 n96, 137 n113; as an ‘Augustan’ emperor 22 n82, 34, 45, 51, 54, 60 n59, 71–2, 75, 144, 153; biography of 11, 127, 133 n35; building programme of 5, 16, 33, 38 n27, 43–5, 53–6, 97, 109 n92, 129–31, 147, 169; and Carmen Saeculare 145; and civil wars 1, 13, 31–3, 43, 50, 71, 81, 84 n50, 93, 113–16, 118–19, 151; coinage of 15, 97, 99–100, 113, 115, 144, 147–51, 160 n44; and contemporary writers 9, 17, 21 n52, 31–3, 38 n22, 44–5, 47–51, 92–3, 100, 104, 130, 149–50, 153, 168; declaring Ludi Honorarii 105–6, 109 n93, 167; death of 7, 95, 150; food supply and 114–19, 122, 133 n38, 149; and imperial cult 79–82; and Jupiter Optimus Maximus 75, 82, 91–2, 102, 145; moral legislation of 65, 72, 100–1; organising Ludi Saeculares 41, 45–7; performing rituals in Ludi Saeculares 63–4, 68, 73, 75, 82, 90–2, 101–3, 112, 120, 122; relationship with the senate 31, 43, 46–52, 54, 59 n56, 80–1, 168;

and religion 128–9, 131, 136 n106, 145, 159 n32; rise to power 1, 31–3, 74, 153; in Rome 43–5; and Trojan Games 154, 157; war against Parthia 13, 34, 43, 93–4, 151 Septizodium 45, 53, 129–31, 136 n109, 137 n113, 137 n119, 169 Serapis 17, 135 n100, 136 n106 Severan dynasty 18, 53, 57, 72, 92, 145, 148, 154; Antonines and 95, 136 n109; army and 150, 152; and Christianity 22 n94; coinage during 100; Flavians and 73–5; Herodian on 32; and imperial cult 78, 81; and moral reforms 76, 101; and religion 126, 128–9, 135 n96, 135 n99, 135 n100, 160 n46; and Vestal Virgins 66–8 Sibylline Books 57 n1, 73, 107 n46, 125, 141, 194, 197; consultation of 69, 141, 144; introduced to Rome 194; ordering the celebration of Ludi Saeculares 45, 58 n17, 90, 96, 143, 194 sun, sun-god 100, 112, 123, 136 n102; Apollo as 124–5, 131, 134 n74, 134 n75, 144; and astrology 126–9; in coinage 100; El’Gabal 128, 135 n99, 152; Sol Indiges 135 n98; Sol Invictus 129–30, 135 n98, 136 n102 Tarentum 41, 55–7, 63–4, 142, 192–5, 197 n2; in coinage 98 Tellus (Terra Mater) 113, 132 n7, 132 n9, 132 n10, 133 n48; in Ara Pacis Augustae 119–20; in Augustan Ludi Saeculares 33, 194; in imperial coinage 113, 132 n13; in Carmen Saeculare 140; in Severan Ludi Saeculares 112, 119 Tertullian 9, 12, 18, 121, 123, 134 n61; on public shows 35–6 Tiber 56, 97–8, 103, 106 n3, 142, 192 Titus 48, 73–4 Trajan 28, 33, 48–9, 74, 146–7, 160 n41 triumphal arch: of Augustus 54; of Lepcis Magna 43–4, 75, 99, 149; of Severus in Rome 45, 52, 54–5, 145, 156; of Tiberius 54 Trojan Games 131, 140, 157, 162 n85; history of 154–6, 162 n80; in Ludi Saeculares 154, 157, 162 n81, 162 n86, 167; as war-ritual 155–7 Ulpian 12, 101, 108 n75, 128

Index  205 Valerius Maximus 142, 192 Valerius Publicola 143, 192–3 Venus 70, 97, 119–20, 130, 162 n80; temple of 155, 195 Vespasian 17, 48, 55, 73–4 Vesta 70, 83 n23, 121, 132 n7, 192; and Julia Domna 67; temple of 54, 67, 83 n23 Vestal Virgins 54, 63–4, 66–9, 72, 91–2, 102–3, 167; identity of 67; in coinage 66, 195; and Italy 146; role in Roman religion 67, 120–2; and Severans 66–8, 83 n23, 101 Virgil 57, 71, 144, 146, 155, 194

women 45, 56, 58 n21, 66, 77, 79, 83 n23, 103; during the second day of Ludi Saeculares 89–92, 95–6, 102, 103, 106, 122, 166; gender role of 98, 101; immorality of 34, 71–2, 108 n50, 166; and legislation 101, 152–3; performing sellisternium 33, 64, 69–72, 89, 126, 143, 157, 165; and Roman identity 20 n21 Zosimus 45, 96; on Ludi Saeculares 90, 142–3, 192, 194–5, 197, 198 n24