Читаем The Augustan Empire 43 BC полностью
45 Smallwood I976(e 1212)96-104; Schiirer 1973 (e 1207) 320-6; Schalit 1969^ 1206) 563-644; Bammel 1968 (e 1083) 73-9; Piatelli (e i 189) 323-40; Bowersock 1983 (£990)49-53; Baumann 1983 (e 1091) 221-37; and see below ch. i5
Joseph.
Herod's privilege of appointing a successor had thus been transformed into a recommendation rather than a directive; Augustus would have the final say. That clause invited discord. The sons of Herod brought conflicting claims to Rome, complicated by a separate Jewish delegation which requested abolition of the monarchy. Augustus decided matters with even-handedness: he endorsed Herod's territorial dispositions, in effect dividing his realm into three parts, but withheld the royal title from all three sons. Archelaus would rule Judaea, Samaria and Idumaea as ethnarch, Antipas and Philip obtained the designation of tetrarch, the one over Galilee and Peraea, the other over Batanaea, Trachonitis and Auranitis. The will and its sequel allowed Augustus both to exercise beneficence and to re-assert his ultimate authority.47 Further, the
What Augustus gave he could also take away. The precedent of asking the emperor to redress grievances created in Palestine had been firmly set in the reign of Herod. A logical step followed in a.d. 6. Complaints registered in Rome against the misrule of Archelaus led Augustus to depose the Herodian dynast, banish him to Gaul, and convert his domain into a Roman province. The smaller principalities under Antipas and Philip remained 'autonomous', but the key districts of Judaea, Samaria and Idumaea would now come under direct Roman rule, governed by an equestrian prefect and under the general surveillance of the imperial legate in Syria. A census directed by the Syrian legate P. Sulpicius Quirinius marked the new order in a.d. 6. It signalled the imposition of Roman taxes and the official subordination of Judaea.49
Consolidation rather than expansion characterized Augustan policy in Syria and Palestine. Syria contained the major Roman garrison in the East and provided the pivot for the defence of Rome's position and enforcement of her authority. The history of Judaea under Augustus exposed the fragility of 'independence' for client states which served as buffers for Roman interests. Herod earned imperial favour by tying his realm more closely to the emperor, thus bolstering power but increasing dependence. The transition from client kingdom to province represented a logical stage in the development. Taxation and direct rule only formalized a continuing process of implementing Roman authority in the East.
47 Joseph.
** Joseph. Д/xvn.250-99;
49 Joseph. Л/xvii.342-4,xvii.354-5; В_/и.111-13,11.i i7;DioLV.27.6;Pani 1972(0 295) 133-7. The census of Quirinius is wrongly dated to the reign of Herod by Luke 2:1-5. Oo the new province, see Smallwood 1976 (E 1212) 144-56; Ghiretti 1985 (e 1119)751-66.
iv. armenia and parthia
M. Antonius had invested heavily in warfare against Parthia. Contests with the great eastern power entailed substantial costs in men and prestige. Parthia had inflicted defeat upon Roman armies, and Rome's influence in Armenia had proved ephemeral. The humiliation left deep scars. Standards of the Republic's army captured at Carrhae and hostages taken in Antony's abortive campaign remained in Parthian hands.50 After Antony's demise, the burden of restoring Rome's honour rested with the victor of Actium. But Octavian resisted the temptation to retaliate. More urgent tasks of consolidation took priority after Actium. And the restraint set a pattern: the
Octavian exercised caution from the outset with Parthia. Dynastic rivalry, as so often, plagued the Parthian ruling houses. Even before Actium Phraates IV and the pretender to his throne Tiridates both sought to enlist Octavian's assistance in their respective causes. Octavian wisely refrained from taking action. After Actium, when Phraates expelled his rival, Tiridates sought refuge in the Roman province of Syria. Octavian permitted him to reside there, a useful card to play in diplomatic games with Parthia, while also maintaining amicable relations with Phraates at an official level.51 In similar fashion, he declined the request of the Armenian ruler Artaxias to restore his brothers, held as hostages in Rome. They too would serve as insurance and potential counter-weight. And he installed the Mede Artavasdes as king of Armenia Minor, thus to provide further check on any Armenian aspirations.52
A reserved cordiality toward Parthia continued through the next decade. In the mid 20s Tiridates left Syria and made his way to Augustus, having in tow the young son of Phraates IV, whom he had managed to kidnap. Phraates sent envoys to the emperor, asking for the surrender of Tiridates and the release of his son. Tiridates, in turn, advertised himself as
On Antony and Parthia, see above, ch. i.
Dio li.18.2-3. 52 Dio li.16.2, Liv.9.2; Strab. xii.3.29 (55 5C); Magie 1950 (e 853) 443.
by Augustus - but no more. Amicable relations held, so long as the
Restraint and quiet diplomacy kept the peace during the 20s. Other matters occupied Augustus' attendon: the working out of constitutional arrangements and the entrenchment of Rome's position in the West. But the
In the East Augustus affected war but practised diplomacy. The celebrated arrangement with Phraates IV in 20 b.c. cannot be disassociated from the
influence.[312] But here again Augustus proclaimed victory, conquest and martial supremacy for consumption at home. The
A sign of continuing cordiality between Rome and Parthia came in 10 в.с. Phraates IV sent four sons to live in Rome. The gesture did not signify deference or subordination, as sometimes portrayed; rather, it provided a means whereby the Parthian king could defuse opposition at home and stabilize his hold on the throne. Augustus was pleased to comply. He could both grant a favour to Phraates and take possession of potentially valuable instruments of diplomacy.[314]
Relations between the empires remained smooth and undisturbed for nearly two decades after Phraates relinquished the standards. Trouble arose, as so often, in the client state and buffer region of Armenia. The death of Augustus' appointee Tigranes II c. 7 в.с. ushered in a turmoil of which our sources preserve only a few confused fragments. A struggle for the throne evidently gripped Armenia, pitting Tiridates III against - another Roman nominee Artavasdes, and prompting the
The situation in Parthia soon complicated matters, dealing Roman interests a further blow. Phraates IV perished, perhaps murdered, in 2 B.C., and his successor Phraates V (or Phraataces) took the occasion to meddle in Armenia.[316] Augustus could not permit Rome's prestige in the East to suffer further deterioration. His own prestige at home was at
stake. The
Augustus' intentions, in fact, were rather more modest. But public perception, as ever, counted. Gaius took an extensive detour, to Arabia and elsewhere, in part to add to his distinctions, primarily to show the flag.[317] News of his achievements and of his arrival in Syria had the desired effect. Tigranes III of Armenia sent a conciliatory message to the
The arrangement in a.d. 2 ought to have settled matters. But
Ov.
Cf. Romer 1978 (c 300) 187-202, 1979 (c 301) 203-8.
Dio lv. 10.20—i, lv.ioa.4; Veil. Pat. 11.101.1-3. Among modern discussions, see e.g., Ziegler 1964 (c 327) 5 3-6; Chaumont 1976 (a i 5) 77-80; Romer 1979 (c 301) 203-4, 208-10; Pani 1972 (c 295) 45-6; Cimma 1976 (d 120) 324-8.
Armenian affairs followed their own path, regardless of agreements between Rome and Parthia. Tigranes III died, probably in a.d 3, setting off a chain of events no longer recoverable in detail or in precise sequence. Gaius installed a new ruler, the Mede Ariobarzanes, thus to reiterate Rome's role in the indirect governance of that client kingdom. But Armenian nationalist sentiment resisted once more, and upheaval followed in which Gaius himself suffered a wound that would prove fatal. Two or three more changes of rulers came in Armenia during the lifetime of Augustus. The
Comparable struggles for the throne occurred in Parthia during the final decade of Augustus' reign. The
The pattern of the emperor's policy in that region maintained consistency throughout. He pursued the twin goals of hegemony via client rulers in Armenia and amicable reladons, including mutually acknowledged spheres of influence, with Parthia.69 The behaviour was marked by restraint, but the public posture was one of aggressiveness. So Augustus presented endorsement of a client king as capture of Armenia, recovery of the standards as Parthian submission, and the assignment of Gaius as an imperialist venture. The
V. SPAIN
The reputation of the
The campaigns proved long and arduous, as so often in Spain. Augustus headed the effort in one year only, 26 B.C., but resistance continued at intervals until 19 B.C., perhaps even beyond. The
Strategic motives do not account for the thrust. Roman commanders regularly claimed triumphs in Spain - six of them had been awarded in the decade just prior to Augustus' invasion itself. Raids by the Cantabrians upon neighbouring tribes might have supplied a pretext. But hardly enough to warrant the emperor's own presence at the head of the army. Nor do economic motives provide an answer. Spanish mines and other resources had long been exploited by Rome; the wealth of the north west was an afterthought rather than an incentive.70 Our sources offer little by way of explanation: Cantabrian harassment of neighbours, Augustus' intent to regulate affairs in Spain, or simply irritation that after 200 years a corner of the peninsula still held itself independent of Roman rule.71 Concrete goals take second place here; propaganda counted for more.
The provinces of Spain (Baetica was soon to be removed) were among the overseas territories assigned to Augustus at the beginning of the year
" Sherwin-White 1984 (a 89) 322—41, sees a more menacing posture by Augustus toward Parthia. 70 Cf. Flor. 11.33.60.
71 On the triumphs, see Fasti Triumph, for the years 36, 34,33,32, 28, and 26;
27 B.C. He announced his resolve to bring them firmly under Roman authority. Since most of the peninsula already fell in that category, the intended targets were plainly the Cantabrians and Asturians. Tales made the rounds of their ferocious nature and fanatic resistance to any infringement on autonomy. Augustus threw open the gates of Janus' temple, a symbolic means to proclaim a crusade against the foe. And his personal leadership of the army would reinforce martial credentials, a check on actual or potential rivals with military claims of their own.[322] As the opening of the gates declared Augustus' purpose, so their closing advertised its accomplishment. The
As in the case of Parthia, battlefield exploits in Spain did not match their publicity in Rome. Confusion in the sources prevents a confident reconstruction of events, geography, or chronology. It is clear, in any case, that Augustus' personal intervention was anything but decisive. The
The victories prompted Augustus to direct the closing of Janus' doors, an announcement of thorough pacification, and generated the award of triumphal honours. The
79 Flor. 11.33.48—50; Oros. vi.21.3-5. Among numerous scholarly discussions, see Magie 1920(0 285) 325-39; Syme 1934 (c 313) 293-317; Schuten 1943 (e 238); Horrent 1953 (c 276) 279-90; Schmitthenner 1962 (c 305) 54-60; Syme 1970 (c 314) 83-103; a recent summary of scholarship in Santos Yanguas 1982 (e 237) 16-26. See also Santos 1975 (c 503) 531-6; Lomas Salmonte 1975 (e 230) 103-27; Solana Sainz 1981 (e 259) 97-119; Tranoy 1981 (e 244) 132-44; Martino 1982 (c 287) 41-104. 80 Dio liii.25.5-8; cf. Flor. 11.33.51; Suet.
Flor. 11.33.50; Oros. vi.21.6—8. The location of Mt Medullius, whether in Asturia or in Callaecia, is uncertain; Santos Yanguas 1982 (e 237) 18-26; Martino 1982 (c 287) 105-24.
Flor. 11.33.54-8; Oros. vt.21.9-10; Dio liii.25.8. For the deployment and identification of the legions, see testimony collected by Lomas Salmonte 1975 (e230) 135-9; Jones (£226)48-51; Solana Sainz 1981 (e 239) 120-42; Santos Yanguas 1982 (e 237) 26-45. 83 Dio liii.26.1.
rose against their new governor, C. Furnius, and the Asturians against the increasing cruelty of Carisius, bringing still more ruthless repression and subjugation.[326] Yet another insurrection by the redoubtable Canta- brians in 19 B.C. provoked the dispatch of M. Agrippa himself who subdued them, but only at heavy cost and severe losses, declining even to accept the triumph voted him at Augustus' urging.[327] Agrippa's campaign which flushed the Cantabrians out of their strongholds and compelled them to settle in the plains finally brought a measure of stability to the region.[328] The
Here as elsewhere propaganda and reality diverged. Augustus entered Spain to claim victory and announce pacification. And so he did. His autobiography saluted the achievement, Velleius Paterculus embellished it, the tradition followed by Florus and Orosius reiterated it. The conquest of north-west Spain rounded off Roman suzerainty in the Iberian peninsula. But the real victory did not match Augustus' boast. It came slowly, a bloody and brutal process that endured well beyond the
VI. AFRICA
In Africa entrenchment of control rather than expansionism predominated. The region served as an important granary for Rome and its security held a place on the imperial agenda. The
Not that calm had descended altogether. Nor did Rome abandon aggression and content herself with consolidation. A series of proconsuls earned triumphs
The intimidation apparently took effect. Two decades passed with no evidence of trouble from the nomadic or semi-nomadic tribes on the fringes of the province. The stationing of
Marmarides, providing occasion for another Roman military success, that of Sulpicius Quirinius, who with modesty uncharacteristic of
Roman influence, limited on the southern borderlands, spread along the Mediterranean coast of Africa. The ruler of Mauretania, Bocchus, died in 3 j в.с. and Octavian took charge of his kingdom, keeping it out of the hands of any native prince and transforming it into a direct Roman dependency." Precisely how the region was administered in subsequent years remains obscure. Mauretania does not appear among the provinces enlisted on Octavian's side in 32 B.C., nor among those assigned in the settlement of 27 в.с.100 The nature of its governance eludes inquiry, but Rome directly or indirectly, took responsibility for it. In 25 B.C., however, the arrangement gave way to a new solution: Augustus turned the realm over to Juba II, son of the former king of Numidia whose dominion had been annexed by Caesar.101 The transfer had perhaps been anticipated from the start, or else Augustus gradually recognized the undue burden of extending Roman resources to administer north Africa all the way to the Atlantic. In any event, the scholarly Juba, now accorded a new throne and assigned new duties, accepted the role of loyal and dependent client.102
The
Roman presence in north Africa increased markedly under Augustus. A garrison at Ammaedara, military action in the frontier zones, a dependent ruler in Mauretania and, perhaps, twenty colonial foundations all reinforced that presence. The need to secure an area which
Dio xux.45.7. 100 Aug. RG 25.2; Dio l.6.3-4, lin.12.4-7.
Dio uu.26.2; Strab. vi.4.2 (288Q; xvii.3.7 (828Q. It is unlikely, despite Dio, li.ij.6, that Numidia had been restored to Juba II in the meantime and was now exchanged for Mauretania. See the arguments of Romanelli 1959 (e 760) 1 j6—8; Ritter 1987 (c 299) 137-42.
On Mauretania between 3 3 and 2 3 B.C., see Pavis d'Escurac 198 2 (c 296) 219-2 5; Mackie 1983 (e 753) 333-42 - highly conjectural. On Juba, see Romanelli 1959 (e 760) 162-74; Pavis d'Escurac 1982 (c 296) 225-9.
Evidence and discussion in Romanelli 1959 (e 760) 187-226; Benabou 1976 (e 715) 50-7; Kienast 1982 (c 136) 395-7; Pavis d'Escurac 1982 (c 296) 229-30; Mackie 1983 (e 753) 332-38.
served as an important source of grain supplied prime motivation. But the measures also provoked resentment and retaliation, guerrilla warfare and disruption by native peoples. The shoring up of Roman authority had at the same time generated challenges to that authority and stirred sentiments that would lead to even more explosive reaction in the reign of Augustus' successor.
VII. THE ALPS
The Alps loomed over northern Italy, a haven for fierce tribes and violent folk who might menace the Roman hold on Gaul and disrupt communications from Italy. For Augustus, ready access through that barrier and containment of restive tribes who could obstruct movement were important desiderata. And he made certain to achieve those goals. That larger motives held - a prelude to comprehensive conquests in the Balkans and Germany - would be a hasty conclusion and premature judgment.
The young triumvir recognized early the importance of controlling the Little and Great St Bernard passes, the routes to Helvetia and the Upper Rhine. His officer Antistius Vetus attacked the Salassi in 34 в.с., tough warriors who inhabited the higher reaches and represented constant danger to that region. Initial efforts miscarried, as the Salassi first surrendered and then expelled a Roman garrison with scorn and glee. The imperial legate Valerius Messalla retaliated a few years later, but success again was short-lived. Subjugation of the recalcitrant Salassi came only in 25 в.с. when Augustus' appointee Terentius Varro forced them to capitulate and sold the able-bodied into slavery. The military colony of Augusta Praetoria (Aosta) soon rose on the site of Varro's camp and facilitated Roman access to central Gaul.104
Determination to command the Alps did not slacken thereafter. Military installations gradually multiplied in strategic places during the next decade: Zurich, Basel, Vindonissa, Oberwinterthur and elsewhere.105 That provincial penetration prepared the way for outright conquest.
Campaigns began in earnest in 17 or 16 в.с. when P. Silius Nerva, proconsul of Illyricum, subdued two Alpine tribes, the Camunni and the Vennii, the first at least and perhaps both in the region between Como and Lake Garda.106 Roman sources, of course, held the enemy respon-
App. III. 17; Dio XLIX.34.2, xlix.38.3, Lin.25.2-5; Strab. iv.6.7 (205-6Q.
Wells 1972 (e 601) 40-6; Fcei-Stolba 1976 (e 616) 350-5.
Dio liv. 20. i. Debate continues over the identity and location of the Vennii. If they are identified with the Vennonetes of the upper Rhine, then Silius' assaults were quite wide-ranging; cf. van Berchem 1968 (£605)4-7; Wells 1972 (e 601)63-6. But the matter remains uncertain; Overbeck 1976 (e 633) 665-8; Kienast 1982 (c 136) 295; Waasdorp 1982/3 (e 639) 39-40.
sible for provoking the conflict. More probably, it represents a stage in Augustus' drive to bring the Alpine regions under Roman dominion. It can hardly be coincidence that a two pronged assault followed in the next year of 15 B.C., headed by the
The victories of Augustus' stepsons were followed in 14 в.с. by subjugation of the Ligurians and annexation of the Maritime Alps.[339]The native dynast Cottius gained recognition as
The Alpine campaigns in 16 and 15 B.C. included fighting against peoples further east, branches of the Norici, inhabitants of the
What prompted pacification of the Alps? A long-range imperialist plan is often conjectured: the Alpine campaigns merely set the stage for major offensives against Germany, the expansion of Roman power across both the Rhine and the Danube to effect the subjugation of that land all the way to the Elbe.[344] Perhaps. But that ambitious scheme need not have been in prospect at the time of the Alpine conquests. Other motives sufficed. The opening of the Great St Bernard and the route through Helvetia gave swifter access from Italy to the Rhine and thus greater protection to Gaul. Reduction of Raetia and occupation of Noricum provided essential links between legions on the Rhine and the armies of Illyricum.[345] The Upper Danube as yet contained no fortresses, a zone of influence, not a fixed frontier.[346] Ease of communications rather than the prospect of further expansion may have been the immediate stimulus.
Concrete objectives coincided with political motives and public relations. Augustus utilized the Alpine campaigns to hone the talents and advance the claims of his stepsons. The advertisement of victory came in varied forms and reached a wide constituency. Horace sang of the exploits in two
VIII. THE BALKANS
Strategy and politics combined to motivate Roman action in Illyricum. Octavian recognized the region's importance at an early stage and led the campaigns in person during the triumviral period. That proved to be just a prelude. Major expansion took place between 13 and 9 b.C., and then the imposition of a new and more permanent arrangement after suppression of the Pannonian revolt in a.d. 9. Augustus prepared the ground for two provinces, Dalmatia and Pannonia, extended Roman control to the Danube, and secured the land route between northern Italy and the Balkans.
The result had not been forecast from the outset. Octavian's thrust into Illyricum from 35 to 33 в.с. had more specific ends in view. He looked to his own needs - and to those of his soldiers. The rugged lands across the Adriatic would provide good training and discipline, a hardening of the sinews that might otherwise grow soft with idleness.[348]Weapons would now be trained on the barbarian, a conspicuous turning away from the civil strife that exhausted and demoralized the troops. They could look forward to enrichment from the spoils of the enemy, so Octavian alleged. Campaigns against foes of the empire would restore morale to the forces and allow their commander to claim leadership in the national interest instead of a factional struggle.[349] The memoirs of the
Neither the cynical judgment nor the self-serving explanation gets to the heart of the matter. Octavian needed to enhance his military reputation, an effort to match the accomplishments of his partner and rival Antony. It is no accident that Octavian took conspicuous personal risks and twice suffered injury in Illyricum. Those badges of courage could be useful. And upon completion of the contest he delivered a speech to the Senate making pointed contrast between Antony's idleness and his own vigorous liberating of Italy from incursions by savage peoples.126
Larger strategic considerations have also been postulated. Perhaps Octavian sought to secure Italy to the north east in order to prevent a march by Antony via that route, as had once been contemplated by Philip V and Mithridates, or else to seize the area in preparation for a future offensive against his fellow triumvir. Or perhaps Octavian already contemplated a broad strategic design that would push the borders of Illyricum to the Danube and forge a link with imperial defences on the Rhine.127 But military conflict with Antony was not yet imminent in 3 5; nor had any eastern ruler yet employed such a path to invade Italy. As for the eventual push to the Danube, Augustus himself ascribes that plan to the campaigns of his stepson Tiberius more than two decades later. Octavian had more immediate needs: establishment of a military reputation through punishment of tribes that had sullied Roman honour. He could thus contrast solid accomplishment with the sloth of Antony. Octavian would unfurl the Roman standards regained from the barbarian. And he would suggest even greater conquests in store for the future: victories in Illyria, it was reported, might lead to bold offensives against Dacians and Bastarnae.128 Not that Octavian actually considered such offensives at this time. But here, as elsewhere, he sedulously advanced the pose of the conqueror.
Actual accomplishments in the Illyrian War of 35 to 33 в.с. were modest. Octavian opened the fighting in 3 5 B.C. with a thrust against the Iapodes, bringing their forces to surrender, and besieging their principal city and citadel at Metulum which was soon destroyed by fire.129 Roman armies pressed on to assault Segesta (Siscia) at the confluence of the Save, blockade the city, and force it to submission. Octavian could take pride in the achievement and returned to Rome for the winter, intending to resume operations in Illyria in the following spring.130 That next season, however, saw him transfer attention to Dalmatia. Talk of advance against Dacia was evidendy given up - or never meant seriously. Octavian did not intend to go beyond the Save. Instead, he could earn further laurels by punishing the tribes that had defeated Roman armies and held Roman standards. The
Territorial gains were relatively limited. But territory had not been the
On the motives, see Syme 1971 (E702) 17,157; Wilkes 1969 (£706)48-9. A healthy scepticism is expressed by Schmitthenner 1958 (c 504) 193-200.
Aug.
App.
App.
objective. Octavian had driven as far as Siscia on the Save and displayed Roman power to the Dalmatians, thus retaliating against peoples who had raided Roman territory or vanquished Roman troops in the past. What mattered was the presentation of events in Rome. Octavian spoke to the Senate and rattled off the names of nearly thirty tribes which his forces had coerced into submission, surrender and payment of tribute. He proudly set up the recovered standards in the portico of Cn. Octavius, thus linking his success to earlier republican victories. And he elevated the prestige of his family through the award of statues and the privilege of tribunician sacrosanctity for Livia and Octavia. Propaganda value, as so often, counted for more than tangible achievement.132
Another barbarian people also held Roman standards in their possession: the Bastarnae on the Lower Danube. They had captured the trophies from a defeated Roman army thirty years before. Octavian would restore Roman honour here as well. The proconsul of Macedonia, M. Licinius Crassus, marched north in 29 B.C. to engage the Bastarnae who, it was reported, had crossed the Haemus mountain range and had overrun parts of Thrace wherein dwelt allies of Rome. Crassus conducted campaigns over a two year period, driving back the Bastarnae, gaining victories over other Thracian tribes from the lower Danube, including the Moesi, the Getae and perhaps the Dacians, slaying a prince of the Bastarnae in hand to hand combat, and regaining the Roman eagles. He celebrated a well-earned triumph in 27 B.C.[351] Nothing suggests that these campaigns actually extended the boundaries of Macedonia. But the punishment of unruly tribes and the recovery of lost military emblems served to demonstrate and reinforce Roman authority.
Major advance in the region awaited a decade and a half. The provincial distributions of 27 в.с. assigned responsibility for Dalmatia and Macedonia to the Senate, two separate and independent proconsular commands. That formal situation remained unchanged through the 20s and for some years thereafter. But the advantages of a link between these domains and a push to the Danube that would control the land route from northern Italy to the lands of the East became increasingly evident. Restive Pannonian tribes attacked Istria in 16 B.C., Thracians ravaged Macedonia, and an uprising in Dalmatia had to be quelled in the same year. The Pannonians rose again in 14 B.C., calling forth yet another
M. Vinicius, probably proconsul of Illyricum, undertook operations in 14 b.c., but Augustus soon entrusted overall direction of the war to Agrippa with broad powers, a
Evidence largely fails for the next fifteen years. Those years, it may be presumed, constituted the time of real pacification, the securing of the middle Danube, and the intimidation of tribes beyond it in order to assure control of the frontier. Augustus' legate Sex. Appuleius completed coercion of the Pannonians in 8 b.c. Excursions across the Danube followed in subsequent years: L. Domitius Ahenobarbus resettled the Hermunduri as a check on the Marcomanni and even brought his troops to the far side of the Elbe; epigraphic testimony records another Augustan legate, perhaps M. Vinicius, who routed the Bastarnae and entered into relations with a number of trans-Danubian tribes; Aelius Catus transplanted 50,000 Getae from the far side of the
Danube to Thrace, where they took on the name of Moesians; and Cn. Cornelius Lentulus successfully drove Dacians and Sarmatians back from the vicinity of the Danube, thus to solidify further Rome's hold on the river.[356] A legionary command was installed in Moesia during these years.[357] Augustus boasts hyperbolically of smashing the Dacians and compelling them to submit to Roman orders, a claim echoed but modified by Strabo.[358] The situation seemed secure.
But that confidence proved to be premature. In a.d. 6 Tiberius assembled troops for a decisive thrust against the Marcomannic leader Maroboduus in Bohemia. The Roman
The rebels assaulted legionary detachments and massacred Roman merchants. The Breuci headed for the key Roman garrison at Sirmium and would have taken it but for the timely arrival of A. Caecina Severus, legate of Moesia who turned back the Pannonian threat while suffering heavy losses. Tiberius immediately cancelled operations against Maroboduus and dispatched the Illyrian legate M. Valerius Messalla to secure the other critical Roman fortress at Siscia which guarded the route to north-eastern Italy. The rebel forces in Pannonia and Dalmatia had been slow to combine efforts; otherwise, the entire Roman position in Illyricum might have collapsed. As it was, the insurgents controlled most of the territory from the Save to the Adriatic and had gathered forces, so it is reported, of 200,000 infantry and 9,000 cavalry. Caecina Severus returned to his own
Tiberius could not afford to move far or fast from his base at Siscia. Grave anxieties gripped Rome. Augustus, now severely alarmed, ordered extraordinary levies, impressed veterans back into service, imposed new taxes, called upon the patriotic instincts of senators and
Rebuilding of the Roman position began in earnest in a.d. 7. Reinforcements from Italy brought Tiberius' army up to five legions. M. Plautius Silvanus led two legions from the east and joined forces with Caecina's army of Moesia. Both commanders, together with the Thra- cian cavalry under Rhoemetalces, now headed west to link with Tiberius. They survived near calamity at the Volcaean Marshes, an ambush by troops under the combined leadership of the two Batos. Old- fashioned discipline, as Velleius describes it, repaired ranks that were broken, stemmed panic, and turned defeat into victory.[361] By the winter of a.d. 7/8 an immense assemblage of ten legions had converged at Siscia, swollen further by seventy auxiliary cohorts, fourteen cavalry units, and no fewer than 10,000 veterans recalled to the colours from Italy - the largest military concourse since the civil wars. Yet the giant gathering once effected, Tiberius almost immediately dissolved it again, escorting the reinforcements from Moesia and the east back to Sirmium.[362] A perplexing decision. Perhaps the assemblage had been Augustus' idea, the product of impatience and anxiety, without consultation of Tiberius.147 More likely, it was a tactic of intimidation: such a concentration of power could overawe the resistance of rebels.
