Was Julius Caesar overrated

Imperial cult in Pompeii

1 Introduction

This work deals with the question of the function of the imperial cult in the Roman Empire, and finally it is examined on the basis of traditional Pompeian inscriptions to what extent the imperial cult appears in its function in Pompeii. For this purpose, the phenomenon of the ruler's cult in the Greek - Hellenistic area will be dealt with first. In the following, the work will concentrate on the forms of the cult of rulers in the Roman Republic and in the Empire.

Ultimately, an attempt is made to find a general definition for the function of the imperial cult and to apply this to the city of Pompeii.

The Roman imperial cult, which began with Julius Caesar as the initiator and Augustus as the founder, was only the result of the development of various benefactor and ruler cults in the Greek - Hellenistic area. In this work, some significant people and events are dealt with, which answer the question of the origin and function of the imperial cult. Due to the complexity of this topic, an in-depth treatment should be avoided, but an attempt should be made to present objective facts as comprehensive as possible. A large number of inscribed sources from the Greek-Hellenistic area show various cases of the personality cult, provide reasons for this and contribute to an understanding of the ruler's cult in the first place.

2. What is the function of the Roman imperial cult and can you find the imperial cult in its function in Pompeii?

2.1. The emergence of the imperial cult

2.1.1. The ruler's cult in Greece

When considering the beginnings of the Hellenistic cult of rulers, Charlesworth suggests using the term "cult of benefactors"1 to use, because the ruler's cult is only a part of a larger whole, which only began with the hegemony of Alexander the Great and the Diadochi, and first of all had to develop over centuries.

Homer's Odyssey from the 8th century BC BC already provides the first example of divine worship of a living person2: "Nausikaa, qugater megalhtoroj Alkinooio, outw nun Zeuj qeih, erigdoupoj posij Hrhj, oikade t / elqemenai kai vostimou hmar idesqai: twi ken toi kai keiqi qewi wj eucetowimhn aieus su hmata panta:" "To worship Nausika like a goddess when he comes home safe, because she saved his life and ensured his survival". If Homer was able to express this kind of thanks so clearly at that time, one can assume that the wording did not cause indignation among the Greeks because of a possible moral decline, when such thanks normally go to the gods, but rather can be conclude from this that the Greeks found it customary to respond to a benefit with reverence for the benefactor.3 The more uncomfortable his situation and the greater the benefit, namely salvation and securing of well-being and property, the more violent the act of thanksgiving in the form of divine veneration turned out to be. The source contains the two elements that make up the structure of the benevolent cult:

a) Nausika is benefactor (Euergethj) and savior (swthr) for Odysseus;

b) Odysseus shows her thanks by giving his swthr godlike honors. For the Greeks, the divine veneration of their benefactors in sacred areas, at altars with offerings, was something they used to show gratitude for the euergesiai.

“Lysander was the first Greek to whom the cities erected altars and offered sacrifices like a god, and the first to whom religious songs were sung. According to tradition, the beginning of one of them reads as follows: “We want to sing solemnly about the general of holy Hellas, who came from the vast Sparta. Oh! Io! Paian "The Samians also decided to rename their main festival, dedicated to the goddess Hera, to" Lysander Festival "."4 This second example shows the strong motivation of the Greeks on Samos to pay the highest honor to their benefactor because Lysander, a Spartan general in the final phase of the Peloponnesian War in 404 BC. Among other things, Samos was freed from the hegemony of Athens in the course of the liquidation of the Attic-Delian League and the ruling upper class that had been driven back was brought back. The foundation of the cult by the people who had returned from exile was an expression of gratitude for the rescue and help experienced.

Although the occurrence of comparable honors cannot be ruled out elsewhere, they have not yet been proven. It is certain, however, that there has not been a widespread worship of Lysander in all of Greece 5. These voluntary and individual honorary decisions mostly had a locally limited scope and were often aimed at political and military figures, because only these had the necessary means of effective aid in a Greek city or on an island.

