The compact formed between Antonius, Lepidus and Octavian near Bononia in November 43 b.c. (Dio Cass. 46.55.1–3), commonly named the second triumvirate, was characterized by civil conflict. The major battles at Philippi, Perusia and Naulochus led to the presence of many legions in Italy. In addition, a large number of time-served soldiers were settled throughout the peninsula. The requirement of land for the veterans meant conflicting interests arose with landowners who were dispossessed to make way for them. The impact of the army on Rome itself and on the population of the Italian countryside was great during the late first century b.c.Footnote 1
During this time of political and social unrest, Antonius and Octavian, the two remaining triumvirs after 36 b.c.Footnote 2 were rivals for the sole leadership of Rome (Dio Cass. 48.1.2–5.5; 50.1.1–2.2). The year 32 b.c. following the end of the triumvirate was characterized by intense and open enmity between the two men and preparations began for war. As in Rome's earlier civil conflicts, men were enlisted for the existing legions and veterans urged to take up their arms again.Footnote 3 It was Octavian who particularly appealed to the veterans for their support that year; it was he who had control of Italy and he needed to supplement the legions already under his command (cf. App. B Civ. 5.93; Plut. Ant. 55.1).
It is clear that the oath of allegiance sworn in 32 b.c. involved the veterans. Although Augustus chose to refer to those who swore to support him in Italy simply in terms of tota Italia (Mon. Anc. 25.2), an indisputably military connotation is given to the oath by Dio who relates the impact on colonies indebted to Antonius (50.6.2–3). Certainly, the colonies and other soldier communities were so numerous and widespread throughout Italy that Augustus might reasonably employ the phrase tota Italia for the veterans taking part even while not identifying them specifically.Footnote 4
In 44 b.c. the swearing of an oath of allegiance to Antonius at Tibur involved both legionary and veteran units (App. B Civ. 3.46). An oath of allegiance sworn en masse at all locations simultaneously would be even more impressive as an expression of support by Octavian's soldiers and veterans in 32 b.c. The impact would be intimidating for Antonius and his troops if it could be achieved and reports of it reached the East.Footnote 5
Dio's reference to the oath is brief and he does not provide any detail about its administration in Italy. However, there is an alternative avenue by which its date may be sought. The Julian Calendar contains several entries for the years of the second triumvirate and a comparison of their relationship to Dio's sequence of events for the years 32–31 b.c. allows the identification of a celebration which, with great profit to himself, Octavian could have used to enhance the swearing of the oath.
In Section 1 below the evidence for identifying that celebration by a process of elimination is set forth. The hypothesis is then tested from the perspective of relevance by a discussion of links between the event it commemorated and the military and political circumstances of 32 b.c.
Section 2 seeks to demonstrate the plausibility of the date proposed for the swearing in Section 1 by drawing upon a wider range of evidence. The discussion extends over the preceding decade as well as the year 32 b.c. as it examines Octavian's relationship to the veteran communities. The question of how the oath of allegiance was administered is addressed by reference to an earlier event which indicates the feasibility of Octavian having the oath sworn simultaneously by all his forces. A discussion of the significance of the oath's words in rousing the veterans to be supporters of Octavian against Antonius concludes Section 2.
1. EVENTS OF THE YEAR 32 b.c. AND THE JULIAN CALENDAR
The following table of events for 32–31 b.c. is based on the narrative in Dio 50–1.1:
Feb.–Mar. 32: consuls flee to Antonius; war declared against Cleopatra by the Senate and people; Octavian appointed their commanderFootnote 6
Apr. 32: Octavian begins to organize his forces
Sept. 32: Antonius looks in vain for Octavian off Corcyra
Oct. 32–Apr. 31: Winter – weather unsafe for sailing
Apr. 31: Octavian and his force set sail for Greece
2 Sept. 31: Octavian defeats Antonius at Actium.
Dio (50.9.1–2) provides some contextual detail of relevance for the year 32 b.c. He states that the circulation of money in Italy by Antonius prevented Octavian completing his preparations to face Antonius before winter.Footnote 7 Therefore, it is between late March and the end of September that an occasion for administering the oath must be sought.