The manoeuvre achieved its end. In the following year, without further show of force, the Pannonians offered full surrender and received terms. A final flurry occurred late in the year, when the Dalmatian chieftain Bato captured and killed his treacherous Breucian namesake and rekindled revolt among the Pannonians. But the Roman garrison at Sirmium under Silvanus crushed the uprising and restored order. The Save valley was once again safely in Roman hands.148
Dalmatia remained to be reduced in a.d. 9. Tiberius returned to Rome in the winter, but three commanders held responsibility for completing the reconquest: M. Lepidus, left as legate in Siscia, Silvanus at Sirmium and Germanicus on the Dalmatian coast itself. But the combination proved inadequate. The inexperienced Germanicus made little headway, and Augustus sent back Tiberius himself to resume command. That decision sealed the fate of Dalmatia. Lepidus forced his way through hostile territory to join with Tiberius. And the redoutable Bato, though eluding capture and resisting siege, finally came to terms - and was spared by the admiring Tiberius.149
Four bloody years had been consumed in suppressing this mighty challenge to Roman authority.150 Military success, as usual, would be translated into political distinction. Augustus exploited the victory to bestow honours on his family. Germanicus made public announcement of the result. The
ix. germany
The confrontation of Rome and Germany created high drama in the time of Augustus - and heated debate in the modern era. What were the objectives of Rome's crossing the Rhine, how far did she intend to go, and how firm a hold did she expect to exercise? The penetration of Germany was no isolated event. It must be considered in close conjunction with Roman presence in Gaul.
Caesar had conquered Gaul but had not fully pacified it. Octavian took the matter in hand, an item of the first priority in consolidation of the western empire. In the early 30s в.с. he commissioned his most trusted collaborator, M. Agrippa, to campaign against rebellious peoples in Aquitania in the south west and against tribes in the north
1,9 Dio lvi.11—16; Veil. Pat. 11.115.1-4. See the analysis of Koestermann 1953 (c 281) 368-76; Wilkes 1965 (E70J) 111—25■
On the war, in general, see the thorough treatment of Koestermann 1953 (c 281) 345-78; also Mocsy 1962 (e 675) 544-8; Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 69-77.
Dio lvi.17.1-3. 'и Cf. Braunert 1977 (c 25 5) 21 j-16.
east.153 Unrest persisted. The years 31 to 28 B.C. witnessed three uprisings requiring Roman military acdon: against the Morini, the Treviri and the Aquitani, each issuing in triumphs or imperial salutations for the victorious commanders.154 Those episodes drove home the lesson that the policing of Gaul could not be divorced from control of Germanic tribes across the Rhine. Caesar had experienced the problem, having faced large scale migrations by Germans like the Sugambri, the Usipetes and the Tencteri who dwelled near the river and who felt the pressure of the potent Suebi.155 It is noteworthy and revealing that Gallic disturbances in the 30s and early 20s b.c. repeatedly involved assistance or provocation from peoples across the Rhine. Agrippa had to fight on the other side of the river; the Treviri got support from trans-Rhenane tribes; and the Suebi came to the aid of the Morini.156 Augustus effected a settlement in Gaul in 27 B.C., conducting a census and perhaps implementing the tripartite division of the land.157 But administrative arrangements did not avert upheaval. The legate M. Vinicius brought an army against Germans in retaliation for their murder of Roman citizens who practised trade in their lands.158 Agrippa returned to Gaul in 20 and 19 b.c. and encountered a familiar scene: conflicts among the Gauls compounded by intervention of the Germans.159 The situation had changed little from the time of Caesar's Gallic Wars a generation earlier. The Rhine was an artificial and largely ineffectual barrier. Germanic peoples dwelled on both sides of the river. It represented at best a frontier zone rather than a demarcated border. And harassment of Roman Gaul by trans-Rhenane intruders was a continual menace.
Diplomatic measures proved unsatisfactory. Rome reached friendly accords with the Chatti and perhaps others, thereby to use them as counter-weight to other peoples who might enter the Roman province.160 To no avail. In 17 or 16 B.C. Sugambri, Usipetes and Tencteri spilled over the Rhine, plundered Gallic territory, ambushed Roman forces, and inflicted an ignominious defeat on the legate M. Lollius.161 The
,u App.
Dio Li.20.;, Li.21.5-6; App.
Caes.
154 Dio xlviii.49.2-}, li-20.5f li.2I.6.
157 Dio Lin.22.5; Livy,
Dio liv.11.2. On Agrippa's activities, see Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 383-402.
Dio liv.56.3; Timpe 1975 (c 321) 135-9.
Dio liv.20.4-5; Veil. Pat. 11.97.1; Suet.
Dio Liv.19.1, Liv.20.6; Veil. Pat. 11.97.1; Suet.
Augustus appeared in the region, prepared to lead forces in person. A Roman defeat, however minor, could not be tolerated. It was essential to present a bold face to the public. Hence the appearance of the emperor in the field. The image of Roman authority had to be advanced.
Augustus stayed in the West for three years.[363] That period marks the beginning of a more aggressive Roman posture to assure ascendancy in Gaul and to intimidate tribes across the Rhine. It represents a logical time for establishment of legionary forts on the river. Six camps eventually arose on the lower and middle Rhine: Fectio, Noviomagus, Vetera, Novaesium, Oppidum Ubiorum and Moguntiacum.[364] Once again the close association of this development with new administrative arrangements to strengthen Roman governance in Gaul is plain.[365]
The
The campaigns spread over four years, gathering in momentum, and displayed might to the barbarian to an extent not previously experienced. Drusus began in 12 B.C. with assaults on the Sugambri whom he caught on the Gallic side of the Rhine and on the Usipetes across the river. He proceeded to an amphibious operation along the North Sea coast, gaining the Frisii as allies and invading the land of the Chauci.[368]Notable advances came in the following year. Drusus subdued the Usipetes, bridged the Lippe, and passed through the land of the
Sugambri into that of the Cherusci as far as the Weser river. The coming of winter again induced him to return to the Rhine, but not before he installed a garrison on the junction of the Lippe and the Eliso, perhaps at Haltern, and another near the Rhine in the region of the Chatti. The achievements earned Drusus triumphal honours.[369]
Augustus himself accompanied Drusus to Gaul in winter i i/io B.C., there to inspect the altar at Lugdunum and to observe the German situation. The linkage between defeat of Germans and consolidation of Gaul remained close. Another season in ю B.C. saw Drusus gain further victories over the Sugambri and Chatti who abandoned lands awarded them in an earlier diplomatic settlement by Rome.[370]
More far reaching successes marked the fourth and final campaign in 9 в.с. Drusus commenced the invasion, it appears, from Moguntiacum, attacked the Chatti once more, defeated the Marcomanni on the upper Main after stiff resistance, turned northward to the realm of the Cherusci, crossed the Weser again, and got as far as the Elbe. That, however, proved to be the terminus. Drusus turned back, suffered the misfortune of a broken leg, and died
What had been accomplished? Drusus' campaigns had been invasions rather than conquests, the Germans intimidated rather than subdued. But these were more than hit and run raids. Drusus left tangible reminders of Roman power. Cassius Dio reports two garrisons planted in 11 B.C.; Florus, with obvious exaggeration, speaks of numerous forts and guard posts installed all along the Maas, the Weser and the Elbe.[374]Archaeology discloses the existence of important legionary bases at Haltern and Oberaden on the Lippe, and other garrisons elsewhere, but does not permit a precise chronology that would fix them to the time of
Drusus' incursions.[375] Nor can one assume that the garrisons signalled a permanent and a full-scale occupation. Tiberius rushed to the scene upon the death of his brother and, if Tiberius' panegyrist Velleius Paterculus is to be believed, he overran all of Germany as victorious commander in 8 B.C. without sustaining any losses. Other sources supply some specifics: Tiberius induced all Germans but the Sugambri to agree to peace terms, but Augustus then refused to embrace a peace without the Sugambri — a convenient pretext to keep options open and maintain a presence in Germany. Tiberius proceeded to deport 40,000 Germans to the Gallic side of the Rhine.[376] The exhibition of Roman power is clear, a necessary demonstration in the wake of Drusus' death. But it is rash to speak of Germany organized as a province of the empire, with Roman authority extended to the Elbe.[377] In fact, even Velleius, who would hardly minimize Tiberius' accomplishment, speaks only of reducing Germany 'almost to the form of a tributary province'. And Florus acknowledges that Germans were defeated rather than subdued.[378] Rome held only selected portions of German soil.[379] As so often, the appearance of Roman success outstripped the reality of Roman control.
The need to maintain a posture of strength in Germany continued to mark Augustan policy. An altar to Augustus was erected among the Ubii who had settled on the Rhine bank, at what later became Colonia Agrippina (Cologne). Appointment of a priest to the cult from the Cherusci was clearly meant to signal German allegiance to the
An ostensibly more vigorous expedition was launched in a.d. 4. Tiberius had come back into his stepfather's good graces, gained adoption by him, and was forthwith appointed to Germany. His
An assault on the Marcomanni was next on the Roman agenda. They had abandoned their ancestral lands in the Main valley under pressure of Drusus' attacks in 9 в.с. and had now carved out a kingdom under their formidable ruler Maroboduus.189 The realm sat in an area bordering on
182 Dio Lv.10a.2-j; Tac.
Veil. Pat. 11.104.5-105.3.
Veil. Pat. 11.106.1-3, n.107.3, n.108.1. Similarly, Aufidius Bassus, in Peter, HRR, ii, 96, 3.
Veil. Pat. 11.105.3,11.106.2.
Dio lv.28.5j cf. Timpe 1967 (0317) 284-88. Note that after the campaigns of a.d. 5 Tiberius evidently returned to winter quarters on the Rhine; Veil. Pat. 11.107.3. 188 Dio lv.28.6.
189 Veil. Pat. 11.108.1-2; Strab. vn.1.3 (290Q; Tac.
regions subject to or linked with Rome: Pannonia, Noricum and neighbouring German tribes. Maroboduus brought some of these tribes under his authority, and induced others into alliance. He made no moves to threaten Rome, but his position and his prestige represented an embarrassment.[381] The Roman high command designed a two-pronged operation in a.d. 6. Tiberius was to lead the army of Illyricum from Carnuntum on the Danube, and the legate Sentius Saturninus would bring the Rhine legions from the west through the land of the Chatti, thus to close the vice on Maroboduus.[382] The plan never came to fruition. News of a Pannonian revolt arrived to panic Augustus and cancel the assault on Bohemia when the two Roman armies were within days of effecting a junction.[383] Peace negotiations ensued instead, and Maroboduus became a friend and ally of Rome. The outcome, of course, was interpreted differently by each party, as suited respective tastes. Maroboduus represented the agreement as putting him on equal terms with his opponents.[384] From the Roman vantage-point, however, the Marcomannic prince had been obliged to keep the peace.[385] That version appropriately accommodated public opinion.
The great rebellion in Pannonia pinned down the bulk of Rome's forces for more than three years from a.d. 6 to 9. Germany was surprisingly quiet during those years. Maroboduus held to his treaty, and the rest of the land seemed untroubled. Five legions remained in the Rhine command, but the hand of Rome, it appears, was felt only lightly in Germany. Roman authority extended to parts of the nation, but by no means to all. The process of urbanization, establishment of markets, and encouragement of peaceful assemblies that came with Roman presence advanced without apparent resistance.[386] The new legate P. Quinctilius Varus, related by marriage to the houses of Augustus and Agrippa, was a man more accustomed to peace than to war, more comfortable with administration than with fighting.[387] Varus' activities, therefore, concentrated on the imposition of rules, the exercise of judicial powers, and the collection of revenues — a practice not hitherto implemented in Germany. Cassius Dio appropriately notes that Varus acted
Details of the insurrection can here be omitted. A young warrior from the ruling house of the Cherusci, Arminius, inspired and headed the rebels. They lulled Varus into complacency, then lured him into an ambush. In the vicinity of the Teutoburg Forest in September, a.d. 9 Varus lost his life and Rome lost three legions, a disaster unparalleled in the Augustan years.199
The news shocked and dispirited the
,9e Tac.
1И Veil. Pat. II.118.1—119.5; Dio Lvi.18.4-22.2; Tac.
ш Veil. Pat. 11.120.1; Dio LV1.2j.2-4. The eight Rhine legions are listed in Tac.
203 Veil. Pat. 11.120.1-2,11.121.1; Lvi.24.6, Lv1.25.2-j; Suet.
from desire to extend the empire or to achieve tangible gain than to wipe out the disgrace of Varus' defeat.205 The
The campaigns of Germanicus after the death of Augustus belong to a later discussion. Suffice it here to point out that those campaigns in a.d. 15 and 16 follow a long familiar pattern rather than mark a conspicuous break with the past. They exemplify once again the repeated discrepancy between achievement and advertisement. Germanicus engaged naval and land forces, brought armies across the Weser, claimed major victories - and accomplished very little.206 Despite, or rather in consequence of, that fact, he enjoyed lavish honours. Germanicus celebrated a handsome triumph and his legates received
Definition of a general Augustan 'policy' on Germany would be difficult to formulate and probably pointless to attempt. To designate it either as 'defensive' or as 'imperialistic' risks oversimplification.210 And it would be erroneous to consider Roman actions in Germany as following a static plan.
Initial thrusts across the Rhine in the early Augustan years stemmed from the need to police and pacify Gaul. Rome experimented with both diplomacy and warfare, intimidating hostile tribes or winning the allegiance of some to neutralize others. A shocking defeat suffered by Lollius provoked sterner measures, not to satisfy imperialist urgings but to restore imperial prestige. Legions were brought up to the Rhine and forts installed at key sites along the river. Augustus himself returned to Gaul to implement administrative changes and dramatize the import-
Tac.
On Germanicus'campaigns, see Koestermann 1957 (c 282); cf. the analysis by Telschow 1975 (c 315) 148-82.
Tac.
Tac.
Strab. vii.i.4 (291C), written after Augustus' death, implies that the
For an extensive rehearsal of opinions through the early twentieth century, see Oldfather and Canter 191 j (c 294) 9-20, 3j-81. A more recent survey by Christ 1977 (c 260) 151-67. Add also Welwei 1986(0 323) 118-57.
ance he attached to the area. Defence of the Gallic provinces and expansion into Germany were complementary rather than contrasting policies. The
Tiberius' appointment to Germany in a.d. 4 signalled the restored confidence of the
Despite shifts in behaviour and action, continuities prevailed: the emphasis on Rome's international authority and her ascendancy over all rivals. That emphasis emerges in the swift retaliation after each challenge, the timely appearance of the
Spain as evidence for his pacification of Europe from Gades to the Elbe.211
X. IMPERIAL IDEOLOGY
Assessment of Augustus' imperial policy has long divided scholars. Was he a relentless expansionist or a prudent leader who set bounds to the empire? Did he conduct aggressive imperialism or a defensive policy? Was he military conqueror or bringer of peace?
Augustus, it is often alleged, placed limits on the extension of territory and advised that the empire be held within fixed bounds. But evidence for that conclusion is slim and dubious. Recovery of the standards from Parthia in 20 B.C. induced the
The martial accomplishments of Augustus belie any systematic policy of limits or leanings toward pacifism. The
211 Aug. RG 26.2. 2'2 Cf e.g., Stier 1975 (a 91) 18-42; Fears 1981 (c 267) 884-9.
Dio Liv.9. i; cf. Lin. 10.4-3. 2'5 Strab. VII.1.4 (291C).
216 Tac.
2,7 Dio Lvi.33.6. Suetonius'assertion that Augustus had no ambition for empire or martial glory
groundwork for Roman provinces along the Danube. He routed Alpine peoples, opened passes in the mountains, reduced Raetia, and occupied Noricum. Romans crossed the Rhine, established garrisons in Germany, and dispatched armies to the Elbe. The record of conquest eclipsed that of all predecessors. The regime thrived on expansionism - or at least the reputation of expansionism.
Augustus left the impression of aggressiveness even where he had no intent to undertake aggression. Britain is a prime example. On three occasions, so Cassius Dio reports, the
Reputation held pre-eminent place in the realm of Augustus. The precedents of the Republic helped shape the ideology of the Principate - not so much in constitutional matters as in the image of martial success.
Defeat of Antony and Cleopatra placed unprecedented power in the hands of the victor. He may have sought to bind up the wounds of the civil war, but he also made certain to commemorate the victory — and to institutionalize reminders of it. Two new cities rose as memorials to the achievement, each bearing the imposing designation of Nicopolis, one on the site of Octavian's camp at Actium, the other to mark the battle
2,1 Dio xlix.38.2, liii.22.5, liii.2;.2.
Virg.
Strab. iv.).3 (200C). These embassies need to be kept distinct from the arrival of British refugee princes as suppliants at the court of Augustus;
E.g. Cic.
On what follows, see the fuller treatment in Gruen 1986 (c 271) 51-72.
near Alexandria that completed the conquest. At Epirote Nicopolis the conqueror sponsored games, enlarged the temple of Apollo, erected a trophy, and displayed a huge inscription to memorialize the victory.[388]And in 29 в.с. Octavian celebrated a triple triumph, a spectacular event that stretched over three days, to signal his successes in Illyria, Actium and Alexandria.[389] The monuments and the ceremonies spelled out these messages clearly: they exalted not
Those celebrations set a pattern for the imagery, both written and visual, that characterized the self-representation of the
The poets of the era reinforce that impression. It need not be surmised that they wrote at Augustus' behest; nor, conversely, that their writings either provoked the
Virgil's verses supply pertinent illustrations. The
Comparable indications recur in the songs of Horace. The poet urges that Roman arms no longer be trained on fellow-citizens but be directed against foreign foes. He takes for granted Roman offensive thrusts against Parthians, Gauls, Scythians, Arabs and Britons. The drive for expansionism is simply a given. Horace foresees a universal dominance for his nation.[397] Parthia is the principal target: Augustus will avenge Roman honour, regain the standards lost by other generals, lead conquered Parthians in triumph, and,annex the land to Rome's empire.[398] The
Reflection can be found also in the lines of Propertius. The convention of the
The cynical Ovid, both playful and serious, describes the heady excitement in Rome on the eve of young C. Caesar's departure to the East in 2 B.C. His
The public manifestations of the regime tell much the same story. Coins, inscriptions and monuments converge in transmitting the picture of Roman might and dominance.
The city of Rome exhibited striking monuments that transmitted the image of conqueror, master and guarantor of security through force. As early as 29 B.C. Octavian installed a statue of Victory in the Curia lulia. A triumphal arch commemorated his successes abroad.246 Two years later the Senate appropriately voted Augustus the privilege of placing laurel trees before his residence and setting an oak crown above them — a gesture that symbolized his role both as perpetual victor over enemies and as saviour of citizens.247
The Forum Augustum gave the most visible and prominent display of Augustan ideology. The imposing temple of Mars Ultor, vowed by
239 Ov.
Ov.
Ov.
E.g.
E.g.
2« Pliny,
247 Dio lin. 16.4.
Augustus after Philippi but not completed until 2 b.c., held conspicuous place. It would be the locus of assemblage for the Senate for all declarations of war or award of triumphs, and the symbolic starting- point for every general to lead his troops abroad. The Forum Augustum served as repository for weapons of all sorts and for arms seized as booty from the defeated foes of Rome.248 The statue of the
Other items add to the impression. Among them the commanding statue of Augustus at Prima Porta takes pride of place. An elaborately engraved cuirass calls forth the martial image. The centrepiece of the breastplate displays the transfer of captured standards by the Parthians to Rome, emblematic of Roman supremacy in the East. And the figures of female barbarians in the middle zone of the cuirass, dejected and submissive, represent Roman humbling of the Celtic peoples of the West. Triumphal symbolism predominates. The mother earth figure, reclining at the bottom with cornucopiae and babies, projects prosperity and the bountifulness of the land. As is clear, the new and prosperous age depends upon armed force and constitutes the fruits of victory.251 The Prima Porta figure signifies conquest of the empire and world-wide rule assured by the continual vigilance of the
The celebrated Ara Pacis, it might be thought, forms a counterpoint to this presentation. Not necessarily so. The altar, in fact, strikes a balance that parallels other verbal and visual productions of the Augustan era: a juxtaposition of the rewards of peace with the military success that made them possible. The Senate voted to consecrate the Ara Pacis in 13 в.с. as memorial to Augustus' return in that year from the subjugation of Spain and the pacification of Gaul.252 The panel of Aeneas on the west side of the altar has him offering sacrifice to the Di Penates, a scene that evidently celebrates his homecoming, just as the monument itself celebrated Augustus' homecoming. But that panel is balanced by
218 Ov.
»» Aug. RG jj.i; Veil. Pat. 11.59.2.
Ov.
On the Prima Porta statue, see esp. Kahler 1959 (f 441); Zinserling 1967 (f 656) j27-j9; Pollini 1978 (f 551) 8-74; Zanker 1988 (f 6jj) 183-92. 232 Aug. RG 12.2.
another, featuring the partially preserved Mars, father of the twins Romulus and Remus, and pre-eminent god of war. A similar balance occurs on the eastern panels of the Ara Pacis. One depicts a female deity with the attributes of fertility and bountifulness, calling attention to the blessings of a tranquil time. But its corresponding panel contains the goddess Roma resting, as often, on a pile of arms. The imagery takes on meaning in combination. The accomplishment of peace is inseparable from success in war.[403]
That association is reinforced by a recent discovery. Close connexion held between the Ara Pacis and the Egyptian obelisk that stood as the
XI. CONCLUSION
A survey of territorial expansion under Augustus tempts conclusions about strategic designs, empire-wide policy, and imperialist intent. It has been claimed, for example, that Augustus adopted and refined a military system of hegemonic rule, resting on a combination of client states and an efficiently deployed armed force stationed in frontier sectors but mobile enough for transfer wherever needed.[405] Many reckon the push to the north as a carefully conceived and sweeping plan that linked the Alpine, Balkan and German campaigns, and aimed to establish a secure boundary of the empire that ran along the line of the Danube and the Elbe.[406] Others, however, consider Augustus a determined imperialist, bent on expansion everywhere and motivated by dreams of world conquest. Only the Pannonian revolt and the defeat of Varus obliged him to check his ambition and bequeath a defence policy to his successor.[407]
Yet the very idea of an all-encompassing scheme, whatever its form, misconceives the diversity and flexibility of Augustus' foreign ventures. No uniform plan or articulated goal guided his acts. Location, circumstances and contingencies determined decisions.
The eastern realms provoked varied responses. In Asia Minor and Judaea Augustus cultivated client princes, generally keeping in place those already established, regardless of prior allegiances. But he was not averse to deposing dynasts (e.g. in Commagene), intervening in royal dispensations (as with Herod), or even converting principalities into provinces (Galatia and Judaea) when unexpected developments called for it. Principal garrisons of Roman power in the East stood in Egypt and Syria - but for very different purposes. Egypt held a special place for Augustus, its economic resources a mainstay of empire and its territory a staging-ground for military adventures in Ethiopia and Arabia. Troops in Syria, by contrast, served to signal stability rather than advance, a means of showing the flag and discouraging Parthian ambitions. The
Different motives and different actions prevailed in the West. The
The great northern campaigns may assume coherent shape in retrospect - but hardly at the time. Divergent aims dictated action, Roman response occurred as often as Roman initiative, political and ideological purposes frequently took precedence over strategic goals. Control of the Alpine regions facilitated communications between the Rhine forces and the troops in Illyricum. The push to the Danube held out many advantages: the disciplining of recalcitrant tribes which had damaged Rome's repute, military laurels for members of Augustus' family, and opening of a land route from northern Italy to the eastern dependencies. The heaviest fighting, however, came in reaction to rebellion rather than as part of an imperial scheme. Advancement against Germans derived from security and administrative needs in Gaul. Strikes across the Rhine advertised Roman might and authority without establishing a permanent presence. Prestige may have counted for more than strategy. Exhibitions of force occurred after the Varian disaster as before.
Diversity stands out far more boldly than uniformity. There was uniformity, however, in one key respect. The
Representation and reality often diverged. Augustus made certain to maintain consistency in the former. Pragmatic considerations might on occasion dictate restraint or withdrawal. And defeat could sometimes mar the achievement. But the public posture remained uniform: a posture of dynamism, success and control. Aelius Gallus' calamitous campaigns in Arabia were covered over in the
The imperial policy of Augustus varied from region to region, adjusted for circumstances and contingencies. Aggression alternated with restraint, conquest with diplomacy, advance with retreat. Acquisitions and annexations occurred in some areas, consolidation and negotiation in others. The insistence upon reputation, however, was undeviating. The regime persistently projected the impression of vigour, expansionism, triumph and dominance. Augustus reiterated the aspirations and professed to eclipse the accomplishments of republican heroes. The policy may have been flexible, but the image was consistent.