The question arises as to what conviction led the Greeks to show deserving people the same honors as the gods. The sense of the divine honors towards people was probably that they had the idea that these persons deserved the honors because they performed the specifically divine function of saving and helping, which ultimately connected them with the gods.6

This swthr-und-euergethj cult was already fully developed when the Romans around 200 BC. Began to be politically active in the east of the Mediterranean area. Inevitably, they were confronted with this kind of thanksgiving, because as allies of the Greeks, taking military action against their enemies e.g. against King Antiochus, they had earned the highest thanks to many poleij. From that time on, the cults were more and more often seen as empire bearers of the Roman Republic, namely as representatives of the rising new great power. "The inhabitants of Greece and Asia Minor reacted in the usual way: They transferred the variable cult of rulers, ..., to the Romans." 7

As part of the swthr-und-euergethj cult, the proconsul Titus Quinctius Flaminius, as the first Roman god-man, was given a permanent cult with a feast day, sacrifice priest and paian from the Greek polij Chalkis on a special occasion for gratitude, because he liberated in 191 BC . The poleij of Greece from the rule of Philip V ..

“We piously honor the loyalty (pistin) of the Romans, may prayers and oaths protect them. Sing, you girls, the great Zeus, praise Rome and Titus and the loyalty of the Romans: Hail, Paian! O Titus, you savior! "8 From this excerpt from the cult song, the end of which Plutarch recorded in the Titus vita, it emerges that Titus was praised as swthr and worshiped together with the pistij, i.e. the loyalty of the Romans and with the goddess Roma, qea Rwmh. The goddess Roma is nothing else than the embodiment of the power of Rome, which the city of Smyrna 195 BC. Established a temple with the associated cult, which A. Wlosok interprets as a purely "political and diplomatic act"9.

For the Romans of the republican epoch there was only the veneration of deserving officials, as representatives of Rome, and the praise of the personified power of Rome, since there was no individual central authority in the Roman republic, unlike in the cities of the Greco-Hellenistic area, in which Kings were the individual recipients, and were also different than at the time of the Principate in the Roman Empire, when the Emperor was the target. It must be noted that the cults dedicated to the Romans were significantly rarer than the Roma cults. There is a list of over twenty names of the Roman administrative officials for whom such honors are attested in writing and literary.10 They included, to name but a few, Sulla, Pomejus, Cicero, Caesar, Antonius. The last cases of this kind are dated 2/3 AD. The cause for the extinction of this custom was the central authority of the Emperor Augustus in Rome.

Another very important figure who played a major role in the swthr-und-euergethj cult and especially in the establishment of the imperial cult was Julius Caesar. With his sole rule in the east after the victory over Pompey, the situation of the benefactor cult changed increasingly. The inscription from Ephesus 11 According to Caesar, he was the first Roman to be referred to as qeoj epifanhj, that is, "God who appears" next to swthr and euergethj. In addition, a divine genealogy is ascribed to him, because it says that he is descended from Ares (Latin Mars) and Aphrodite (Latin Venus). The reason for this deification was the new regulation of the tax system by Caesar. Statements of this kind were unheard of in Rome at the time.

So far, the swthr-und-euergethj cult has been dealt with, which forms one of the two pillars in the development of the imperial cult, with which the Romans most frequently came into contact and which probably had the greatest influence on the development of the imperial cult12. In addition to this benefactor cult, which went back to the voluntary decision of individual cities, which is often interpreted as a political and diplomatic act towards a powerful benefactor, often also bearing numinous aspects13From the 3rd century onwards there were also the official imperial cults of Hellenistic kings and thus an institutionalized ruler cult, whereby the initiative came from the ruler himself, who was interested in lending his power a sacred foundation and thus increasing his position as ruler.14

