RomanRepublican Augury
FreedomandControl
LINDSAYG.DRIEDIGER-MURPHY
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
©LindsayG.Driediger-Murphy2019
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted FirstEditionpublishedin2019
Impression:1
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2018955536
ISBN978–0–19–883443–4
PrintedandboundinGreatBritainby ClaysLtd,ElcografS.p.A.
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
Preface
Thisbookisarevised,expanded,andupdatedversionofmyDPhil thesis(2007–11).Iwouldliketothankallthosewhomadeitpossible tobringthemonographtofruition,especiallymygraduatesupervisors,EdBispham,AnnaClark,andSimonPrice.Thecommentsof myexaminersandassessors,NeilMcLynn,JohnNorth,Jonathan Prag,andNicholasPurcell,weretremendouslyhelpful.JohnNorth, NicholasPurcell,andananonymouspeer-reviewerforOUPpainstakinglyreadthemanuscriptindraftandimproveditimmeasurably. Anyerrorsthatremainareofcoursemyown.
Manycolleaguesofferedhelp,advice,andencouragementalong theway,includingBorisChrubasik,EstherEidinow,MichaelFlower, AndrewGregory,AndrewLintott,WolfgangdeMelo,TeresaMorgan, LuciaNixon,ScottNoegel,ChristopherPelling,CatherineSteel, PeterToohey,thescholarsoftheFestusLexiconProjectandofthe FragmentsoftheRomanRepublicanOrators,andmanyotherpatient colleaguesandfriendsinOxford,Nottingham,andCalgary.Papers relatingtothisprojectwerepresentedatseminarsorconferencesin AnnArbor,Calgary,Cambridge,Kavala,Leeds,London,Oxford, Princeton,andQuebecCity,andIamgratefultotheorganizersand participantsattheseeventsfortheirstimulatingfeedback.
ThisresearchwassupportedbytheSocialSciencesandHumanities ResearchCouncilofCanada,aswellasfundingfromtheFondation Hardtpourl’étudedel’antiquitéclassiqueandtheUniversityof Calgary.Fundingformygraduateworkwasalsoprovidedbythe GovernmentofAlberta,theMacKenzieKingScholarshipTrust, theJ.ArmandBombardierInternationalistFellowship,University College,Oxford,andtheFacultyofClassics(UniversityofOxford), toallofwhichIamdeeplygrateful.IthanktheDepartmentof ClassicsandReligionandtheFacultyofArtsattheUniversity ofCalgaryforacrucialsabbaticalin2018.Thestaffatthelibraries oftheBodleianandSacklerinOxford,theFondationHardtin Geneva,theInstituteofClassicalStudiesinLondon,theUniversity ofNottingham,andtheTaylorFamilyDigitalLibraryinCalgary workedtirelesslyto findtheresourcesIneeded.Iwouldalsoliketo thankthestaffatOxfordUniversityPress,includingCharlotte
Loveridge,GeorginaLeighton,andtheproductionteam,especially KavyaRamuandMalcolmTodd,foralltheirhelpandcare.My researchassistant,KathrineBertram,wasindefatigableingathering booksandarticles,checkingthebibliography,andhelpingtocompile theindices.
Finally,Iwouldliketothankallthosefamilymembersandfriends whohavebornewithmethroughoutthisprocess,especiallymy parents,mysisterRoxanneandbrother-in-lawJace,mycatMira (forchewingon,butnotdestroying,manybooks),andaboveallmy husbandWilliam:IreallydoloveyoumorethanIloveCicero.Lastly, allmythankstotheOnewithwhomnothingisimpossible: ‘Teachme todoyourwill,foryouaremyGod;mayyourgoodSpiritleadmeon levelground.’
1.DoAsISay,NotAsIDo?ReportversusReality inAugury51
1.2.Principle1intheHighandLateEmpire:Comments onSignification
1.3.Principle1intheHighandLateEmpire:Claimsthat AuguralRulesGaveHumanstheFreedomto AcceptorRejectSigns
1.4.Principle1intheMiddle(andLate)Republic:Claims thatHumanAwarenessofSignsDeterminedtheirValidity
1.5.Principle2intheEarlyPrincipate:TheClaimthatAugural RulesGaveHumansFreedomto ‘Create’ Signsby ReportingThem
1.6.Principle2intheLateRepublic:TheClaimthatHumans ContrivedAuspicationsoastoReceiveFavourableSigns andAvoidReceivingUnfavourableOnes
2.ConvenienceorConversation?Why ‘WatchingtheSky’ WasMorethanWishfulThinking127
2.3.DidSky-WatchingInvariablyProduceSigns?
