This book deals with the question of how Romans conceived of themselves as men during the Augustan era. This is an interesting question simply because of the fact that the monarchical system under Augustus changed the conditions for the performance of masculinity.
In the introductory chapter (‘Augustus and the End of Republican Masculinity’), Melanie Racette-Campbell emphasises that a core characteristic of masculinity lies in its performative nature. The crisis of masculinity under Augustus was therefore a crisis of the opportunities for public office, which became more restricted for male members of the senatorial elite with the establishment of autocracy. The monarch not only controlled the chances for male prowess within the elite, but also assumed a leading position for himself, which placed him as a man above all other men. Based on the Res Gestae, the author shows how Augustus was constructed as a self-constrained and dutiful man as well as a successful military leader who served as a model for later monarchs. According to R.-C., Augustan propaganda also provided models for men of senatorial and equestrian rank. The author interprets the Ara Pacis as an example of Augustus staging himself as a male role model in the religious and family sphere, which was to serve as a role model for the men below him.
The prerequisites for Augustus’ monopolisation of masculine virtues were established during the late Republic. Ch. 1 (‘Catullus and Cicero. Word Play in the Ruins’) shows that, even a few decades before the establishment of the monarchy, display and acceptance of masculine qualities had already become challenging for men of the Roman upper class. Using the examples of Catullus and Cicero, the author illustrates how men who lacked military experience sought alternative ways to present themselves as masculine. The next chapters follow a similar pattern, concentrating on different authors of the Augustan period, showing, however, very different perspectives on the question of how masculinity could be conceived and realised under Augustus.
Ch. 2 (‘Virtus under the Principate’) investigates the meaning of virtus in Horace, Livy and Vergil, arguing that these authors use the term in a complex way, not always serving the interests of the Augustan regime. This is a surprising finding due to the fact that the Roman Odes as well as the Aeneid and Ab urbe condita are generally seen as promoting Augustan ideology. Chs 3 (‘Resistance through Authority’) and 4 (‘Disengagement through Recusatio’) go even further and discuss texts that imply resistance to the values and ideological programme of Augustus. R.-C. demonstrates that authors such as Horace, Propertius and Ovid constructed themselves as moral and intellectual authorities, criticising and advising the emperor cautiously, without, however, stirring up any doubt about the legitimacy of Augustus’ exceptional position. They finally disengaged not only from public office but also from literary genres and topics that were traditionally associated with masculinity.
Ch. 5 (‘Speaking through the Gods’) centres on the voices of three deities in Augustan poetry that are special in terms of their masculinity: Priapus, Hercules and Vertumnus. Each of these disrupts prevailing masculine ideals of self-control and moderation either through physical and sexual aggression or through gender instability. The author interprets their transgressive masculinity as a distorting element within the city of Rome and the pantheon promoted by Augustus.
The concluding chapter investigates the masculinity of Augustus’ successor Tiberius as well as the (lack of) opportunities for masculine performance under his reign. Finally, the author explores different strategies of elite men in the Principate to cope with the crisis of masculinity caused by the establishment of monarchy. For me as an ancient historian, these considerations are some of the most exciting in the whole book, even if they only take up a few pages.
In the end, the book leaves me with mixed feelings. For large sections, one gets the impression that it is not a book about the crisis of masculinity, but rather about literary genres and motives, such as thematic shifts away from the military and political to the private and erotic. The book serves well as a general study of Augustan literature. But does it work as a study on Roman masculinity? Certainly, the elite's literary work can be interpreted as constrained performances of masculinity. However, the author does not really address alternative male performances aside from literary production. It would have been interesting to get a broader view of elite men's coping strategies to redefine their masculinity in the face of the crisis. Nonetheless, the book is very well written and offers many innovative and instructive insights.