With the Ptolemies and Seleucids the cult of rulers developed and reached maturity and at the end of the development the Hellenistic cult of rulers implied the apotheosis, i.e. the rapture of a king to the divine. In this context, the researchers are concerned with the question of the extent to which Alexander the Great is to be regarded as the founder of the ruler cult. Eduard Meyer is of the opinion that Alexander demanded divine honors and purposefully strived for absolute monarchy, according to which the cult would have been a real ruler cult during his lifetime, while Balsdon takes the opposite position that Alexander the Great did not even want any honors. Wilcken and Habicht, on the other hand, assume that Alexander, in accordance with contemporary Greek ideas, claimed apotheosis as recognition of his outstanding achievements without pursuing a political purpose15. In other words, an expression of appreciation for extraordinary deeds without a relationship of domination. However, this was included in the cults of the Diadochi, the successors of Alexander the Great. While there is uncertainty in assessing the Alexander cults, the imperial cults of the Diadochi with the implied apotheosis are the classic examples of the Hellenistic cult of rulers. The development of the dynastic ruler's cult among the Ptolemies is best recognizable in the following stages16:
1. Alexander the Great was heroized as the founder of the city in Alexandria.
2. created Ptolemy I. Soter an official Alexander cult with priesthood.
3. divinized Ptolemy II, the deceased father Ptolemy I with his wife and now erect a temple with priests and a festival for them as “qeoi swterej”17.
4. Ptolemy II married his sister and possibly deified her while she was still alive, and a little later he joined this cult as a living person.
5. Under the name "qeoi adelfoi" he and his sister were named

Include temple members in the imperial cult of Alexander the great.

This line of qeia basileia continued through the generations of the Ptolemies until the end of the dynasty.

In this divine kingdom the ruler differed essentially from the rest of the people through his divine nature and his participation in the divine. His position on earth corresponded to that of the highest God in the universe. He possessed qualities such as goodness and majesty, and was equal to God in virtue. After all, his main function was to save and help like that of the gods.18 The qeia basileia thus contains a syncretism, because it is the identification of the ruler with a deity, which at that time was based on contemporary ideas of epiphany.

2.1.2 The Roman relationship to the ruler cult

For the Romans it was deification19 a person's life or death by nature alien. Up to the threshold of the 1st century BC there was probably no cultic veneration of great personalities in Rome during their lifetime. So far, the Romans only practiced the ancestral cult of the Roman family. This applied to the spirits of the deceased, the Manes or Di Parentum, whereby they were viewed as an indefinite collective without a particularly deserving individual having been singled out by special honors.

It was only the Greek influence, which spread through literature and philosophy, which were supported by many Greek teachers who came to Rome as servi or liberti, that Eastern forms of religion gained a foothold in Rome and were perceived as attractive20. Due to the military activities in the east, many Roman empire bearers such as Caesar, who plays a particularly important role with regard to the Roman imperial cult, gained experience with the ruler's cult there, which they brought home with them. The Roman plebs tended to lavish exuberant homage, yet they did just before the

Deification stop. This means that there were honors to the living in Rome, although they were always spontaneous thanks to the respective benefactors for very special political achievements, but not the apotheosis in the real sense.

"The Hellenistic influence which penetrated through innumerable channels into all strata of Roman-Italian society"21, has paved the way for a religious change in Rome. Because Caesar wanted his own apotheosis on Roman soil, he carried out it in 60 BC. The equation of the Roman archegete, namely Romulus, with the ancient Roman god Quirinius, in order to "create a model for the treatment of his own person"22.

The questions about Caesar's endeavors cannot be answered unequivocally even today, namely whether Caesar worked according to plan on his sacred exaggeration, whether he really claimed the royal dignity for himself and, if so, whether he was guided by the Hellenistic ruling cults based on Alexander the Great. In fact, traces of the Alexander imitation and the imitation of Romulus are proven23. But then the question arises whether Caesar wanted to restore the Roman kingship of the Romule type or a synthesis24 wanted to create from various elements. In addition, the possibility is being considered that it was not Caesar himself who was the driving force, but an overzealous Senate and a Roman town population interspersed with strangers to him the divine honors of 46/44 BC.25 imposed26. No clarity can be achieved on these questions, since the time from the divine honors to the murder of Caesar in 44 BC. BC was too short for the lines of further development to emerge more clearly. The assassination of Caesar in 44 BC Namely marks an irreversible break.

The fact is that the honorary resolutions to Caesar made your position of power more and more sacred and he gradually moved from Rome and from many Greek cities27 was deified, e.g. he was after the victory over the Republicans at Thapsus 46 BC. Seen as a demigod in close proximity to the highest god Iuppiter. In the following year after the victory over the sons of Pompey at Munda, Caesar was raised to his sunnaoj by setting up his statue in the temple of Quirinius (-Romulus)28. This temple fellowship with Quirinius therefore meant an entitlement to deification.