CHAPTER 5 TIBERIUS TO NERO
Т. E. J. WIEDEMANN
i. the accession of tiberius and the nature of politics under the j ulio-с l audians
Political history explores the ways in which the men (and very occasionally women) who wielded power over others chose to exercise that power. In every system of government there are dozens, if not hundreds, of individuals who have to use their initiative about the exercise of power in particular circumstances, or about the best way to implement decisions taken by their superiors. But Rome under Augustus and his successors was a monarchy: every exercise of political power had ultimately to be answered for to the emperor. The emperor's authority could not publicly be challenged (anyone who successfully did so would become the new emperor). The political, history of the Principate is therefore primarily an account of the relationship between the reigning emperor and the other individuals and groups who played a role in public life. Although some of the political figures of the Julio-Claudian period were descended from families that had been powerful under the Republic, it does not follow that the 'republican' aristocracy still wielded independent power. Such men - like the 'new men' who were prepared to put their military or rhetorical skills at the service of the Caesars - had only as much power as the emperor allowed them, and only for as long as the emperor needed to make use of them. They had a place in public life only because, and insofar as, they had the
From Augustus on, as Cassius Dio noted, politics had ceased to be 'public'. Important political choices no longer needed to be debated, or voted on, in public, but only in the private
1 For the nature of politics under the Principate, see chs. 2 and 3 above; Wickert 1974 (a 102) (with bibliography, pp. 5-8); Millar 1977 (a 59); Levick 1983 (c 371). Standard narrative histories of this period: H.H. Scullard,
198
his
The annals speak of the crimes committed by the men of old, And the stains will remain for ever. Who will not for all eternity Condemn the monstrous actions of the House of Caesar, Nero's dreadful murders, the disgusting cliffs of Capri, Inhabited by an aged pervert?2
The most fascinating source of such information about the Julio- Claudians is to be found in the surviving portions of Tacitus'
The relationship between emperor and Senate is a major concern of other senatorial writers beside Tacitus. The language in which they tend to express that concern is that of a contrast between 'tyranny' and 'freedom' (
Cassius Dio on secret politics: liii.19. The
Furneaux's edition of Tacitus'
In recent years historians have stressed that imperial 'policy' was often purely passive, that the decisions taken by emperors were often made in response to the actions of others. The emperor's most important activity was the exercise of
The events which followed the death of Augustus at Nola in Campania on 19 August a.d. 14 became a paradigm for the smooth transfer of power from an emperor to his successor; few future emperors found themselves in total control with as little difficulty as Tiberius did. Nevertheless the moment at which monarchical power is transferred from one man to his successor is a critical point at which the different elements that constitute a political system can be seen most clearly. Although Tacitus' record of these events at the opening of the
Although the
Tiberius was Augustus' stepson; notwithstanding his marriage to Augustus' daughter lulia, it was not his birthright to succeed Augustus as 'Caesar'. But in a.d. 4 he had been formally adopted by Augustus as his son. The grant of
This made it imperative for Tiberius as heir to step into the
Tiberius' first reported acuon after Augustus' death was to write to all the Roman armies (not just his own in Pannonia). He did not style himself Augustus, since that was a title that had been bestowed by the Roman Senate, and he had no right yet to use it. But there was no need to wait for the Senate to confirm the manifest fact that following Augustus' death, Tiberius had become the new head of the imperial household. The next thing that happened was that Agrippa Postumus was put to death. Augustus had suggested that Postumus' rowdy character made him entirely unsuitable for public responsibility. But Tacitus reports rumours, presumably put about by those who did not wish to see Tiberius succeed, that the emperor had visited his exiled grandson at Planasia in the year before his death, and planned to reinstate him. Later, one of his freedmen pretended to be the dead Postumus, suggesting that there were those who might be expected to back his claims against Tiberius. He had to be killed. The fact that Postumus' name was not mentioned at all in Augustus' will suggests that the execution had been arranged by Augustus before his death, to facilitate Tiberius' accession; it might have been ordered by Livia, purporting to act for Augustus, for the same reason (or out of'stepmotherly spite', as Tacitus would have it); or by Tiberius himself. It was probably carried out by one of Augustus' advisers, Gaius Sallustius Crispus (a grand-nephew of the historian), as soon as he heard of the emperor's death. When Tiberius heard of the execution, he denied responsibility and said that the action would have to be answered for to the Senate. No further discussion occurred.6
By inheriting the imperial household, the
6 On the accession, Timpe 1962 (c 403). Tiberius writes to armies: Dio lvii.z.i. Postumus: Jameson 1975 (c 126). The 'false Postumus': Tac.
was available to anyone else, including the magistrates at Rome. He also inherited the loyalty and gratitude which every Roman in public life owed to his predecessor in return for the patronage which Augustus had bestowed (and which Tiberius ensured would not be forgotten: see the
Tiberius accompanied Augustus' body on its ceremonial return to Rome, just as twenty-two years before he had accompanied the body of his brother Drusus on its long journey back from northern Germany. The ceremonial procession, and the funeral itself, were to set precedents for the treatment of other members of the imperial family after their deaths. The public funeral was decreed at a meeting of the Senate early in September, convoked by Tiberius in virtue of his
7
death. Augustus' will was read to the Senate. It confirmed Tiberius as principal heir; he was awarded two thirds of Augustus' property, and the remaining third went to Livia. Historians have made much of the opening words of the will, stating that Augustus wanted Tiberius to be his heir because 'a cruel fate' had taken away his own (adopted) sons (and natural grandsons) Gaius and Lucius. This was not a calculated or even unintended insult to Tiberius, suggesting that he was only a second best as successor, but an explanation for why Augustus had adopted as his son and instituted as his heir someone from outside the Julian family. These words can only have been intended to strengthen further the legitimacy of Tiberius' position as head of the
On 17 September, after the funeral, there was a second meedng of the Senate, at which it was reported that Augustus' spirit had been seen rising to heaven in the form of an eagle while the body was being cremated. If the Senate chose to believe this testimony, it would be powerful evidence in favour of the proposidon that Augustus had now joined the Olympians; the Senate chose to believe, and accepted the consequence, that a cult ought to be formally established by the Roman state to worship the new god.
Turning next to the matters of this world, the Senate had to give its opinion on what was to happen to Augustus' responsibilities now that he had departed the scene. Tacitus does not explicitly tell us what modon was debated. It cannot have been to advise the people to grant Tiberius
At this point in his narrative Tacitus reports a story that Augustus had once suggested that, apart from Tiberius, there were other persons who were 'capable of being emperor',
8 Liebeschuetz 1986 (c 163); cf. Tac.
executed, by Caligula; Lucius Arruntius (also cos. a.d. 6) was the son of one of Octavian's commanders at Actium, and adopted as his own son Camillus Scribonianus, who was to rebel against Claudius in 42; and various Julio-Claudian emperors felt themselves threatened by men called Piso. Whatever lies behind the anecdote, it raises the question what the source would be from which an alternative leader might derive his authority. Tacitus' account is intended to suggest that at the beginning of Tiberius' reign, there still existed political figures whose power was independent of the backing of the
Gallus had implied that Tiberius could not shoulder Augustus' responsibilities alone. Tiberius could not conceal his displeasure; Gallus backtracked by pretending that he had made the point only in order to prove that imperial power could not in fact be divided. The episode raises the question of Tiberius' honesty in claiming that he did not want the imperial office. Contemporary evidence shows that Tiberius himself was worried about his reputation for disguising his real intentions,
' 'Capaces imperii': Tac.
10 On the
loyal to Tiberius. In Spain there was Marcus Lepidus (the consul of a.d. 6), who had been Tiberius' legate in putting down the Pannonian revolt between a.d. 6 and 9; in Pannonia, Tiberius had his own legates, in particular Iunius Blaesus, and Germany was governed by Tiberius' adopted son Germanicus. Tiberius had nothing to fear from any of these generals; the soldiers themselves were not to transfer their allegiance without trouble, but that was a question of discipline, not of high politics. Even if Tiberius had already heard of the mutinies in the Pannonian army which broke out as soon as the troops heard of the death of Augustus, the commander to whom they had taken their oaths of military service, it does not follow that such a threat of rebellion would have been a real reason for declining the imperial office.
The Senate duly confirmed Tiberius' succession to the
The same session of the Senate also proposed to vote honours to Livia; Tiberius expressed reservations about these, possibly because he was embarrassed by suggestions that he derived his position from his mother's influence over Augustus. Other decisions relating to the extent of Tiberius'
Apart from the imperial household, the Senate and the people, the emperor also had to control the army: as we have seen, Tiberius' first act after Augustus' death was to inform every provincial army. Tacitus describes in great detail the mutinies of the two most powerful groups of legions, on the Rhine and the Danube; but we should not assume that they were a serious threat in the same way as apparently similar events were in a.d. 69 and a.d. 97. Augustus' death gave the Roman conscripts serving in Pannonia and Germany an opportunity to express their long- repressed resentment at their terms of service.The Roman soldier's oath of loyalty was not only to the
Tacitus' account of the unrest among the Pannonian legions includes a speech encapsulating the soldiers' (largely legitimate) grievances, such as long terms of service, often over twenty years, low pay and the deduction of money to buy exemption from unpleasant duties, and the quality of the land allotments granted to soldiers by the
The story told by Tacitus implies that the mutineers were by no means inclined to accept Drusus' promise to refer their complaints to Tiberius as their commander, and through him to the Senate. But a coincidental eclipse of the moon on the night of 25-6 September served them as an excuse to back down, enabling Drusus to execute the two ringleaders and return to Rome without even bothering to await the return of the soldiers' delegation to Tiberius.
The legions on the Lower Rhine, under the command of Aulus Caecina Severus, also used the death of the
According to Tacitus, the major difference between the mutinies in Pannonia and on the Rhine was that some of the soldiers on the Rhine offered to make Germanicus emperor if he acceded to their demands. We may be sceptical about how serious this offer was; an anecdote about a soldier who was prepared to help kill Germanicus himself is just as likely to be authentic. Whatever the political significance of the mutiny, it is clear from Tacitus' account that (some) soldiers who had completed long terms of service had to be discharged, and that in return the legions on both the lower and the upper Rhine were prepared to take the military oath to their new
13 Ov.
use the authority of the Senate as an excuse to reject the newly won concessions. The legate Lucius Munatius Plancus, who had been consul in the previous year, was humiliated; and Germanicus ostentatiously sent his wife and children (including the two-year-old Gaius, often dressed in 'little boots' - hence his later name Caligula) away to safety at Trier. Tacitus suggests that the mutiny was now so serious that Germanicus should have called on the upper Rhine legions to suppress it by force; in fact he seems to have been able to restore order without difficulty at Cologne, and Caecina was able to do the same for the two legions stationed at Xanten (when Germanicus inspected the bodies of those executed, he claimed to be appalled at the catastrophe). The mutinies on the Rhine and in Pannonia were not unimportant, but they were by no means the threat either to Rome or to Tiberius that Tacitus, or his sources, imply. Spectacular though the mutinies may have been, they were an expression of Augustus' failure, or inability, to provide for the real costs of his military policy, rather than a threat to Tiberius.
ii. the reign of tiberius14
In the autumn of a.d. 14, and during the following two summers, Germanicus employed his legions on a series of campaigns east of the Rhine. Both archaeological and literary evidence indicates that there was no serious attempt to expand the territory under direct Roman control. These campaigns were fought for reasons of prestige, both for Rome — whose reputation for military success had to be re-established after the Varus disaster of a.d. 9 - and for Germanicus himself. The fact that Germanicus received the news of Augustus' death while organizing a census of the Gallic provinces suggests that Augustus himself had planned these campaigns; they did not contradict the advice he allegedly appended to his summary of the resources of the empire, that its borders should not be expanded. Augustus' advice to his heir to restrict the opportunities for commanders to acquire military
We should not accept Tacitus' suggestion that Tiberius was jealous of any successes Germanicus might achieve, and therefore recalled him
14 Tiberius' reign: see n. j above. The main narrative sources are: Tac.
after two years. He wanted to make it clear to the Germans that Augustus' death did not mean the end of Roman military efforts on the northern frontiers. He also wanted Germanicus to win enough glory to make his
It was because of a genuine concern that his successor should have the experience required of a ruler that Tiberius sent Germanicus on a tour of the eastern half of the empire in this year. There were precedents from the Augustan period: Agrippa, Tiberius himself, and Gaius Caesar had all ruled the east of the empire for a time when they had been heirs- apparent. Some practical tasks had to be performed. King Archelaus of Cappadocia had died at Rome in a.d. 17 (of natural causes, but exacerbated by the hostility shown by his
The death of Germanicus meant that Tiberius' other son, his natural son Drusus, was now the heir-apparent. That is suggested by coins celebrating the birth of Drusus' twin sons in a.d. 19/20 (only one, known as Tiberius Gemellus, was to survive). Drusus' position was fully confirmed when Tiberius shared his fourth consulship with him in a.d. 21; and in April 22 he was formally granted
This
Gaul, too, suffered from rebellion at this time, because of heavier taxation to pay for the army and perhaps also as a result of the cessation of military activity involving Gallic units in Roman operations against Germany. Tacitus' account mentions the leaders as Florus and Sacrovir, and implies that druids were involved. But he describes the crisis very much in terms of Vindex's uprising in a.d. 68, criticizing Tiberius for failing to go in person to defeat the rebels as though he was behaving as thoughtlessly as Nero did in 68.
One of the roots of Tiberius' later reputation for failing to exercise the responsibilities of an emperor was his own emphasis on
But Tiberius' absences resulted in a failure to control proceedings in the Senate. That was one of the elements responsible for the series of accusations of treason,
19 Trebia: Suet.
accusations against senators during these years. The emperor could intervene to exercise the imperial virtue of
Another important effect of Tiberius' absences from the capital was to increase the importance of Aelius Sejanus, now the sole praetorian prefect, as the channel of communication between senators and the emperor. During these years Sejanus greatly strengthened his police powers in Rome by concentrating the praetorian cohorts in a single, permanent camp (one of the first military camps to have a permanent stone wall). There is no reason to believe that the immediate objective was anything more sinister than to impose better discipline on the soldiers; but the camp was also a suitable place to keep political prisoners.
The death ofDrusus on 14 September a.d. 23 ended for the time being any hopes Tiberius had of leaving his power in the hands of a son, natural or adopted, who would be old enough and experienced enough to rule. Perhaps Drusus would not have been an ideal emperor. Like his father, he was a heavy drinker; it was said that he had once physically attacked Sejanus during a drinking party. The story was one of the arguments later advanced in support of allegations that Sejanus had poisoned Drusus, but these inventions postdated Sejanus' fall; the two had been loyal colleagues and friends for many years, and the summer of a.d. 23 was another particularly unhealthy one. Tiberius made a point of being present in Rome to give the funeral speech.
The question of the succession was now open again. By early a.d. 23, two of Germanicus' sons had already come of age; to strengthen their position, their mother Agrippina asked Tiberius to provide her with a new husband. It is possible that she had Asinius Gallus in mind. One of his sons, Asinius Saloninus, had been betrothed to a daughter of Germanicus, but died in a.d. 22, before the marriage could take place; two other sons of Gallus were consuls during these years, C. Asinius Pollio in 23, and Marcus Asinius Agrippa in 25 (but he died in the following year). Tiberius would not allow Nero and Drusus to come under the protection of such a powerful stepfather, particularly one whom he loathed.
The emperor's concern that Germanicus' sons might replace him was shared by the praetorian prefect Sejanus. Sejanus' own interest in Tiberius' survival was illustrated by an incident in a.d. 26.21 While Tiberius was on his way to his villa at Capri, part of the ceiling of a grotto near Terracina collapsed on the imperial party during a dinner. Sejanus threw himself upon Tiberius, convincing him of the genuineness of his loyalty. In the previous year Tiberius had had doubts about Sejanus: he refused a request that he should be allowed to marry Drusus' widow Livilla (Livia lulia). Sejanus may have been a loyal supporter of the dynasty, like his father and perhaps grandfather before him, but that did not give him sufficient status to rank with the republican nobility. Even his wife's family had only been consular for one generation. In Tiberius' opinion, Sejanus would not have had the political influence needed to protect Tiberius Gemellus against the claims of Agrippina's children. In any case, he had every intention of remaining alive for many years to come, and was supported in this by the prognostications of his personal astrologer Thrasyllus.
Tiberius had been 66 in the previous November. At an age when other Roman senators could look forward to retiring from public life, he saw no escape from the responsibilities inherited from Augustus. It is not surprising that he should have preferred to stay away from Rome, even for the funeral of his mother Livia in a.d. 29. The question of the succession will have been a major source of conflict between mother and son; Tiberius Gemellus was Livia's great-grandson, but so (through Drusus) were Agrippina's three sons, and Augustus had clearly indicated in his will that the succession should ultimately go to them. So long as Livia was alive, she could protect them against Tiberius' displeasure. Livia's funeral oration was given by Gaius Caligula, whom Livia had taken into her own
Following her funeral, Livia was awarded full divine honours by the Senate, similar to those awarded to her husband on his death (there were minor differences, as protocol required; for instance the image of the
21 Stewart 1977 (f 583).
500,000 he was prepared to countenance. Galba's elder brother (cos. a.d. 22) had already attracted his disfavour, and was later forced to commit suicide (
Although Tacitus insinuates that one of Tiberius' main motives for leaving Rome had been to avoid his mother, her death made him no more willing to return. His absence did not mean that he ceased to control the empire; but it allowed Sejanus to monopolize the information and advice about events in the capital on the basis of which Tiberius' decisions were taken. Sejanus had already made clear to the emperor his readiness to marry Drusus' widow Livilla, and thus immediately become the stepfather of Tiberius' grandson and intended successor, and in due course perhaps the father of further children who would be eligible for imperial office. So long as Sejanus' stepson, or his own children, were still too young for this office, he could fulfil the role that Augustus had intended Tiberius to play for Germanicus. Tiberius understood this ambition, though it is not clear whether he was now prepared to allow the marriage.[415] What he did do was appoint Sejanus, although he was not a senator,
For Tiberius, the public recognition of another potential successor could only increase his freedom of manoeuvre
Agrippina. For Sejanus, on the other hand, the elimination of Agrip- pina's children as candidates was essential for the success of his dynasdc ambitions. Nero and Drusus were accused of plotting against the emperor by a relative of Sejanus, Cassius Longinus (probably Lucius, who was
It was Germanicus' mother the younger Antonia, the young men's grandmother, who warned Tiberius in a letter delivered to him personally through her freedman M. Antonius Pallas that Sejanus' consolidation of his power was not just aimed against Agrippina and her children, but beginning to threaten Tiberius' own chances of polidcal survival. With Sejanus as protector of Tiberius' heir, and no other candidates for the Principate surviving, Tiberius' own role would have been played out. And given that it was Sejanus who was responsible for Tiberius' personal security, Antonia must have pointed out to him that Sejanus would have no further interest in keeping Tiberius alive once Agrippina and her offspring no longer existed. It was a powerful argument, and Tiberius summoned Germanicus' remaining son, Gaius Caligula, to the safety of his household at Capri. He did not prevent Sejanus from executing Nero.
In over seventeen years as emperor, Tiberius had not ordered the execution of one single senator. The old man's well-planned and efficient elimination of Sejanus on 18 October a.d. 31 consequently came as a great shock to Rome. His agent was another equestrian public servant, Sutorius Macro, prefect of the urban
Sejanus' fall enabled a number of figures who had been supporters of Germanicus to return to the centre of the political stage, under the protection of the younger Antonia. Some of them were to give support to the regimes of her grandson Caligula, and then her son Claudius. Lucius Vitellius, who was to become Claudius' principal adviser and the father of another later emperor, was
On the other hand the overthrow of Sejanus did not make any difference to Tiberius' hostility to Agrippina herself. Neither she nor Drusus were released from prison or exile, and they both died in a.d. 33. Her daughters could be made harmless without being killed. In 33, Tiberius married Drusilla to Lucius Cassius Longinus, and Germanicus' youngest daughter, lulia Livilla, to the powerful and loyal Marcus Vinicius; his grandfather, the consul of 19 B.C., had been one of Tiberius' early generals in Illyricum and won the
Vinicius was powerful enough to be the major contender for the succession after Caligula's removal in 41. The third daughter, Agrippina the Younger, had already been married in a.d. 28, to Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus (cos. a.d. 52). Through his mother Antonia the Elder, he was the grandson of Mark Antony and Augustus' sister Octavia. It is hardly surprising that the couple avoided having children so long as Tiberius was alive. Only in the last year of Tiberius' life was Ahenobarbus exiled on a charge of incest with his sister, Domitia Lepida. Tiberius also forced Asinius Gallus to end his life in a.d. 33, after three years of house-arrest. Tiberius' hatred for him went much further back than Gallus' association with Agrippina and alleged support for Sejanus. Nevertheless three of his sons survived to take office again under Caligula (Servius Asinius Celer, cos. 38, executed in 47; Asinius Gallus, banished in 46; and Asinius Pollio, proconsul of Asia 38/39).
Tacitus notes that the attacks on Sejanus and Livilla in the Senate were led by 'men with the great names Scipio, Silanus, Cassius'. If Tacitus wished to imply that the political significance of these men derived from their republican ancestry, that was not the whole story. Their links with the
But it suited other political figures to suggest that there had. The charge of association with Sejanus was used as a cover for political, family and personal hatreds in such a way as to give the impression that there must have been a major conspiracy organized by Sejanus in which half the Senate had been involved. Rumour exaggerated his power to such an extent that it was even said that Tiberius had given instructions that, if Sejanus' supporters in the praetorian guard posed a threat, Germanicus' children might have to be released from prison to act as a rallying-point for those loyal to the dynasty. But the minute number of those directly convicted of being Sejanus' associates suggests that they were not executed for being conspirators, but because they might resent the way in which a loyal servant and his wife and daughter had been dealt with by Tiberius. Had Sejanus managed to remove all the offspring of Germanicus, he might have been a real threat to Tiberius. As it was, the conspirator was not Sejanus, but Tiberius.
Tacitus blames Tiberius for the deaths of a considerable number of people accused of
Tiberius' main concern during these years continued to be to ensure the succession of his grandson Tiberius Gemellus. His astrologer seems to have persuaded him that he would survive to see Gemellus old enough to succeed him. Consequently there was no danger in honouring Caligula: he was made a member of the college of augurs and a pontifex and in 3 j he held the office of quaestor. At some time during these years, Tiberius tried to bring Caligula more firmly under his control by marrying him to Iunia Claudilla, the daughter of his old supporter Marcus Silanus (cos. a.d. i 5). Also in 33, Tiberius' granddaughter Livia lulia was remarried; her husband was the relatively insignificant Gaius Rubellius Blandus (cos. suff. a.d. 18, and grandson of Tiberius' rhetoric teacher). Tiberius will have assumed that they and their descendants would represent no threat to Gemellus, though many years later Nero was to be sufficiendy frightened of their son Rubellius Plautus to have him killed in a.d. 62. Together with Domitius Ahenobarbus, Marcus Vinicius and Cassius Longinus, Blandus was publicly honoured as one of the emperor's grandsons-in-law,
Tiberius continued to carry out his other duties as
25 Blandus: Syme 1982 (c 401)
whose houses had been destroyed by fire, he intervened to avoid a major crisis of credit in a.d. 33, apparently caused by a shortage of coin; although the economic significance of Tiberius' actions has been grossly overestimated by modern historians applying anachronistic economic models to antiquity, it was thought to be part of an emperor's duties to ensure that the wealthy could feel secure in the possession of their property. In another respect too Tiberius' reign was a period when the security of those with property increased, through the continuing development of Roman jurisprudence by the so-called 'schools' of jurists whose legal opinions were backed by the emperor's authority. In comparison, Tiberius' own absence from the courtrooms of Rome will have made little difference, though it made life more difficult for those who sought privileges (and would have to travel to Campania) and was a major reason for the emperor's increasing unpopularity. Claudius attacked 'the constant absence of my uncle' in a surviving edict.[418]
It is less clear how much attention he devoted to providing good government for provincials; although he was credited with telling Aemilius Rectus, a later prefect of Egypt, that 'good governors shear their sheep, they do not strip them', there is no reason for believing that he took a personal interest in initiating accusations against governors for corruption, or that the reason why he left his legates in charge of the same province for years on end was that this would make them less greedy. Poppaeus Sabinus served as legate of Moesia from a.d. 1 i unul 3 5. Tiberius himself complained to the Senate about the unwillingness of consulars to accept their obligation to govern distant provinces. Nevertheless the old emperor was clearly afraid that change might mean trouble; Augustus too had kept governors on in their respective commands after the crisis of a.d. 9. One reason why a legate might be left in charge of an army was that Tiberius feared that he would rebel if he tried to recall him: the governor of the upper Rhine army, Lentulus Gaetulicus, is reported to have come to an unofficial arrangement whereby he promised to cause no trouble for Tiberius so long as he was not recalled. Gaetulicus must have calculated, rightly, that Tiberius' reign would soon be over. But where the good of the Republic required it, Tiberius was still capable of taking decisions. In a.d. 35 Lucius Vitellius was sent to Syria as legate, to intervene in the affairs of Armenia by imposing a Roman nominee, Tiridates, on the throne.[419]
Despite his firm belief that he would live for another ten years,
Tiberius died on 16 March a.d. 37 at Misenum, while on a journey back to the capital. The following day was the feast of the Liberalia, traditionally one of the days suitable for bestowing the
iii. gaius caligula28
The popular rejoicing that greeted the news of Tiberius' death was not just a reaction against an unpopular
я Tacitus does not survive for Caligula: we have Dio ux and Suet.
n Timpe 1962 (c 403)', for date of acclamation and
Communities and officials in East and West swore their loyalty to Caligula and to his
The immediate requirement if the new regime was to establish itself was the distribution of
At the same time, Caligula did what he could to win the support of the upper classes; he refused the title
The new emperor's policy towards client kings should also be seen primarily as an attempt to ensure that the network of hellenistic rulers which was an integral part of the Roman empire had close personal links with the reigning Caesar. The fact that some of them were related to Caligula through Antony, and some had been brought up together with him in the house of Antonia the Younger, also helped to bind them and their territorial resources to him; but the great-grandson of Antony had no grand plan to resolve the conflict between East and West.32 The three Thracian princes, Cotys, Polemo and Rhoemetalces, to whom he granted the kingdoms of Lesser Armenia, Pontus and eastern Thrace, were probably cousins. The son of the last king of Commagene was given back his father's kingdom, plus the taxes extracted by the Romans over the intervening twenty years. The Jewish prince Marcus Iulius Agrippa (usually known as Herod Agrippa I) was also presented with extensive domains. We should be sceptical of later accusations that these kings trained Caligula in the ways of oriental (ie. hellenistic) despotism.
Caligula was particularly keen to draw attention to his family relationships in order to stress that (by implication, unlike Tiberius) he deserved loyalty because he was a Caesar by descent and not just by adoption. He went in person to bring back to Rome the ashes of his exiled mother and brother Nero for interment in the mausoleum built for the Caesars by Augustus. Coins show his mother Agrippina and grandfather Agrippa, his brothers Nero and Drusus on horseback, and his sisters Agrippina, Drusilla and lulia Livilla holding the attributes of 'Security', 'Concord' and 'Good Fortune'. The three sisters were given the honours due to Vestal Virgins. Caligula's uncle, Claudius (who had not been adopted into the imperial household), was honoured as befitted Germanicus' brother; he became Caligula's colleague in his first consulship, held from 1 July to 31 August (so as not to impair the respect due to the regular consuls). The memory of Livia was also honoured: Caligula began the construction of a temple and cult, voted but never undertaken at her death. When his grandmother Antonia died on 1 May, the prestige of the imperial family was emphasized again by the grant of similar honours.
The losers were those who had supported Tiberius. It is hardly
» ADLOCVT СОН, OB CIVES SERVATOS. For Caligula's coinage, cf. Sutherland 1987 (в }j8) chs. 26-9;
12 Ceaujescu 1973 (c 337) (at a time when Rumania was seeking to play a similar role as mediator between East and West). Cf. Sherk 42; Braund 1984 (c 254) 41-6; Sullivan 1983 (e 1224) (Judaea).
surprising that Gemellus was soon required to commit suicide on the charge of having taken an antidote, ie. implicitly accusing Caligula of wanting to poison him. Caligula executed Tiberius' long-term associate Marcus Iunius Silanus (cos. a.d. i 5), the father of his deceased wife Iunia Claudilla, and presumably a supporter of Gemellus. Caligula accused him of attempting a coup while he was away, possibly during his trip to recover his mother's ashes. Macro, too, soon met his end: Caligula had no intention of making the mistake of being as dependent upon him as Tiberius had been on Sejanus. It is interesting that while later tradition accuses Caligula of having been too friendly with client kings, there are no references to his being under the influence of his freedmen or even prefects: Caligula did not shift the responsibility for his own actions onto others.
