Ovid and the Domus Augusta aspeciallinkto‘‘thedescendantofAphrodite,SebastosTheosKaisar’’(the
DeifiedCaesarAugustus).Nonetheless,itisworthrecallingthattheywere
infactsituatedsomeone-and-a-halftimesasfarfromRome,asthecrowflies,
asTomoi,andwerefacedwiththesameneedtoconstrueanunprecedented
situation.Whatismore,theytoohadheardthattherewassomehesitation
inthenewemperor’sacceptanceoftheimperialnomenclature,anddulyleft
intheinscribedtextoftheiroathofloyaltytwogapsintowhichtheymight
laterinserttheword‘‘Autokrator’’—ifthenewemperorlaterturnedoutto
have taken thepraenomen‘‘Imperator’’ afterall. But, more important, they
laid a heavy emphasis on the (fictional) continuity of the imperial house:
somehonours(itisnotclearwhich)wouldbevoted‘‘alongwiththeother
gods,toRoma,toTiberiusCaesar,sonofAugustus,Augustus,andtothesons
ofhisblood,andnoneotherofall.’’Theideologicalforceofthenewmon-
archywasindeedremarkable:poetryandprose,inscriptionsinbothGreek
andLatin,coinsbothRomanandnon-Roman,andimagesbothRomanand
provincial,hadallcometoexpressanelaborateseriesofconstructionsofan
imperial‘‘family’’whichwasitselfasuccessionofconstructions.