"Mom Said I’m in Charge”: Understanding the Motivations of the Gracchi Brothers, Caesar, and Augustus through their Maternal Parenting

“Mom Said I’m in Charge”

Understanding the Motivations of the Gracchi Brothers, Caesar, and Augustus through their Maternal Parenting

Lydia Davis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Class of 2023

Abstract

Recent psychological research suggests an association between authoritative maternal parenting with high levels of academic achievement and a self-attributed need for autonomy in children. To provide a novel analysis of the characters of the Gracchi brothers, Caesar, and Augustus, this paper applies such psychological findings to these revolutionary figures. It concludes that the mothers of these men, Cornelia, Aurelia, and Atia, respectively, influenced the ambitious mindsets of these men through their strict parenting. In addition, it argues that these women were able to affect such influence through a combination of unusually high levels of education and positions as widows or sole disciplinarians.

During the late Roman Republic, a few key historical figures facilitated the governmental transition from Republic to Empire: Gaius and Tiberius Gracchus, Julius Caesar, and Augustus. Recent scholarship has begun analyzing the specific motivations of these revolutionary leaders, but a common motivation has yet to be agreed upon. However, modern psychological techniques have identified personal ambition as a characteristic common among leaders of reform. 1 As an explanation for this commonality, other psychological findings suggest that authoritative maternal parenting correlates to personal ambition, achievement, and a need for autonomy in children. 2 This indicates that examining the maternal parenting of revolutionary Roman figures allows for a better understanding of their behavior. Corroborating this, in his Dialogus de oratoribus, Tacitus mentions the exhaustive parental regulations of Cornelia, Aurelia, and Atia, connecting these to their sons’ later accomplishments and ambitions (Dial. 16.28). 3 Therefore, by applying current psychological findings to contemporary Roman perspectives and Roman definitions of motherhood found in the works of ancient historians, this paper seeks to establish a link between the actions of the Gracchi brothers, Caesar, and Augustus and their maternal parenting. While the late Republic of these figures’ day is remembered for its tumultuous political history, it was also a time of greater opportunities and power for Roman women. As Hemelrijk notes, this is when the ideal of educated motherhood originally appeared. 4 Beginning with Cornelia, mothers were praised for their education because of the benefits it could convey to their male children. Many, but not all, women of senatorial rank therefore received at least a basic education. 5 This is indicative of the fact that the actions of their adult sons were one of the few ways Roman women could elevate their statuses. 6 It is no wonder, then, that the ideal of the univira (literally ‘one-man/husband woman’) was born during this time and that widowed mothers were able to reach consider

4 Emily Ann Hemelrijk, Matrona Docta: Educated Women in the Roman élite from Cornelia to Julia Domna (London and New York: Routledge, 1999), 69. 5 Ibid. 212-3. 6 Suzanne Dixon, The Roman Mother (Norman: University of Oklahoma, 1988), 6. able levels of power. 7 Not only did widowed mothers likely have greater control over their household wealth, but they were also solely responsible for the upbringing of their sons, from whom they could gain social prestige. 8 Thus, Romans expected mothers to maintain a much greater level of influence in an adolescent or adult son than is typical today. 9 For these reasons, republican and imperial authors praising mothers focus on their actions as firm disciplinarians, keenly interested in their sons’ later success. 10

Cornelia et Fratres Gracchi

The preeminent example of the ideal Roman mother is Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi. Born into a wealthy patrician family, as the daughter of Scipio Africanus, Cornelia’s upper-class status, accompanied by her father’s permission, allowed her to be educated in Greek literature and Latin rhetoric. This was very unusual for a woman of that period, and it left her with a unique position in society as a well-educated woman. 11 Additionally, through the death of her husband and lack of remarriage, she achieved the status of univira (P. Vit. Ti. Gracch. 1.1-5). Because of Cornelia’s extensive education and widowhood, she was poised to exert great influence over her sons, Tiberius and Gaius, and to fuel their ambitions.

With Plutarch stating, “these sons Cornelia reared with such scrupulous care…[that] they were thought to owe their virtues more to education than to nature,” 12 the great influence Cornelia had over her sons was well-known throughout Roman history (P. Vit. Ti. Gracch. 1.5). As a widow, she was able to utilize her household wealth to provide her sons with a rhetorical education by Diophanes and a philosophical education by Blossius (P. Vit. Ti. Gracch. 8.5). Plutarch goes on to claim that many Romans place the blame for Tiberius’ (and likely Gaius’ as well) revolutionary behaviors on these teachers or on Cornelia herself. In fact, he mentions that Cornelia “often reproached her sons because the 7 Ibid. 6, 22. 8 Ibid. 6. 9 Ibid. 134, 233. 10 Ibid. 2. 11 Hemelrijk, Matrona Docta: Educated Women in the Roman élite from Cornelia to Julia Domna, 24. 12 Trans. B. Perrin.