The way in which Caligula built up support and eliminated potential opposition shows that the new emperor had learnt a great deal
Drusilla was married to Lucius Cassius Longinus; Caligula gave her instead to Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, member of one of the wealthiest surviving republican dynasties, long associated with Augustus' family.33 His father (cos. a.d. 6) was one of those allegedly described by Augustus as suitable for imperial office (see p. 204f. above); he was related to the younger Iulia's husband Aemilius Paullus, exiled in a.d. 8; and his sister Aemilia Lepida had been the wife of Caligula's brother Drusus. Caligula trusted Lepidus to the extent that they were said to have been homosexual lovers, and more significantly he gave his seal-ring to Lepidus during his serious illness in a.d. 37 — the customary sign that Lepidus, as Drusilla's husband, was to administer the household if Caligula were to die without issue.
33 Syme 1970 (в 178) ch. 4; 1986 (a 95);
When Drusilla died, Caligula had her deified (23 September 38).There was nothing un-Roman about her cult: as a Julian, she was associated with Venus, the ancestor of the Iulii. The title 'Panthea' associated her with the Magna Mater, but that cult too (notwithstanding its hellenistic origins) had been at home in Rome for over two centuries. And there was nothing 'oriental' about the new goddess' elephant-drawn
The deification of Drusilla raises the question of whether Caligula had a 'religious policy', wanting to be adored as a god in the style of hellenistic monarchs. 'Emperor-worship' can no longer be dismissed as an irrational oriental superstition (see ch. 16 for a discussion of the various cults); if Caligula saw himself, or his office, as divine, then this was an attempt to express the reality of his position as a mediator between the Roman community and the world of the gods. It was not fantastic to express this position as analogous to that of Hercules, the man whose labours made him divine (and, like later emperors with a special devotion to Hercules, Caligula liked to be seen as a gladiator, imposing law and order upon wild beasts and criminals), nor strange to commune with Jupiter. That monotheism made it impossible for the Jews to accept the emperor as divine in this sense was beyond the comprehension of Caligula, as of so many other Romans. Recent excavations suggest that some anecdotes about Caligula's claims to divinity (eg. that Castor and Pollux were his 'doorkeepers') were based on his building activities on and around the Palatine.34
A number of the peculiar stories told about Caligula suggest that, more clearly than other emperors, he saw that the emperor's role symbolized the struggle of man against nature. Although unable to swim, he seems to have been particularly keen to impose his will upon the sea: according to Suetonius' grandfather, the astrologer Thrasyllus had once told Tiberius that Caligula had no more chance of being emperor than of riding a horse across the sea. To refute him, he built a bridge of boats from Baiae to Puteoli and rode across. Soon after his accession he braved the elements to sail to the island of Planasia, where his mother and brother had died in exile, in order to demonstrate his piety towards them; and control over the Ocean also featured in his military expeditions. In a successful emperor, such attempts to control nature were divine, but — like Xerxes' bridge over the Hellespont - they might also be the acts of a tyrant. It is not surprising that Caligula is reported to have suffered from nightmares in which he pitted himself against the Mediterranean Sea.
34 Buildings and religion: Wiseman 1987 (e 140); Barrett 1989 (c 553) ch. 13.
Sexual licence was another characteristic of the typical tyrant. Stories of incest and homosexuality have to be understood as representing Caligula's tight political control over his family, and over others who might threaten him. We are told that he intervened to prevent a marriage between C. Calpurnius Piso (the man who was to lead the conspiracy of a.d. 65) and Livia Orestilla, presumably a relative of Livia's; he slept with her himself, to ensure that, if there were any children, it would not be clear that they were Piso's. Caligula took steps to control other Pisones, too. When Lucius Piso (consul in 27, and urban prefect under Tiberius) was proconsul of Africa in 39/40, he felt it necessary to remove the Third Legion from the proconsul's command (a decision which later emperors did not think it politic to rescind).
The threats represented by his sisters as well as by more distant relatives would be much less immediate if Caligula had a child of his own. In 38, he married Lollia Paulina, the granddaughter of Augustus' general (and Tiberius' enemy) the consul of 21 в.с. Paulina did not please Caligula, and she was divorced after a year (but survived to rival Agrippina for the hand of Claudius). His last wife was Milonia Caesonia, whose mother Vistilia was famous for marrying six husbands in succession; one of Caesonia's stepfathers, Cnaeus Domitius Corbulo (father of Nero's general), was given a suffect consulship in 39. Caesonia provided Caligula with a daughter, lulia Drusilla; he was delighted, and his position
In the autumn of 39, Caligula claimed to have uncovered a major conspiracy to replace him with Lepidus; although the exact sequence of events is impossible to reconstruct, it is clear that he acted swiftly and decisively. He publicized the striking failure of the consuls to offer prayers on his behalf on his birthday on 31 August. Cnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Gaetulicus, consul in a.d. 26 and in command of the upper Rhine legions since 30, could be represented as constituting a military threat. Caligula gave orders for a major military force to be concentrated in Upper Germany, and marched north himself with the praetorians (he pretended that the object of the expedition was to levy Batavians for his personal bodyguard). Lentulus Gaetulicus' own legions were overawed by the display of imperial might, and he was executed; a considerable number of tribunes and centurions had to be retired.
Caligula had kept Lepidus, Agrippina and Livilla by his side during this expedition. Lepidus was now formally tried and executed; correspondence was produced incriminating both sisters, and Caligula sent to Rome three daggers with which he claimed they had intended to kill him. Agrippina and Livilla were condemned on the standard charge of adultery, and exiled. In a parody of the return of their grandfather Drusus' and father Germanicus' ashes to Rome, Caligula forced Agrippina to return bearing those of her 'lover' Lepidus. The future emperor Vespasian, who was praetor in that year, distinguished himself by his attacks on Agrippina in the Senate. The records of the Arval Brethren inform us that on 27 October 39, the
Caligula's visit to the Rhine legions provided him with an opportunity to enhance his status by winning military glory. The first imperative was to regain the loyalty of the Rhine army. Gaetulicus' replacement was Lepidus' brother-in-law Servius Sulpicius Galba; his friendship with Caligula will have dated to the period when Caligula lived in Livia's household. Galba restored strict standards of discipline to the legions, and Caligula himself led a number of expeditions across the Rhine. They were not obviously less successful in reasserting Roman prestige in the eyes of the German tribes than his father Germanicus' had been in a.d. 14-16. It is only because of Caligula's own unpopularity that our ancient sources with one accord decry them as artificial and unreal, accusing Caligula of cowardice, and suggesting that he fabricated the fighting, and bought or kidnapped the captives in Gaul, where he spent the winter.
Accounts of Caligula's activities at Lyons during the winter emphasize his bad relations with the Senate, and his need for funds. The property of Gallic notables was confiscated, as well as senatorial estates in Italy (eg. those of Sextus Pompeius, cos. a.d. 14); he auctioned off the property of his exiled sisters, and even some of the effects of the imperial household. Such anecdotes illustrate the fiscal requirements of policies that were themselves likely to strengthen the regime. Coins advertise the abolition of the \ percent sales tax on slaves, which will have been welcome to wealthy Italians; the tax had already been reduced from 1 per cent by Tiberius, at the time when Germanicus had overseen the annexation of Cappodocia. To make up for the lost income, Caligula will have looked for another client kingdom to integrate into the empire. His choice fell on Mauretania, whose king, Caligula's cousin Ptolemy, was summoned to Lyons and executed (not, as has been suggested, because Caligula coveted his alleged position as high priest of the Isis cult).36
и Lepidus and Gaetulicus: Meise 1969(0 5 75) ch. 5; Simpson 1980(0 394);
36 Ptolemy and Mauretania: Fishwick 1971 (e 732); Braund 1984 (c 254); Hoffman 1959 (c 275) (Isis). Coins advertising tax reduction ('RCC'): Sutherland 1987 (в 358) ch. 19. Victory over the Ocean: Suet.
But Caligula was also planning to follow in the footsteps of his ancestor Iulius Caesar by imposing Roman military control over Britain. The expulsion from his kingdom and flight to Gaul of Cunobelinus' son Adminius gave Rome an excuse to intervene. Two new legions (the Fifteenth and Twenty-second) seem to have been raised at this time; they were called
Caligula returned to Italy in the summer of a.d. 40. ТЪе winter in Lyons had not been conducive to good relations with the Senate. Communications were a problem; when one of the consuls-elect died shortly before 1 January, there was not enough time for Caligula to be consulted about a replacement, and he was (very unreasonably) blamed for entering office without a colleague — perhaps the context of the story about his wishing to appoint the horse Incitatus to the consulship. There had been executions, such as that of the father of Tacitus' father-in-law Agricola. After the removal of Lepidus, any relative represented a threat, even his uncle Claudius. He was said to have thrown Claudius into the river Rhine when he arrived at the head of a senatorial delegation sent to congratulate him on the elimination of Lepidus and Gaetulicus.
Caligula remained outside Rome for a time, possibly simply to avoid the unhealthy summer months, rather than out of fear of conspiracies (although he is said to have remarked that he wished he could eliminate the entire Senate at a stroke). We should beware of taking Seneca's hostile remarks, or the later justifications for his murder, as evidence for widespread unpopularity. It is hardly surprising that Cassius Chaerea and the other disgruntled praetorian officers responsible for Caligula's death and the brutal killing of his wife and baby daughter on 24 January a.d. 41 should have justified their treason by claiming that it was tyrannicide. No doubt Chaerea was genuinely unhappy about Caligula's persecution of other members of Germanicus' family, but it also irked him that the emperor kept drawing attention to Chaerea's effeminate tone of voice.
IV. CLAUDIUS37
Most ancient sources treat Claudius as a fool who became emperor by accident. Already in Seneca's satire the
The reported views of Augustus, of Claudius' grandmother Livia and his mother Antonia the Younger as to his unsuitability for public office should not be ignored. A public position was not something automatically inherited at Rome; it was something that each individual had to prove himself fit for. Neither Augustus nor Tiberius felt that Claudius was suitable for election to office, and he had remained an
37 Main literary sources: Tac.
Urgulanilla, had an Etruscan background). The effect has been to make him particularly sympathetic to modern historians, who see a fellow- worker in Claudius. More crucially, the mask of pedantry enabled him to survive Tiberius' reign.
At his accession, Caligula brought his uncle fully into public life as part of his attempt to strengthen his position by enhancing the respect due to his relatives. From i July to 12 September a.d. 37 Claudius was Caligula's colleague during his first consulship. In 39 he married his third wife, Valeria Messallina; her father was Claudius' cousin Marcus Valerius Messalla Barbatus, son of the consul of 12 в.с. and of Augustus' niece Marcella the Younger, and her mother was Domitia Lepida. Although Octavia and Britannicus were not born until 40/1, the possibility that his uncle might produce children who, unlike Antonia (Claudius' daughter by Urgulanilla), had Augustus' blood in their veins, cannot have pleased Caligula.
When Caligula was unexpectedly assassinated, there was no precedent for the form which the transfer of power to a new
The Senate was immediately summoned by the consul Quintus Pomponius Secundus: this need not indicate that he was privy to the plot. As a half-brother of Caesonia, he too had an interest in the succession. Later, after the Senate had failed to institute a Caesar of its own, it became politic for everyone, including the new emperor, to pretend that they had merely been acting in the public interest. The Senate debated the situation in the language of republicanism, and that language masked the ambitions of those involved. On the evening of the assassination, the hundred or so senators who had the courage to appear were in no mood to confirm Vinicius' claims. Instead, they celebrated the removal of a tyrant, and the consuls - for the first time since the establishment of the Principate — gave the urban cohorts their watchword for the following day. But the celebradon of
While the Senate debated, Claudius had taken control of the house-
38 Accounts of the succession crisis: Joseph.
hold of the Caesars. Tradition had it that after Caligula's death he was found hiding in the palace by a guardsman who acclaimed him as emperor, and taken to the praetorian camp where he was recognized as the legitimate head of the Caesars. In strict law, that may not have been so; but Roman law also recognized the principle of
Claudius was not a member of the Julian household; but his uncle Tiberius and his brother Germanicus had been adopted into it, and they and his nephew Caligula had headed, or been expected to head, that household. After his acclamation as their new
When the Senate reconvened on the following day, it was too late to recognize the claims of Marcus Vinicius or any other candidate. The consul Pomponius allowed other names to be considered, including those of Annius Vinicianus (who supported his uncle Vinicius) and Decimus Valerius Asiaticus, who had been an early adviser of Caligula and was married to a sister of Lollia Paulina. There were a number of other consulars who were related to the Julian family through descent or by marriage; they too might want a say in who was to head the
Claudius' debt to the guard is reflected in his early coins. A gold
Other coins celebrate decidedly non-military aspects of the image the new ruler wished to present of himself: there are representations of 'Augustan Liberty' holding a liberty-cap, and dedications 'To Augustan Peace' and 'Augustan Constancy'. A copper
One way to show that he intended his reign to be an improvement on Caligula's was by recalling those who had been exiled (as Caligula himself had done at his accession). Those who returned included Agrippina and lulia Livilla. The public honour Claudius bestowed upon
40 Coins:
his relatives did not mean that he could trust them. His fear of assassination was extreme (up to the last years of his reign, everyone who entered his presence was searched for weapons). Historians have expressed doubt about the extent to which Claudius' third wife Messal- lina was responsible for the executions of these early years of his reign. But many of those who threatened her threatened him too, and Claudius publicly thanked her for warning him against at least some of those he had put to death. Soon after her return, Iulia Livilla was exiled again and then executed. Agrippina fared better; her son Domitius Ahenobarbus returned to her care, and his property, confiscated by Caligula, was restored to him. Agrippina looked for the support of a new husband; her first choice was Livia's protege, Galba, but Galba's mother-in-law pointed out to him that that would make his claim to the imperial office so strong that he could not expect to survive for long. (She also made a point of slapping Agrippina's face in public.) Instead, Agrippina married C. Sallustius Passienus Crispus, the adopted son of Augustus' closest associates (see above pp. 202). As a new member of the imperial family, and potential father of Caesarian children, Crispus had to be honoured with a second consulship in a.d. 44; but he died soon after — poisoned by Agrippina, according to Suetonius - so that Messallina allowed Agrippina to survive.41
Claudius and Messallina also looked for support through matrimonial alliances. In 42 Appius Iunius Silanus was recalled from the governorship of Tarraconensis to marry Messallina's mother Domitia Lepida, daughter of Augustus' niece the elder Antonia. Claudius' daughter by Aelia Paetina, Antonia, was married to Pompeius Magnus, son of Marcus Licinius Crassus Frugi (cos. a.d. 27); through his mother Scribonia, he was related to Augustus. Claudius' two-year-old daughter by Messallina, Octavia, was engaged to Augustus' great-great-grandson Lucius Iunius Torquatus Silanus (the youngest son of the consul of a.d. 19, proconsul of Africa under Caligula: not closely related to Appius Silanus), aged about sixteen. Silanus was identified as a suitable successor, sufficiently young to pose no immediate threat: he was made a
By and large Claudius was initially unsuccessful, or unlucky, in his attempts to build up a wide enough network of dependants to whom he had distributed
41 Opposition: McAlindon 19(6(0 573), 19(7(0 374); Baldwin 1964(0 330); Meise 1969(0 375); Wiseman 1982 (в 198). Agrippina and Galba: Suet.
sized by Josephus in his
Just under a year after his accession, on 12 January 42, it was felt that Claudius had distributed honours and offices to enough members of the political class to warrant accepting the title of
The execution of Silanus was a sign of Claudius' insecurity as well as of his readiness to eliminate rivals. The legate of Dalmatia, Lucius Arruntius Furius Camillus Scribonianus (adopted son of Lucius Arrun- tius, one of those who, according to Tacitus, had been thought worthy of the Principate by Augustus), calculated that his chances of survival would be better if he made a bid for empire himself. Scribonianus commanded two legions, the Seventh and Eleventh, and his attempt was supported by a number of figures in Rome who had failed to respond positively to Claudius' acclamation in the previous year. They included Lucius Annius Vinicianus and the consul who had summoned the Senate, Quintus Pomponius Secundus. Our sources tell us that Claudius seriously discussed the advisability of surrendering his
Claudius' third consulship in a.d. 43 was again a sign of weakness rather than strength. During these first years of his reign, he had to make every effort to ensure that he was popular with the Roman plebs — apart from staging games and spectacles, he initiated some major building operations, some of them directly raising the living standards of the Roman population. They included the draining of the Fucine lake, to provide much-needed agricultural land in the vicinity of the capital, a new aqueduct, and the construction of a safe harbour at Ostia. A riot early in his reign made it clear to Claudius that, since the time of Iulius Caesar, the supervision of the corn supply was one of the ruler's principal functions. Another was the supervision of the judicial system; particularly during his tenure of consular office. Claudius made himself visibly available in the law-courts. Even hostile sources (who dwell on his tendency to ignore the law in favour of so-called 'equity') had to admit that he was serious in his desire to be seen to be a hard-working judge.
In terms of the qualities required of a Roman
Claudius reserved for himself the glory of conquering Britain. Ever since the time of Iulius Caesar, Britain, as an island in the Ocean, had had a symbolic importance for Romans: its conquest would indicate that not just the whole world, but even lands beyond the edge of the world, were subject to the dominion of the Roman people. The occupation of Britain would have the additional benefit of removing several legions from within striking distance of Rome: Caligula's new legions had raised the number in each of the German armies to five, and that made their commanders too powerful.
Claudius felt that he could trust the Pannonian governor, Aulus
Plautius, to undertake the actual military operation. Son of an officer of Claudius' father Drusus and brother Germanicus, Plautius had remained loyal during Scribonianus' rebellion, and he was a cousin of Claudius' first wife (although he had divorced Urgulanilla, Claudius is said to have remained on good terms with her). The other person Claudius trusted was Lucius Vitellius, the consul of 34, son of a mere
There were few others he trusted not to plot in his absence: a large number of senators had to accompany him. It was even said that Claudius put off the voyage to Britain by a few days because Galba claimed that he was too ill to travel. Galba was one consular Claudius could not afford to leave behind. Among others in the party were both Valerius Asiaticus and Marcus Vinicius. The Britons themselves presented considerably fewer problems (see chapter 1
But the integration of Mauretania, south-east Britain, and also Lycia- Pamphylia during these years did not imply a 'policy' of general expansion, in contrast to that initiated by Tiberius. Military adventures can be seen as a function of a weak emperor's need to buttress his
While the administrative measures of these years can be seen primarily as responses to Claudius' political weakness, the form they took suggests that Claudius was keen to represent himself as following in the footsteps of the Claudii of old, and - like Caligula - of Iulius Caesar. This lay behind the policy of extending Roman citizenship to the provinces, and looking after the interests of the army. Serving soldiers were granted the legal
The important role that ex-slaves were said to have played in Claudius' household is more interesting, and should not be dismissed entirely as hostile propaganda. Claudius had had little experience of politics, even during the reign of Caligula. He depended for advice on
One area in which Claudius was keen to demonstrate the 'democratic' tradition he had inherited both from the Claudii and from Iulius Caesar was the distribution of corn to the urban population. Responsibility was transferred from the
Coins and inscriptions confirm the emperor's personal interest in providing his people with 'Augustan grain' and fresh water. Apart from constructing the Aqua Claudia, Claudius instituted a second gang of slaves to look after Rome's aqueducts. He took equally seriously his patronal responsibilities to protect the people from fire and flood damage. An inscription shows that the canal he had dug in the lower reaches of the Tiber as part of the works associated with the construction of new harbour facilities at Ostia was not only intended to assist navigation, but also advertised as having the result that 'he freed the city from the danger of flooding'.44
Claudius was consul yet again in 47. Together with Vitellius, he also held the first formal census for over thirty years. This again was a way of honouring his supporters, and seeking the support of potential opponents. A large number of new senators owed their position to Claudius; and many families which had played a political role for two or three generations were raised to patrician status. Of course, we should not exclude completely a genuine feeling for past tradition as one of Claudius' motives in wanting to hold the ancient office of censor, and ensuring that there were patricians to carry on archaic religious rituals.
That Claudius had genuine antiquarian interests is clear from the speech in which he defended his decision to allow Gallic aristocrats who were Roman citizens to stand for political office and join the Senate. The speech is summarized by Tacitus, and fragments survive from a copy set up at Lyons.45 When the census was completed in 48, the consul Lucius Vipstanus Poplicola duly suggested that Claudius should be granted the tide
In the same year, he arranged a series of magnificent spectacles associated with the ceremony of the
The year 48 also saw the last major threat to Claudius' rule, an attempt by his wife Messallina to replace him. Responsibility for the removal of a number of potential rivals both inside and outside the imperial household is ascribed to her by our sources: they include Germanicus' daughter lulia Livilla and C. Appius Iunius Silanus in 42; Tiberius' granddaughter lulia (wife or widow of Rubellius Blandus) in 43; powerful senators such as Catonius Iustus in 43; Marcus Vinicius in 46, and Valerius Asiaticus in 47. Also in 47, the husband of Claudius' daughter Antonia, Cnaeus Pompeius Magnus, was executed, together with the parents through whom he derived descent from Pompey and Crassus. Antonia was re-assigned to Faustus Sulla, a son of Domitia Lepida: as Messallina's half-brother, he was no threat to her. In at least some of these cases, the blame may be assigned to Messallina. She had a claim to Julian blood in her own right, and was building up a power base for herself and her two children. But her plans threatened not just Claudius' daughter Antonia, but also many of the servants of the
Although Messallina's plot was suppressed, it again underlined the weakness of Claudius' rule. Despite his promise to the praetorians never to have anything to do with women, another matrimonial alliance was essential to put an end to speculation about the succession. There were several possible candidates. Lollia Paulina, who had been married to Caligula, was supported by Callistus, who had served that emperor. Antonia's mother Aelia Paetina had been married to Claudius before, and was descended from an ancient republican family. Agrippina was the most direct descendant of Augustus. Her candidature was strongly opposed by the freedman Narcissus, who saw that it would be the end of Britannicus' chances of succeeding. Agrippina was selected, thanks to the support of Antonius Pallas, who had been the trusted procurator of Claudius' and Germanicus' mother Antonia. Vitellius was given the task of asking the Senate to set aside the legal objections to a marriage between uncle and niece, and the wedding was celebrated on i January 49.
The rise of Agrippina implied the fall of the man who had been nearest to being Claudius' successor during Britannicus' minority, Lucius Iunius Silanus. For several years, he had been engaged to Claudius' daughter Octavia, now aged ten. Again it was the loyal Vitellius who arranged what was necessary: he accused Silanus of incest with his sister Iunia Calvina, the wife of his own son Lucius. Four days before Claudius' wedding, Silanus was forced to give up the praetorship to which he had been appointed and was expelled from the Senate. His only option was to kill himself. The new dynastic relationships were demonstrated publicly during Claudius' fifth and last consulship in a.d. 50: on 2 5 February he adopted Agrippina's son Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus as Nero Claudius Caesar. Agrippina herself was given the title of Augusta, and her birthplace Cologne honoured with the title
Claudius' marriage to Agrippina greatly strengthened his position, and the last years of his reign were marred by far fewer executions and
44 Messallina: Meise 1969 (c 375) ch. 6; Ehrhardt 1978 (c 343).
plots than the first. The need to win military prestige was no longer so great, though much was made of the capture of the British king Caratacus, who was displayed at Rome. In the East, on the other hand, there were difficulties which continued at great financial expense into the next reign; the Parthian king Vologases I succeeded in imposing his brother Tiridates as king of Armenia. There continued to be food riots in the capital, but these were not now a serious threat.
The situation was stable because for the time being the succession was as clear as the imperial system could ever make it. Agrippina managed to have her own nominee Sextus Afranius Burrus appointed to command the praetorian cohorts; Burrus came from Narbonensis, where the Domitii Ahenobarbi had exercised patronage for generations. But Britannicus too had his supporters, including his grandmother, Domitia Lepida (also Nero's paternal aunt), and the
But Britannicus would be fourteen on 12 February 5 5, and old enough to be introduced to public life; there were rumours that Claudius said that he wished to be succeeded by a 'real' Caesar. That would have been fitting for one who had emulated Julius Caesar in being the patron of the people and of the army, effecting the spread of citizenship in the provinces, and making Britain part of the empire. Suetonius reports him as telling Britannicus to 'grow up quickly, so that he [Claudius] could explain all his actions'.47 On 13 October 54, Claudius suddenly died after eating mushrooms. The suspicion that Agrippina poisoned her husband is shared by all ancient sources (only Josephus calls it a 'rumour'). His death was most opportune for Agrippina and her son, and the fact that Narcissus happened to be away from the court for a short time seems too convenient to have been fortuitous.
V. NERO[423]
At the moment of Claudius' death, there was no question of any other candidate for the imperial office but Nero; he was his predecessor's adopted son and the husband of his predecessor's daughter (herself descended from Augustus' sister); he had been designated to hold a consulship when he reached the age of twenty (for a.d. 5 8), and he had been granted proconsular powers in Italy
Nero went on to a meeting of the Senate, where he was recognized with the full imperial powers; he turned down, for the time being, the title
Nero's speech at Claudius' funeral, as well as his speech to the Senate accepting the imperial powers and outlining his approach to the office that had been bestowed upon him, were both composed for him by his rhetoric teacher Seneca. Like Caligula and Claudius at their accessions, Nero promised a new start, and a return to the principles of Augustus. There would be no more secret trials within the emperor's
Seneca's treatise
The success of Seneca and Burrus in persuading contemporaries that they were guiding the young emperor along the path of virtue has had a considerable effect on the historical tradition. Our sources agree that Nero's reign began well, and that it was only in the last few years that Nero alienated the elite to the extent of provoking conspiracy and ultimately open rebellion. The propaganda levelled against him by the rebels in a.d. 68 made much of his personality and cultural interests, in particular his philhellenism and his un-Roman desire to appear publicly as a performer. Opponents in the 60s had to explain why these character- traits had not provoked hostility from the start; and since antiquity did not allow much scope for the concept of character development, it was argued that Nero directed his self-indulgence towards other ends during the years when Seneca and Burrus were in a position to advise him. Burrus died and Seneca retired in 62; while they are characterized in a generally favourable way in the historical tradition, Burrus' successor as prefect of the praetorian guard, Ofonius Tigellinus, is presented as a wicked contrast to Burrus, and even (unconvincingly) as Seneca's enemy. Partly at least this was so that Nero's last years could be painted even blacker.