The celebrations listed below are those in the Julian Calendar which are of significance for the triumviral period:Footnote 8
7 January (43 b.c.): Caesar first assumed the fasces
14 April (43 b.c.): Caesar victorious for the first time
16 April (43 b.c.): Caesar first saluted Imperator
19 August (43 b.c.): Caesar entered on his first consulship
3 September (36 b.c.): Caesar Augustus victorious in Sicily
Which one, if any, of the above dates might Octavian have associated with the swearing of allegiance to himself in 32? In attempting an answer to this question, two criteria are of fundamental importance: the plausibility of the calendar date with respect to Dio's chronology for the year 32 and the relevance of the celebration to the political alignments of the day.
The field of possible dates is narrowed when these two criteria are applied. The first of the above dates, for example, must be dismissed from consideration. It is too early in the year because Domitius and Sosius, the consuls with Antonian sympathies, did not depart Rome immediately after entering office (Dio Cass. 50.2.3–6).
The triumviral celebrations on 19 August and 3 September are both too late in the year to have served as ceremonial occasions for the oath of allegiance to be administered. The distribution of bribes among Octavian's fighting men in Italy by Antonius' agents must have taken place after they were already aligned. Dio reports that Octavian had to be alert to prevent disaffection (50.7.3).
April 14 and April 16 remain for consideration. Each of these two dates is suitable for the swearing of the oath. They fall within the period of time Octavian was building his forces according to Dio's chronology for 32 b.c.Footnote 9 They are also relevant to the contemporary military crisis. These calendar entries, so close in date, both celebrate Octavian's victory over Antonius by raising the siege of Mutina on behalf of the Senate.Footnote 10
In these two celebrations for Mutina lay a unique opportunity for Octavian to connect his intention to do battle against Antonius in 32 b.c. with earlier political and military alignments. In fact, Octavian may have held the commemorations of Mutina even before 32 b.c.Footnote 11 An annual celebration of that victory would have assisted in demonizing Antonius as the triumvirs' enmity became increasingly overt.Footnote 12 Certainly, Octavian signalled the importance of the victory at Mutina in his own eyes when he chose those who were veterans of Mutina to receive land first among his mutinying troops in 36 b.c. (App. B Civ. 5.129; Dio Cass. 49.14.1). Many of the veterans that Octavian was rallying to his cause in 32 b.c. were those same men.Footnote 13
The fact that Mutina was a victorious experience shared by the widely dispersed communities of veterans with each other, as well as with Octavian, surely also contributed to the support for him in Italy (cf. App. B Civ. 5.46). A close parallel existed between the current situation and the period of Mutina. Octavian and those swearing the oath of allegiance in 32 b.c. had already made common cause against Antonius in April 43 (Dio Cass. 46.29.3–5).Footnote 14 Octavian was once again the Senate's commander and the enemy was, once again, Antonius.Footnote 15 For these reasons, celebration of Mutina, observed by veterans and soldiers simultaneously, could have provided a natural focus for an oath of allegiance for the forthcoming conflict with Antonius.
The celebration on the 16th of the month would seem the more apt of the two April dates for the swearing of the oath because it was the occasion of Octavian's imperatorial salutation at Mutina. Nevertheless, both days continued to be celebrated during the Augustan principate. Ovid includes each of them in his Fasti. He describes Octavian in battle array attacking his enemy with an energetic thoroughness on 14 April.Footnote 16 On 16 April, he portrays Octavian in battle again but, this time, Octavian has divine aid and is pursuing victory.Footnote 17 The twofold commemoration of Mutina in the Fasti demonstrates again the prominence accorded the Mutina tradition by Octavian-Augustus.
