Julius Caesar in Jupiter's Prophecy

ROBERT F. DOBBIN

I L

Julius Caesar in Jupiter's Prophecy,

Aeneid, Book 1

nascetur pulchra Troianus origine Caesar, 286

imperium Oceano, famam qui terminet astris,

Iulius, a magno demissum nomen Iulo.

hunc tu olim caelo spoifis Onrentis onustum

accipies secura; vocabitur hic quoque votis. 290

aspera tum positis mitescent saecula bellis:

cana Fides et Vesta, Remo cum fratreQ uirinus

iura dabunt; dirae ferro et compagibus artis

claudentur Belli portae; Furor impius intus

saeva sedens super arna et centum vinctus adnis 295

post tergum nodis fremet horidus ore cruento.

THUS JUPITERco ncludes his speech of consolation to Venus in the first of

the Roman prophecies in the Aeneid (Book 1, lines 254-96). Readers will recall

the occasion of the speech: Venus is distressed by the rough treatment her son and

the rest of the Trojans have received at Juno's hands. She protests (229-53) that

her father has forgotten his oath that a race would emerge from the remnants of Troy

to rule a great empire. Jupiter calms her fears and in an extremely condensed survey

lays out the destined future of Aeneas, the Trojans, and the Roman people. The

prophecy mainly proceeds in five- or six-line increments: Aeneas, who is destined

for immortality, will wage war in Italy and found Lavinium, where he will reign

for three years (261-66). Ascanius, now Iulus, will succeed him and reign for thirty

years in the new settlement of Alba Longa (267-71). Here his descendants will

live for three centuries, until Romulus founds Rome (272-77). Jupiter goes on to

I wish to thank Professors Erich Gruen, Tom Habinek, Charles Murgia and Peter White, along with two

anonymous readers, for their help at various stages in the preparation of this paper. Not all would

agree with the conclusion, and any errors are my own.

? 1995 BY THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

6 CLASSICAALN TIQUITY Volume 14/No. 1/April 1995

promise that Juno will come around to the Romans' side and with divine sanction

they will enjoy "empire without limit" (278-82); they will conquer Greece and

other lands (283-85). Then, quite suddenly, appear controversial lines on Caesar

(286-90), followed by a concluding vision of universal peace (291-96). In tracing

the trajectory of fortune in the career of Venus' descendants Jupiter concentrates

on events toward the beginning and the end. That helps bring out parallelisms in

Rome's long history (signalized, for instance, by the quoque in 290). It also means

that certain details regarding the means that brought Rome to her glorious end are

left for narration later.

The identity of the Caesar in 286 is a venerable problem.' Recently the case for

deliberate ambiguity has been advanced, by O'Hara, Bishop, and others. The latest

contribution to the debate, however, by Kraggerud, has defended the apparently still

dominant view that Caesar is Augustus. In this paper I will argue the case for Julius

Caesar: a view that prevailed in antiquity (to judge from the imitation of Ovid,

and the commentary of Servius), and one that may again be gaining ground.2 That

Caesar is the Emperor remains the communis opinio, however, supported in the

present generation by the comment of R. D. Williams. He has lent the authority

of his name to what has actually been the majority view since Heyne. But Williams

was hardly dogmatic about it, and my position is consistent with his insofar as I

argue that, although the Caesar may not be Augustus, the passage is still about

the Augustan age. Argument for this involves exploring some byways of Roman

religion in the turbulent period of the late Republic, with particular attention to the

apocalyptic expectations attending Julius Caesar's death. My position draws on an

important new study of Caesar in Augustan Rome, and expands on the neglected

note of Servius.

Some thoughts, first, on the issue of ambiguity. One reason it has flourished of

late is the perception that straightforward exegesis has failed, the traditional choice

between Julius Caesar and Caesar Augustus having finally proven unsatisfactory.

But in fact the case for Julius Caesar has not yet been properly made, in the way

Kraggerud, for instance, has defended Augustus. And as Kraggerud points out,

there is at least a prima facie case in favor of clarity in a context, as he puts it,

1. Literature on the passage: Norden 273-75; Quinn 47 n. 1; G. Williams 1968, 427; Kenney

106; Austin 1971, 108-10; R. D. Williams 1972, 181-82; Clarke; Basson 28 n. 73; Kinsey; G. Williams

1983, 141; Sirago 753; Stahl 340 n. 46; Binder 1988, 269; Bishop 13-16; Koster 142-43;