Many accounts, both ancient and modern, have maintained that the Julio- Claudian women had unprecedented influence in their spheres. This dissertation attempts to determine the degree of autonomy and influence that the Julio-Claudian women had and to examine the factors that may have contributed to their exceptional influence. In trying to establish the extent and nature of the influence of the Julio- Claudian women, the ancient sources (literary, documentary and iconographic), in conjunction with modern scholarly views, were critically examined throughout. In attempting to determine the factors that influenced such weight and autonomy as these women had, the dissertation looks at the influences on women of earlier times, in particular the late Roman Republic, from a legal and a socio-historical angle. Whether the Julio-Claudian women could be considered, for example, to have been part of a “super-elite” in comparison with aristocratic women of earlier, and even later, times, was discussed and evaluated. On the surface the Julio-Claudian women did seem to enjoy a wider range of freedoms, power and influence than their counterparts, or the Roman women before or after them. Yet it is clear from the sources that these women also had restrictions laid upon them and that the patriarchal framework still curtailed their influence. When they over-stepped the accepted bounds, they were invariably vilified by the ancient historians, and often came to be negatively portrayed by subsequent generations. Whether these women truly deserved their vilification, or whether it can simply be ascribed to the bias of the ancient writers, was also explored throughout. / Classics and World Languages / M.A. (Classical Studies)

Ce travail s’inscrit dans le sillage des études récentes sur la mémoire culturelle et démontre comment la notion de mémoire joue un rôle clef dans le déroulement de l’Énéide. L’épopée virgilienne attire fréquemment l’attention du lecteur sur la fabrique poétique d’une atmosphère mémorielle identifiable à travers les lieux de mémoire, des objets signifiants (monimenta) et certains personnages divins et humains. Parmi ces personnages, Anchise représente la mémoire du passé et Ascagne-Iule symbolise le futur en tant qu’ancêtre de la gens Iulia, tandis qu’Énée s’affirme comme le parangon de la memoria romana. Ses choix, ses errances, son séjour carthaginois, sa catabase, sa visite de Pallantée et même le meurtre de Turnus sont imprégnés de la dialectique de la mémoire et de l’oubli. Ces observations permettent de poser un nouveau regard sur le sens général du poème et d’interroger la réception de l’Énéide comme racontant l’accomplissement des fata de Jupiter. Le poème épique renvoie aussi à la narrativisation de la conquête progressive de la mémoire par Énée, qui offre d’intéressants échos aux préoccupations augustéennes sur l’alternative embarrassante entre la vengeance (ultio) et la clémence (clementia). Le poète suscite ainsi une réflexion sur la mémoire comme un puissant moteur de l’action épique, également présentée comme un lien entre les hommes et les époques grâce à la construction d’une mémoire culturelle romaine, héritière des identités culturelles troyenne et latine. Virgile n’utilise pas seulement la mémoire comme la pierre de touche de son poème mais témoigne souvent d’une forme de « mémoire rétroverse », un concept forgé pour les besoins de ce travail. Dans plusieurs passages, Virgile regarde en effet les événements qui ont lieu à l’époque d’Énée avec la subjectivité embarquée d’un poète vivant à l’époque augustéenne. Ce point de vue rétrospectif et prospectif offre un aperçu intéressant de la construction de la mémoire dans l’épopée et de son télos augustéen. / This work draws on recent studies of cultural memory and aims to demonstrate that the notion of memory has a key role to play in the unfolding plot of the Aeneid. The virgilian epic calls the reader’s attention, more often than not, to the poetic fabric of a memorial atmosphere which is identified through ‘places of memory’; meaningful and powerful objects (monimenta); and divine and human characters. From theses characters Aeneas’s family emerges: Anchises represents the past and Ascanius-Iulus embodies the future as the ancestor of the gens Iulia. Aeneas, meanwhile, is the parangon of Memoria Romana. His every choice, the wanderings, the Carthaginian temptation, the catabasis, the visit of Pallanteum and even the death of Turnus at the end of the Aeneid, are permeated throughout with the dialectic of Memory and Oblivion. These observations encourage us to reconsider the general meaning of the poem and to question the reception of the Aeneid as an accomplishment of Jupiter’s fata and the realization of divine will. For the epic poem also seems to be the narrativization of Aeneas’s progressive conquest of memory. This, in turn, suggests intriguing echoes of Augustan preoccupations with the embarrassing alternative visions of ultio and clementia.The poet also raises the suggestion of memory as a driving force behind epic action, which is equally presented as a link between individual and time, owing to the construction of a Roman cultural memory inherited from Trojan and Latin cultural identities. Not only does Vergil use memory as a cornerstone for his narrative, but he often exploits the position of « reversive memory », a concept introduced by this thesis. In many passages, Vergil looks at the events of Aeneas’s time from the embedded perspective of a poet living in Augustan times. This both retrospective and prospective point of view provides a fascinating insight into the continuous construction of epic memory and its historical télos under Augustus.