Romans still called her…not yet the mother of the Gracchi” 13 (P. Vit. Ti. Gracch. 8.5-6). Not only does this demonstrate that she was actively attempting to influence the behaviors of her sons, both through selecting their teachers and through speaking directly to them, but also that even the Roman audience saw maternal parenting as a cause of revolutionary actions. Both Quintilian and Cicero later understood Cornelia’s effect on her sons; they used her to demonstrate that educated women are better suited to their sons’ political careers (Quint. Inst. 1.6; Cic. Brut. 104, 210-211). In addition, Cornelia convinced her younger son, Gaius, to spare a man named Octavius, and she was publicly honored with a bronze statue inscribed “Cornelia, Mother of the Gracchi” 14 (P. C. Gracch. 9.3-4). Therefore, Cornelia was known during her own time and throughout the late Republic as a major influencer of her sons and a contributor to their grand ambitions.

While Cornelia’s true beliefs and exact words concerning her experience as a mother are likely lost to history, many sources claim to record such matters. First of all, both Seneca the Younger and Plutarch portray Cornelia as coping with the death of her sons in a composed, stoic manner, burying them honorably and considering their deaths her only true losses of children, though she had supposedly lost nine others (P. C. Gracch. 19.1; Sen. Helv. 16.6, Marc. 16.3). In these accounts, Cornelia appears to have had immense pride in her sons and to have connected her own self-worth to their successes. The most controversial source of information about Cornelia is the “letters” Cornelius Nepos recorded in his biography on Gaius Gracchus. In his recording, these two letter fragments allegedly depict Cornelia begging her younger son to refrain from his act of standing for the tribunate for fear of his life after the murder of Tiberius. Because of the nature of this advice, many scholars have overlooked the fragments as Optimate propaganda. As Dixon notes, though, the two “letters” differ significantly, and the first fragment may in fact be closer to some original piece of writing by Cornelia. If this is true, Cornelia’s use of the word nostri in “long and surely shall our enemies not perish but remain as they now are” 15 depicts a personal belief that she is intimately connected to her son’s political career. Finally, and most famously, Valerius Maximus records her as saying haec ornamenta sunt mea (‘These are my jewels’) when her children returned home from school, after a guest kept bragging about her jewelry (Val. Max. 4.4). This story depicts Cornelia as the archetype of a Roman mother devoted to her sons, and its popularity conveys the impact that her authoritative parenting had not only on her sons, but on Roman society as well. Based on the accounts of near contemporary Roman authors of the behaviors and beliefs of Cornelia, she fits Ramsay’s definition of an authoritative mother in his study on the effects of authoritative maternal parenting: ‘[having] high control and positive encouragement of the child’s autonomous and independent strivings.’ 16 She exemplifies this in her actions, such as carefully selecting her sons’ educators and encouraging them to elevate her 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid. 15 Trans. J.C. Rolfe. 16 Ramsay, “Authoritative Maternal Parenting Associates With the Explicit Need for Autonomy,” 2, qtd. in Baumrind 1971, p.2. to the title of “Mother of the Gracchi.” No wonder, then, that the lives of both Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus fall in line with the findings of Ramsay’s study. Both men appealed to the Roman populace and the tribunate to satiate their need for autonomy and their quest for power. Each man succeeded in acquiring power because of Cornelia’s mothering; a United States study supports linking academic success to authoritative maternal parenting. 17 A young American’s academic success is comparable to a young Roman’s political career, and both societies emphasize the role of the mother. Therefore, there is strong evidence that part of the Gracchi’s success is because of Cornelia’s scrupulous upbringing. Because of her prominent background, extensive education, and position as a univira, Cornelia was likely able to influence her sons’ decisions to seek immense personal power and facilitate their successes in these undertakings. Strangely, while the Gracchi are often vilified in later years and while Roman authors depict Cornelia as a major influence on their lives, she is never blamed for their actions. Instead, she becomes a symbol of Roman motherhood, while her sons become symbols of the tumultuous Late Republic.