2.4.WasSky-WatchingTechnicallySufficienttoProhibit Assemblies?
2.5.PossibleObjections:TheTimingof ServaredeCaelo
2.6.ButWouldItActuallyWork?
3.OutofControl?TheEffectsofAuguryonRoman PublicLife161
3.1.Introduction
3.2.Motives,Part1:Cicero,the AuguriumSalutis,and theLimitsofourKnowledge
3.3.Motives,Part2:TwoMethodologicalProblemsandTwo AbdicatingConsuls
3.4.Motives,Part3:TheConsul,hisColleague,aTribune,and RomanRespectforAugury
3.5.TheDynamicsofStateDivination
3.6.ButDidItReallyMatter?
3.7.Conclusion:WhenSignsSaidNo
TextsandAbbreviations
Abbreviationsofancientauthorsandworks,andofstandardreference works,arethoseofthe OxfordClassicalDictionary.Abbreviationsofjournals arethoseof L’Annéephilologique. Exceptionsandotherabbreviationsareas follows:
August. Doct.christ.Augustine, DeDoctrinachristiana
Cic. Rab.Perd.Cicero, ProRabirioPerduellionisReo
Donat. ad Ter. Adelph.Donatus, CommentaryonTerence’sAdelphoe Obseq.JuliusObsequens, LiberProdigiorum
Editionsusedinclude:
App. Hann.
App. BCiv.
Asc. Pis.
Viereck,P.,Roos,A.G.,andGabba,E.(1962), AppianiHistoriaRomanaI (Leipzig: Teubner).
Mendelssohn,L.andViereck,P.(1905), AppianiHistoriaRomanaII (Leipzig: Teubner),reprinted1986.
Lewis,R.G.andClark,A.C.(2006), Asconius: CommentariesonSpeechesofCicero (trans. Lewis,ed.Clark)(ClarendonAncientHistory Series)(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress). LatintextreprintedfromClark’ s OCT of1907.
August. Doct.christ. Green,R.P.H.(1995), Augustine:DeDoctrina christiana (OxfordEarlyChristianTexts) (Oxford:ClarendonPress).Referencesusethe traditionalnumbering,followedbyBulhart’ s numberinginthe CSEL editioninsquare brackets.
Cass.DioBoissevain,U.P.(1895–1931,repr.1955, 2002), CassiiDionisCocceianihistoriarum Romanarumquaesupersunt (Berlin: Weidmann),vols.1–3(text),vol.4(index historicus,ed.H.Smilda),vol.5(index Graecitatis,ed.W.Nawjin).IuseBoissevain’ s numbering,whichinthebookscitedmatches thenumberingofLeunclaviusandthe numberingintheLoebtranslationbyCary,E.
Cic. AdBrut.
Cic. Att.
Cic. Cat.
Cic. Div.
Cic. Dom.
Cic. Fam.
Cic. Har.Resp.
(1914–27), CassiusDio:RomanHistory, 9vols.(LoebClassicalLibrary)(Cambridge, MA:HarvardUniversityPress).
ShackletonBailey,D.R.(2002), Lettersto QuintusandBrutus.LetterFragments.Letter toOctavian.Invectives.Handbookof Electioneering (LoebClassicalLibrary) (Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress). Referencesusethe ‘vulgate’ numbering, followedbyShackletonBailey’snumbering (labelledSB)insquarebrackets.
ShackletonBailey,D.R.(1999), Cicero’ s LetterstoAtticus,4vols.(LoebClassical Library)(Cambridge,MA:Harvard UniversityPress).Referencesusethe ‘vulgate’ numbering,followedbyShackletonBailey’ s numbering(labelledSB)insquarebrackets.
Maslowski,T.(2003), M.TulliCiceronis Scriptaquaemanseruntomnia, fasc.17: OrationesinL.Catilinamquattuor (Munich andLeipzig:K.G.Saur).
Pease,A.S.(1920), M.TulliCiceronisDe Divinatione:LiberPrimus and(1923), M.Tulli CiceronisDeDivinatione:LiberSecundus (Urbana,IL:UniversityofIllinois).
Maslowski,T.(1981), M.TulliCiceronis Scriptaquaemanseruntomnia,fasc.21: OrationescumSenatuiGratiasEgit,Cum PopuloGratiasEgit,DeDomoSua,De HaruspicumResponsis (Stuttgart:Teubner).
ShackletonBailey,D.R.(2001), Cicero:Lettersto Friends (EpistulaeadFamiliares),3vols.(Loeb ClassicalLibrary)(Cambridge,MA:Harvard UniversityPress).Referencesusethe ‘vulgate’ numbering,followedbyShackletonBailey’ s numbering(labelledSB)insquarebrackets.
