What Factors Led to a Roman Emperor

These cults can provide great pressure in order to secure deification for an emperor; nevertheless they themselves rely on the virtues of the emperor. The model for a deified man is that of Hercules, who laboured in humanity all his life, living a ‘good life’ and henceforth being rewarded after death.  Likewise emperors had to live similar virtuous lives in order to gain the support and devotion of a cult, who can call for the deification of a ‘good’ emperor.  However this virtuous elevation of emperors can be dangerous, as seen in the case of Caesar.  His ascension whilst still living provoked opposition from noble Romans, leading to his assassination because they feared his supreme power.

Another factor that emperors themselves build up is their divine patronage.  Augustus constantly stressed the importance of his divine ancestry and his temple to Mars Ultor in the Forum Augustus clearly displays his divine background.  Over the centuries the idea of family ties with gods and goddesses resulted in images becoming more common and apparent; in the late second century, coins appeared depicting the current emperor with the face of his ancestral god acting as his shadow.

This new tradition brought the emperors divinity to the street and images showing the ascension of dead emperors became increasingly common.  The depiction of Antoninus Pius and his wife Faustina ascending to heaven appeared on a funery column within the Campus Martius for public display.  The Gemma Augustea (AD 12/13) depicts Augustus already in heaven with other roman gods while Tiberius returns from battle.  Augustus is sitting beside the figure of Roma and in the process of being crowned by who is speculated to be Oikumene (the inhabited world).  Both the oak crown and the eagle underneath his chair are representations of Jupiter, which stresses Augustus’ natural place in heaven (even before his death).  The Gemma Augustea was a small private piece of art proving that the belief of the emperor as a god is shared in public and private life.  

The power of literary influences when discussing factors of emperor worship is crucial as it is usually in literature that emperors are first referred to as gods.  Cassius Dio wrote of Augustus, ‘We should glorify his spirit like that of a god forever.’  The myths created in text raise the emperor above everyday life and thus solidify his position in power.  Hopkins says, ‘They [myths] were the currency of the political system, just as coins were the currency of the fiscal system,’ and this supports the idea that the political system in Rome was intertwined with the perceptions and beliefs of the subjects. Those further down in the social hierarchy need to glorify the emperor in order to venerate their own position.  

Signs throughout the emperors life that were documented and spread like myths meant that, like the Christian belief in Jesus, the Romans were able to ‘prove’ the divinity of an emperor.  Tacitus writes of a miracle performed by the emperor Vespasian in which a blind man and a cripple is cured by Vespasian's touch.  The text shows the emperors divinity but also his reluctance to accept this divine gift and an interest in science. These ideas support the suggestion that a Roman emperor was not to encourage divine worship to himself directly, in his lifetime.  When looking at the context of Vespasian’s reign, he was unexpectedly brought to power and therefore may have felt the need to reinforce his divine nature to secure his dominance.

The use of divine signs to cement divinity was not a new occurrence; in the Augustan age at the Olympic games held in honour of the recently deified Caesar, a comet was said to have been seen in the sky for seven days and that this was a sign from the gods to say that they were pleased about the worshipping of Caesar.  Similarly during a storm a lightning strike hit a statue of Augustus and melted the letter ‘C’ in the word Caesar, leaving only ‘Augustus aesar’.  Suetonius writes on how the people of Rome took this to believe the emperor would live for another 100 days (the Roman numeral for 100 was c) and that he would then ascend to heaven and become a god (the Etruscan word for god was aesar).

  In order for an emperor to be worshipped as a god certain factors in his lifetime had to be achieved, however deification was also a major aspect after an emperor’s death.  The manner of an emperor’s funeral was very important as the process of deification (apotheosis) was incorporated into the funeral process.  Apotheosis was the ceremony in which a man was deified and the imperial funerals were largely based on both the divine funerals of the past and the noble funerals of the present.  Certain elements were modified to distinguish an imperial apotheosis from a regular noble funeral and likewise over time these aspects evolved with the changing political system.  There are two main sources of information on apotheosis and they come from the contemporary texts of Dio (details the funerals of Augustus and Pertinax) and Herodian (details the funeral of Septimus Severus).  