Aurelia et Caesar

While much less is known about the next mother identified by Tacitus, Aurelia, the mother of Julius Caesar, appears to have likewise been an univira with a distinguished family lineage. Once again, this would have placed her in a position to exert great influence over her son’s life, as Tacitus records that she did (Tac. Dial. 28). Therefore, the ambitions and successes of Julius Caesar may be better understood through analysis of his maternal upbringing. Contemporary Roman authors later documented Aurelia’s upbringing of and political involvement with her sons. In addition to Tacitus’ mention of her disciplina ac severitas (‘discipline and strictness,’ Tac. Dial. 28), Cicero implies that familial influence, therefore Aurelia, led to Caesar’s rhetorical powers: “of all our orators he is the purest user of the Latin tongue” 18 (Cic. Brut. 252). These statements indicate that Aurelia made use of her unusual degree of freedom by taking extreme care of her son and that she was probably well-educated because of her ability to prepare Caesar for rhetorical prowess. Regarding her political actions, Plutarch describes Aurelia watching over her son’s wife Pompeia and preventing her from being unfaithful to Caesar (Plut. Vit. Caes. 9.2). While this action remains more in the domestic sphere, an affair could have severely damaged Caesar’s political reputation and position, so Aurelia is maintaining her son’s power however she is able to as a woman. Later, she assisted Caesar in divorcing and prosecuting Pompeia by acting as a witness in the aftermath of the Bona Dea scandal (Suet. Iul. 74.2). Thus, Aurelia guided and supported her son’s political actions to the best of her ability. Finally, Plutarch describes Caesar walking with his mother to the election of Pontifex Maximus and saying, “Mother, to-day thou shalt see thy son either pontifex maximus or an exile” 19 (Plut. Vit. Caes.

17 Newman et al. “Relationship Between Maternal Parenting Style and High School Achievement and Self-Esteem in China, Turkey and U.S.A,” 265–288. 18 Trans. G. L. Hendrickson, H. M. Hubbell. 19 Trans. B. Perrin.

7.3-4). In this account, it is apparent that Caesar wishes to make his mother proud, a likely product of her authoritative parenting.

Once more, recent psychological research can help shed light on the extent of a mother’s influence. Caesar’s military conquests and eventual assumption of the title Dictator Perpetuo demonstrate a self-attributed need for autonomy and great level of success. As Ramsay’s and Newman’s studies show, these elements of Caesar’s life likely found a partial cause in the extreme devotion of Caesar’s mother to him. Interestingly, Ramsay’s study only saw a correlation between authoritative maternal parenting and a self-attributed need for autonomy, and it was self-attribution that ultimately led to Caesar’s assassination. Furthermore, self-reliance and personal ambition are common elements among great leaders of reform worldwide. 20 Using Aurelia as an example of a devoted mother, Roman authors saw Aurelia as a key influence for Caesar’s political actions and that this is consistent with modern psychological findings.

Atia et Augustus

Unlike Cornelia and Aurelia, Atia, mother of Augustus, was not the ideal of an univira. While she was also of a noble and senatorial background (Suet. Aug. 4.1), she did remarry after the death of her husband (Vell. Pat. 60.1 and Nic. Dam. 3). This second husband, Philippus, was able to exert his power as pater familias by having Augustus raised by his grandmother for several years after his father’s death. After the grandmother died as well, Atia was finally able to live with and bring up her son again (Suet. Aug. 8.1 and Nic. Dam. 3). Therefore, Atia eventually became the primary influence over her son, just like Cornelia and Aurelia did before. In addition, her similarly high-status background likely allowed her to receive a quality education also akin to these two women, providing her with knowledge the Romans found beneficial for raising a good Roman man.

Atia took advantage of her univira-like position to keenly direct both her son’s early upbringing and, later, some of his political decisions. As Nicolaus of Damascus describes in his Life of Augustus, Atia, like Cornelia, closely monitored her son’s education and would even ask his instructors how he had progressed and what he had done each day (Nic. Dam. 3). In addition, Augustus continued living with his mother, under her strict guidance, even after he donned the toga virilis (Nic. Dam. 4). These actions show that Atia sought to control her son’s life as much as possible — an indication of authoritative parenting. While Roman men were expected to continue visiting their mothers into adulthood, authors noted Augustus’s unusually frequent visits to Atia and her home, displaying a deep bond between the two (Nic. Dam. 15). This bond and Atia’s influence over her son continued well into August’s adulthood. For example, she once advised her son to withdraw from the city during the aftermath of the assassination of Caesar (Nic. Dam. 30), and she later expressed concern over his adoption of the name Caesar (Vell. Pat. 60.1). Although women in antiquity were known to continue to advise their adult sons, these accounts