Connue du milieu érudit des historiens, l’histoire romaine rejoint le grand public au XXe siècle sous diverses formes : cinéma, littérature, éducation et expositions. L’empereur Auguste est important dans cette histoire en transformant le monde romain. Né en 63 avant J.-C. et décédé en 14 après J.-C., Auguste devient le fondateur d’un nouveau régime politique, le Principat, remplaçant la République, et faisant d’Auguste le premier Empereur. Il marque ainsi l’histoire de l’Empire romain jusqu’à sa chute, et influencera encore vingt siècles plus tard tout le monde européen et occidental. En 1937, la Mostra Augustea della Romanità est une exposition italienne organisée sous le régime fasciste célébrant le caractère romain – la Romanità –, et voulant amalgamer Auguste à Mussolini. Cette exposition est analysée en comparaison avec deux autres expositions (Kaiser Augustus und die verlorene Republik, Berlin, 1988; et Augusto/Moi, Auguste, Empereur de Rome, Rome/Paris, 2013/2014). La recherche s’intéresse à la représentation muséale d’Auguste et à l’articulation des expositions relativement à l’historiographie évoluant à chaque exposition. Les catalogues d’exposition constituent la principale source sur les artéfacts exposés, les thèmes, les recherches et la mise en récit. Chaque exposition est remise dans son contexte et comparée à l’historiographie contemporaine, centrée sur des ouvrages marquants de leur époque. Ainsi, ces expositions sont teintées par leur époque, mais influencent à leur tour la culture historique populaire et le milieu académique contemporains et futurs. Le travail muséologique n’est pas seulement une vulgarisation du discours historique pour le grand public, mais aussi un travail participatif à l’historiographie. / Known to the scholarly milieu of historians, Roman history reached the general public during the 20th century in various forms: cinema, literature, schools and museum exhibitions. The emperor Augustus is important in Roman history for his transformative role of the Roman world. Born in 63 BC and died in 14 AD, Augustus became the founder of a new political regime, the Principate, replacing the Roman Republic, and making Augustus the first Emperor. He thus marks the history of the Roman Empire until its fall, and will still influence the entire European and Western world twenty centuries later. In 1937, the Mostra Augustea della Romanità is an Italian exhibition organized under the fascist regime celebrating the “idea of Rome” – the Romanità –, and wanting to amalgamate Augustus with Mussolini. This exhibition is analyzed in comparison with two other exhibitions (Kaiser Augustus und die verlorene Republik, Berlin, 1988; and Augusto/Moi, Auguste, Empereur de Rome, Rome/Paris, 2013/2014). The research focuses on the museum representation of Augustus and on the relation of the historiography still evolving with each exhibition. The exhibition catalogs are the main source for exhibited artifacts, themes, research, and storytelling. Each exhibition is put in its context and compared to their contemporary historiography, centered on outstanding works of their time. Thus, these exhibitions are tinted by their time, but in turn influence contemporary and future popular historical culture and as for academia. Museological work is not only popularization of historical discourse for the general public, but also participatory work in historiography.

Vergil’s Georgics was published in 29 BCE, at a critical point in the political life of Octavian-Augustus. Although his position at the head of state had been confirmed by victory at Actium in 31, his longevity was threatened by his reputation for causing bloodshed during the civil wars. This thesis argues that Vergil, in the Georgics, presents a defence of Octavian against criticism of his past, in order to safeguard his future, and the future of Rome. Through a complex of metaphor and allusion, Vergil engages with the weaknesses in Octavian’s public image in order to diminish their damaging impact. Chapter One examines the way in which the poet invokes and complements the literary tradition of portraying young men as destructive, amorous creatures, through his depiction of iuvenes in the Georgics, in order to emphasise the inevitability of youthful misbehaviour. Since Octavian is still explicitly a iuvenis, he cannot be held accountable for his actions up to this point, including his role in the civil wars. The focus of Chapters Two and Three of this thesis is Vergil’s presentation of the spring season in the Georgics. Vergil’s preoccupation with spring is unorthodox in the context of agricultural didactic; under the influence of the Lucretian figure of Venus, Vergil moulds spring into a symbol of universal creation in nature, a metaphor for a projected revival of Roman affairs under Octavian’s leadership which would subsequently dominate the visual art of the Augustan period. Vergil’s spring is as concerned with the past as it is the future. Vergil stresses the fact that destructive activity can take place in spring, in the form of storms and animal violence; the farmer’s spring labor is characterised as a war against nature, which culminates in the horrific slaughter of oxen demanded by bugonia. In each case destruction is revealed as a necessary prerequisite for some form of creation: animal reproduction, increased crop yield, a renewed population of bees. Thus, the spring creation of a new Rome under Octavian will come as a direct result of the bloodshed of the civil wars, a cataclysm whose horrors are not denied, but whose outcome will ultimately be positive. Octavian is assimilated to Jupiter in his Stoic guise: a providential figure who sends fire and flood to Earth in order to improve mankind.