Maslowski,T.(1981), M.TulliCiceronis Scriptaquaemanseruntomnia,fasc.21: OrationescumSenatuiGratiasEgit,Cum PopuloGratiasEgit,DeDomoSua,De HaruspicumResponsis (Stuttgart:Teubner).
Cic. Leg.
Cic. Nat.D.
Cic. Phil.
Cic. Pis.
Cic. Prov.cons.
Cic. Q.Fr.
Cic. Sen.
Cic. Sest.
Cic. Vat.
Powell,J.G.F.(2006), M.TulliCiceronis:Dere publica,Delegibus,CatoMaiorDesenectute, LaeliusDeamicitia (OxfordClassicalTexts) (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress).
Pease,A.S.(1955), M.TulliCiceronisDe NaturaDeorum,LiberPrimus and(1958) M.TulliCiceronisDeNaturaDeorum,Libri SecundusetTertius (Cambridge,MA:Harvard UniversityPress).
ShackletonBailey,D.R.(1985), Cicero: Philippics (ChapelHillandLondon: UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress).
Nisbet,R.G.M.(1961), M.TulliCiceronisin L.CalpurniumPisonemoratio (Oxford: ClarendonPress).Reprinted1975.
Maslowski,T.(2007), M.TulliusCicero,fasc. 24: OratiodeProvinciisConsularibus,Oratio ProL.CornelioBalbo (Teubner)(Berlinand NewYork:DeGruyter).
ShackletonBailey,D.R.(2002), Lettersto QuintusandBrutus.LetterFragments.Letter toOctavian.Invectives.Handbookof Electioneering (LoebClassicalLibrary) (Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress). Referencesusethe ‘vulgate’ numbering, followedbyShackletonBailey’snumbering (labelledSB)insquarebrackets.
Powell,J.G.F.(2006), M.TulliCiceronis:Dere publica,Delegibus,CatoMaiorDesenectute, LaeliusDeamicitia (OxfordClassicalTexts) (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress).
Maslowski,T.(1986), M.TulliusCicero,fasc. 22: OratioProP.Sestio (Leipzig:Teubner).
Maslowski,T.(1995), M.TulliCiceronis Scriptaquaemanseruntomnia,fasc.23: OrationesInP.VatiniumTestem,Pro M.Caelio (StuttgartandLeipzig:Teubner).
Dion.Hal. Ant.Rom. Book1:Fromentin,V.(1998), Denys d’Halicarnasse.Antiquitésromaines. Introductiongénérale,LivreI (Budé)(Paris: LesBellesLettres).Book3:Sautel,J.-H.(1999),
Denysd’Halicarnasse.Antiquitésromaines, LivreIII (Budé)(Paris:LesBellesLettres). Books2,4,5,8,10:Jacoby,K.(1885–1905), DionysiHalicarnasensisantiquitatum Romanarumquaesupersunt (Leipzig: Teubner).Reprinted1967.
Donat. ad Ter. Adelph. Wessner,P.(1966), AeliDonatiCommentum Terenti,vol.2(Stuttgart:Teubner).
FestusLindsay,W.M.andMountford,J.F.(1930), GlossariaLatina,vol.4: Placidus,Festus (Paris: LesBellesLettres).Readingsarefromthis edition.References(labelledL)aretopage numbersinthemorecommonlycitededition ofLindsay,W.M.(1913), SextiPompeiFesti Deverborumsignificatuquaesupersuntcum Pauliepitome (Leipzig:Teubner),followedby pagenumbersinLindsayandMountford (labelledLM)insquarebrackets.
Gell.Marshall,P.K.(1990), A.GelliiNoctesAtticae, 2vols.(OxfordClassicalTexts)(Oxford: ClarendonPress).
LivyBooks1–5:Ogilvie,R.M.(1974), TitiLiviAb urbecondita,vol.1(OxfordClassicalTexts) (Oxford:ClarendonPress).
Books6–10:Walters,C.F.andConway, R.S.(1919), TitiLiviAburbecondita,vol.2 (OxfordClassicalTexts)(Oxford:Clarendon Press).
Books21–5:Briscoe,J.(2016), TitiLiviAburbe condita,vol.3(OxfordClassicalTexts) (Oxford:ClarendonPress).
Books26–30:Johnson,S.K.andConway, R.S.(1935), TitiLiviAburbecondita,vol.4 (OxfordClassicalTexts)(Oxford:Clarendon Press).Reprintedwithcorrections1953.
