The Cult of Claudius: Scope and Survival


Main theme: this essay examines whether the Cult of Divus Claudius was given the same degree of
legitimacy as Augustus’ and its survival under Nero, the Flavians, and the Five Good Emperors.

As we discussed in class, Claudius was surrounded by the imperial cult from childhood, and this
connection may have been considered as proof of his own divinity by the time of Suetonius. Under
Tiberius, Claudius served as a member of the Augustan priesthood and, according to Suetonius, had
to pay a fee for entering Gaius’ new priesthood. After ascending the throne, he personally
intervened in the cult – he prevented the dishonouring of Gaius and was willing to reverse the
decisions of previous emperors to confer divine honours on Julio-Claudians. So, he deified Livia
against her own wishes, which points to a personal policy of aggrandizing his family by means of
divine honours.

Claudius was reluctant about applying the imperial cult to himself and did not accept excessive
honours. He rejected the status of a living god and forbade anyone to worship him or offer him any
sacrifice. Nevertheless, worship of Claudius as a living god seems to have occurred in the Greek
East, which is reflected by a temple at Cos, and “a head of Claudius” in a temple dedicated to
Athena in Priene. Evidently Claudius was unable, and probably also unwilling, to tightly control
the imperial cult over the expanse of the empire.

From a Roman perspective the cult of Claudius began at his death on the 13^th October, 54 AD. There
was, however, a tension within the cult between respect and outright mockery. First, there is
evidence of seriousness in the establishment of the cult, especially in the funeral, where
Suetonius, Cassius Dio and Tacitus mention the honours given to him on the same scale as those of
Augustus. Tacitus writes that Agrippina was an active participant in the funeral of her husband and
in his cult, which clearly gave her status as well. He was given priests and sacrifices were
performed, he was considered an integral part of Roman religion throughout the reign of Nero, as
attested by Acta Fratrum Arvalium.

But there is evidence of contempt for the new cult as well. Cassius Dio wrote that Agrippina and
Nero only pretended to grieve for the man whom they had killed; Seneca wrote that, with Claudius’
death, “[t]he people of Rome were walking about like free men”; Pliny the Younger speculated that
Nero deified Claudius only to make him a laughingstock. Even the placement of certain temples
suggests a slight to Claudius. Suetonius mentions a temple to Claudius on the Caelian Hill, begun
by Agrippina. As the Caelian Hill was a peripheral site, associated in legend with an Etruscan
bandit, and notorious for its brothels, its selection, likely at least partly a decision of the
Senate, seems to reflects hostility to the new cult. Tacitus also mentions a temple erected in
Camulodunum in Britania, which was seen as a place of savages and barbarians. The decision to
locate an official temple to Claudius in Britain was laughable to Seneca even back then and could
be seen as a deliberate insult on the part of the Senate.

Evidence for the subsequent survival of the cult is similarly mixed. The cult came under attack
during the reign of Nero, who annulled many of Claudius’ decrees and edicts. In addition, Nero
neglected and then cancelled the divine honours given to Claudius, and almost completely destroyed
the temple on the Caelian hill. From the perspective of the Senate, the cult of Claudius seems to
have been largely dismantled by January of 70 A.D, at the beginning of Vespasian’s reign. However,
later in the same reign there seems to have been an effort to reinstate the cult. Suetonius writes
that Vespasian restored Claudius’ divine honours and started work on the temple on the Caelian
Hill. Cassius Dio also attests to Vespasian’s rebuilding programme. Archaeological evidence
suggests that the temple at Camulodunum was rebuilt under the Flavian dynasty around  80 - 100. AD.
The temple to Claudius in Prusa by Pliny’s time had collapsed and there seems to have been some
doubt whether the temple had actually been erected in the first place. What happened to the cult
after that is difficult to determine, as the inscriptions attesting to it are undated.

To sum up, according to the article, Claudius’ involvement with the imperial cult extended from his
birth to well after his death. The cult of Divus Claudius was not held in high regard, even by
those most responsible for establishing it, yet despite a disastrous beginning under Nero, it
survived and appears to have been observed for some time thereafter.