One consequence appears to be the development of a myth of the
49 Seneca and Agrippina: Griffin 1976 (в 71). Coins:
buildings were in accordance with the best Roman traditions of public benefaction: 'What was worse than Nero? What is better than Nero's Baths?'50
The idea of Nero's
It would be naive to believe that Nero's rule was perfect so long as he was under the control of Seneca and Burrus - and not only because Cassius Dio tells us how rich Seneca managed to become during his years as imperial adviser, to the extent that he was at least partly to blame for the exasperation of the Britons which led to Boudica's rebellion in a.d. 60. Political conflict did not cease because the emperor was being advised by a Stoic. Nero may have been the obvious candidate to succeed Claudius; but should he make any false move, there were a number of men who had survived Claudius' reign who might provide a focus of opposition - Domitia Lepida's grandson Britannicus, of course, but also her son (by a different marriage from that which produced Messallina), Faustus Cornelius Sulla Felix, the husband of Claudius' daughter Antonia. And further candidates of Julian ancestry were available in the person of Rubellius Plautus (Tiberius' great-grandson), and the surviving brothers and sisters of Lucius Iunius Silanus, who were grandchildren of Augustus' granddaughter Iulia. Nero's position needed strengthening by fair means, and foul. Fair means included claims to military prestige; in a.d. 55, the administration made much of an imperial salutation for a temporary success in Armenia achieved by Domitius Corbulo. To buttress his
Nero's legitimacy as emperor also needed strengthening in dynastic terms. Immediately after Claudius' funeral, the Senate had voted the late emperor divine honours; although the unpopularity of Tiberius and Caligula at the time of their deaths had prevented them from being
50 Quinquennium: Aur. Vic.
similarly acclaimed, some female members of the
The death of Britannicus early in 5 5, whether or not Seneca and Burrus were personally responsible, certainly strengthened their position — and Nero's — against Agrippina. So did the removal of Agrippina's ally Pallas from his post as
During these years, Seneca and Burrus seem to have used their influence to appoint associates to positions of honour and power. The brother of Seneca's wife, Pompeius Paulinus from Aries, commanded the army of Lower Germany from 5 6 to 5 8; he was succeeded by Lucius Duvius Avitus, who came from Burrus' home town, Vasio, also in Narbonese Gaul. (Nero's supporters from this region had been inherited from his paternal ancestors, the Domitii Ahenobarbi, rather than from the Julio-Claudians.) Avitus had been consul in 56. Another provincial who may well have been associated with them, Lucius Pedanius Secundus from Barcelona, had been consul in 43 and was appointed
It has been argued that Longinus' interpretation of the law should be seen as evidence of a new direction in imperial policy, no longer under the influence of freedmen as it had been under Claudius. This raises the question whether the events of Nero's reign should be ascribed to the 'policies' of the emperor and his advisers rather than to his individual personality and temperament. During his first consulship, Nero realized that he vastly enjoyed being a public figure and at the centre of attention. He was delighted to accept the title of
The desire to appear in public was not restricted to the political forum. Like other good emperors, Nero took seriously his duty to provide the Roman people with games. Unfortunately, he had an uncontrollable desire to be seen by the public as a performer himself, both on the stage and at the races. At first, Nero could be persuaded only to appear himself in contests held in the relative privacy of the imperial
Nero's personal tastes certainly affected the political scene when it came to his matrimonial affairs. Our sources suggest that his love for Poppaea Sabina (granddaughter of Tiberius' legate of Moesia) led to a complete rift with his mother. Later rumours suggested that Nero's relationship with Poppaea had existed several years before he divorced Octavia in order to marry her in 62. It was said that the emperor asked his friend Marcus Salvius Otho to marry Poppaea so that Nero could visit her secretly. Certainly there was a good political reason why Nero was unable to repudiate Octavia immediately: if he did so, then his claim to the loyalty of Claudius' supporters would be weakened in comparison with that of Antonia's husband Sulla Felix. This was seen by Agrippina, who is said to have advised her son against divorcing Octavia on the grounds that he would have to return her dowry — the empire. It is not inconceivable that the great crime for which Nero was to go down in history, the murder of his mother in a.d. 59, was the result of a personal conflict about whether or nor Octavia could be divorced; the fact that Seneca and Burrus seem not to have been involved in the initial plot to shipwreck a pleasure-boat on which Agrippina was returning home from dinner with her son suggests that this may not have been planned as an act of state. It may be that the original intention was not to kill Agrippina, but to frighten her so that she would not in future interfere with her son's wishes.
But in any case, once the shipwreck had been arranged by one of Nero's freedmen, Anicetus (who had been Nero's
Agrippina's killing may have brought an end to the
Paetus walked out of the Senate in disgust, other senators accepted the explanation given by Nero and Seneca. But in future Nero needed the legitimacy conferred by his marriage to Octavia more than ever; we should not be surprised that there was a three-year hiatus between Agrippina's death and Nero's divorce of Octavia. Before that could happen, Nero needed to remove Sulla Felix; and also Rubellius Plautus (who seems not to have had the slightest ambition to become emperor). Sulla had been required to withdraw to Marseilles in 5 8. A comet in a.d. 60 led to rumours that a new
The same year also saw continuing success by Corbulo in the campaign to maintain Armenia as part of the Roman sphere of influence. After the installation of a pro-Roman king, Tigranes V, Corbulo was transferred to the governorship of Syria. Tigranes made the mistake of invading the Parthian dependent state of Adiabene in the following year, which not surprisingly resulted in a Parthian military response. It seems that Corbulo had to remove Tigranes from his throne, and in the year after that (62) an attempt by the new legate of Cappadocia, Caesennius Paetus, to reimpose Roman control resulted in the humiliation of his army by the Parthians at Rhandeia. In a.d. 63, Corbulo was given an unusual grant of
So was the rebellion in Britain, brought about - at least in part - by the calling-in of debts of 40 million sesterces by the philosophical Seneca's procurators. A commission of three consulars was appointed to investigate the tax-collecting system in 62. Part of the results of this investigation is revealed in an inscribed dossier found at Ephesus, containing the accumulated regulations regarding the farming of the
Asia. The
Nero's reign saw a considerable number of trials of ex-governors for extortion. Both extortion by provincial governors, and accusations lodged against them by their opponents after their term of office had come to an end, were constant factors in Roman political life, under the Principate as under the Republic. But concern that its subjects should be justly treated should not be denied out of hand. It is even possible that Stoic theory may have played a part: Thrasea Paetus was particularly keen to oversee provincial matters, and on one famous occasion drew the Senate's attention to the unacceptable influence of the leading man in Crete, Claudius Timarchus. In 57, Thrasea successfully prosecuted the son-in-law of Tigellinus, an associate of Seneca's who was to become Burrus' successor as praetorian prefect. But in general such trials reflect rivalry between senators, rather than a 'policy' on the part of the government.[425]
Some sources blame Nero for the death of Burrus in a.d. 62, suggesting that Nero (now aged twenty-four) wished to rid himself of the restraining influence of his advisers. Seneca retired in this year, too: but that does not mean that their 'party' lost influence, or was replaced by another supposedly centred on Tigellinus. Tigellinus owed his rise to Seneca, and the picture of him as an enemy of Seneca and Burrus is an attempt by those who loyally served Nero to draw a clear but artificial distincdon between Nero's good 'early' years and his wicked later years. The deaths of Britannicus and Agrippina, the exile of Sulla and Rubellius Plautus, and the uprising in Britain, all occurred while Seneca and Burrus were Nero's ministers. Seneca's retirement from public life at the age of sixty-five is not unexpected.
Tacitus' account makes much of the reintroduction of trials for
Tiberius, дал/гх/лг-accusations flourished as a result of too little control of affairs by the emperor, and particularly his absence from Rome. Like charges of extortion, these accusations arose from conflicts between senators, and the opportunities they provided for able
In general, those who suffered before a.d. 64 suffered because of their descent from the family of Augustus. Sulla Felix and Rubellius Plautus, exiled in 5 8 and 60, were both executed in 62; this made Nero feel secure enough to divorce Octavia (alleging barrenness) and exile her to Campania in order to marry Poppaea, which he did twelve days later. Her husband Otho had been sent to govern Lusitania shortly after Agrippina's death in 59. Public demonstrations in Octavia's favour by the urban plebs, who had perhaps not forgotten the benefits Claudius had bestowed upon it, made Nero realize that he had been wrong to discount her influence; he claimed that she was involved in a plot, and had her executed on 9 June. Although Poppaea gave birth to a daughter in January 63, the baby died after a few months. Her deification as Claudia Augusta was no consolation for the fact that Nero still had no direct heir. He was now frightened of anyone who might have a claim to be emperor. In 64, Decimus Iunius Silanus Torquatus, great-great- grandson of Augustus through the younger Iulia, had to commit suicide; the only child of the consul of a.d. 19 who had not been disgraced was now Iunia Lepida, wife of Gaius Cassius Longinus.
Nero's mistakes had hitherto affected mainly those whom he feared as rivals. But on the night of 18-19 July 64 there occurred a chance event which resulted in widespread dissatisfaction with Nero both in the city of Rome and throughout the empire. The fire of Rome and the subsequent programme of reconstruction were immensely costly, and contributed directly to Nero's loss of popularity among the wealthy throughout Italy and in certain other provinces. Later rumours ascribing responsibility for the fire to Nero himself, anecdotes about the pleasure he took in playing the lyre while Rome burnt, and the revulsion of writers normally hostile to the Christians at his attempt to mark them out as the incendiaries, illustrate the extent to which an emperor was seen as personally responsible for the disasters as well as the benefits experienced by those whom he ruled. In fact, Nero did what he could to prevent the fire from spreading by creating fire-breaks (only to be accused of pulling down buildings in areas he coveted for extensions to his own palace); and like the emperors before him, he assisted those made homeless and personally supervised the rebuilding programme.
But the reconstruction of large areas of the city was immensely expensive, and put additional strains on the finances of the
Not only senators suffered. We are told that the free distribution of grain to the urban population had to be suspended for a time, and that some troops were not paid. Nero was now so desperate for additional sources of funding that - like a typical tyrant — he is said to have told magistrates to ensure that the maximum number of cases resulted in conviction, and confiscations. We are told that he confiscated 'half the province of Africa' (effectively the fertile Bagradas valley in northern Tunisia), executing six landowners to do so. Temple treasures were melted down; the need for precious metals resulted in considerable hostility in provinces both West and East, and contributed directly to the rebellions both of Vindex and of the Jews. In May 66, the procurator of Judaea, Gessius Florus, arrived in Jerusalem claiming that the Jews owed the imperial
These fiscal problems were exacerbated by the great fire at Rome, but as Boudica's rebellion shows, they had already existed before. Throughout Nero's reign, the precious metal content of the coinage had been steadily declining. By a.d. 64, there had been a major reform of the currency: the number of
Nero's removal of the descendants of Augustus meant that the option to replace him was extended to others whose connexion with the Caesars was far more distant. Nero's unpopularity was exploited by a group of people who selected as their candidate C. Calpurnius Piso, the man whose marriage to Livia Orestilla had been barred by Caligula (see above, p.226); Claudius had recalled him from exile and gave him a consulship in 41. The members of the conspiracy were said to have included Faenius Rufus, co-prefect of the guard, who was afraid of the influence of Tigellinus, with three of the sixteen praetorian tribunes. The consul designate, Plautius Lateranus, was also involved, and many others were accused. To give legitimacy to the cause, Claudius' daughter Antonia was to be taken to the praetorian camp after Nero had been killed in the circus. There was nothing 'republican' about the plot.
The effect of the conspiracy was that Nero now became afraid of many who were not related to him; and he reacted by eliminating an extraordinary number of suspects. Seneca was one of those required to end their lives. Donatives were given to the praetorian guard, and other gifts to those Nero thought he could continue to trust: triumphal insignia to Tigellinus, Petronius Turpilianus, and the later emperor Cocceius Nerva. Nymphidius Sabinus, grandson of Caligula's freedman Callistus, was given
The death of Poppaea Sabina in a.d. 65 was a political as well as a personal disaster for Nero: she had not provided him with an heir.54 There were rumours of further plots, and executions. C. Cassius Longinus, husband of Iunia Lepida, was forbidden from attending meetings of the Senate; soon after Nero asked the Senate to exile him and his wife's nephew Lucius Iunius Silanus. Silanus, son of the Marcus reputedly poisoned by Agrippina in 54, was a descendant of Augustus; although the Pisonian conspirators had ignored his prior claim to the position of Caesar, Nero felt he had to execute him after a trial for incest. Cassius himself was able to return from exile in Sardinia under Galba. Another casualty of a distant relationship with the imperial family was
Antistius Vetus, Rubellius Plautius' father-in-law, and once a protege of Agrippina.
Nero's execution of those he feared continued into 66. Ostorius Scapula, son of an early governor of Britain, had consulted astrologers about how much longer Nero was likely to survive. P. Anteius, an ex- consul, was accused on the same charge; both killed themselves. The list of casualties included Seneca's two brothers, Annaeus Mela (father of Lucan, who had already killed himself on Nero's orders), and Gallio (who appears in the Acts of the Apostles as governor of Achaea); C. Petronius, Tigellinus' rival as Nero's boon companion; the ex- praetorian prefect Rufrius Crispinus; Anicius Cerealis, who had been consul in 65; and the two noted Stoics, Thrasea Paetus and Barea Soranus. Stoicism may have given some of these the vocabulary and slogans to articulate their opposition to the way Nero was behaving, but those Roman families that now turned against Nero did not do so as a 'group' or 'party', nor, primarily, because of any philosophical beliefs they may have held about 'ideal kingship', let alone 'republicanism'.
To strengthen his own dynastic position, Nero proposed to marry Claudius' daughter Antonia; but she had no wish to oblige. Instead, Nero married Statilia Messallina, the widow of another of his victims, Vestinus Atticus. She counted amongst her ancestors Augustus' generals Statilius Taurus and Valerius Messalla Corvinus.
Nero also made every effort to re-establish his military prestige after 65. He made the most of the solution to the Armenian problem which had been achieved by Corbulo, and arranged some spectacular festivals on the occasion of King Tiridates' visit to Rome in 66 to receive his diadem from Nero's own hands. New issues of coins stressed 'Augustan Victory', the Altar of Peace, and the fact that 'he shut the temple of Janus after peace had been achieved by land and sea'. Nero honoured generals like Vespasian and Suetonius Paulinus (who was granted a second consulship), perhaps to counter any threat from the
During Nero's journey to Greece with his entourage, a further conspiracy was uncovered at Beneventum (details are sparse, and it is not clear whether Nero was present when the conspiracy was brought to light). The leading figure was Annius Vinicianus, who was executed. Nor is it clear what this man's relationship was to the Annius Vinicianus who was involved in Camillus Scribonianus' rebellion against Claudius: his brother may have been the Annius Pollio implicated in the Pisonian conspiracy in the previous year. What is known is that he was Corbulo's principal supporter. He had been
» Nero as
56 Liberation of Greece:
executed (in the very Senate-house, according to our sources) by Caligula in a.d. 40.
On his arrival in Greece Nero heard of the failure of Cestius Gallus, governor of Syria, to restore Roman control over Jerusalem in November 66. Gallus seems to have died soon after, and it was imperative for someone to be appointed quickly to take command in the full-scale war which needed to be fought for control over Judaea. In February 67 Nero appointed two men to replace Gallus, Mucianus as legate of Syria, and Vespasian to take command of the war itself; it is not surprising that the administrative problems involved in separating what had been a single provincial administration into two different commands should have caused friction between the two generals, and we do not have to suppose that there was any deep ill-feeling between the two. Their disagreements did not prevent Vespasian from pursuing the pacification of Galilee with general success during the years a.d. 67 and 68, as described in ch. 14b of this volume. By the time of Nero's death, when Vespasian ceased major operations in Palestine, there was little left for the Roman army to do apart from the recovery (and destruction) of Jerusalem itself and of a number of other forts whose reduction was more a matter of demonstrating Rome's might than of removing a serious threat.
By the winter of a.d. 67/8, it had become clear to Helius and the other members of the household who were looking after affairs in the capital that Nero's artistic victories in Greece had weakened, not strengthened, his position with the Roman elite. In January, Helius went to Greece in person (in spite of the dangerous winter weather) to persuade Nero that a return to Rome was imperative. As he travelled back to Rome via Naples, Nero's first concern was to be honoured as a Greek Olympic victor by driving his chariot through specially constructed gaps in the walls of the cities he passed on his journey to Rome via Naples. He showed much less concern when he heard that Gaius Iulius Vindex, legate of Gallia Lugdunensis, had thrown off his allegiance - news which reached him at Naples on the anniversary of his mother's murder.
CHAPTER 6 FROM NERO TO VESPASIAN
Т. E. J. WIEDEMANN
I. A.D. 68
In January 68, Nero had been persuaded by his freedman Helius to break off his successful and popular tour of Greece and return to Italy immediately. The fact that Helius braved the winter storms to cross the Adriatic confirms that he was deeply concerned about the possibility not just of a conspiracy among members of the Senate at Rome, but of a rising by one or more provincial governors with their armies. The evidence for this was a series of letters calling for Nero's overthrow circulated to other governors by C. Iulius Vindex, probably the legate of Gallia Lugdunensis. Some of the recipients passed the letters they received from Vindex on to Rome via local imperial procurators. But those who were administering the government on Nero's behalf cannot have been certain which governors if any were still to be trusted.
Imperial procurators in Tarraconensis, for instance, will have realized that the legate, Servius Sulpicius Galba, was taking no action to punish those who were circulating verses hostile to Nero. No one could tell whether Galba might not be similarly tolerant of those - perhaps the same people — who were plotting armed disloyalty.
The only direct evidence we have for assessing Vindex's reasons for rebelling, and his objectives, are the anti-Neronian writings he circulated, and the inscriptions on the coins he minted to pay his followers. Suetonius tells us that Vindex referred to Nero as 'Ahenobarbus', emphasizing that he had not been born a member of the
z56
after he had thrown off his allegiance to Nero. The Spanish denarii refer to the 'Freedom' and to the 'Life-force of the Roman People', with images of Mars the avenger and a liberty-cap. Perhaps the most interesting issue shows personifications of Spain and Gaul with a Victory between them, and the legend 'Harmony of the Spanish and Gallic Provinces'; the reverse represents the 'Victory of the Roman People' driving in a two-horse chariot. The similarity between Vindex's issues and those of Galba indicates collusion between the two legates after they had withdrawn support from Nero, but it cannot prove that Galba was actively involved in Vindex's conspiracy from the beginning. Nor does the fact that both legates minted coins with inscriptions asserting republican virtues and referring to the 'Roman People' mean that Vindex or Galba rebelled against Nero in order to re-activate a form of republican constitution. That was not what 'The Liberty of the Roman People' meant to Vindex, whose ancestors had not even been citizens at the time of the Republic. He will have wanted to replace a failed
Vindex was not just a legate of Caesar; he was also a powerful man in Gaul in his own right. We are told that his ancestors had been 'kings' amongst the Aquitanians (ethnically, Basques, although the root *vent- is Celtic). We should not be surprised that Vindex made use of his local connexions; and we hear of Basque fighters volunteering to join Galba. Rivalry between different Gallic tribes, as well as between Gauls and communities of Italian settler origin with their traditional loyalty to the Ahenobarbi, will have played a role in determining who joined and who opposed Vindex. But there is no basis for the theory, popular earlier in this century, that Vindex's revolt was essentially a 'native' uprising against Roman rule. Tacitus follows the official Flavian interpretation of events in coupling Vindex with Civilis as though both were primarily native chieftains seeking to set up their own separate (but Romanized) states in north-west Europe. Like Civilis, Vindex will have exploited what opposition there was to Roman rule, aggravated by Nero's fiscal requirements; but it would be anachronistic to see him as a nationalist freedom-fighter rather than as a Roman senator reacting against Nero's 'tyranny'.
While the numismatic evidence demonstrates that those who rose against Nero agreed in recognizing the ultimate authority of the 'Roman Senate and People', the literary sources suggest that it was not clear from the start that Vindex would win the support of Galba, or of anyone else. Although Galba kept back evidence of Vindex's intentions from Nero's procurators, he was sceptical of Vindex's chances of success. It was Titus Vinius Rufinus, the commander of the Sixth Legion (currently the only legion stationed in Spain), who pointed out that if Nero's opponents did not all rally round Vindex now, the frightened and angry emperor would subsequently find it easy to deal with them one by one.
Galba was acclaimed as 'Caesar' by his troops at the regular gubernatorial assizes held at New Carthage on 2 or 3 April. He immediately rejected the imperial title, which soldiers had no right to bestow, but called himself'Legate of the Roman Senate and People'. There was some opposition: the proconsul of Baetica, Obultronius Sabinus, and his legate, Cornelius Marcellus, had to be executed. Apart from Titus Vinius, Galba was sure of the support of the quaestor Caecina Alienus, who took over the government of Baetica, and in particular the legate of Lusitania, Marcus Salvius Otho. Between them, the three governors controlled most of the empire's resources of precious metals. Otho had for many years been an associate of the young Nero. Almost nine years before, Nero had sent him to Lusitania as governor in order to facilitate his own access to Otho's wife Poppaea. Poppaea was now dead; Otho had nothing to lose from Nero's overthrow, and much to gain. Galba would be seventy in December, and had no son to succeed him in the imperial office, while Otho was thirty-seven, and available as Galba's supporter and successor.
Nero had heard of Vindex's rebellion at Naples. He was not unduly concerned at news of unrest in Gaul, but Galba would have some chance of winning recognition as Caesar; his defection changed the picture completely. It confirmed that no governors could be trusted any longer.
Petronius Turpilianus, who had proved so loyal in the suppression of Piso's conspiracy, was sent to northern Italy to assemble an army, to include the Fourteenth Legion and a new one raised from the marines at Misenum. As a deterrent to others, Galba's estates in Italy were confiscated; Galba retaliated by auctioning off the property of the
Primus, Otho, Vinius and Alienus had made it clear that they were deserting Nero in favour of Galba. Others who played an important part in Nero's overthrow did not make their intentions so clear, either to contemporaries or to us. At some point in a.d. 68, the legate of the Third Legion in north Africa, Clodius Macer, threw off the authority of the government in Rome, deposed the proconsul of Africa, and raised an additional legion, which he called
The actions of the legate commanding the upper Rhine army, Verginius Rufus, are even more difficult to interpret. We must assume that Rufus, like his colleagues, had been approached by Vindex. When Vindex offered Galba the support of Gaul, he claimed to have 100,000 soldiers to put at his disposal; since Vindex's own provincial levies only came to 20,000 men, this can only mean that he thought that some at least of the Rhine legions, and their commanders, would support his coup. On the other hand, it is also possible that Rufus stayed loyal to Nero. Tacitus says explicitly that the Rhine legions stood by Nero and the Caesars longer than other armies did.
Rufus mobilized his legions and marched south west through the 2 Macer coins: Sutherland 1987 (в 558) ch. 4a;
Franche Comte in the direction of central Gaul. When he heard of Rufus' march, Vindex was attempting unsuccessfully to reduce Lyons, which remained loyal to Nero out of gratitude for recent favours; he broke off the siege, marched towards Rufus, and met him at Vesontio, probably towards the end of May. There followed a battle in which Vindex's levies were defeated by the Rhine legions, superior in numbers, weapons and training; the only option left to Vindex was suicide. Soon (but not necessarily immediately) after the battle, Rufus was acclaimed emperor; he rejected the offer (or several such offers). Many years later, the epitaph on his tomb stated that 'after Vindex's defeat, he laid claim to the imperial power not on his own behalf but on that of the fatherland'.
Since the 1950s, the consensus amongst scholars - following the account given by Cassius Dio — has been that the Battle of Vesontio was a mistake. Vindex and Rufus were co-conspirators who had arranged to combine their forces and then to march on Italy together in support of Galba. Unfortunately, when Vindex's largely Gaulish levies met the legionaries from the Rhine, the resentment which the two groups felt for one another resulted in unexpected violence which the respective commanders could not contain. Similar uncontrolled violence by Roman troops during the campaigns of the following year suggests that this is not impossible. On this interpretation, the Rhine legions may have hated the Gauls and their upstart leader, but that does not mean that they were loyal to Nero; indeed, having flexed their muscles at Vesontio, they offered to put their own commander in Nero's place.
If Vindex was indeed certain of Rufus' support for himself and Galba, it is curious that he should have marched north to meet Rufus at Vesontio instead of waiting for his army at Lyons or Vienne. It is more likely that Vindex feared that Rufus and the Rhine army would stand by Nero. As for Rufus, he may well have destroyed Vindex on Nero's behalf; but very soon after the battle news reached Gaul that Nero had lost his nerve and killed himself. It was now essential for Rufus to hide the fact that he and his soldiers had supported Nero and destroyed Galba's allies, artd it was perhaps only then that the Rhine legions acclaimed Rufus as an imperial candidate - not as an alternative to Nero, but as an alternative to Galba, who would not (and did not) look kindly upon what they had done to Vindex.3
Rufus was certainly not acting in association with Galba; Galba later separated him from his army in order to give him the 'honour' of accompanying him on his journey to Rome. The immediate effect of the news of Rufus' destruction of Vindex was to make Galba withdraw to his base at Clunia, where he is said to have contemplated suicide himself. It was later asserted that he erroneously thought that Rufus had betrayed him; he may rather have feared that the Rhine legions would impose their own candidate, or that their victory would allow Nero to reestablish his authority.
Rufus' victory at Vesontio turned out to be irrelevant to the final issue, since early in June Nero had lost his nerve and effectively abandoned the administration of affairs. We do not know enough about the exact chronology of events that year to be able to say whether he had heard of Vindex's defeat, or of the Rhine army's attempt to acclaim Rufus. He may have suspected the loyalty of Turpilianus' army in northern Italy. A plan to flee to Egypt led Nymphidius Sabinus, who in Tigellinus' continued illness commanded the praetorian guard, to promise them a donative of 30,000 sesterces each if they broke their oath of loyalty to Nero, on the grounds that their emperor had already abandoned them. The Senate's role was to confirm that Nero no longer had the authority to govern, and to decide who in fact had that authority. On 9 June (or possibly 11) it declared Nero an enemy of the Roman people, recognized Galba as Caesar, acclaimed him as Augustus, and voted him imperial powers. Nero, realizing that the only support he had left was that of certain members of his household staff (and, perhaps, of the Roman plebs), committed suicide; his last words — 'what a creative artist I have been' - show how much more interested he was in his public image than in governing. Galba's freedman Icelus was released from custody and travelled to Clunia in a mere seven days to inform the new emperor of the events in the capital.
Each new emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty had faced considerable but quite different problems in establishing himself. Galba had to face most of them together. At Tiberius' accession, there had been no previous transfer of power from one emperor to another; but Tiberius, Caligula and Nero had been the legitimate heirs of their predecessors. Galba's links with the Julio-Claudians were so tenuous as to be worthless in terms of loyalty. He made what he could of these links: an official document from Egypt calls him 'Lucius Livius Galba', and Livia's head appears on his coins.4 But like Claudius, Galba was an 'outsider' taking over
4 Galba is called 'Livius' in the Edict of Tiberius lulius Alexander: MW
be won, at least until they could be made safe, like Verginius Rufus. Galba had to ensure that all these groups would come to be as dependent upon him as they had been on earlier Caesars; under the circumstances, we should not be too surprised at his lack of success.
The nature of the Principate naturally gave any new emperor the advantage of having patronage to bestow, and being able to remove from positions of authority men upon whose loyalty he had no claims, to replace them with others who would be
With the exception of Africa under Macer - whom Galba soon destroyed, possibly after a naval campaign - there was now no province which failed to recognize the new emperor. But not all those who held military power owed their authority to Galba. Galba's authority might be seen as stemming from the decision by the praetorian prefect Nymphidius Sabinus to abandon Nero. It was Sabinus who was in effective control of Rome. He allowed sections of the urban mob, those who thought that they had suffered under Nero, to indulge in attacks of physical violence on some of Nero's freedmen. He also removed the invalid Ofonius Tigellinus from his position as co-commander of the guard, claiming that Tigellinus had been particularly involved in all the evil aspects of Nero's administration (a myth which those who had loyally served Nero for many years were happy to accept). The removal of Tigellinus concentrated power in Sabinus' hands; and Sabinus soon came to think of himself as potentially more than a kingmaker. To justify a bid for control of the imperial household, rumours were circulated that he was in fact an illegitimate son of Caligula, whose freedman his grandfather had been.