The funerals involve the displaying of the body in the Forum, a procession of the gods and ancestry, an oration usually given by the emperors heir and the cremation (usually of an effigy) on a specially built pyre, from which an eagle is released to symbolise the ascension to heaven.  The pyre in later centuries became the focal point of the apotheosis and was commonly depicted on coins within the Roman Empire.  The origin of this tradition is widely accepted to be from the funeral stories of Romulus and Hercules.  Romulus is said to have been carried to heaven on Jupiter’s eagle and literature in the Augustan age stressed the point that Hercules was told by an oracle to climb a burning pyre, which was then ‘consumed’ by a lightning bolt.  This gave the funeral a divine element and apotheosis became central to the deification process.

The funerals were a public event and the mourning display by the people present did contribute to the official deification of an emperor.  This public feeling of loss was echoed in the regulations set by the senate after Augustus’ death.  The decree stated that all noble men mourn for a few days and that all women of position (the wives and daughters of senators) mourn for a year.  This decree ‘redefined the boundaries of kinship’ as the mourning period for an emperor was now equal to that or a husband or father.  

Posthumous honours were granted to emperors after death but this didn’t always result in official deification.  For example Lucius, Germanicus and Drusus all received honours in the shape of annual sacrifices, imperial arches, and a place in divine processions but none of these were deified.  The three main posthumous honours which were given to officially deified emperors were a temple, a priest and a priestly college.  

But again it is not any honour given to an emperor in his lifetime or after his death which officially makes him a god.  The over-riding factor is the senatorial decree which usually follows the apotheosis ceremony.  This involves the testimony of a witness who claims to have seen the ascension, just like Julius Proculus who saw an apparition of the deified Romulus.  The official decree depends on prior expectations as well as attitudes after the emperor's death and demonstrates the collective superiority of the senate's members.  

The senatorial decree in the first century AD was the climatic end to the apotheosis process, however as the political system changed, so did the traditional aspects of the imperial funeral.  The loss of senatorial power in politics was paralleled in the deification of emperors: the senatorial decree was no longer needed in the late second century AD and the use of a witness was completely abolished.  The deification of an emperor became less of a traditional religious ritual and more of a political formality.

The final factor that will be discussed is the succeeding heir and the power he held to force deification.  Although in the first century the final decision was made by the senate they could be forced into deifying an emperor by the purposed new ruler.  For example Antoninus Pius refused to be crowned as emperor until his predecessor, Hadrian, was deified.  The successive emperor also has a duty to encourage the acceptance of a newly deified emperor and should lead by example, making sacrifices to him and holding festivals in his honour.  

As it has been argued there are many factors that contribute to an emperor being worshipped as a god and it is the combined effect of all these aspects that eventually lead to the official deification.  From the Augustan age many emperors attempted to subtly change time to imperial time and likewise religion was altered to create an imperial religion.  Hopkins argues that our modern rationalistic prejudices prevent us from fully understanding the need for glorifying the Roman hierarchy and we underestimate the power that myth has on the Roman populace.  In the first three centuries AD, there was a great belief that emperors were of divine origin and so were to rejoin their ancestry after death in heaven; many literary texts and images depict emperors as ‘gods on earth,’ and the cults of emperors continue to bestow heavenly honours after their deaths.  However, no matter how virtuous the emperor or how much pressure is placed on the senate by the cult of the living emperor or the succeeding ruler, the only title given to a deified emperor is that of ‘divus’ meaning divine; the title associated with the traditional gods is that of ‘deus’ meaning god.  Even though the emperor is worshipped as a god and is deified by senatorial decree it is arguable that no emperor is ever made a true god of Rome.  

Bibliography: 

• Beard, M. and North, J. and Price, S., Religions of Rome, Vol. 1 [Cambridge 1998]

• Fishwick, D., The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the Ruler Cult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire, Vol. 3: Provincial Cult, Part 1: Institution and Evolution [Leiden 2002]

• Gordon, R. L., ‘The Veil of Power: Emperors, Sacrifices and Benefactors’, in Beard, M. and North, J. (eds.), Pagan Priests: Religion and Power in the Ancient World, [London 1990]  

• Hopkins, K., Conquerors and Slaves: Sociology Studies in Roman History Vol. 1 [Cambridge 1978]

• Price, S. R. F., ‘Between Man and God: Sacrifice in the Roman Imperial Cult, Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 70. (1980), pp. 28-43.

• Price, S., From Noble Funerals to Divine Cult: The Consecration of Roman Emperors, found in Cannadine, D. and Price, S., R., F., Rituals of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies [Cambridge 1987]

• Taylor, L. R., The Divinity of the Roman Emperor [U.S.A. 1931]

---