2. OCTAVIAN AND THE VETERAN SETTLEMENTS, 41–32 b.c.
Octavian had arrived at a position where he might anticipate persuading the veterans to give whole-hearted support for his leadership of Rome against Antonius through years of persistent work.
By agreement with Antonius, he had been made chiefly responsible in 41 b.c. for settling soldiers who had fought at the battle of Philippi (Dio Cass. 48.2.2–4). It proved to be a contentious job full of difficulty. He became extremely unpopular with landowners during 41 because of the confiscations and proscriptions associated with the task of finding sufficient land for those veterans. He was also challenged by L. Antonius and Fulvia about his role and forced to concede to demands that men from Antonius' forces be established in colonial settlements or within existing towns by others than himself (App. B Civ. 5.12–14; Dio Cass. 48.6.1–2). By the end of the same year, Octavian had been drawn into armed conflict with Lucius Antonius on the issue of the settlements and, during the siege of Perusia, was opposed by other Antonian forces as well.Footnote 18
The capitulation of Perusia in 40 b.c. brought victory over Lucius, together with the acquisition of a large number of troops (App. B Civ. 5.46–51). Octavian and Antonius entered a new treaty of reconciliation and division of resources (Dio Cass. 48.28.1–29.1) yet, despite this, their relationship remained full of distrust.Footnote 19 During 36 b.c. Octavian went around Italy and visited the settlements (App. B Civ. 5.99). That year, he donated an aqueduct to Capua in return for that city making land available for soldier settlers (Dio Cass. 49.14.5). He continuously fostered the veterans' good opinion everywhere in order to consolidate their potential military support. In 36 b.c. he also began addressing the problem of banditry on the roads so that communications between settlements would be improved (Suet. Aug. 32.1).Footnote 20 When it was clear that war was imminent in 32 b.c. the Senate came to the assistance of Octavian. It tried to seduce Antonius' supporters by offering them benefits if they would change their allegiance to Octavian instead (Dio Cass. 50.4.4). This action is likely to have encouraged veteran settlers in Italy to look to their future interests and to align with Octavian even if few under Antonius' command in the East responded. Certainly, according to Dio (50.6.3), Octavian had even secured the loyalty of all the Antonian colonists by 32 b.c.Footnote 21
The veterans were called upon to repay Octavian for his assiduous attention that same year. He required more fighting men because Antonius' resources in the East were superior to his own (Dio Cass. 50.7.2). Mobilizing the veterans must have assumed the highest priority for him because they offered more than just a supplement to his legions in terms of numbers. They brought with them, importantly, battle-hardened experience.Footnote 22
In due course, Dio relates, Octavian's army swore an oath to him as their commander and Antonius' forces, similarly, swore allegiance to him (50.6.6). These expressions of partisanship were clearly unremarkable given the matter-of-fact manner in which they are reported. The oath is not represented as the basis for Octavian's command. Dio had already narrated the procedure by which Octavian gained his imperium to lead the army against Cleopatra on behalf of the Roman state.Footnote 23 The soldiers' oaths were simply an expression of loyalty to one or the other of the contending commanders.Footnote 24
For Octavian, the oath's real significance lay in whether or not the occasion of swearing it was effective in cementing the alliance between himself and the veterans (cf. Dio Cass. 50.6.6–7.3). A simultaneous oath-swearing across Italy would stimulate the very commitment he sought because the veterans had a shared sense of identity (cf. App. B Civ. 5.46). The occasion would be ‘universal’ due to the far-flung distribution of their settlements.
Octavian had a precedent ready to hand for staging such an event. In 36 b.c. he had ordered that a sealed letter be delivered to each of the military camps with instructions that it be opened only on the day designated and that the orders written inside be carried out forthwith (App. B Civ. 5.131). A universal administration of the oath of allegiance within Italy might have been different in nature but the general procedure would still be satisfactory. In both veterans' towns and military camps the oath could simply be introduced at the time of the celebration of Mutina.