Galba's insistence that, since he was a member of a republican family
a.d. 68
that could be traced back for several centuries, his authority stemmed from his own
Galba's arrival in Rome would mean changes in the distribution of power there; he was bringing his own supporters with him, Icelus and Asiaticus to help him in the
2б5
Whatever the threat Sabinus may have represented, Galba's reaction was harsh. He ordered the execution of Varro, and took the opportunity to kill other friends of Sabinus and of Nero, such as the exiled king Mithridates of Pontus (who had said some unpleasant things about
Galba's appearance). Petronius Turpilianus was ordered to commit suicide. These deaths did not bode well for those who hoped that
Galba was rapidly losing much of the goodwill with which he had set out. It was not just his parsimonious personal regime which led to resentment. He realized that Nero had been unpopular during his last years because of the need to raise funds in the provinces in order to pay for new buildings and spectacles in the capital. Galba's solution was to cut expenditure. He even went so far as to set up a commission of thirty senators to try to get back money which Nero had bestowed on his favourites. Needless to say they claimed to be able to recover only one tenth of what Nero had disbursed.
There were other aspects of Galba's administration that undermined support for him. On Nero's death, those exiled by the tyrant during the last few years returned to Rome, and some opened legal proceedings against those who had accused them; a praetor-elect, Helvidius Priscus, was particularly keen to begin a vendetta against all those who had supported Nero. When Galba arrived, he made it clear that the past should best be forgotten. As expected, he, or Icelus, arranged for the execution of some of the principal freedmen of the
Historians once thought that one of Galba's strengths as an imperial candidate had been that he had no obvious successor. In fact there was a grand-nephew, Publius Dolabella, and the Caesars' personal bodyguard of German soldiers assumed that he would be Galba's heir. This displeased Galba: the history of earlier emperors had indicated that when the succession was clear, those who wished to prosper transferred their loyalty from the setting to the rising sun. A plurality of potential successors could be as much to an emperor's advantage as a source of instability for the empire (see above, ch.5 n.4). The fact that Galba should have thought that the adoption of a son and successor would be a solution to his present difficulties therefore requires explanation. Even more surprising is the identity of the man he adopted: Lucius Calpurnius
Piso Frugi Licinianus. This Piso was the youngest son of the consul of a.d. 27, destroyed by Messallina in a.d. 47. Although he had been exiled under Nero as a member of a family who seem consistently to have represented a threat to the Julio-Claudians, Piso had no political ambitions (we do not even know whether he had ever been a senator). The choice of Piso was not made because Galba needed the support of Piso's relatives. Galba claimed that he was choosing Piso on entirely personal grounds; many years before, as a private citizen, he had decided to make Piso his own heir, and now that Galba had become a Caesar, he asserted that there was no reason to take any other factors into account (in fact Piso was a brother of the Cn. Pompeius Magnus who married Claudius' daughter Antonia and related to the Julians through Seribo- nia: see Stemma III, p. 992). But if Galba's decision was determined by private factors, why did he pass over his own nephew, Dolabella?
One explanation for the adoption of as unspectacular a successor as Piso may be that there already was an obvious successor: Otho. Otho was associated with Nero's 'good', early years; he was popular with the praetorians, and had considerable support within the
11 a. d. 69—70
Our knowledge of the calendar year 69 is much better than of 68, since Tacitus' description of the events of this 'long' year in his
By replacing Verginius Rufus with Hordeonius Flaccus, Galba had
5 The events of a.d. 69 are covered by Tacitus in books i-iii of the
The readable modern narrative accounts by Wellesley 1975 (c 412) and Greenhalgh 1975 (c 551) put more stress on the military action than on analysis of the political manoeuvring.
removed a potential rival for the imperial office, and Titus Vinius a personal enemy; they had not won the allegiance of the three legions of the upper Rhine army. The appointment of one of his earliest supporters, Caecina Alienus, as legate of the two legions encamped at Mainz is an indication of Galba's anxieties about them. It is not particularly surprising that on i January a.d. 69, Hordeonius Flaccus was unable to persuade the legions at Mainz to take the annual military oath to Galba; as in the previous year, an oath of loyalty to the 'Roman Senate and People' cloaked treason to the emperor. Such disrespect would only become a serious threat if the troops found an alternative candidate for the imperial office, more willing to risk civil war than Rufus had been. Flaccus was old and lame, and not a potential emperor.
Just a month or so previously, however, the lower Rhine army had received Aulus Vitellius as its commander in place of the executed Fonteius Capito. Vitellius, born on 7 September a.d. 12, and
Galba's procurator for Belgic Gaul, Pompeius Propinquus, had immediately informed the government of the trouble at Mainz on 1
6 Vitellius'proclamation: Murison 1979(0 378).
January. Galba may well have thought that the animosity of Verginius Rufus' old army was directed not so much against himself, as against Vinius and Otho; 1 January was the day when Galba and Vinius entered upon their joint consulship, and many had assumed (Plutarch tells us) that on that day Otho would be publicly acclaimed as Galba's adoptive son and successor. Even if he had known that the Rhine armies had already gone so far as to proclaim a rival emperor, Galba will still have thought that his chances of regaining the loyalty of these armies would be improved if he showed that there was an alternadve to Vinius and Otho. If he rejected making his nephew Publius Cornelius Dolabella his heir, then it was because he was too fond of him to force him into the position of being a foil to Otho. But Piso mattered less; Galba was willing to put his life at risk. On 10 January he announced his decision to his
The adoption of Piso was not so much a matter of indicating who was to be the next emperor, as indicating who was not: Otho. Otho moved swiftly to recover the prize that had as good as been his. Vinius had let him down in the imperial
On the advice of his astrologer, Otho finally chose 15 January for his enterprise. He accompanied Galba to a public sacrifice at the temple of Apollo on the Palatine; at the appropriate moment his freedman Onomastus gave the agreed message - that 'the building surveyors are waiting for you at home' - and Otho slipped away to be saluted as emperor by just twenty-three soldiers of the bodyguard. When this small group of supporters reached the praetorian camp, there was no opposition from the officers. Galba's associates — including Vinius, apparently still unaware of Otho's plans - sent to the other troops present in Rome for military support, but without success. A false rumour that Otho had been killed by guards loyal to himself induced Galba to leave the palace in order to give thanks to the gods on the Capitol. As he and his entourage crossed the Forum, it became clear that their hopes were in vain. A small number of praetorians — considerably fewer than those who subsequently claimed the credit — attacked the party. Galba was killed in the Forum by a soldier from one of the Rhine legions. Piso died outside the temple of Vesta, where he had taken refuge. Titus Vinius failed to persuade the man who killed him that he was actually involved in Otho's conspiracy.
The Senate formally recognized Otho as the man who controlled the imperial household and the empire at a meeting held on the same evening. Otho was the first emperor to have seized power as a result of open bloodshed (Claudius had executed his predecessor's assassins). He also soon realized that he was faced with the candidature of a rival emperor on the Rhine. There was an exchange of correspondence with the usurper, and Otho suggested that Vitellius take Vinius' place as his prospective father-in-law. A senatorial embassy was sent to persuade Vitellius to abandon his claim, but it soon became clear that he was not a free agent, and that the Rhine armies would not countenance a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
Nevertheless Otho's regime was popular. He already had the support of the praetorians, and of their officers. For all that he had virtually been Galba's expected successor, he publicly dissociated himself from that unpopular emperor, and instead emphasized his association with Nero: Galba's freedman Icelus and his appointee as praetorian prefect, Cornelius Laco, were both executed. Statues of Nero and Poppaea were restored, and the emperor was acclaimed by the urban plebs as 'Nero Otho'. Any negative features of Nero's last years (when Otho was in Spain) were blamed on the unfortunate Tigellinus, whom Otho now executed. The disappearance of Vinius was a bonus; not only could unpopular decisions taken by Galba be ascribed to him, but Otho was freed from his promise to marry Vinius' daughter. Instead, he proposed to strengthen his claim to be the legitimate
Vespasian's elder brother, Flavius Sabinus, was re-appointed to the urban prefecture he had held under Nero.
Like other emperors, Otho made the most of news of military success. The defeat of a Sarmatian raiding party by the legate of Moesia, M. Aponius Saturninus, in February not only gave Otho some of the military prestige which he had hitherto lacked, but also enabled him to tie both the governor and one of his legionary legates, Aurelius Fulvus (grandfather of the emperor Antoninus Pius), to him by bestowing military honours. The governor of Pannonia, L. Tampius Flavianus, was honoured by being given Galba's place among the Arval Brethren; although related to Vitellius, he was to remain loyal to Otho. In any case, most provincial governors had no qualms about recognizing Galba's murderer. Even the governor of Tarraconensis, Cluvius Rufus, at first recognized Otho as emperor. So did the eastern armies: Antioch in Syria minted coins with his image and title. The gold coins issued in Otho's name and proclaiming 'peace throughout the world' were perhaps optimistic, but not absurdly so.7 Only the German and British legions refused to take the oath. (The situation in Britain was confused; the governor Trebellius Maximus seems to have lost control, and fled to Vitellius; but the legionary legates also provided Vitellius with
Otho's coup was irrelevant to the plans of Vitellius, Valens and Caecina. Their rebellion had been as much against Galba's intimates as against Galba himself. For Vitellius to be a legitimate emperor — and he made no claim to be
The two Rhine armies had probably not heard of Otho's accession when they set off to cross into Italy as soon as the Alpine passes were clear of snow, Caecina through Switzerland and across the Great St Bernard, Valens through central Gaul and then across the Mont
7 Otho's coin issues: PAX ORBIS TERRARVM, MW 32; Otho recognized at Antioch, MW 77. For Sabinus: Wallace 1987 (c 407).
Genevre. Later historians following pro-Flavian sources give a highly coloured account of the havoc the two armies caused along their route. In January, the Twenty-first Legion, based at Vindonissa, was involved in a regular battle against the
Otho acted immediately and, as far as one can judge, rationally. It was not to be expected that an army would be able to cross the Alps until March or April (he could not predict the unusually early spring that year). Loyal legions from the Balkans could be marshalled in northern Italy well before Vitellius' main armies arrived, so long as the area was kept under the government's control. In winter, the only weak point on Italy's north-western border was the Via Domitia, the coastal road between the Ligurian Alps and the sea. A number of units commanded by officers who had backed Otho's coup (but who quarrelled amongst themselves) reached this sector by early February. The government was assisted by its command of the sea; when the governor of Corsica, Decimus Picarius, came out prematurely on Vitellius' side, he was soon killed. The legate of the Maritime Alps, Marius Maturus, also joined Vitellius before Valens' army was near enough to protect his province from the Othonians (among those who lost their lives at the hands of plundering Othonian soldiers was Agricola's mother). A cavalry force (including a unit of Treverans under Iulius Classicus, the later rebel leader) was sent south, but failed to dislodge Otho's troops.
The success of Otho's soldiers in Liguria prevented a quick dash by Valens' cavalry towards Rome along the Etrurian coast. What Otho cannot have foreseen was that Caecina would be able to take advantage of an early warm spell to cross the Great St Bernard with a force of about 18,000 troops, and establish himself in north-western Italy by the beginning of March. He advanced as far as Cremona without encountering significant opposition.
The fact that a rebel army had been allowed to enter Italy before the arrival of the loyal legions from the Danube was to mean that Otho had already lost. Nevertheless the officers he had sent to hold northern Italy managed to inflict a series of reverses on Caecina. A force based at
Verona under Annius Gallus, largely made up of three praetorian cohorts, and one based at Placentia under Vestricius Spurinna, consisting of Nero's
With Valens' arrival at Cremona, the advantage held by the Vitellian forces was, for the moment, overwhelming. But the emperor was already beginning to receive the reinforcements he had summoned from Pannonia; it would be another month before the Moesian legions were there in strength, but the main force of one of the Pannonian legions (the Twelfth) reached the Othonians a few days after Ad Castores, and the two others (the Seventh
The battle, known as the 'First Battle of Cremona' or 'Bedriacum', took place on 14 April. The imperial army had the advantage of surprise, and gained some initial successes; but they were tired out by a 20- kilometre march to the batdefield, and the terrain - thick with vineyards and watercourses — was not to the advantage of the attackers. The Vitellians' greater military experience, as well as their numerical superiority, decided the batde. Needless to say, the emperor's troops believed that they had been betrayed by some, or most, of their officers. Suetonius Paulinus immediately decamped to beg pardon from Vitellius at Lyons. On the day after the batde, Marius Celsus, Salvius Titianus and the other officers surrendered on behalf of their troops.
Otho had awaited the outcome of the battle at Brixellum, 20 km away on the south bank of the Po. He had the option of holding off the Vitellian army for a few more days, in the hope that the two other Pannonian legions would reach him, and that they would fight for him. That was unlikely: their colleagues in the Twelfth Legion were part of the army that had been defeated, and the emperor had to assume that the war was over. After making those arrangements that antiquity expected of a good monarch to protect his supporters from the vengeance of Vitellius — including kind words for his nephew, Salvius Cocceianus, whose relationship to Otho was not to prove fatal until the reign of Domitian — he killed himself on the morning of 16 April. He was not able to foresee that his death only freed Rome from the horrors of further bloodshed for some months; it was applauded as a brave act, then and later.
After the battle, Caecina and Valens both returned to Vitellius at Lyons. There the usurper received and pardoned a number of Otho's officers, and heard that the Senate had bestowed imperial powers on him on 19 April. Vitellius accepted the grant of
Despite the military victory of his armies and his formal recognition by the Senate, Vitellius' position was weaker than any emperor's had been on his accession. He had ensured that the legions which had remained loyal to the government of Otho were dispersed as widely as possible: the Fourteenth was returned to Britain, Nero's First
Vitellius' coins show his awareness of the deep split between those soldiers who supported and those who opposed him. A Spanish
Vitellius not only failed to reconcile the troops who had opposed him, but also failed to win popularity in other quarters. Coins advertising the imperial corn supply show that he was aware of the need for support from the plebs; and on the day after his arrival at Rome, he accepted the title 'Augustus' in response to popular demand (early coins describe him as 'Germanicus', with the
» Vitellius' coin issues: IMP. GERMANICVS, Sutherland 1987 (в 3 5 8) chs. 47-9; CONSENSVS EXERCITVVM S.C.; FIDES EXERCITWM/ PRAETORIANORVM; ANNONA AVG. S.C., MW 36-9; LIBERI IMP. GERM. AVG., MW 80; L. VITELLIVS COS III CENSOR, MW 82 (we may note that Joscphus pretends to know nothing of these children:
Foremost amongst the provincial commanders was C. Licinius Mucianus, legate of Syria. Mucianus preferred literature to soldiering, and did not propose to put forward his own candidature. Although we do not have enough information about his family to know how 'aristocratic' he was, his own career — governor of Lycia and Pamphylia in 5 7; consul towards the end of Nero's reign — gave him the authority to recommend a name to the Roman establishment. And those officers whose careers had been advanced by Corbulo before his execution in a.d. 66 now looked to him to protect their interests against their fellow- officers in the Rhine legions, who were being given swift promotion by Vitellius. Vespasian, like Mucianus, had loyally served Nero in his last years; he had had much military experience, and distinction; and he also had two adult sons, ensuring that there would be someone to succeed him. Between them the two legates commanded six legions, enough at least to challenge the rebellious Rhine armies. Vespasian was prepared to take the initiative. Despite initial disagreements of the kind only to be expected when Syria and its army had been divided between the two of them by Nero in the spring of 67, Mucianus was prepared to back him.
Vespasian's son Titus was instrumental in arranging Mucianus' support for his father. At the end of 68, he had left Palestine for Rome to submit himself as a candidate for the quaestorship; Galba had been his father's superior at Strasbourg in a.d. 41-3, when Titus had been a child, and Titus was certain that he would favour him. But at Corinth he heard both of Galba's assassination, and of Vitellius' proclamation, and decided to return to Palestine. Oracles and omens along the way confirmed him in the view that Vitellius should be resisted. When news of Otho's defeat reached them, Mucianus and Vespasian were in no doubt about their responsibility to restore legitimate government. They informed governors, imperial procurators and legionary legates throughout the empire of their intentions, and won the support of the network of client kings in the eastern Mediterranean. Minor military operations against the Jewish rebels in Palestine in June had left Vespasian in control of most of the province except Jerusalem and three other strongholds; most of the Judaean army was free for operations elsewhere.
By the time Vespasian was publicly proclaimed emperor, the Danube armies were already throwing off their allegiance to Vitellius. The process by which they were persuaded to support Vespasian rather than a more legitimate Galban successor is unclear. Personal animosities between officers played their part; in Moesia, discipline collapsed when the governor, Marcus Aponius Saturninus, tried to kill the legate of the Seventh
The first official formally to proclaim Vespasian was in fact the prefect of Egypt, Tiberius Iulius Alexander. Son of Alexander 'the Alabarch', a procurator of the younger Antonia, he was the nephew of the Jewish philosopher Philo, and his deceased brother had been the son-in-law of King Iulius (commonly but incorrectly 'Herod') Agrippa I. Not surprisingly, he had done well during the early years of Claudius; from a.d. 46 to 48 he was procuratorial governor of Judaea. After some quiet years probably to be explained by the primacy of Agrippina (when Vespasian, too, had been in disgrace) his experience and connexions throughout the eastern Mediterranean made him a suitable choice as an officer on Corbulo's staff in 63 (probably
In mid-July, Vespasian and Mucianus held a conference at Berytus (Beirut) to plan their campaign. Agrippa, and representatives of other eastern clients of the Julio-Claudians such as Antiochus of Commagene, also attended. The Judaean countryside had been pacified; the glory of conquering the centre of the rebellion, Jerusalem, could safely be left to Titus, supported by Alexander as his
What the plan decided upon at Berytus actually was cannot be known because by the time Mucianus reached the Balkans two months later, he found that the Danubian legions had already begun their own war against Vitellius under the command of Antonius Primus. To do that they had left the Danube frontier almost unprotected against the continuing Sarmatian pressure, and Mucianus was forced to turn north to repulse a serious invasion. Leaving his army behind, he hurried on after the Danube legions, to reach Italy in December. His haste suggests that Primus' advance into Italy at the beginning of September was by no means in accordance with the plans drawn up at Berytus. Tacitus says that Primus ignored Vespasian's written instructions to hold back at Aquileia. Vespasian and Mucianus were not pleased at Primus' victories, and he had to spend the rest of his days in peaceful retirement in his home town of Tolosa. On reaching northern Italy, Primus had shown where his loyalty lay: at Padua, he called for the busts of Galba to be restored. It is also remarkable that no coins bearing Vespasianic legends can be assigned to his army; serious objections have been raised to the view that a series of coins bearing Galba's portrait and referring to him as
From Vitellius' point of view, the immediate effect of Primus' action
11 On the so-called 'posthumous' coins of Galba, see Kraay 1956 (в 532).
was to cut Italy off from any further reinforcements from the British and Rhine armies. It also made it clear to some of Vitellius' own supporters that there was now no chance that he would be accepted as a legitimate emperor. In September, Caecina and Valens entered upon the suffect consulship which was their reward for their victory. In response to Primus' invasion, Caecina took the entire army north (the praetorians, including the best of the soldiers who had come from the Rhine, were left behind; so was Valens, who was ill). He left it at Bologna, and then went to Ravenna to discuss with the prefect of the Adriatic fleet, Sextus Caecilius Bassus, the best way of solving the crisis without bloodshed. (Bassus was disappointed with Vitellius because he had hoped for promotion to praetorian prefect.) Bassus had already been in touch with an imperial freedman, Hormus, acting for Vespasian.
While military and civilian officers were trying to avoid bloodshed, that was exactly what the armies were looking for. Primus' legions, stationed at Verona, rioted against the two provincial governors, and both Tampius Flavianus and Aponius Saturninus were expelled from the camp. Meanwhile at Bologna, Caecina tried to remove Vitellius' portraits, but could make no headway in persuading his legions to accept Vespasian as emperor. He fled to Bassus, who had brought his sailors over to the Flavians without difficulty. Two legionary tribunes, Fabius Fabullus and Cassius Longus, took over command of the Vitellian army until Valens was to arrive.
Primus saw that he should force a battle now, before Valens could restore the Vitellians' morale. He advanced on the strongly pro-Vitellian city of Cremona, forcing the Vitellians to try to reach it first. Battle was joined to the east of the city in the late afternoon of 24 October, and lasted through the night; ancient sources give the expected vivid accounts of the horrors of this 'Second Battle of Cremona'. There were said to be 50,000 dead, and worse than the actual battle was the destruction of Cremona by the victorious Flavians which followed; the fire, started by the Thirteenth Legion in revenge for the insulting way it had been forced to help build an amphitheatre for Valens' games after the first battle, was said to have lasted for four days.
Caecina's defection showed that Vitellius could no longer trust some of his own officers. The praetorian prefect, Publius Sabinus, had to be replaced before the major part of what remained of the Vitellian army, fourteen praetorian cohorts, moved north along the Via Flaminia in support of Valens, who no longer had an army. Meanwhile Cornelius Fuscus had occupied Rimini on behalf of the Flavians, and the Vitellian army fell back, ultimately taking up a position at Narnia, about 100 km north of Rome. Valens himself travelled through northern Italy to Gallia Narbonensis, hoping to raise another army on the Rhine; but Valerius
Paulinus, the procurator - who, like many of the imperial procurators of whom we know, gave immediate support to Vespasian's bid for the empire - arrested him and sent him to Primus, who had him executed.
Late in November, a centurion of the fleet at Misenum was instrumental in effecting the fleet's transfer of loyalty to Vespasian. But here Vitellius had some success: he sent his brother Lucius to Campania with a few praetorian cohorts, and on 18 December - during the Saturnalia - Lucius' troops managed to recapture Terracina from the marines. But Lucius' actions came too late to save his brother: the cohorts at Narnia had surrendered one or two days before.
Vitellius' failure to bring about a swift end to the civil war after the second battle of Cremona has been unfavourably compared to Otho's suicide after the first. His indecision may be explained as due to uncertainty as to the extent to which Primus and his army were actually acting in support of Vespasian. Throughout the autumn, Vespasian's brother, the urban prefect Flavius Sabinus, had been available as a mediator; Vitellius seems to have been guaranteed his life, and the opportunity to retire to Campania. But Sabinus, too, was unclear about whether Primus would accept his authority (Vespasian's twenty-year- old younger son Domitian was not prepared to leave Rome in the company of Primus' messengers). Only when Mucianus himself had reached northern Italy could Sabinus and Vitellius act publicly. But the soldiers from the Rhine legions whom Vitellius had promoted to his praetorian guard had too much to lose to accept his abdication. When a formal
While these negodations had been in progress, Primus was in no hurry to rescue Vespasian's relatives in Rome. Independent action was taken by a cavalry unit commanded by Petillius Cerialis, described as a close relative of Vespasian; he was almost certainly the husband of Vespasian's daughter Domitilla (now deceased). Cerialis' attempt to break through the Vitellian defences on the northern outskirts of Rome was repulsed, and in revenge Vitellius' soldiers turned against Sabinus. It appears that some of the Flavian supporters set fire to buildings on the slope of the Capitol in order to protect themselves: the fire spread and engulfed the principal temple of Rome. Several Flavian supporters were killed. Sabinus himself was captured and brought before Vitellius, whose attempts to save his life failed. Domiuan escaped in the garb of a priest of Isis, together with his cousin, Sabinus' son T. Flavius Clemens (consul in a.d. 95 as Domitian's colleague).[429]
When he heard of Cerialis' failure to enter Rome and of the destruction of the Capitol, Antonius Primus could no longer hold back his army. He may also have calculated that the death of Sabinus would enable him to present a candidate of his own choice to the Senate. Tacitus suggests that in the first days or weeks after the occupation of Rome, he tried and failed to persuade Licinius Crassus Scribonianus to become his own puppet emperor. As brother of the Piso adopted by Galba, and the Cn. Pompeius Magnus married to Claudius' daughter Antonia, Crassus had a stronger connexion with the household of Caesar than Vespasian. Primus entered the city on 20 December (possibly 21), and encountered considerable resistance. Vitellius attempted to flee the city - he may have heard of his brother's successes in Campania — but his praetorians would not let him go. He was discovered hiding in the deserted palace, dragged through the Forum by a mob of soldiers and civilians, and put to death.
Mucianus succeeded in reaching Rome within a few days of Primus, and acted swiftly to isolate him. Even before his arrival, Mucianus had sent written instructions to the Senate to ensure that it was Vespasian who was duly recognized as Caesar and Augustus, and that the people passed a law voting him all the legal powers that earlier emperors had had (one of the two bronze tablets bearing the text of this
Mucianus' next problem was to defuse the rivalry between Vespasian's two sons. Titus had won military glory as his father's legate in Judaea (he was to remain there for the prestige of destroying Jerusalem that summer). Domitian suspected that he would have little chance of surviving for long if his brother ever came to the throne. One option open to him was to win military glory himself by leading the Flavian legions north to deal with the remaining Vitellian units in Gaul, Britain and the Rhineland. Mucianus had already sent Petillius Cerialis to the Rhineland, and allowed Domitian to follow (thus removing him from Rome); later tradition had it that Domitian personally received the surrender of the Lingones, but he seems to have been prevented from seeing any fighting. Instead of seeking to rival the military glories of his brother Titus and brother-in-law Cerialis, Domitian dedicated himself to writing poetry, including epics recording the fighting on the Capitol and his achievements in Gaul.
The failure of the Rhine legions to accept Vespasian after Vitellius' death proved a major embarrassment to the Flavians, and to pro-Flavian historians. The events of a.d. 69/70 in the Rhineland had to be re-written in such a way as to avoid giving the impression that Vespasian had been supported by Batavians and (some) Gauls, while the citizen legions and (other) Gauls continued to constitute a 'Vitellian' force. In consequence, Tacitus'
The leaders of a number of Gallic tribes also remained loyal to the Vitellian cause. With the Flavians recognized at Rome and the arrival of Cerialis and Domitian in Gaul in the spring of 70, their resistance could be re-interpreted as a tribal uprising. But these men were as little Gallic nationalists as Vindex had been. Iulius Classicus had led the Vitellian advance as far as the Maritime Alps in early 69; the other leaders, Iulius Tutor and Iulius Sabinus, were 'Romans' to such an extent that Dillius Vocula's legions accepted their command after the disastrous retreat from Vetera. In the absence of any senator who might be put up as the Vitellians' candidate for the imperial office, Iulius Sabinus made a bid by claiming that his grandfather had been an illegitimate son of none other than Iulius Caesar himself. The 'Gallic Empire' (
It was the absence of a plausible leader that gave the legionaries no alternative but to accept Vespasian. Their last hope was to persuade Cerialis himself to take up their cause; he passed their offer to make him emperor back to Domitian. The Flavians took what measures they could to win the loyalty of these supporters of Vitellius. Four of the Rhine legions had to be disbanded
14 Civilis: Urban 1985 (c 406). Classicus' coins include the legends ADSERTOR LIBERTAT1S, LEGION XV PRIM and CONCORDIA: FIDES may be an appeal for continued loyalty to the Vitellian cause. Cf. Zehnacker 1987 (в 564). Tacitus' admission that the rebels were only 'separatists' in secret:
CHAPTER 7 THE IMPERIAL COURT
ANDREW WALLACE-HADRILL
I. INTRODUCTION
If the powers of Augustus and his successors were monarchical, the most important arena where those powers were exercised was the court. Both as an institution and as a word, the court was alien to the Republic.