Not until shortly before his death were Caesar in January / February 44 BC. In view of the imminent departure into the Parthian campaign, clear decrees of deification were made29 collected. A cult name for Caesar, a priest nominated as a Flemish priest and a temple that was to be consecrated to him with his Clementia were planned. These resolutions were no longer implemented before Caesar's death. However, many Romans could not make friends with Caesar's growing divine position. For many he seemed more and more un-Roman.

2.2 Beginning of the Roman Empire and the Imperial Cult

After Caesar's murder, his adoptive son Octavian tried to promote Caesar's apotheosis because he was anxious from the start to bring himself into contact with the gods as Caesar's heir. The appearance of a comet at the funeral ceremonies in July 44 BC. Chr. Was a sign for the people that Caesar's soul has gone under the gods. This popular belief made it easier for the princeeps to enforce Caesar's Consecretio (= apotheosis). Finally, Caesar became a Senate and popular vote in January 42 BC.consecrated and as Divus Iulius30 included among the gods of the Roman community.

The multitude of honorary resolutions31 from January 42 BC B.C. such as the legal stipulation of the idolatry of Caesar and the name Divus Julius, the construction of a temple on the site of the funeral pyre, etc. were not new honors to Caesar, but the confirmation of the honors in the state cult, which were granted with the title Divus Julius before Caesar's death32. Caesar's consecration was the first legal step on the way to the institutionalized Roman imperial cult.

Octavian himself took over in 40 BC. In the peace at Brundisium the title Divi Filius33 and at the same time he put himself in a close relationship with Apollo34. At the latest with the victory over Sextus Pompeius in 36 BC. BC he politically highlighted his ties to Apollo and from then on played propagandistic against the Dionysianism of Antony. In the same year Octavian received divine honors from the grateful Italian munipia. They worshiped Octavian alongside their patron gods.

After the final victory over Antony and Cleopatra, who made the young Caesar the sole ruler, he was given a monopoly in 30 BC. BC also awarded divine and godlike honors by the Roman Senate. It was decreed that his birthday should be celebrated as an official feast day with the offering of sacrifices and that a libation sacrifice, i.e. a donation, should be offered to him at all feasts35. In 27 BC He was finally given the sacred name Augustus: Quo pro merito meo senatu [s consulto Aug. appe] llatus sum36. This title lifted Octavian out of the human circle and brought me closer to the gods.

In 14/13 BC the genius Augusti was officially included in the state cult by senatus consultum, prepared by the honorary shelling of 30 BC. The Augustan genius - he is a guardian spirit who accompanies the individual throughout life - became the recipient of divine honors, because in him was the power and the principle of man's action. So the veneration of Augustus took place in a roundabout way, “via these deified powers of the ruler, adapted to the circumstances of the Roman religion, who in analogy to the Roman housefather, namely Pater Familias, and at the same time the heavenly father, the Iuppiter Optimus Maximus, as father of the country, Pater Patriae should be seen "37. Accordingly, the genius Augusti was in the foreground as a cult recipient. Separately from this one turned to his numen38, to the divine power present in him, Tiberius even before Augustus' death, namely in the year 11 BC. Has consecrated an altar.

From 17 BC Also personified abstractions such as pax, concordia, iustiatia, victoria, fides, etc. attributed to a ruler, deified and venerated. In the case of Augustus, the Pax Augusta was especially venerated because the peace of Rome was one of his most important achievements. For this reason, among other things, in the year 13 BC. An altar of Pax Augusta was erected in Praeneste39: "Paci August (ae) sacrum decuriones populusque Praenestin". After the death of the princeeps, he was consecrated by a senate resolution because of his outstanding political achievements and was placed in the ranks of the Roman state gods as Divus Augustus40: "Post redditum caelo patrem, et corpus eius humanis honoribus, nomen divinis honoratum." From this point on, all emperors who did not make themselves unpopular were consecrated by the Senate. The person of the dead emperor and everything related to him was sacred. The worship of the emperors was ultimately made a duty of all residents of the Roman Empire. The model given by Augustus remained decisive for the external design of the imperial cult for three centuries.