Books31–40:Briscoe,J.(1991), TitiLiviAb urbeconditaLibriXXXI–XL,2vols.(Stuttgart: Teubner).
Books41–5:Briscoe,J.(1986), TitiLiviAburbe conditaLibriXLI–XLV,vol.2(Stuttgart: Teubner).
Livy Per.
Macrob. Sat.
Rossbach,O.(1959), T.LiviAburbecondita Libri.Periochaeomniumlibrorum,Fragmenta Oxyrhynchireperta,IuliiObsequentis ProdigiorumLiber (Stuttgart:Teubner). Reprintof1910edition(Leipzig).
Kaster,R.A.(2011), MacrobiiAmbrosii TheodosiiSaturnalia (OxfordClassicalTexts) (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress).
Obseq.Rossbach,O.(1959), T.LiviAburbecondita Libri.Periochaeomniumlibrorum,Fragmenta Oxyrhynchireperta,IuliiObsequentis ProdigiorumLiber (Stuttgart:Teubner). Reprintof1910edition(Leipzig).
Plin. HN
Jan,L.vonandMayhoff,K.F.T.(1892–1909), C.PliniSecundiNaturalishistoriaelibri XXXVII (LeipzigandStuttgart:Teubner).
Plut. Mor. (Quaest.Rom.)Nachstädt,W.,Sieveking,W.,andTitchener,J. (1971), Plutarchus:Moralia,vol.2,second edition(Leipzig:Teubner).Referencesusethe pagenumbersoftheFrankfurteditionof Stephanus(1599).
Plut. Vit.
Ziegler,K.(1964–73), PlutarchiVitae Parallelae,3vols.,second–fourtheditions (Leipzig:Teubner);andGärtner,H.(2000), Plutarchus:VitaeParallelae,vol.1,fasc.1, fifth edition(MunichandLeipzig:K.G.Saur). IhaveusedZiegler–Gärtnerforthetext,but retainthemorecommonchapterand subdivisionnumberingoftheLoebeditionby Perrin,B.(1914–26), Plutarch:Lives (Loeb ClassicalLibrary)(Cambridge,MAand London:HarvardUniversityPress).
Polyb.Book3:deFoucault,J.andFoulon,E.(2004), Polybe:Histoires,LivreIII (Budé)(Paris:Les BellesLettres).
Book6:Weil,R.andNicolet,C.(1977), Polybe:Histoires,LivreVI (Budé)(Paris:Les BellesLettres).
Book10:Foulon,E.andWeil,R.(1990), Polybe:Histoires.LivreXetLivreXI (Budé) (Paris:LesBellesLettres).Divergentreadings
inWalbank,F.W.(1957–79), AHistorical CommentaryonPolybius (Oxford:Clarendon Press)andintherevisedLoebeditionsby W.R.Paton,F.W.Walbank,C.Habicht,and D.Olson(2010–12,LoebClassicalLibrary) (Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress) areindicatedasrelevantinthenotes.
Schol.Bob.Stangl,Th.(1964), Ciceronisorationum scholiastae.Asconius,scholiaBobiensia, scholiaPseudasconiiSangallensia,scholia CluniacensiaetrecentioraAmbrosianaac Vaticana,scholiaLugdunensiasive GronovianaeteorumexcerptaLugdunensia, 2vols.(Hildesheim:G.Olms).Reprintof Stangl’s1912edition(Vienna:F.Tempsky; Leipzig:G.Freytag).
Sen. Q.Nat. Hine,H.M.(1996), L.AnnaeusSeneca NaturaliumQuaestionumLibros (Stuttgart andLeipzig:Teubner).
Sen. Vit.Beat. Grimal,P.(1969), L.AnnaeiSenecaeDevita beata.Sénèque:Surlebonheur (Paris:Presses UniversitairesdeFrance).
Serv. Aen.Books1–2:Rand,E.K.(1946), Servianorumin Vergiliicarminacommentariorumeditionis Harvardianae,vol.2(TheCommentarieson AeneidI–II)(AmericanPhilological Association)(Oxford:Clarendon Press).
Books9–12:Murgia,C.E.andKaster,R.A. (2018), ServianiinVergiliAeneidosLibros IX–XIICommentarii (SocietyforClassical xvi TextsandAbbreviations
Books3–5:Stocker,A.F.andTravis,A.T. (1965), ServianoruminVergiliicarmina commentariorumeditionisHarvardianae, vol.3(TheCommentariesonAeneidIII–V) (AmericanPhilologicalAssociation)(Oxford: ClarendonPress).