The historical and biographical sources recognize the role of the Julio-Claudian court. Stories told about Vespasian's early career encapsulate assumptions about how court life worked. His success under Claudius was ascribed to the influence of the freedman Narcissus; he also had a mistress, Caenis, among the imperial freedwomen. His son, Titus, was brought up at court
See
283
learnt of his disgrace from one of the freedmen who controlled admissions
The work of the last generation of historians has represented a large step towards a better understanding of the early imperial court. Several major studies have extended our detailed knowledge of the freedmen personnel,[432] the equestrian
But in spite of these advances, the court remains partly veiled from our sight. Historiographically it leads a sort of twilight existence. This is true both of the ancient sources and modern scholarship. The difficulties that obstruct the historian were articulated by Cassius Dio: monarchical rule involved a retreat of political life and the decision-making process from open places (the Senate and Forum) into privacy. Dubious official announcements and hearsay represent the only access to what was going on.[435] Tacitus reacts to this problem by the tactic of irony.9 Rather than focus on the court on the basis of suspect information, he directs his attention to public places in the style of his republican predecessors: he thereby underlines not merely the political impotence of the Senate, but the impotence of the historian, who can only approach the true locus of power indirectly. The majority of our direct information about the workings of the Julio-Claudian court is anecdotal: this is true not only of the biographies of Suetonius, but of the numerous reminiscences of contemporaries, Seneca in his philosophical dialogues, the elder Pliny in his
Modern historians have reacted to the problem differently. Suspicious of anecdote, and disinclined to see history as made by feminine schemes and palace plots,[437] we have moved away from study of the Principate as a political system to study of administrative systems and hierarchies. The temptation has not always been resisted to substitute modern bureaucratic structures for the unfamiliar structures of a court society.12 The world of kings and courts is one of which the present age has lost sight, and it requires an effort of historical imagination to take its structures seriously.[438] In consequence, this chapter represents a sketch not only of what we have learnt, but of what we stand in danger of forgetting.[439] In discussing the nascent court of the Julio-Claudian period, it will be necessary to generalize more broadly about the function of the court in the structure of imperial power.
ii. access and ritual: court society
The court and its membership had no 'official' definition, for this was a social not a legal institution, private in its composition though public in its importance. The contrast with the Senate is significant: membership of that body was a legal status, only open to certain social categories, age groups, and one sex, and Augustus at an early stage took measures further to define eligibility and to formalize procedures and conduct of business.15 The court remained in its nature undefined: membership was constituted by proximity to the emperor, and only social ritual could distinguish degrees of proximity. At the negative extreme, the renouncement of
Nor was its location fixed:
Suetonius' emphasis on the modesty of Augustus' residence may create a false impression, engendered by the desire of a later age to idealize the simplicity of the past.24 Contemporary reactions in the poets, explicit in Propertius and Ovid, veiled in Virgil, register the overwhelming impression made by the novel complex of private house and public temple (Actian Apollo), portico (adorned with Danaids) and libraries.25 The tantalizing fragments that have emerged from recent archaeological
'8 Vitr.
Veyne 1976 (f 71) 682-5 perversely identifies the whole city of Rome as court.
Millar 1977 (a 59) 15-28.
Ov.
Wiseman 1987 (f 81).
Suet.
Esp. Prop. 11.31; Ov.
exploration give concrete documentation of the interweaving of public and private in the area of the temple of Apollo, approached from within Augustus' house by a series of ramps, which is more reminiscent of a hellenistic royal palace than a traditional Roman house.[440] This feature, dating back to 28 B.C., was extended in the course of the reign: in 12 в.с. the public cult of Vesta, symbolic hearthplace of the city, was incorporated within the private house of Augustus as
The Augustan development lacked unity; it was rather a string of separate households absorbed piecemeal, and this was still true of the palace as Josephus describes it at the time of Gaius' murder.[442] Nero's vast building activities, both before and after the great fire, imposed coherence for the first time, and eliminated the final traces of independent houses of the aristocracy on the Palatine, such as the house of the orator Crassus with its famous lotus trees, finally owned by Claudius' courtier Caecina Largus.[443] Even without taking into account Nero's extension of his Golden House onto the Esquiline, we may be struck, as were contemporaries, by the staggering extent of the palatial complex.[444]Covering some 10 hectares, it exceeded the palace of Attalus at Pergamum by a factor of 30, though indeed if the palaces of Alexandria or Antioch were preserved, they might have approached somewhat closer to the Roman scale. This vast development implies human activity on a corresponding scale. The so-called Aula Regia of Domitian's palace was preceded by an earlier and not much less impressive auditorium. A small indicator is provided by the lavatories which constitute one of the few fragments of Nero's rebuilding on the Palatine: with a capacity of over forty, they exceed the public lavatories attached to the
Rome was where the early emperors held court for serious business: Italian villas and the Bay of Naples, even in the case of Tiberius' last years, represented an escape from the pressure of people into relative
The composition and rituals of the imperial court were evolved from patterns current among the Roman upper classes at large.[446] Three groups can be broadly distinguished: family, servile household, and friends. The first two represent the 'insiders', the
Freedmen too, following Roman social custom, might be more or less loosely attached to their imperial patron's house: they might reside within the palace to perform daily services, but they might keep separate households of their own. Augustus used the houses of freedmen on the Palatine or elsewhere to escape from visitors or to watch the games, while the independent houses of Claudius' great freedmen like Posides and Callistus were among the wonders of the city.[447] What distinguishes both family and freedmen as 'insiders' is their relationship to the emperor, not their residential location. Fortune, whether through birth, marriage or the slave market, had placed them in a permanent proximity to the ruler to which no outsider had access. The imperial household, unlike that of the medieval or early modern king, opened no avenues to the talent and ambition of the subject: the element of sheer chance behind the making of a potent freedman was epitomized by Epictetus in the figure of Felicio, the cobbler slave who by an exchange of hands emerged as an imperial functionary, to the confusion of his old master.[448] To start with, the
The court is not simply the ruler's household, but the household operating as an interface with the society over which he rules. The distribution of power in monarchical society is likely to correspond to the distribution of access to the ruler. In the hellenistic kingdoms there was marked conflict between the status systems of the court and of the cities. The royal
The similarity has often been remarked between these hellenistic
The social rituals which channelled access, notably the morning
Other institutions taken directly from the republican nobility include the appointment of
Perhaps the most striking feature of the anecdotal descriptions of imperial admissions and receptions is the predominance of senators and members of the upper stratum of the equestrian order. There was evidently widespread attendance at salutations by members of the senatorial order (including their wives and children); not until a.d. i 2 in the infirmity of old age did Augustus ask the Senate to be excused his normal practice of greedng them all at his home.47 As a rule they enjoyed precedence. Senators were greeted with a kiss - a hellenistic custom indeed, but one already current among the elite in Cicero's day.48 Nero is said to have denied the kiss to all senators on his return from Greece: this was a powerful mark of imperial displeasure, not an attempt to reverse the assumption that senators were entitled to this mark of intimacy.49 A vivid reflection of the social ties which interconnected the upper orders and linked them to the emperor is the elder Pliny's report of the outbreak of a facial disease in Tiberius' reign.50 Pliny remarks on the way this epidemic was restricted in its incidence both geographically to Rome and socially to the upper orders
Accounts of imperial dinners repeatedly feature senators and equites.52 Even if Gaius was tickled by the macabre thought that he could execute both consuls at will, they were reclining next to him in the positions of honour when the thought arose.53 Conversely there is a dearth of anecdotes illustrating the entertainment of the socially humble, or complaining of their access to the imperial table. Augustus is said only once to have admitted a freedman (not his own) to his table.54 His successors were not necessarily so strict; but there is no sign of imperial freedmen jostling for places with the
47 Dio lvi.26.2—j* 48 Cic.
49 Suet.
51 Alfoldi 1934 (d i), 4off; Sen.
и Friedlander 1922 (a 30) 1. 98-103: Turcan 1987 (d 20) 2}7ff; cf. D'Arms 1984 (f 23).
51 Suet.
54 Suet.
intimate moments, 'when he was playing ball, taking exercise, at his bath and at his breakfast, and retiring at night'.55 But as far as social life was concerned, the early emperors behaved as members of their own social class, greeting, entertaining, and on occasion reciprocating offices by accepting hospitality and attending functions.[460]
Senators and
Because integrated into the social and cultural life of the Roman upper class, the court not only served to reflect existing norms but dictated the tone of society.[461] The emperor was seen as a model eagerly imitated by others. The hothouse atmosphere of the court helped to disseminate tastes and fashions as well as facial disorders. Fashions in hairstyles or the decoration of houses throughout the empire closely and rapidly respond to models set by the court in Rome, and art history points to the deep penetration of the lives of Romans by the stylistic and moral values of the imperial circle.[462]
The role of the court in shaping fashion was aided by its use as a place for the upbringing of the children of favoured courtiers (as well as the children of foreign and barbarian kings). In hellenistic courts, the pages or
Looking back from the complacent respectability of the Flavian and Antonine eras, our historical sources regard the
This display contained the seeds of its own destruction. Their very magnificence, as Tacitus observes, was the ruin of the great houses, and Nero, who outstripped all competition with the sumptuousness of his Golden House and the wasteful dinners when guests were drenched in perfume from the ceiling, was surely aware of the political advantages of ruining his rivals financially with the aid of his unique access to the wealth of empire.64 But Nero in turn was ruined by employment of this technique, both financially and, more damagingly, morally. The acceleration in extravagance of his reign produced a revulsion of taste within the court circle itself, among men from municipal and provincial backgrounds who perceived the implications of the way of life into which they found themselves sucked.[464] The tone of the Flavian court, for which the elder Pliny acts as spokesman, was palpably different.
Just as the court had a decisive impact on the culture and morality of Roman society at large, it is likely to have played a central role in the formation of opinion. It is frequently stated that the outlook of our sources is 'senatorial'. In some ways this is undeniable. Republican historiography had been dominated by senators, and imperial historians were conscious inheritors of the republican tradition. Respect for the upper classes in general and for the Senate in particular is one of the criteria on which emperors are most consistently praised or condemned. Social contacts within the relatively small group of senators could have been close, and doubtless many of them saw eye to eye on many issues. But what cannot be demonstrated is that such a 'senatorial' viewpoint is at variance with an alternative viewpoint, and that things looked rather differently from the perspective of the Palace.
It is notable that two of our major sources for the Julio-Claudian period, the elder Pliny and Suetonius, were men of equestrian rank who held posts in the service of the emperor. Their judgments of individual emperors and their underlying ideals do not appear to differ significantly from those of the senatorial Tacitus; on the other hand, both can be taken to reflect the views of the courts at which they served, Pliny in his loyalty to the Flavians and their puritanical morality, Suetonius in his implicit acceptance of the ideals of the 'golden age' of Trajan and Hadrian.66 Other non-senatorial sources follow the same pattern. Josephus' blackening of Gaius, though in line with senatorial opinion, was determined by his own Jewish sensibilities, and was evidently quite acceptable to his Flavian patrons. Epictetus' reminiscences of court life are based on his experience as slave of Epaphroditus; though his master was close to Nero, he fully shares the 'senatorial' view of Nero as a tyrant.67
Without suggesting that the court always had a homogeneous point of view (there could be deep internal conflicts, as under Nero), it is not hard to imagine that it may have acted as a focus for discussion, gossip, and eventual opinion formation. Gossip it generated in abundance, and courtiers at all levels might be the source of anecdotes, from Augustus' attendant Julius Marathus who could describe his physique, and the
Behind trivial gossip lies concealed the serious purpose of the
64 Wallace-Hadrill 1983 (в 190) 998; Gascou 1984 (в 59) 71 iff; Lambrecht 1984 (в 103).
Rajak 1983 (в 147) i8jf on Josephus; Millar 1965 (d 14) on Epictetus.
Suet.
Suet.
exchange of observations and impressions by those in the imperial entourage. Court life, as Saint Simon appreciated, is a watching game. It could be vital to second-guess the imperial mind, to see who was rising in favour and who falling, and what changes were in the wind, for on such observations, as Sejanus' facdon discovered to their cost, fortune and even life depended. Tacitus' descripdon of the dinner at which Britannicus was poisoned suggests something of the sense of urgency of the game, and of the simultaneous need to see into the minds of others while concealing one's own: 'those sitting nearby were thrown into confusion; the imprudent fled, but those with deeper understanding remained rooted to the spot and watched Nero'.70
Assessments of individual emperors and their characters are surprisingly constant in the different sources, and it was once the fashion of source-criticism to posit a single source from whose initial assessment of an emperor all successive accounts derived. This perhaps underestimates the potential of the social circles around the court, the
In social terms, then, the Julio-Claudian emperors, whatever the political strains they may have experienced with the Senate, and however much power they may have allowed to their freedmen, drew their friends and companions from the upper class, afforded them easy access, failed to elaborate rituals that set themselves apart, and were bonded to them by the integrating force of common culture. Rather than regarding the court as an institution apart, we might think of it as the centre of a sort of solar system. Numerous houses of the rich and powerful in the city of Rome acted as lesser courts, centres of influence round which social activity clustered, to which visitors and clients thronged in the morning, and where sophisticated entertainment was provided later in the day. The palace was both similar to them and yet outshone them, the centre round which they themselves revolved, and from which ultimately they derived their own radiance.
iii patronage, power and government
The social rituals of a court may act as a fafade to screen the realities of power. The endlessly elaborate etiquette and ceremonial of the French court of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries partly served to mask the diversion of power from the old nobility by substituting the fafade of social precedence for the realities of control.[467] The 'civility' for which 'good' emperors are praised by the sources has also been seen as a charade designed to screen the unpalatable truth of imperial power. The disjunction between appearance and reality has been greatly exaggerated. For while emperors undoubtedly used the court to control and limit the power of the upper classes, they also used it to strengthen their own power by embedding it within the existing social structure. The relationship of emperor and upper classes is thus complex and ambivalent.[468]
What drew men to court was more than social life. The court was the font of power and favour - and so the scene of anxieties and humiliations. Men love or hate Caesar, according to Epictetus, only because of his power to confer and take away advantages, wealth, military rank, praetorships or consulships.75 The court inspires fear, not just of bodyguards and chamberlains and the like, but because of anxiety to secure the benefits Caesar distributes, governorships, procuratorships, praetorships, consulships, money; the courtiers behave like children fighting in their scramble to gather the scattered figs and nuts.76 The lure of court is irresistible: the returning exile who swore to live in peace could not resist the invitation to court, and found himself praetorian prefect.77 Yet was success worth the humiliations involved? The rising early, the running around, the kissing hands, rotting at others' doors, speaking and acting like a slave, sending gifts?78
From the first, emperors derived power from their ability to distribute resources. Claudius had shown, according to Seneca, how much more effectively imperial power was secured by favours (
The network emerged rapidly. One aspect is the swift evolution of a ramifying secretariat of slaves and freedmen. Over 4,000 inscriptions, mostly sepulchral, attest the sheer scale of the imperial secretariat over the course of the Empire.82 The shape of imperial business dictated the division and organization of labour, and it is significant that the lines along which it divided were not areas of government but the channels of communication between subject and ruler. The letters, petitions, embassies and legal hearings which brought contact with the emperor generated the Palatine 'offices' of
In some respects, the
80 Millar 1977 (a 59)
82 Weaver 1972 (d 22) 8. 83 Millar 1977 (a 59) 20з(Г. м Boulvert 1970 (d 6) 5jff.
»5 Suet.
Tac.
Weaver 1972 (d 22) 227ff; Boulvert 1974(07) 127ff on grades is too schematic, cf. Burton 1977 (D 8).
partially analogous to the
But in analysing the functions and powers of the
The range of posts within and without the Palace reflected the diversity of its activities, from distribution of resources and judgment to feasting and entertainment. Certainly the appointment of equestrians to the major secretarial posts which Vitellius initiated shows their development under the Julio-Claudians to a conspicuous role in public life; yet equestrians had been employed before this in the imperial household in less 'political' functions, like Pompeius Macer as
In trying to understand the power of the imperial freedman, then, it is not enough to say that the early emperors turned their household into a new arm of government (though this is clearly the case). The power of the freedman derived from his proximity to the emperor and his consequent ability to influence specific aspects of resource-distribution. The word even of a court-jester might cost a man his life.[472] Claudius' prepotent freedmen, who included Posides the eunuch and Harpocras as well as the 'heads of bureaux', owed their power to their master's combination of an insatiable appetite to bestow favours and judgment with an inability to control the detail of so many transactions. The mistresses of emperors, as of many later kings, were in an ideal position to extract favours, as Vespasian's Caenis, with her long experience of the court, well understood.[473] That the elite resented the wealth and influence which flowed from such brokerage is not surprising, not because the use of political position to amass
The reign of Augustus was one of transition from the pluralist patronage system of the Republic, whereby the nobility competed with each other to maximize their following and thus their influence with the
From the first, then, the elite looked to the emperor for favours, and their attendance at court was motivated by pursuit of favours. The court thus played a vital role in consolidating imperial power within the context of imperial society." First, it enabled the ruler to control the elite. In order to pursue power it was necessary to come to Rome and enter the intrigue of the court. That firmly established Rome as the arena of political conflict and discouraged the emergence of alternative regional power bases. The 'big men' of the empire were under the immediate eye of the emperor. He could manipulate their ambition by playing them off against each other, using his control of the distribution of resources to keep them on tenterhooks, withholding favours and elevating new favourites if the influence of old favourites threatened to become entrenched. Secondly, he could through the elite exercise a progressively wider control throughout the empire. The elite, senatorial and equestrian, was drawn from the municipalities of Italy and, in this period, increasingly the western provinces. Those at court acted as brokers for their contacts at home, securing benefits for them and drawing further compatriots into the circle of power at Rome — a marked example of this process is the rise of Spaniards in various posts in the administration during the Corduban Seneca's period of influence with Nero.100
Within the broad circle of the hopeful and ambitious who attended the court, there was an inner circle of
" Cf. Elias,
Juv.
Crook 1955 (d 10) 8-20; i04ff.
sensitive issues, than others, and these could be seen as
The accessibility of the emperor to the elite thus worked to their mutual advantage. Individual members of the elite had access to power and influence; the emperor was able to reduce the elite to dependence on himself. That does not mean that the court operated smoothly and without tension. On the contrary, it was a battleground — much more so than the Senate, where the only real battles were trials. In the Julio- Claudian period the battle was particularly bloody, for while the system was still emergent, major tensions were unresolved. The sharpness of the conflict is reflected in the bitterness of the accounts given by the sources, for instance the power of the praetorian prefect Sejanus under Tiberius, or that of the freedmen Pallas and Narcissus under Claudius. Two areas of tension are apparent: that within the senatorial-equestrian elite, and that between the elite and members of the inner imperial household, especially the freedmen officials.
Because of the obvious contrast between the monarchical nature of the court and the republican nature of the Senate, it is tempting to envisage a permanent tension between senators as a group and non- senators, whether
But it is wrong to represent the senators as a coherent group, either socially or politically. They were as much creatures of the court as the imperial freedmen. Patronage cut across status barriers: senators enlisted the support of
The heyday of the power of freedmen coincides with a period of intrigue and influence among the female members of the imperial household. Wives and freedmen have it in common that they are 'insiders' and therefore stand apart from the 'outsider' elite. In no sense were freedmen in compedtion with members of the elite: they were not eligible for army rank nor senatorial positions (even if they could be awarded military and senatorial decorations); they did not function as
The women of the Julio-Claudian household were openly involved in the opieradon of patronage. We hear casually of Livia's role in promodng Galba and the grandfather of the emperor Otho.108 An inscription shows her openly acknowledged by Augustus for her role in securing privileges for the island of Samos.109 Networks of friendship extended from the palace among the women of the Roman elite. Seneca (who owed the start of his career to his aunt Helvia, and its furtherance to Agrippina) takes for granted that Marcia, as an indmate of Livia, used her influence to secure a priesthood for her own son.110 Messallina abused her position not by exercising but by selling patronage: together with Claudius' freedmen, she sold the cidzenship so liberally that it was said to be had in exchange for glass beads, and not only the citizenship, nor even military commands and provincial governorships, but everything in general.111 Her presence at the trial
Female involvement in patronage was not simply a side product of the system. From Augustus to Nero the imperial court is characterized by sharp intrigue that periodically surfaces in the eruption of major conflicts between competing groups; in almost all these conflicts, the women play a central role. The court of Louis XIV was analysed by pardcipants as split between cabals that clustered round various members of the royal family; any distinctions of political or religious principle that could be detected between the cabals were of secondary significance.113 A similar analysis seems to .apply to the Julio-Claudian court. The power groupings are heterogeneous in composition: female members of the
The aim of a cabal is to maximize its own influence in the distribution of resources. Naturally groupings tend to form around potential candidates for the succession: there are already hints of rival groups round Octavia and her son Marcellus on one side, Agrippa, Livia and her sons on the other early in Augustus' reign,115 clear signs of rival groups round Julia, Livia and their respective sons later,116 and under Tiberius explicit feuding between the supporters of Agrippina and those of Sejanus, adulterously linked to Livilla.117 It should not be assumed that such cabals formed with explicit designs on the throne: the mere existence of a potential successor is enough to constitute a catalyst for intrigue, and much of the policy of intermarriage and interadoption,
109 Reynolds 1982 (в 270) no. 13 line 5, cf. Suet.
111 Dio lx.17.3-8. 112 Tac.
1,5 See E. Le Roy Ladurie 'Versailles observed: the court of Louis XIV in 1709' (in
114 Suet.
Syme 1984 (a 94) hi. 912-36. 117 Levick 1976 (c 366) i48fF.
particularly as practised by Augustus, must have been designed (however ineffectively) to frustrate the formation of rival cabals. The marriage of Tiberius to lulia, for instance, though it did little to clarify the line of succession to power, must have aimed to obviate precisely the sort of tensions and rivalries that erupted with such unfortunate consequences.
A characteristic of conflict between rival groupings is that they come to a head in accusations of adultery - against the two Iulias, Livilla and Sejanus, the sisters of Gaius, Messallina, and Nero's betrothed Octavia. The charge of adultery is often regarded as a sham to disguise political realities; indeed the strings of 'accomplices' of the adultery of the Iulias indicate that no ordinary adultery is involved.118 But we should not underestimate the threat posed to stability within the court by adulterous liaisons (nor overestimate the innocence of the accused). Since marriage was used as an official instrument of dynastic policy, to mark succession and to unify potentially divergent groups, adultery represented the inverse, the dark underside of intrigue and group formation out of the emperor's control. Sejanus' adultery was seen as a vital step in his rise to influence and his establishment of a stranglehold over the network of patronage. Of course, some accusations of adultery were false, and could be cooked up by rival interests to discredit the accused (Livia must be suspect on this count). But, as with accusations of magic, which was the inverse of the divine protection behind imperial power, the charge reflected a threat to imperial power which the participants felt to be real.
Finally, we should not exaggerate the rigidity of such cabals. Their membership was unstable and fluid. Loyalties and friendships could evaporate in a moment (it was the misfortune of Sejanus' supporters that they had no warning of his fall). Courtiers watched carefully to see whose stock was rising with the emperor, whose falling. 'Nothing in human affairs is so unstable and fluid as the reputation of power': Agrippina's crowded threshold was deserted in an instant when the whisper circulated of her son Nero's displeasure.119 Epictetus compares court life to the lot of a traveller who attaches himself to the convoy of a passing official for protection from bandits; the friendship of Caesar is an equally undependable method of progress, hard to pick up, easy to be lost, and limited by the life chances of the Caesar himself.120 The point applies similarly to friendship with Caesar's friends. Moreover, the groupings were fissile, potentially divided into further groupings. Messallina was overthrown by a combination of her old supporters, Narcissus and Vitellius; during the crisis, Narcissus did not feel sure even of Vitellius and had him excluded from the imperial Utter.121 Though supported in the overthrow by Pallas, Narcissus was ruined by the combination of
118 Tac.
120 Epictetus,
Pallas and Agrippina, having unwisely shown too much interest in Britannicus. Agrippina was abandoned by her proteges Seneca and Burrus. Such cases serve as warning against any attempt to detect long- term political groupings and alliances.
With new patterns of politics, the court generated new styles of life peculiar to itself. Even survival, let alone success, was fraught with dangers. Seneca reports the reply of the old courtier asked with amazement how he had reached old age at court: 'by accepting insults and expressing gratitude for them'.[478] Flattery and the concealment of true feelings were a structural necessity. Seneca goes on to tell the tale of the distinguished
Hypocrisy and flattery stood in direct antithesis to the
In this context of instability and psychological strain, philosophy had an important role to play. Stoicism, with its stress on the value of single- minded pursuit of public duty and virtues irrespective of the dangers, offered a vital antidote to the hypocrisy of court life.125 It is no coincidence that Stoicism flourished, in martyrs like Thrasea Paetus, when the excesses of Nero's court were at their peak. The philosophy of both Seneca and Epictetus emerges from men with a court background and offers explicit reaction against court morality. In the long run the Stoics carried their point, and the tone did change. Yet a century later, the Stoic emperor Marcus still needs his philosophy as antidote to court life, its vain pomp and superficiality, its transitory quarrels and ambitions, and the sheer irritation of working with the pettiness of his courtiers.126
IV. CONCLUSION
The court, as social and political insdtution, lies at the heart of the new regime established by Augustus and his heirs. It also encapsulates the paradoxes of that regime, and the way it transformed the structures of the old city-state to create those of the new monarchy. The household of a private citizen, based on the forms and practices of the households of the republican nobility, became the centre of the state; the focus of political activity shifted irrevocably from a plurality of households to a single one, sprawling monstrously over the symbolical heart of Rome. In drawing to itself the threads of patronage, the court brought the transactions of political dealing under imperial surveillance.
The similarities to the royal courts of the East were only too apparent to participants. Court life brought servility in the place of the freedom of a society of citizen equals. The tone of public discourse changed, from bold self-advertisement and uninhibited attack on rivals, to self-concealment and lip-service to the source of power. And yet the transition from city-state to monarchy was a hesitant and gradual one, and the reuse of old forms was essential. The Julio-Claudian court preserved the social hierarchy of the Republic, while yet seeming to undermine it and subject senators to slaves. The early emperors needed to exercise power with, not against, the traditional ruling class. They used republican forms to establish their own dominance while appearing to respect their fellow- citizens. The rituals of court allowed them at one level to use the republican status hierarchy to legitimate their own position, while at another playing off the aristocracy against new men promoted from the provinces and against
Between Augustus and Nero the patterns of court life were developing, and still far from fixed. But there is an unmistakable movement towards formalization and institutionalization. The differentiation of the secretariat and the evolution of its internal hierarchy is one tangible
124 Cf. Brunt 1974 (в 19).
example of this. It is also right to emphasize the element of continuity.127 When we ask what made possible the stability of the government evolved by Augustus, which despite its extraordinary lack of legal definition and its reliance on Augustus' own charismatic personality, nevertheless managed to survive the eccentricities of four members of his own house and a return to civil war, to become the system without which peace was unthinkable, the answer must He partly in the imperial court. Despite notable instances of the fall of political favourites, like Sejanus or Seneca, there was an underlying condnuity of personnel. The Flavians were served by many with long experience of power in the Julio-Claudian court. The anonymous father of Claudius Etruscus, who served as freedman of every Caesar from Tiberius to Domitian to die in his ninetieth year excited Statius' admiration by surviving so many changes of yoke and so many stormy seas.128 But though few could rival him in longevity, imperial slaves and freedmen, originally personal to Augustus, came to transfer automatically to the new regime, giving rise to a stability of staff.