2.2.1 The characteristics and functions of the imperial cult

The cult of the Roman emperors often varied in appearance and intensity in certain periods of time and space. It was often dependent on the tactical work of the emperor himself and the mentality of the population as well as the temporary socio-political conditions. Although Augustus, for example, consciously promoted the cult around his person, since he had recognized that a cultic

Adoration of his person could contribute to the stabilization of the new monarchical form of rule, he often had to show restraint and cautiousness, especially in Rome, in order to avoid undesirable reactions in Rome. Therefore he only allowed the cult of Divus Julius and his own cult there in connection with the cult of Dea Roma41. In Rome the princeps would have met with displeasure from the citizens if he had ruthlessly propagated his cult than in the East, since the people there would have found nothing at all offensive about the worship of a living ruler, and people also saw in Augustus the Soter, Euergetes and Ktistes42after liberating Asia Minor.

In the east of the empire the willingness and initiative for cultic veneration of the emperor was so great that Octavian even had to slow it down to the Roman level. In the West, on the other hand, the prerequisites for a spontaneous emergence of imperial cults did not exist, so that their introduction first required an impetus from Rome and took place precisely in the newly acquired and little Romanized provinces. In other words, the emperor permanently regulated the honors given to him with the aim of binding the population of the empire to himself and, in the case of young provinces, of civilizing and Romanizing them first.

Although usually only the worship of dead emperors after their apotheosis was allowed and at the same time obligatory, the western provinces were an exception in that they were allowed to honor the emperors during their lifetime, as long as he appeared in cult community with Dea Roma. This model created by Augustus should also serve his successors. It was, however, a purely political and not a religious creation, a means of tying bonds of loyalty more firmly.43 In addition to the provinces, the client states also practiced the imperial cult. At the time of the principate of Augustus, King Herod in particular had many Augustus temples built in the non-Jewish cities and he was allowed to claim to the Jews that he had acted according to instructions. Apparently the Roman government demanded the cult of Augustus from Herod as a sign of loyalty44. He, too, demanded the oath of loyalty from his subjects, not for himself alone, but also for Augustus. In most communities of the Roman Empire, however, it was not the emperor himself who received the cult, but his genius and, separately from him, his numen45.

The imperial cult basically surpassed all other existing cults in that it united all classes of the population, slaves, freedmen and free. In principle, the veneration was not so much for the person concerned as for the world power Rome, which has taken on an individual form in the person of the emperor.

In the 34th chapter of the "res gestae" Augustus provides a good characterization of the visible signs which made his autocracy and that of his successors visually comprehensible46: “... For this merit of mine I was named Augustus by the Senate resolution; the state put two laurel trees on my doorposts; The civil rescue wreath was hung over my front gate. And in the curia Iulia a golden shield of honor was set up, which, according to the testimony of its inscription, the senate and the Roman people offered as a reward for my war virtue, gentleness, justice and piety Merit of the salvation of the Roman citizenship, formerly an honorary award of a Roman soldier for the rescue of a comrade, while the laurel trees, which come from prehistoric times with a sacred role, caused by ideas of magic and superstition, instead of the prehistoric enchantment of one The uncanny power of the man on whom the fate of millions of people depended were increased to the power47.

Through syncretism, the connection of the imperial cult to existing cults of other deities, it was natural for their priesthoods to take over the cultivation of the imperial cult. In Pompeii, for example, the ministri Mercurii Maiae meet, who later met ministri Augusti Merurii Maiae and since the year 2 BC. BC simply called ministri Augusti48: "A. Veius Phylax N. Popidius s Musk T. Mesinius s Amphio Primus s Arrunti s M.L. min.Aug.ex. d. d. iussu M. Holconi Rufi IV A. Clodi s Flacci s III d. v. i. d. P. Caesti s Postumi N. Tintiri s Rufi [d] v..v. s. p. p. [imp. cae] sare s XIII [m. plautio si] lano s cos. ”Only a year later, the first ministri appear in Pompeii

Fortunae Augustae49: "Agathemerus s Vetti Suaris s Caesiae s Primae Pothus s

Numitori Anteros s Locutulani minist. Prim. Fortun. Aug. iussu. M Stoi Rufi.Cn. Melissaei d. v. i. d. P. Silio. L. Volusio s Saturn s cos. "

The bearers of the cult in Italy and the western provinces were the Augustales, mostly liberti, rarely ingenui, who formed a college and, together with earlier Augustales, were soon considered to be a separate class between the plebs and the decurion class. In addition to the Augustales, there were also the seviri Augustales and magistri Augustales50. The Augustalenamt was one year old, but re-election was not ruled out. The establishment of the municipal Augustus cult made it possible for the principle to establish the wealthy liberti as a privileged class and to bind them closely to his person. Since it was precisely the freedmen who played an important part in the economic upswing after the civil wars, they quickly became loyal supporters of the Prinzeps and important carriers of the new order51.