Books6–8:Thilo,G.andHagen,H. (1881–1902), ServiiGrammaticiquiferuntur inVergiliicarminacommentarii,vol.2.1(In VergiliiAeneidosLibrosVI–VIIICommentarii) (Leipzig:Teubner).Reprinted1961.
Studies)(OxfordandNewYork:Oxford UniversityPress).
Suet. Iul., Aug., Tib., Claud. Kaster,R.A.(2016), C.SuetoniTranquilliDe vitaCaesarumlibrosVIIIetDeGrammaticis etRhetoribusLibrum (OxfordClassicalTexts) (Oxford:ClarendonPress).
Val.Max.Briscoe,J.(1998), ValeriMaximiFactaet DictaMemorabilia,2vols.(Stuttgartand Leipzig:Teubner).
Varro, ARD
Varro, Ling.
Varro, Rust.
Verg. Aen.
Cardauns,B.(1976), M.TerentiusVarro: AntiquitatesRerumDivinarum,2vols. (Mainz:AkademiederWissenschaftenund derLiteratur;Wiesbaden:FranzSteiner).
Goetz,G.andSchoell,F.(1910), M.Terenti VarronisDeLinguaLatinaquaesupersunt (Leipzig:Teubner).
Goetz,G.(1929), M.TerentiVarronisRerum RusticarumLibriTres (Leipzig:Teubner).
Conte,G.B.(2005), P.VergiliusMaroAeneis (Teubner)(BerlinandNewYork:De Gruyter).
Zonar.Dindorf,L.(1868–70), IoannisZonarae EpitomeHistoriarum (Leipzig:Teubner). Referencesaregivenusingthestandardbook andchapterdivisions,followed(inbrackets) byvolumeandpagenumberinDindorf.For easeofreference,Ialsoprovide(insquare brackets)thevolumenumber,pagenumber, andDiobooknumberofeachpassagein Boissevain’seditionofDio.
Othereditionsusedareidentifiedinthenotesasneeded.Wherenoeditionis given,Ihaveusedthe PackardHumanitiesInstitute(PHI) forLatintextsand the TLG forancientGreektexts.Translationsaremyown,unlessotherwise noted,thoughtheyhavebenefittedfromconsultationofmanypublished translations.InLatin,Iprintconsonantaluas ‘ v ’,andhavecapitalizedthe beginningsofsentences.
Introduction
0.1.OFGODSANDMEN
FortheRomans,thegodJupiterwasthe ‘all-powerfulfather’ (pater omnipotens),the ‘KingofGodsandMen,whoseawfulhand/dispersesthunderontheseasandland,/disposingallwithabsolute command’ (asDrydensomemorablytranslatedVenus’ invocationof thegod’spowerinVergil’ s Aeneid).1 Hewasthe ‘greatestandbest’ of alldivinepowers(JupiterOptimusMaximus,ashewascalledonthe CapitolineHillandininscriptionsthroughouttheEmpire).Inhis manifestationsintheRomanpast,itwashewhohadblessedthe foundingofthecitybyRomulus,hewhoasStayerofFlighthad preservedthecityfromdestruction,hewhoasFeretriusgaveRoman commandersthestrengthtokillrivalleadersinbattle.Itwastohim thattheconsuls,Rome’shighestregularmagistrates,sworetheiroath ofoffice,andatthefeetofhisimageintheCapitolinetemplethatthe triumphator,havingachievedthegreatestmilitarygloryofhislife, offeredthesymbolsofhisvictory.2
Jupiterwasalsothesourceofoneofthemostimportantformsof public,state-mandateddivinationatRome:3 augury,thesolicitation,
1 Verg. Aen. 1.229–30: Oquireshominumquedeumque/aeternisregisimperiiset fulmineterres.
2 ForoverviewsoftheseattributesofJupiter,seeWissowa1912:113–29;Koch 1937;Dumézil1977:153–82;Fears1981;Ziolkowski1992:79–94;Scheidand Montremy2008.
3 Cic. Div. 2.72,78;Cic. Leg. 2.20;Livy1.12.4–7;Linderski1986a:2226andn.312, withreferences.TheDanielisScholiast’sclaimthat ‘inthebooksoftheaugursJunois saidtopresideovertheauspices’ ([Iuno]inlibrisaugurumpraeessedicaturauspiciis: Serv.Dan. Aen.4.45)refersonlytomarriageauspices,notto auspiciapublica (Linderski1985:214n.36;Ziolkowski1993:217).
4 Introduction
graviusquamremsusceptamdirimi,siunusaugur ‘alio<die>’14 dixerit?