There were many among the veterans settled by 32 b.c. who had served under Caesar and who still revered his memory (App. B Civ. 3.40, 66). For this reason it is surely not accidental that the oath of allegiance of 32 b.c. bears a strong similarity to the oath sworn to Caesar in 45 b.c.Footnote 25 When Antonius read out that oath beside Caesar's pyre in 44 b.c. he did so to underline the betrayal represented by Caesar's assassination and to stir up indignation against it (App. B Civ. 2.144–5).Footnote 26 At that time Antonius was the spokesman for the Caesarian party but soon he, too, betrayed Caesar by becoming the enemy of Caesar's adopted son and heir (Dio Cass. 46.29.2–4). The veterans' involvement at Caesar's funeral placed a powerful tool in the hands of Octavian when he sought to add men from the settlements to the legions already under his command in 32 b.c.Footnote 27 The wording of his own oath was used as a reminder of Caesar and of his own pietas in seeking to avenge his assassinated father.Footnote 28 At the same time, the oath would revive memories of Antonius as the enemy of Caesar and, now for a second time, of Octavian.
The military nature of the oath sworn in 32 b.c. is revealed by the phrases ducem depoposcit and iuravit in verba included by Augustus in his Res Gestae (Mon. Anc. 25.2).Footnote 29 It is displayed even more openly in a fragmentary Augustan oath which has survived from Spain. This, the Conobaria version of the oath, is the earliest so far known from the West.Footnote 30 The presence in it of victoria among the reasons for which allegiance is sworn to the imperial family points to the same conclusion as that drawn from the Res Gestae. The oath sworn to Octavian was originally intended to bind together those who swore it for an armed conflict. It was not designed merely to secure an expression of loyalty from the wider Italian population.Footnote 31 Noteworthy, also, is the repetition of the same military language used in Res Gestae 25.2 in the Conobaria version of the oath (line 5: in ea ve[rba iuraverunt], and note also the use of partes in line 15 to refer to Augustus and his family, rather than, for example, domus).Footnote 32 All these features suggest the Conobaria oath, though modified, nevertheless preserved elements that refer back to the war of 32 b.c.
Once the veterans are identified as those who, primarily among the resident Italian population, swore the oath of allegiance in 32 b.c., Augustus' later rhetoric is clarified. Within decades after Actium, veterans were increasingly finding a place among the elites of the Italian towns as municipal office-bearers.Footnote 33 Thus, Cicero's tota Italia, a collective term for the Italian elite, provided an appropriate rubric for Augustus to include in the Res Gestae when he described who swore the oath in 32 b.c.Footnote 34
CONCLUSION
Ancient accounts of the ten years of the second triumvirate lack the same degree of detail as those of the Augustan years after 27 b.c. Nevertheless, enough remained in the historical record to show that the second triumvirate was formed solely for the advantage of those involved and that it brought years of dissension and civil war upon the Roman people (App. B Civ. 4.3–16, 35; Dio Cass. 47.1.1–17). Augustus' goal was to replace the Roman people's painful memories of civil discord with peace and prosperity after he won in 31 b.c. (Dio Cass. 51.20.4). The memory of Antonius was deliberately erased from public life (Dio Cass. 51.19.3–5). The manner in which Octavian mustered and secured his army in Italy during 32 b.c. has only survived in the most shadowy form. References to the triumviral years and 32 b.c. in the Res Gestae are dispersed and lack detail (cf. 3.3, 7.1, 25.2–3).Footnote 35
The rich and diverse nature of the Augustan age has been thoroughly studied because abundant literary, archaeological and epigraphic evidence survives. Octavian deliberately cultivated during the triumviral years a unified outlook among the cities and towns where there were veteran settlers, but this is generally much harder to locate in the literary sources and archaeological record.Footnote 36 It was the peace and prosperity which followed Actium that allowed the political and ideological consensus which Octavian, somewhat prematurely, claimed for 32 b.c. to flourish and achieve its fullest expression.Footnote 37