The achievement of apotheosis by the deceased emperor, the last formal participant of which was probably the decided opponent of Christ, Emperor Julian, depended on two factors. First, the Caesars must have made a positive impression on the people and the Senate, and by practicing the functions of the Soter and the Euergetes as much as possible, in order to arouse favor, especially among the influential circles. If they have already made themselves popular through great social and political achievements, secondly a witness had to appear in the Senate Assembly after their death and swear that he had seen that he saw the soul of the deceased in whatever form ascend to heaven. If this testimony existed, as was the case with the comet that appeared in Caesar's case, nothing stood in the way of consecration52.

In summary, it can be said that for the people the emperor was not just a representative of the Roman Empire close to a deity, who was keen to promote the cohesion and growth of the empire by carefully spreading the cult of his person and the collective the consecrated emperor in connection with other gods, especially the Dea Roma, sought to achieve the loyalty of all subordinate classes, thereby connecting them together, but he was above all (ideally) the Euergetes par excellence, on whom the fate of the entire citizenry depended. Standing in divine syncretism, it was supposed to reflect kindness, grace, protection and the will for peace like the gods themselves, which asks if necessary, for which, in the end, strong loyalty to the emperor was demonstrated as thanks as in the example of Pompeii.

2.2.2 Pompeii and the imperial cult

As a provincial city of the Roman Empire, Pompeii not only accepted the imperial cult, but practiced it very strongly. The first evidence for this is provided by sources according to which the priest Holconius Rufus honored the emperor Augustus while he was still alive53. The sources already quoted in the previous chapter54 also point to the continuously increasing priesthood of the Emperor Augustus in Pompeii. Pompeii welcomed the accession of every emperor to the throne, and the imperial family always received a lot of attention. The imperial statues55 at the Forum of Pompeii show great zeal in this regard. Vespasian and Nero enjoyed particular popularity among the Caesars because they proved to be Euergetai to the residents of the city. Nero showed himself gracious to the Pompeians for lifting the ban on the games in AD 59 after the Senate had banned them for ten years because of a bloody dispute between the Pompeians and the residents of Nuceria56. Loyalty to the emperor also promoted Nero's marriage to Poppaea Sabina, a Pompeian from a wealthy family who was highly regarded by the residents. She and the emperor were highly venerated because of the resolution that allowed the games in the amphitheater again57: "IVDICIS AVGVSTI P P ET POPPAEAE AVG. FELICITER ”and so58: "IVDICIS AVGVSTI AVGVSTAE FELICITER NOBIS SALVIS FELICES SUMUS PERPETUO". Vespasian was again venerated in the person of a judge, as he ensured, by delegating a certain T. Suedius Clemens to Pompeii, that order was restored to the city's cadastre and that it regained land that had previously been illegally taken away by private individuals had been59: "M EPIDIVM SABINVM II VIR I D O V F DIGNISSIMVM IVVENEM SANCTUS ORDO FACIT CLEMENTI SANCTO IVDICI FEL". The images of the Emperor Vespasian were found all over the city

Square, in the marketplace, in the Laren sanctuary and in the temple itself, which was dedicated to him.

3. CONCLUSION

For the first time since republican times, the Romans, the inhabitants of the provinces and the client states had a central palpable deity to whom, in competition with others, they could bring flattering divine honors in order to seek help for themselves through imperial grace. The imperial cult was only able to gain a foothold in Rome and the West through the immense political achievement with which Emperor Augustus had impressed the people as savior of the Roman citizenship and peacemaker.

Since Pompeii itself was heavily influenced by Hellenism, and many Greeks found new living space there while spreading their religious ideas, Pompeii was relatively early ready to practice the ruler's cult, in contrast to other cities to the west, where the conditions for it were not existed immediately.