Quidmagnificentiusquampossedecernereutmagistratuseabdicent consules?Quidreligiosiusquamcumpopulo,cumplebeagendiiusaut dareautnondare?Quidlegem,sinoniurerogataest,tollere ... ;nihil domi,nihilmilitiaepermagistratusgestumsineeorumauctoritateposse cuiquamprobari?
Themodernreadersnortsderisively(andrightly)atCicero’ sassurancethatheisnothererevellinginthepowerofthecollegetowhich hehimselfhad finallygainedalong-covetedadmission.Butthe powersheattributestotheaugursherewererealenough,evenifhe omitsorobscurestherolesofotherparticipantsintheaugury system.15 Whatwillcarryconvictionforeverymodernreaderis Cicero’sfocusonthepowerthesystemgavetohumanbeings.For iftheaugurormagistratecouldpersuadeotherstoaccepthisclaim thatJupiterwasopposedtoagivenactionordecision,hecould influencethespecificcoursesofaction,thepoliticalopinions,sometimeseventheentirecareersofhiscontemporaries.16
ModernstudiesoftheeffectsofauguryonRomanlifehavebeen quicktotakeCicero’slead,understandingthisformofdivination primarilyinwhatanthropologistscall ‘functionalist’ terms,17 thatis, withparticularattentiontoitsroleinmaintainingandperpetuating Romansocialandpoliticalstructures.18 Likeotherformsofpublic divination,auguryissaidtohaveenhancedmagisterialandsenatorial
14 <die>issuppliedbyTurnebus;acceptedbyDyck2004:343;Powell2006:212.
15 Mostimportantlythesenate,whichhadthe finalsayindecidingwhetherto acceptarecommendationfromtheaugursonsomeofthesepoints(specifically,the invalidationoflawsandmagistracies).Ontheaccuracyofthispassage,seeSchmidt 1969:54–7;Powell2001;Dyck2004 adloc.Thisisonlyoneofnumerouspassages whereCiceroextolsthepowersoftheaugursandemphasizestheimportanceof augury:foralist,seeTucker1976.
16 InCicero’sview,suchpowerswerenecessarytoblockthepassageofproposals dangeroustothestate:Cic. Div. 2.43;2.74.AsaLateRepublican optimas,Cicerotends tostresstheobstructivepowerofdivinationasacheckontheallegeddemagogueryof the populares. Thisisespeciallyevidentinhistreatmentofthe legesAeliaetFufia, whichgovernedauspicationwithrespecttoassemblies:seeCh.2,nn.27,33.
17 Forhistoriographicaloverviewsoffunctionalisttheories,andsubsequentcriticismsofthem,seeHolmwood2005;Bell2009:esp.23–60.Foranoverviewof anthropologicalapproachestodivination,seeBeerden2013:ch.3.
18 Adifferentapproachhasbeentoconcentrateontheplaceoftheauspicesin defining,structuring,andcircumscribingthepreciseconstitutionalpowersofmagistrates:recentandlearnedexponentsareVervaet2014;Drogula2015;Berthelet2015; paperscollectedinBertheletandVervaet2015.AlthoughIwillengagewithsuch issuesasrelevant,theyarenotmyfocushere.
authority;tohavecalmedpanicandvalidateddecisionstakenby magistratesandsenate;tohaveenforcedmagisterialsubmissionto thesenateandpriestlybodies;tohavehelpedRomanstocopewith situationsofuncertaintyandhelplessness;andtohavecreateddelay inordertobuy ‘breathingspace’ forcalmerandmorereasoned discussionand/ortheapplicationof ‘ peerpressure ’ . 19 Itisseen aboveallasatooloftheelite,employedbythepoliticalauthorities tobolstertheirpoweroverthelowerorders,bythesenatemajorityto compelindividualpoliticians’ adherencetoanemergingconsensus, orbytheindividualmagistrateoraugurtoalterthebehaviourofhis rivalsandopponents.20
Yetthereisoneimportantdifferencebetweentheancientand modernapproacheswehavejustoutlined.ForCicero,thesocial andpoliticalpowerofaugurylayultimatelyinthefactthatthe augur(orthemagistrate)actedonbehalfofJupiter,astheonewho expressedhiswill.Inthecurrentconsensusviewofaugury,onthe otherhand,theseroleshavebeenreversed.Formanymodern scholars,itistheaugurorthemagistratewhoexpresseshisown willthroughaugury,andthegodwhothenactsontheman’sbehalf. ThusinthewordsofJerzyLinderski,themostdistinguishedmodern
