(Re)presenting Empire: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor, 31 BC - AD 68.

Abstract

This dissertation examines the sculptural and architectural ornamentation of Roman imperial cult temples in Asia Minor. I argue that the imperial cult was not an intrinsically “Greek” institution as some have suggested, but rather the hybrid product of a complex cultural negotiation between local communities and the imperial center. I contend that the emperor Augustus and his advisors worked together with local elites to formulate a dynamic new visual language of power that combined elements of Roman triumphal art with representational strategies drawn from iconographic repertoire of the Achaemenid empire, which ruled over Asia Minor from 546 to 333 BC. My dissertation focuses on three case studies: the temples at Pisidian Antioch, Aphrodisias and Ankara (Ancyra). Contrary to conventional wisdom, I argue that Augusteum at Pisidian Antioch was constructed through a close collaboration between Italian colonists and local Phrygian elites. This determination is based largely on the discovery of a new inscription, which I interpret as the dedication of the Augusteum. The Sebasteion at Aphrodisias features a series of reliefs that depicts over fifty ethnic personifications from around the empire. I argue that this ethne series was the continuation of a deeply rooted local tradition, stretching back to the reign of the Persian king, Darius I. By couching Roman power in an idiom familiar to Anatolian viewers, the designers of the Sebasteion made the realities of Roman rule seem palatable to the inhabitants of Aphrodisias. My final case study explores the meaning of the Res Gestae as inscribed on the Temple of Roma and Augustus at Ankara. I contend that rather than a simple disembodied text, the Res Gestae was, in fact, a potent visual symbol with a strong precedent dating back to the Bisitun inscription of Darius I in the sixth century BC. I conclude that the mobilization of Achaemenid imagery in the context of the Roman imperial cult implicitly likened the power of the Roman emperor to that of the Persian King. It also helped to ensure easy intelligibility among local viewers, who were more familiar with lingering representations of Achaemenid art than that of imperial Rome.