The imperial cult in Pompeii is to be seen as a benefactor cult, because there one encounters the interplay of swzein and timan, the basic structure of the benefactor cult, especially with the emperors Nero and Vesapian. But one must also consider that the cultivation of the state cult by the Pompeians had the purpose of self-help, at least after AD 62. After the earthquake of February 62 AD, Pompeii was dependent on loans and therefore forced to be loyal to the emperor to demonstrate60. Regardless of whether Pompeii first flattered the emperor with honor in order to get help from him, or whether the emperor first took the initiative to help, for which he was honored, the function of the Roman imperial cult to bind the colonies and provinces to Rome is in any case through the resulting mutual expectations are fully met. It can also be assumed that the function of Romanization and the connection between people of all origins also found fulfillment in the state cult in Pompeii.

bibliography

Alföldi, Andreas .: The two laurel trees of Augustus, 1973 in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, pp. 403 - 422 Balsdon, JPVD: Review of: Gerhard, Dobesch: Caesar's apotheosis during his lifetime and his struggle for the royal title in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, pp. 364 - 367

Bowersock, GW: Augustus and the imperial cult in the east in Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, S. 389 - 402 Charlesworth, Martin Percival .: Some observations on the ruler cult, especially in Rome in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult , Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, pp. 163-200

Étienne, Robert .: Pompeji, Life in an ancient city, ed. 5, Philipp Reclam jun. Stuttgart 1998

Gelzer, Matthias .: Decisions of honor for Caesar (in the year 45) in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, pp. 334 - 340 Heinen, Hubert .: On the foundation of the Roman imperial cult, Chronic overview from 48 BC. until 14 AD, Diss.Tübingen 1910

Kienast, Dietmar .: Augustus, Prinzeps and Monarch, Edition 3, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1999

Klauck, Hans.-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996

Mommsen, Theodor .: Monumentum Ancyranum, 2nd edition. 1883

Taylor, Lily Ross .: Divus Julius in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 333

Wlosok, Antonie .: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p.1 - 52

Zanker, Paul .: JdAI 90, 1975

reference

CIL IV, 3726, 1074, 7579; CIL X, 830, 837, 824, 890; CIL XIV, 2898 SIG³ 760; Vell. II, 124

Homer: Odyssee, Reclam, Stuttgart 1979, translated by Hampe, Roland

Plutarch: Tit, in: Große Greeks und Römer, Hrsg v. Ziegler, Konrat, Zurich 1957 Plutarch: Lys, trans. in Nilsson, Martin.P., Religion, Beck, Munich 1977

Theocrit:.: Poems (TuscBü), ed. Fritz, F.P, Munich 1970

[...]



1 Charlesworth, M. P .: Some observations on the ruler cult, especially in Rome in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 163f

2 Odyssey VIII, 464 ff.

3 Cf. Charlesworth, M. P .: Some observations on the ruler cult, especially in Rome in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, pp. 164-173

4 Quoted from Plutarch, Lys 18,3f; Translated from e.g. Nilsson, M.P., Religion

5 Cf. Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. (Kohlhammer study books theology) Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 19f

6 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p.4.

7 Quoted from Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 41

8 from Plutarch; Tit 16,3f. Printed in: Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 41

9 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 5

10 see Bowersock, G. W .: Augustus and the imperial cult in the east in Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978 p. 401f

11 SIG³ 760: "ai poleij ai en thi Asiai kai oi [dhmoi] kai ta eqnh Gaion Ioulion Gaio [u ui] on

Kaisara, ton arcierea kai autokratora kai to deuteron upaton, ton apo Arewj kai Afrode [i] thj qeon epifanh kai koinon tou anqrwpinou biou swthra “; Translation by author

12 See chapter 2.1.2

13 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 5

14 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 7

15 to the research positions: Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, pp. 7-11

16 Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 37f

17 Cf. Fritz, F.P., Theokrit: Gedichte (TuscBü), Munich 1970, Z.121-130 only in late Republican times, often with her special favorites like the Gracchen or Marius

18 On the god kingship see Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 14

19 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 16f

20 Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 42f

21 Gelzer, Matthias: Decisions of honor for Caesar (in the year 45) in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 335f

22 Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 42

23 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 26f

24 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 26

25 on honors to Caesar from the Senate see Heinen, Hubert: On the grounds of the Roman imperial cult., Chronic overview from 48 BC. to 14 AD, Diss. Tübingen 1910., pp. 2-5

26 Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 47

27 Inscription from Ephesus: SIG³ 760

28 Wlosok A. admonishes not to regard these measures as strict apotheosis, as elevation to God, because these events would be overrated with regard to the Roman ruler cult introduced under Augustus. Indeed, these measures were a considerable advance in deification.