19 Afewexamples:Vernant1974:10(divinationmakesdecision-makingappear more ‘objective’);Liebeschuetz1979:8ff.;Wardman1982:20,45;Scheid1985b:46 (augurylegitimatedpublicdecisions);Gordon1990a:192–3(religionasa ‘veil’ concealingthe ‘real-worldforces’ [i.e.actionsoftheelite]thattrulyshapedevents); North1990b:62–5(divinationcouldvalidatepublicdecisions,thoughnotehis criticismsofLiebeschuetz’semphasisonthis);Dowden1992:35;Orlin1997:90–1 (consultationsoftheSibyllineBookscalmedpanicandvalidatedsenatedecisions, thoughherecognizesthatconcernaboutthegodscouldalsoplayarole);Rosenberger 1998;Rüpke2005a(divinationboughttimeforthenegotiationofeliteconsensus);Rüpke 2005b(vol.3):1443–4(divinationaspsychologicalaid,socialprocess,andsymbol), 1450(divinationas ‘Widerspruchsschleifen,dieinsgesamtdenEntscheidungsprozeßin RichtungKonsensoptimieren’);Rüpke2012b:47,81,213(religionasameansofsocial controlofaristocraticcompetition,awayofkeepingelitesinlinewithinthesociopoliticalsystem);Berthelet2015:145–6(augurs ‘remplissaientunefonctiondecontrôle surlesmagistratsetlesassemblées ... assurantainsiunéquilibreentrel’auctoritas du Sénat,d’unepart,la potestas desmagistrats,d’autrepart’),232.The ‘controlofhelplessness ’ theoryisalsoprominentinstudiesofGreekdivination,e.g.Eidinow2007;Flower 2008:74ff.,243–4(divination’ s ‘primaryfunction isitsabilitytohelpindividualsand groupsmakedecisionsthatareparticularlydifficult,stressful,contentious,orconsequential’).ItsapplicabilitytoRomeisquestionedbyNorth1990b:62–4.
20 IntherecentandpromisinglytitledFranco-Germanproject ‘Divinationet décision’,forexample,thepossibilitythattheresultsofdivinationmightclashwith theinterestsoftheeliteisallbutignored(CahiersduCentreGustaveGlotz 16[2005]; Revuedel’histoiredesreligions 224.2[2007]).
scholarofaugury,thisformofdivinationreveals ‘anactive,boldbut carefulattitudeoftheRomanstowardsupernaturalpowers’,suchthat ‘oneshoulddowhateveronecouldtoappeasethem,butalsowhenever itwaspossibleoneshouldtrytogaincontroloverthem ... Like everybodyelse,thedeityhadtoservethestate. ... InRomethe fight forpoliticalpowerwasalsoa fightforcontroloverthegods.’21 Other influentialscholarsofRomanreligionexpresssimilarviews.ForJohn Scheid, ‘danslesritesdivinatoires,lesmagistratsoulesprêtresseulsont laparole,lesdieuxrestentsilencieux’,foritwasthepriestsandmagistrateswho ‘createdandannounced’ thedivinewill,22 withtheresult that ‘thegodswereunderthecontrolofthemagistrates’ . 23 ForJörg Rüpke,Romandivinationcanbeunderstoodwithoutanymentionof thegodsatall:itissimply ‘uneformedecomportementcollectifqui,en situationd’incertitude,àl’aidederôlessociauxdéfinispourl’interprétationetl’élaborationrituelledesignesstandardisés,rechercheet articulel’accordetledésaccord’ . 24 Andinspecializedstudiesofthe rulesofaugury,wereadagainandagainthatitwastheRoman magistrateoraugurwhowasthoughtto ‘create’ auguralreality, ‘binding’ Jupitertoactualizewhateversignshumanbeingschosetoreport.25
21 Linderski1986a:2207.
22 Scheid1987–9:133–4: ‘ilsontledroitdecréeretd’annoncerlavolontédivine’ .
23 Scheid2003a:150;similarly1985b:52,55;1987–9:126–7(‘lesréponsesdes dieuxsontpratiquementtoujourspositives,ellesvonttoujoursdanslesensdemandé etespéré’).ThereisnotmuchdistanceherefromSzemler1971:124:Romans ‘expectedthegodstofulfilltheirobligationstowardsthem,inmaintainingtheir goodwillandfendingoffhostilepowers.Thereligiousactsandceremonials,therefore,weredesignedintheorynotsomuchtopleasethegodsastobringaboutsome manifestationofthedivinitybyprofferingcertain formulae,thusexercisingcoercive forceuponthedivinitytoassistandcooperatewiththeindividualorcommunity’ . Scheid1985a:47marksadeparture,incallingdivinationa ‘dialogue’,butScheid’ s subsequentpublicationsrejecttheterm.
