A Closer Look at “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus”

 

Augustus is one of the most interesting emperors that touched the surface of earth. His prudent and intelligent approach to gradually and slowly become the ultimate authority of Rome was and is inimitable. However, some argue that his steps to become the true sovereign of the empire were filled with corruption and greed for power, recognition.  The only difference that separates Augustus from other corrupt rulers and portray him as the genius ruler he is, is that he was patient and far-seeing enough to find the right time and place to establish his dynasty. In his autobiography Augustus dwells on the achievements of his life time and what he went through along the way. His autobiography carries vital importance as it fosters the idea that on the surface Augusts thrived to support the republic to preserve democracy and avert tyranny from autocracy. However, a deeper analysis of his endeavors unveil that Augustus true motive was to become the ultimate father of Rome not protect the republic. This is most prominently evident when he subordinatses the laws to his authority and depict them as more important than religion and culture. Additionally, the sense of pride filled in every line of his writing “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus” reinforces the sense of hypocrisy. They ultimately deem his autobiography as being filled with hypocrisy.

Augustus attempt to advocate for liberty of the republic results in him becoming the ultimate sovereign figure. This destroys republic and grants him the reins of power over the roman empire. Here an irony emerges, the senate rewards Augustus’ success at preserving the freedom of republic by giving him the autocracy which in turn eradicates the core of republic's liberty, democracy. In the beginning of the book Augustus states that “I successfully championed the liberty of the republic when it was oppressed by the tyranny of a faction.” here Augustus give importance to liberty and is against tyranny. It is significant to note that while Augustus is valuing liberty he considers the factions authority to be tyrannical. In this way, he could be avoiding to condemn autocratic monarchy as something unfitting. He is doing so because his end goal is to possess the autocratic ruling power. Eder in his articled “….”  Contemplates on whether Augustus was a corrupt leader greedy for power or a Machiavellian leader who selflessly endeavors to improve the welfare of its nation even if it requires deception and oppression, In his deliberation Eder argues that “Augustus had deliberately draped himself in a republican mantle, and because he needed to protect it, he could not damage it but had to give it permanent luster” and he asserts that Augustus hid under the cloak of being a republic supporter to become a ruler whose identity is so woven into the empire that he eventually becomes the embodiment of roman empire. Eder’s argument holds truth because in Augustus autobiography touches upon a law that immortalize his name and a sense of pride prevails through his language. Augustus says “My name was inserted in the hymn of the Salii by a decree of the senate, and it was enacted by law that my person should be inviolable for ever and that I should hold the tribunician power for the duration of my life.” His remark about being cited in one of the religious hymns and how his name will be immortal carries a hidden feeling of pride and bolsters the idea that Augustus true goal was to become a leader that is adored and worshiped by its citizens.

Furthermore, the fact that Augustus abused his power to silence dissident ideas and those whose moral values are different than him demonstrates his tyrannical and oppressive nature. In the beginning of his book Augustus while he boasts about venging his uncle(father as he puts it) he states that “I drove into exile the murderers of my father, avenging their crime through tribunals established by law “ While Augusuts is emphasizing on his success at purging the province from the murderers. It is claimed that he abused his power to shun whoever negates with him. One of the examples that illustrates how he tainted his power to silence and oppress dissident figures can be drown from the famous poet Ovid. Even though Ovid did not commit a crime nor professed any conflicting ideas and it is belived that he was a merely witness of an event pertinent to adultery, he was still shunned from the city. In his biography book Goldsworthy puts it as follows Caught up in the whole business was the poet Ovid, who faced no formal charge or trial, and was simply instructed to take himself off to the city of Tomi on the Black Sea and stay there until told otherwise.” This goes to show how little tolerance Augustus had towards those who defied his convictions. Following that it becomes evident that such little tolerance is a sign of oppression to which Augustus was professedly against. Ultimately, this reveals once he reigned in roman empire as the solo authority, he tried to instill his convictions to his subordinates and citizens which is at core what he was against to. Hence, it portrays Augustus as a hypocrtic figure that on the surface protected the liberty of the republic but at the end, he only did so to become a tyrant himself.

In conclusion, Augustus was a mastermind, alas, he did not use his intelligence to prosper roman empire but to become a tyrant himself. In his auto biography, it could be even argued that he connived the calamites that were upon roman empire so that he could be the savior in the eyes of people.  There were laws contradicting with religious that he enacted and there were religious rules which he defended at all costs. He only did those to become the leader he wished to be. Therefore, he did not have a rigid perception on religion or laws, his attitude towards them were tentative and changed according to what favors his dynasty rather than what is right and wrong.