20 Zaharia et al. “Great Reformers: Psychological Analysis of Their Personality Justinian, Julius Caesar and Shi Huangdi,” 212-20. display Atia’s much deeper level of involvement with her son’s life and political ambitions. Finally, as in the case of Cornelia, public regard for her ideal maternal parenting is apparent in the fact that the Roman people honored her with a public funeral (Dio Cass. 47.6). Not only may Atia have influenced Augustus with direct suggestions, but her disciplinarian parenting may have instilled his great ambitions in life. Though Augustus avoided the title imperator, his increasing authority displayed as princeps depicts a self-attributed need for autonomy. Furthermore, his success in transitioning Rome out of a tumultuous and bloody past into an era of prosperity may be somewhat comparable to academic achievement, as seen in the political successes of the Gracchi brothers. In these ways, the authoritative maternal parenting of Atia psychologically impacted her son’s behavior. Additionally, Aurelia likely had a grandmotherly influence on Augustus’s ambitions because of her disciplinary parenting of Caesar and his later, well-documented, influence on Augustus. In light of the possible influence of Atia on her son, the figure of Tellus in the Ara Pacis, may have a somewhat nuanced meaning, perhaps suggesting a divine influence of mothers on the history of Rome.

Conclusion

Because of their senatorial backgrounds, with educational benefits, their univira or near-univira statuses, and abilities to gain social power through the acts of their sons, the Roman mothers Cornelia, Aurelia, and Atia were able to and did claim great influence over their sons. The sons of each went on to assume major revolutionary roles in Rome’s transition from Republic to Empire. With the aid of modern psychological data, the common need for autonomy in and political achievement of each man is a result of authoritative maternal parenting. Furthermore, both Tacitus’ specific reference to these women and the public honor shown to them display that this conclusion was shared by contemporary Romans as well. This begs the question, though a somewhat extreme one, of to what extent great mothers ultimately lie behind the characters of great men.

Works Cited

Cicero. Brutus. Orator. Translated by G. L. Hendrickson, H. M. Hubbell. Loeb

Classical Library 342. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1939. Dio Cassius. Roman History, Volume V: Books 46-50. Translated by Earnest Cary,

Herbert B. Foster. Loeb Classical Library 82. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press, 1917. Dixon, Suzanne. The Roman Mother. Norman: University of Oklahoma, 1988. Hemelrijk, Emily Ann. Matrona Docta: Educated Women in the Roman élite from

Cornelia to Julia Domna. London and New York: Routledge, 1999. Jacoby, Felix. “Nikolaus Von Damaskos.” In Die fragmente der griechischen historiker (F GR HIST). Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1961. Quintilian. The Orator’s Education, Volume I: Books 1-2. Edited and translated by Donald A. Russell. Loeb Classical Library 124. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002. Nepos. On Great Generals. On Historians. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. Loeb

Classical Library 467. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1929. Newman, J., H. Gozu, S. Guan, J.E. Lee, X. Li, and Y. Sasaki. “Relationship

Between Maternal Parenting Style and High School Achievement and

Self-Esteem in China, Turkey and U.S.A.” Journal of Comparative Family

Studies 46, no. 2 (2015): 265–288. Plutarch. Lives, Volume X: Agis and Cleomenes. Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus.

Philopoemen and Flamininus. Translated by B. Perrin. Loeb Classical

Library 102. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1921. . Lives, Volume VII: Demosthenes and Cicero. Alexander and Caesar.

Trans. Perrin. Loeb Classical Library 99. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1919. Ramsay, Jonathan E. “Authoritative Maternal Parenting Associates With the

Explicit Need for Autonomy.” Journal of Individual Differences 41, no. 2 (2020): 110–116. Seneca. Moral Essays, Volume II: De Consolatione ad Marciam. De Vita Beata.

De Otio. De Tranquillitate Animi. De Brevitate Vitae. De Consolatione ad

Polybium. De Consolatione ad Helviam. Translated by John W. Basore.

Loeb Classical Library 254. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1932. Suetonius. Lives of the Caesars, Volume I: Julius. Augustus. Tiberius. Gaius.

Caligula. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. Introduction by K. R. Bradley. Loeb

Classical Library 31. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914. Tacitus. Agricola. Germania. Dialogue on Oratory. Translated by M. Hutton, W.

Peterson. Revised by R. M. Ogilvie, E. H. Warmington, M. Winterbottom.

Loeb Classical Library 35. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914. Valerius Maximus. Memorable Doings and Sayings, Volume I: Books 1-5. Edited and translated by D. R. Shackleton Bailey. Loeb Classical Library 492. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000. Velleius Paterculus. Compendium of Roman History. Res Gestae Divi Augusti.

Translated by Frederick W. Shipley. Loeb Classical Library 152. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1924. Zaharia, Daniela, Elena Stănculescu, Florica Mihuţ-Bohîlţea, and Ecaterina Gabriela Lung. “Great Reformers: Psychological Analysis of Their Personality Justinian, Julius Caesar and Shi Huangdi.” Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences 140, no. C (August 22, 2014): 212–220, doi: 10.1016/j. sbspro.2014.04.412.