24 Rüpke2012a:479.Cf.thesummaryofRomanpublicreligioninRüpke2007b: 29: ‘the sacrapublica shouldbeunderstoodnotonlyasreligiousceremonialorganized bytheélitesoastoattachtheignorantmassestoitselfandensuretheirloyalty throughfearofthegods(aperceptionwidespreadeveninantiquity)butalsoasthat importantpartofthereligioussystemasawholethatwasperformedbythemembers oftheupper-class,infactasasystemofsigns,asamediumofinternalcommunication.And,atanyrateintheeyesoftheparticipants,itwasatthesametimeanefficient meansoffulfillingthegods’ expectationthattheirgiftsshouldbeproperlyrecognized.’ Notehowtheperceptionsofparticipantscomelastinthisschema.
25 Detailedoverviewsofthebibliography,withfullreferences,willbeprovidedfor eachoftheseviewsineachchapterofthisbook;forthemodernnotionof ‘binding’ Jupiter,seeespeciallyCh.1.
Likeotherformsofpublicdivination,auguryisthusseenprimarily assupportingRomanindividualsand/orgroupsinplansanddecisionsthattheyhadalreadyformed.Jupiter,inotherwords,wastotell thosewhoconsultedhimwhattheywantedtohear.26 Hewasnot reallyexpectedtoanswerback,ortointerfere.27 Andintheunlikely eventthathedidexpressanopinionwhichclashedwiththatofhis humanenquirers,hewasnottoexpectthattheywouldheedhis advice.Foronly ‘aquiteimprobablystrongbeliefwouldhaveproducedacquiescenceinadecisiononthesolegroundofitbeing supportedbydivination’ , 28 and ‘fearofdivinedispleasurewasvery rarelyamotivewhenaRomandecidedonacourseofaction’ . 29 The Romanswereapracticalpeople,afterall;theywouldnothaveallowed adivinatorypracticesuchasaugurytodamagetheirrealinterests.30 Evenwhentheyperformeddivinatory(andother)ritualsincorrectly, theydidnotworrymuch:ritualremediestokeepthegodsonside wereconvenientandreadytohand.31 Itistruethattheyspentagreat
26 InScheid’swords,formsofstatedivinationsuchasauguryfunctionedprimarily asare-enactmentofatheologicalgiven,revealingoncemorethegods’ supportof Rome(‘Lerôledel’officiantconsisteàmettreenévidence,àdecouvrirdanslesfaitset d’annoncerl’assentimentdivin.Laconsultationdesdieuxn’estdonc,àproprement parlerpasundialogueentreunofficiantetundieu,maislamiseenscènedramatique d’unedonnéethéologique.OnpourraitconsidérerlesritesdivinatoiresdesRomains commel’équivalentd’untextesacréexposantquelepeupleromainétaitlepeupledu dieu,lepeupledesdieux’ [Scheid1987–9:132]).SimilarlyScheid2003a:112:divinatoryriteswere ‘notsomuch ... anempiricalanddirectconsultationwiththegods, butrather therecitationofakindofprayerthatrevealedthegods’ agreementwith whoeverwasconsultingthem’.SimilarlyChampeaux2005:211: ‘Laplusancienne divinationromaine’ had ‘uneseulepréoccupation ’,whichwas ‘obtenir,pourl’action humaine,l’assentiment,donclagarantie,desdieux’ .
27 e.g.Rüpke2006:225: ‘Ingeneral,theRomanswerenotexcessivelyeagerto contact[thegods].Thegodswerethoughtofasmembersofanorderedsocietywho hadobligationsandrights.Theyweretoreceivetheirshareand,forthemostpart, nomore. ’
28 Liebeschuetz1979:29. 29 Liebeschuetz1979:3.
30 BibliographicoverviewandfullreferencesinCh.3.Perhapsthemostextreme formulationofthisviewisthatofGoodmanandHolladay1986:160: ‘thereisno certainevidencethattheobservanceofreligiousscrupleseveractedtoRome’ s detriment’.Champion2017mountsoneassaultonthisview,reachingsomeconclusionssimilartomyown,althoughhisdiscussionofspecificcasesisnotthorough enoughtobefullyconvincing,andIamnotfullypersuadedbyhisassumptionsabout Romanpsychology:cf.Introductionn.32andsection0.3.
31 Richardson2011:102: ‘AtRomereligiouserrorswereusuallyeasilyrepaired. Improperlyperformedritualscouldberepeated,andanyritesneededtoplacatethe godscouldbeperformedreadilyenough.’ SoalsoBloch1984:100–1;Goodmanand Holladay1986:160–4.
