Note 122 — Below is a copy of the deeds of the divine Augustus, by which he subjected the whole world to the dominion of the Roman people, and of the amounts which he expended upon the commonwealth and the Roman people, as engraved upon two brazen columns which are set up at Rome.1

Here the record is of commotions quelled within the recognized limits of the empire. In Spain there was the Cantabrian war from 727 to 735. In Gaul, G. Carrinas had subdued the Morini, and triumphed, July 14, 726; and M. Messala had suppressed the Aquitani, triumphing Sept. 25, 727. Cf. Suet. Aug., 20, 21.

The German campaigns extending at intervals over the years from 742 to the very end of Augustus’ reign it is needless to detail. This reference to the pacification of Germany has been the subject of much dispute. Mommsen in two places (R. G., p. VI, and 48), uses the word “crafty” (callidus) of Augustus, referring to his alleged glozing over of unsatisfactory events. Hirschfeld goes further, and in connection with the present passage accuses Augustus (Wiener Studien, V, 117) of a “masterly concealment and whitewashing (übertünchung) of all that could hurt his reputation.” This charge is made because Augustus omits all mention of the disaster under Varus. Against this charge Johannes Schmidt defends Augustus, (Philologus, XLV, p. 394, ff.). The contest between Schmidt and Hirschfeld is based really upon opposing views of the purpose of the Res Gestae. Schmidt believed it to be an epitaph. In this there would be no place for anything save the fortunate events of a life. If nil de mortuis nisi bonum be wise, Augustus might well have adapted the adage to his own case and said, nil de me morituro nisi bonum. But Hirschfeld insists that the Res Gestae constitute not an epitaph, but “an account of his administration,” and therefore contends that the omission of the German disaster was not in good faith. To this, Schmidt answers that Augustus had nothing to gain by such concealment—indeed that concealment of so notorious a disaster would be absurd. And in the text itself he finds a recognition of the real state of affairs, inasmuch as Augustus expressly distinguishes Germany from the provinces, Gallic and Spanish, and while claiming it for Rome, does not assert that it belongs to her as do organized provinces. Schmidt also says that pacavi, “I pacified” does not necessarily imply that Germany continued in a state of peace. It may well enough cover the fact that there was temporary success. But this is hair-splitting. The character of the Res Gestae must be always had in mind. Cf. Introduction. Its deliverances were ad populum and they constituted an epitaph.