29 Balsdon, J.P.V.D .: Review of: Gerhard, Dobesch: Caesar's apotheosis during his lifetime and his struggle for the title of king in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 356

30 Taylor, L. R .: Divus Julius in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 333

31 Cf. Heinen, Hubert: On the grounds of the Roman imperial cult., Chronic overview from 48 BC. to 14 AD, Diss. Tübingen 1910, p. 7f

32 Taylor, L. R .: Divus Julius in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 333

33 Cf. Heinen, Hubert: On the grounds of the Roman imperial cult., Chronic overview from 48 BC. until 14 AD, Diss.Tübingen 1910, p. 12

34 Oktavian consciously chose the god Apollo as the guiding star because this stands for clarity, measure and sobriety, in complete contrast to Dionysus of Antonius, which symbolizes intoxication and ecstasy. Cf. Klauck, Hans-Josef: The religious environment of early Christianity II. Rulers and imperial cults, philosophy, gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996. pp. 49f

35 Cf. Heinen, Hubert: On the justification of the Roman imperial cult, Chronic overview by v. to 14 AD, Diss.Tübingen 1910, pp. 15-19

36 Mommsen: Monumentum Ancyranum, 2nd ed. 1883, p. 144

37 Quoted from Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 38f

38 Because a person is assigned a numen, that is the specific peculiarity of a Roman deity, his work, his will, his exercise of power is predicted as divine and thus ultimately also the person himself. Cf. Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 39f

39 CIL XIV, 2898 (ara elegant sculpta)

40 Vell. II, 124

41 Kienast, Dietmar: Augustus, Prinzeps and Monarch, ed. 3, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1999, p. 246f

42 Wlosok, Antonie: Introduction to: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 42f

43 Charlesworth, M.P .: Some observations on the ruler cult in: Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 180ff

44 On the imperial cult of Herod and the Augustus temples built by him, see Otto, W., RE Suppl. II 1913, 64ff. Taylor, L.R. Divinity 171.

45 Kienast, Dietmar: Augustus, Prinzeps und Monarch, ed. 3, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1999, p. 253

46 Printed and translated by Alföldi, Andreas: The two laurel trees of Augustus, 1973 in Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, p. 403

47 For the meaning of the individual honorary elements see Alföldi, Andreas: Die Zwei Lorbeerbäume des Augustus, 1973 in Wlosok, Antonie: Römischer Kaiserkult, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1978, pp. 404 - 422

48 CIL X, 890 (inscription from Pompeii)

49 CIL X, 824 (inscription from Pompeii)

50 On the priesthoods see Kienast, Dietmar: Augustus, Prinzeps and Monarch, edition 3, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1999, pp. 253ff

51 See Zanker, P .: JdAI 90, 1975, 281ff

52 On the Consecratio des Prinzeps see Klauck, Hans-Josef: The Religious Environment of Early Christianity II. Rulers and Imperial Cults, Philosophy, Gnosis. Vol. 9. Stuttgart et al. 1996, p. 47f

53 CIL X, 830, 837 (sacerdos Augusti); 838, 947, 948 (Flamen Augusti)

54 CIL X, 824, 890 (inscription from Pompeii)

55 see the plan of the forum in: Étienne, Robert: Pompeji, Life in an ancient city, ed. 5, Philipp Reclam jun. Stuttgart 1998, p. 121; Legend to the forum plan p. 120

56 Étienne, Robert: Pompeji, Life in an ancient city, ed. 5, Philipp Reclam jun. Stuttgart 1998, p. 114

57 CIL IV, 3726

58 CIL IV, 1074

59 CIL IV, 7579

60 Étienne, Robert: Pompeji, Life in an ancient city, ed. 5, Philipp Reclam jun. Stuttgart 1998, p. 112