The same continuity can be observed at higher social levels. It is striking what long and intimate links each of Nero's successors display with the Julio-Claudian court. Galba started as a favourite of Livia, and served successive emperors, being especially favoured by Claudius who admitted him to his
Good friends, Trajan is supposed to have said, compensated for
Crook 1955 (d 10) 29, 11 j fF etc.
Stat.
Suet.
132 Crook 19j5 (d 10) i)9f; for the consulate of Nerva's father, AE 1979, 100.
Domitian's bad rule.133 But emperors inevitably took over their predecessors' friends and servants, good or bad, since these made themselves indispensable. Vested interests were at stake. Augustus and his successors needed a court in order to rule; but if imperial rule came under question, the court needed its emperor. Thus, despite its conflicts and distasteful features, the court was a system of power which tended to its own perpetuation.
133 SHA
CHAPTER 8 THE IMPERIAL FINANCES
D. W. RATHBONE
The economic resources at the disposal of the emperors from Augustus to Vitellius and the uses which they made of them are most clearly explained against the background of the state expenditure of the Roman empire.1
The empire required an army, and under Aifgustus a standing army was developed, of which the size and terms of service of the legionary component remained broadly stable throughout this period, although the nature of the auxiliary component took much longer to crystallize.2 Annual pay for a legionary was 900 sesterces, while cavalrymen, higher ranks and the praetorian guard received considerably more. There were stoppages against this pay for replacement equipment and clothing and almost certainly for food. On discharge a surviving legionary in theory received a bounty of 12,000 sesterces - equivalent to over twelve years' basic pay, and so a third of a surviving veteran's total remuneration - but he may often have been given a plot of land in a frontier zone instead or in part payment. The conversion of auxiliary forces, traditionally supplied
1 General treatments: Frank 1940 (d i 28) v. chs. I—II; Neesen 1980 (d 151); Lo Cascio 1986 (d 145); Noe 1987 (d 152). г See below, ch. 11.
309
The total annual cost of the imperial armed forces cannot be computed with accuracy because of the mass of variable and unknown factors. Most modern estimates of the average annual wage bill before Domitian's pay-rise would put it, if we include discharge bounties, at 400 million sesterces, at least.[480] Even if not fallacious, such estimates are misleading. Because of the system of deductions at source from pay, much of the theoretical wage bill was probably never paid in cash. On the other hand, the total bill will have increased steadily as the number of auxiliary units grew and their remuneration was regularized. Actual cash expenditure also swelled when campaigns were mounted, probably mainly to mobilize extra supplies — the slave
The empire required administration, mostly in the spheres of finance and law and order. Salaried officials were few - the senatorial governors and legates and the slowly growing number of equestrian procurators - but their salaries were substantial, perhaps totalling over 50 million sesterces per annum, and presumably were paid in cash; revenues were also skimmed off by the increasingly numerous and permanent clerical staff in their offices.[482] However, many of the costs of administration were hidden. The emperor, senators and town councillors throughout the empire were meant to perform public functions at their own private expense, an obligation which helped to justify and to reinforce their economic dominance.[483] As subordinates they would also use their own dependants - which was initially the position of the
The empire had no economic or social programmes, but it still incurred massive expenditure on public buildings and roads, on the rituals of civic life such as sacrifices, games and banquets, on rewards to artists, athletes and educators, on minting coinage, and on ensuring a reasonably regular supply of staple foodstuffs to its urban populations, in short on producing and maintaining what we recognize as Roman civilization. In the provinces and Italy this expenditure normally fell on the local aristocracy, who were mostly, in this period, not unwilling to bear it in return for the prestige and power which it conferred. In Rome itself, though senatorial commissions to supervise public buildings and facilides had been instituted by Augustus, who had also revived the priestly colleges, a
Beyond this state munificence which was arguably necessary there was the
The cost of all this munificence, both necessary and spontaneous, is impossible to compute. More important is its size in relation to military expenditure. Under Claudius, for example, the draining of the Fucine lake over eleven years is said to have employed 30,000 men (though perhaps 30,000 was the aggregate total of man-days), and the estimated costs of the new port at Ostia were expected to kill off his enthusiasm for the project. There were other imperial building projects in Rome, lavish
8 Eck 1984(0 39). ' Bourne 1946(0 11 j); Corbier 1985 (o 124); Mitchell 1987(0 150).
"> Kloft 1970 (d 138). 11
shows and several handouts. The freedmen Pallas and Narcissus between them allegedly accumulated a sum equal to one and a half years' military budget.[484] It is likely that Claudius spent in and around Rome - and necessarily in actual coin - as much each year as the army in theory cost him, and in practice much military expenditure was notional since it was covered by supplies in kind. If we allow also for civil expenditure outside Rome and its environs, it is likely that the army, even if it was the single largest regular item in the imperial budget, in this period accounted on average for less than half of all imperial spending. The claims in later Roman writers that the reason for taxation was the need to pay for the armies which guaranteed peace have a propagandist whiff about them.
To meet this varied expenditure the state had a correspondingly varied range of assets and incomes. As heir to the ideology of the Greek city-state, the Roman government did not subject its own citizens, wherever they resided, to regular direct taxation on the person, and did not tax its own 'citizen land' (i.e. that held
In the early Principate different direct taxes, assessed on different bases and according to different rates, continued to be levied from province to province. Republican modes of thinking and terms persisted: the fiscal value of a province was estimated as an annual cash sum, the word
The collection of direct taxes was now mostly devolved to the theoretically autonomous cities and tribes of the empire, each of which was meant to produce a fixed annual sum of direct tax assessed in cash terms. The elimination of tithes and of their collection by Roman
Although the total tax dues of provinces and communities were usually expressed in terms of a lump cash sum, direct taxes on land were often assessed and collected in kind, mainly wheat, rather than cash. (Peasants presumably often paid local collectors in kind, and the collectors sold the produce and made the payments to the government in
Neesen 1980(0 151)25-9, 117-20.
Brum 1990 (d 119); Jones 1974(0 157) 164-8, 180-3; Cimma '981 (D I21)'
cash, but this is a different matter.) The early evidence from Egypt and Britain for
Many indirect taxes, called
The collection of imperial indirect taxes continued in the early Principate as in the Republic to be farmed out to
" Tac
General: de Laet 1949 (d 140); Neesen 1980 (0151)156-41; see n. 18 above. Cases of Asia and Egypt: Engelmann and Knibbe 1989 (в 229); Sijpesteijn 1987 (e 965); Wallace 1938 (e 979).
Dio Lx.10.3; Corbier 1974 (d 122); Millar 1964 (d 149); see nn. 18 and 20 above.
Principate were indirect. Other advantages were that they produced a fairly immediate cash revenue, which in several cases was actually paid over in Rome, and that Roman citizens, perhaps with the excepdon of veterans, were not exempt. Indeed, if we except the landholdings of Roman citizens in territories not exempt from
The state also had fixed assets consisting principally of land, urban properties and mines. In theory all
The possessions of the emperor himself, his
The basis of the
22 Millar 1977 (a 59) ch. IV and Apps. 1-3; Rogers 1947 (d 154); Crawford 1976 (d 125); Parassoglou 1978 (e 9)6); Rathbone 1993 (e 962). и Bellen 1974 (d 112).
that is by senatorial standards; the comment implies significant growth by the end of the century. Emperors were also from the beginning massive landowners in the provinces. Augustus' acquisition of substantial estates in Egypt (known locally as
These, in outline, were the resources available to the imperial government to meet its expenditure. The last topic which must be added before the management of the imperial finances can be discussed is the imperial coinage and its production.[488] The coinage of Rome as stabilized by Augustus in or by 19 B.C. was trimetallic, consisting of almost pure gold and silver coins and a range of what is for convenience termed 'bronze' (or
The various denominations in the Augustan-Neronian system were minted in varying quantities, often discontinuously, from two main and some minor mints. The mint at Lyons (Lugdunum) produced almost all the imperial gold and silver coinage from 15 b.c. onwards until Nero (or possibly Gaius) transferred production to the mint at Rome. From 23 or 19 b.c. the Roman mint produced most of the imperial 'bronze' coinage, but in most reigns there were sporadic and sometimes heavy regional issues of imperial type from provincial mints. Output of mainstream imperial coin was supplemented by the issue of silver tetradrachms, didrachms and drachmas by the mints of a number of Greek cities, notably Ephesus, Pergamum, Caesarea (in Cappadocia) and (Syrian) Antioch. These and other city-mints also produced sporadic issues, occasionally quite large, of bronze fractions. Egypt had its own internal coinage based on the Alexandrian tetradrachm. In the west local mints had always been rare. Most were in Spain, they produced only bronze coin, and those which survived Tiberius were shut down by Gaius. The broad pattern of supply of coinage in the period as a whole is thus that the mints at Rome and Lyons produced gold coins for the whole empire and silver and bronze for all the western provinces; western silver coins also reached the East but were outnumbered by the regional producuons there, and the eastern provinces were almost wholly dependent on very locally produced bronze coinage.
Minting was essentially controlled by the emperor. Most of the bullion used must have come from sources under imperial control — an early example is the exaction of bullion in Gaul by Augustus' freedman
3i8
8. the imperial finances
Detailed quantification of coin production in the early Empire must await systematic study of the number of dies used for each issue, although even this will leave considerable uncertainty about the scale of issues.30 Compared to earlier and later eras the surviving gold and silver coinage of this period is relatively rare; significant quantities of the heavier republican denarii condnued to find their way into hoards through to the end of the first century a.d. Augustus had to mint extensively to establish his new system of bronze coinage, but there was a drastic fall in producdon later: Tiberius and Gaius, for example, closed the western provincial mints, and no imperial bronze was struck in the first ten years of Nero's reign. There is no evidence for regular recall and re-minting of old coins (which would have been very expensive). Old coins collected by the state were simply re-issued. The main sources of metal for minting new coins were bullion acquired through taxadon orconfiscation and above all the mines which had rapidly fallen under imperial control. It is therefore very likely that the overall stock of coinage in the early Empire was constantly if gradually increasing.
The rationale underlying this pattern of minting is a controversial topic.31 It is likely that the imperial government recognized some political responsibility, incurred through its near monopoly of minting, to maintain in circulation an adequate supply of the full range of denominations. The rare but heavy issues of small denominations, however, must be taken as one-off responses to particularly noticeable shortages and thus as indicators of a lack of any forward planning. The famous 'crisis of liquidity' at Rome in a.d. 33 tells the same story for the higher denominations.32 Clearly there can have been no government statistics for the volume of coinage in circulation, for any lump of gold or silver, including coins of the Roman Republic and of the hellenistic kings, could be used for exchange, while imperial gold and silver coins could be hoarded or melted down as bullion. These considerations undercut modern theories that changes in the rate of output and in the weight and purity of the imperial coinage represent attempts to keep it in tune with the changing market values of the uncoined metals; it is more plausible that the 'bronze' was a largely token coinage from the start, and that the denarius was deliberately overvalued in relation to the
State income and expenditure in cash in the Roman empire is best visualized not as a massive annual ebb and flow of coin between the provinces and Rome, but as a series of provincial whirlpools, some of them spilling over into others and all being sporadically topped up from the imperial mints at Rome and elsewhere. The whole system functioned
For example Crawford 1970 (d i 26); Lo Cascio 1981 (d 144); Howgego 1992 (d i }s).
Rodewald 1976 (в 548) ch. 1. 33 Bolin 19)8 (o 11 3) ch. 4; Lo Cascio 1980(0 143).
}20
8. the imperial finances
largely under its own momentum with little direct intervention from the central government. It seems that, following republican practice, each province had a 'fiscus' (literally 'basket', sc. for holding coins), a sort of branch office of the main state treasury
In republican Rome the central state treasury, to which all state revenues were in theory due and from which expenditure was made — though in practice many transactions were handled entirely by the provincial fisci — was the
Admittedly the nature and origins of this imperial fiscus have been keenly disputed.[493] A common view is that a new imperial treasury called the fiscus, separate from the
The
In some respects Augustus had behaved in the tradition of late republican commanders, notably Pompey. There had not, therefore, been any formal division of responsibility, and in theory the
31 Suet.
39 For example, the case of Claudius: Suet.
offered any account of the imperial revenues and expenditure to the Senate. Instead of the emperor's agents reporting to the
The stability of Roman taxation at a level which, if it hurt individual peasants, was low for each community as a whole is often used to help explain the acceptance and support of Roman rule by the upper classes of the provinces.40 But the proposition should perhaps be reversed: the Romans were so dependent on this local co-operation that to avoid the risk of disaffection they rarely dared to increase provincial taxation, and its level constrained rather than was determined by imperial expenditure. In the Julio-Claudian period expenditure on the army must have increased gradually as auxiliary forces were turned into regular units. Total state revenues, however, will also have increased as new areas were converted into provinces subject to direct Roman taxadon. The evidence suggests that, outside Egypt, censuses were not regular and neutral operations but occasional deliberate attempts to increase the tribute assessments of individual provinces; if so, it would appear that as Gaul developed economically, its tribute was increased.41 Similar increases probably occurred in other relatively new and underdeveloped provinces as, for instance, in Moesia under Nero through the settlement of Transdanubians.42 In the Principate, however, only Vespasian is credited — and dubiously so — with widespread increases of tribute, examples of imperial caution about the general level of provincial taxation are numerous, and individual communities could petidon for reductions in their tribute assessment and doubtless frequently did so, somedmes with success.
It is difficult to estimate the size and nature of the public profit made from the provinces by imperial Rome. The situadon can be pictured as an outer ring of coin-hungry fisci of frontier provinces with large
Jones 1974 (d 137); MacMullen 1987 (d 147).
Cf. Brunt 1981 (d i 18), modified in 1990 (a 12) 533. «2
garrisons which kept solvent by drawing on the cash surplus of the fisci of interior civilian provinces.43 How much or little cash surplus this left to be shipped to Rome is unknowable; against it must also be set all the newly minted coinage injected into the provincial system. But the profits of imperialism did not come only in cash. Direct taxes, although assessed and accounted for in cash terms, were partly collected in kind. Thus, for instance, insofar as soldiers received supplies in place of cash remuneration, the fisci of frontier provinces need not always have been seriously short of coin; on the other hand civilian provinces may have produced surpluses in kind rather than cash. More importantly, the one provincial revenue which is certainly known to have been shipped to Rome is the annonal wheat.
While the revenues which could be drawn in cash from the provinces were limited, emperors were under constant pressure to spend munificently, especially in Rome. Tiberius was exceptional in his accumulation of a large cash reserve, and Gaius' immediate spending of it was almost inevitable. Such savings undermined the justification for taxation, a mentality which was in part the legacy of the republican system of
43 Hopkins 1980(0 153).
THE SENATE AND SENATORIAL AND EQUESTRIAN POSTS
RICHARD J. A. TALBERT
I. THE SENATE1
There can be no question that the 20s B.C. and the half century which followed were a time of unparalleled change for the Senate and its members. Augustus was its principal instigator. Once peace had been secured after the long civil wars, the 'restoration of the Republic' was one of his foremost aims. By definition that touched closely the central institutions of the Republic, the Senate among them. The size and quality of senatorial membership engaged his attention first. In size it had expanded to 1,000 or more, partly because of numerous adlections by Iulius Caesar as dictator, partly because following his death others successfully used influence and bribery to gain admission by the same means. Moreover, by raising the total of quaestorships from twenty to forty, Caesar had doubled the number of new members each year, since tenure of this junior magistracy in practice offered life membership of the Senate. As early as 29 B.C. Octavian (as he then was) used a review of the senatorial roll to exclude 190 members on one ground or another. It was
1 Since contemporary testimony is largely lost along with the Lex Iulia of 9 b.c. which governed procedure, the main sources of knowledge for the Senate during the Julio-Claudian period are the later historical writers Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio — in particular Tacitus, who certainly drew upon the detailed record of senatorial proceedings
Inscriptions are the main source for knowledge of senatorial and equestrian administrators and their work. Significant in this connexion from Augustus' reign onwards is the growing frequency with which records listing all the offices a man had held were no longer inscribed just posthumously, but during his lifetime too (Millar and Segal 1984 (c 176) ch. ;).
Modern discussion: Talbert 1984 (d 77) offers a starting-point on most aspects; for senators and their careers, see also Hopkins 1983 (a 46) ch. 3. Much relevant documentary material is assembled in
324
probably also during the 20s that he reduced the number of quaestor- ships to the old figure of twenty. Either then, or during the 'teens b.c., he took the consequential step of reducing the lower office holders (mostly aspirants to the Senate, not yet members) from
A Senate of about 800 still seemed too large. When Augustus returned to the task of reducing it further by another review of the roll in 18 b.c.,2 his preference is said to have been for a body of just 300: the simultaneous removal of as many as 500 members would thus be required. Unless he was displaying an astonishing lack of foresight, a more profound reappraisal of the role of the Senate would have been called for next, since all the existing functions assigned to the corporate body and its members could barely have been carried out by such a reduced group. In the event, however, Augustus abandoned any drastic aims of this type, and enrolled about 600 members by a peculiar method which combined co-option and the drawing of lots. Thereby the Senate returned to the approximate size which the dictator Sulla had made it. Up to the end of the Julio-Claudian period there are known to have been at least two more revisions of the roll during Augustus' reign (around 13— 11 b.c. and in a.d. 4), and a third carried out by the emperor Claudius and L. Vitellius as censors in a.d. 47/8. But in none of these instances does there appear to have been further significant alteration to the size of the membership. Rather, the regular number remained about 600, though it should be understood that this figure was always just a notional optimum, never a fixed maximum or fixed total. The normal method of entry continued to be through the twenty annual vacancies in the quaestorship. On present evidence at least, the alternative of'adlection', or direct elevation of a non-member to a grade of membership within the Senate (at the emperor's instigation), was only used very sparingly indeed during the Julio-Claudian period.3
The quality of senatorial membership concerned Augustus, as well as its size. As his conduct of the reviews in 29 and 18 B.C. demonstrated, he was determined to rid the Senate of members who were immoral, irresponsible, or lacking means. His purpose was to create a body which should be an outstanding elite of princes - high-minded, statesmanlike, wealthy. He waited until 18 B.C. to translate this ideal into reality. From that time all members had to be worth at least one million sesterces rather than just showing the modest equestrian census of 400,000, which was all that had previously been required.4 He appreciated the strain which would result, and over the years did help both worthy existing members who could not show the increased amount, and many prospective
2 Dio Liv.13-15. 3 Demougin 1982 (d 36) 81-2.
4 Nicolet 1976 (d j 3); Millar and Segal 1984 (c 176) ch. 4.
3*6
9- the senate
entrants. Among Augustus' Julio-Claudian successors similar assistance is known to have been given by Tiberius (albeit sometimes in rather grudging fashion) and by Nero.
Also from 18 в.с. in all likelihood, the old custom was abandoned whereby every prospective entrant wore the distinctive badge of the senator — the broad stripe
This particular way of marking out senators' sons and encouraging them to emulate their fathers was one of Augustus' many experiments which did not endure. The restriction had evidently come to be disregarded by the 30s a.d. at the very latest. Instead the practice developed whereby all equestrian aspirants to a senatorial career were obliged to gain the emperor's permission to wear the
The class first appears formally in Augustus' marriage legislation of 18 b.C., and of course it did endure. Membership belonged to senators and their descendants to the third generation, plus wives. Once a distinct class had been formed on this pattern, it was natural for a haphazard growth of privileges and restrictions to become attached to it. Among privileges, special front seats at shows and a certain precedence at elections were introduced early; limited exemption from particular local obligations may also have been granted.[496] Among restrictions, a series of bans on marriage with the lowest classes, prostitution, and appearances in shows or on stage, were all intended to maintain the dignity of the highest class in society.[497]
Regardless of how they gained the
Beyond the praetorship a minority of favoured senators could sooner or later proceed on to the highest magistracy, the consulship. Both the number of consulships each year, and the choice of holders, in effect quickly came to be a choice for the emperor alone to make. Initially there was no more than one pair of holders for the entire year on the traditional republican pattern. But from 5 в.с. these two 'ordinary' consuls, who retained the prestige of opening the year, were regularly replaced by one or two further pairs of 'suffect' consuls at variable intervals, with the result that up to six men were permitted to attain this distinction within a single year. Thereby competition for it became less intense, and there were more members eligible to occupy posts reserved for senators of this standing. Certain highly distinguished men might be privileged to enjoy the supreme honour of a second, and even a third, consulship.
In time Augustus formed the opinion that it was not just the membership of the Senate which required his attention, but also the workings of the corporate body. His revival of fines for non-attendance in 17 в.с. is an early sign of his impatience with members who failed to match up to his ideals. Though in theory a presiding magistrate had always had authority to fine absentees, not since the second century B.C. perhaps had it been normal practice to do so, with the result that this clumsy measure by Augustus merely served to give offence. Only in 11 в.с. did he act further, when he formally abolished the quorum of 400 which was still required for any measure passed to be valid. In all likelihood it dated back to Caesar's dictatorship, but must have been a dead letter ever since the reduction of the membership to 600 in 18 в.с.
The abolition at least cleared the way for positive reform in the shape of the comprehensive
Beyond all this the Lex Iulia codified senatorial procedure. That really did represent a new departure, since previously the proceedings seem to have been governed almost exclusively by custom, rather than by written statute. So it was probably now for the first time that features like the order in which opinions were to be asked for, or the manner in which a vote was to be taken, were actually written down. Such codification no doubt appealed to Augustus' sense of order. Even so it is striking that he does not appear to have exploited the opportunity to change procedure much. In practice meetings seem to have beeA generally conducted in just the same way after 9 в.с. as before. There is no foundation to the
modern claim10 that the law in some way curtailed the ancient right of a member, when called upon for his opinion (
Of course what neither the Lex lulia nor any other law ever codified was the position of the emperor in the Senate. His presence was a major new feature to which the corporate body had to adjust from the 20s B.C. All emperors were patrician senators and must have headed the list of members during their reigns, though Augustus alone of the Julio- Claudians took the title
At least up until a.d. 8, when old age compelled him to reduce his activities, Augustus showed the Senate respect by attending not just as president, but also as a private member. The one meeting which we know him to have missed deliberately was the occasion in 2 B.C. when the discovery of his daughter Iulia's scandalous behaviour had to be made public: in his shame he could not face the Senate in person, but sent a letter instead. Unfortunately the source-material is lacking which would allow us to build up a picture of his participation and performance at meetings in the way that can be done for Tiberius through Tacitus'
The first was the nature of members' reaction to the superior position of the emperor, which might take the form of respect, or fear, or resentment, according to different individuals' viewpoints. These feelings sprang from a variety of causes: the knowledge that in practice nothing which the emperor requested or openly supported could be refused; the recognition that every senator's advancement depended in large measure upon his approval; and the realization that control of many key spheres of government had effectively become his alone. Even
10 Mommsen 1888 (a 65) 111.2. 940.
many of the Senate's meeting-places were now powerful symbols of the imperial regime — the Curia Iulia, begun by Iulius Caesar, dedicated by Octavian in 29 B.C., and thereafter adorned with a growing number of monuments and dedications in honour of the emperor and his family; the temple of Apollo on the Palatine, close by the emperor's residence; and from 2 B.C. the temple of Mars Ultor in front of which was sited a great statue of Augustus victorious in a chariot. Under such circumstances, and in such surroundings, members came to feel, more or less willingly, that it was pointless any longer to take an active, critical, independent part in sessions, when the result seemed a foregone conclusion, and no more than officially selected extracts from the detailed record of proceedings —
Despite Augustus' efforts to counter the trend, this understandable reluctance was to persist indefinitely. Tiberius' impatience with it as emperor prompted his allegedly regular exclamation on leaving sessions 'O homines ad servitutem paratos', 'O men ready to be slaves!'.[498] It must be reflected again by the otherwise unknown Titius Rufus whose claim that 'the Senate thought one way and voted another'12 led to his indictment in a.d. 39; and there is no doubt that it was a principal target of the consular Thrasea Paetus, who consciously risked Nero's disapproval by his outspoken encouragement of greater independence on the part of fellow members in the late 50s and early 60s. The most vehement attack on such senatorial reluctance, however, is made in the speech of an unidentified senator (in all likelihood the emperor Claudius) preserved on a papyrus fragment:
If these proposals meet with your approval, Conscript Fathers, say so plainly at once, in your own considered words. But if you disapprove, find another solution, yet do so in this temple, or, if you perhaps want a more generous interval in which to think, take it, provided you remember that, whatever the place you should be summoned to, you must give us your own opinion. For
Conscript Fathers, it is most unbecoming to the dignity of this order here that just one consul designate should deliver a
Even where the emperor took care not to express a view, his relatives (who generally pursued senatorial careers) might still be regarded as speaking for him. Thus in a.d. 13, when alternadves to the 5 per cent inheritance tax were under discussion, Augustus specifically forbade Germanicus and Drusus to make any suggestion, for fear that it would be regarded as his, and adopted without more ado.
The second main difficulty which acted as a curb on the freedom and vigour of senatorial proceedings in Augustus' reign was his introduction some time between 27 and 18 в.с. of a
In a pithy summary Tacitus later wrote of Augustus 'drawing to himself the functions of the Senate, the magistrates and the laws'.14 There is a large measure of truth in the allegation: even though not only Augustus but also all his successors studiously derived their formal authority from the Senate, it did still have to adjust itself to a curtailed prerogative. Of course many traditional functions remained. The Senate legislated actively, and its resolutions came to be recognized as law without the need for confirmation by a popular assembly. Honours were bestowed in greater quantity and variety than ever. The Senate's authority in matters of religion was still accepted as supreme, and it continued to be approached by embassies, albeit in reduced numbers. On the other hand the emperor in large measure reserved to himself matters relating to the army and foreign affairs; public finance; and the administrative oversight of a large group of existing provinces, together with that of all new ones. In consequence the Senate lost for ever the major
prerogative (already challenged formidably in the late Republic) of determining the disposition of the state's military forces year by year and the extent of the territory to which it laid claim. The creation of supervisors for roads, aqueducts, the distribution and supply of corn, and for other concerns (treated further below), in practice represented further encroachment upon its formerly exclusive authority.
However, despite the fact that the republican Senate had seldom shown more than the most desultory concern for such matters, Augustus was still scrupulous in arranging not just for the new officials to be appointed by the Senate, but also for their activities to be authorized by it. He likewise constantly informed and consulted the Senate about military, provincial, diplomatic and financial affairs, in addition to inviting its approval of significant changes or unusual expedients in these spheres.15 In many instances it may be that this was not merely tact or caution, but rather that he was genuinely seeking to hear a range of proposals, to test opinion and to mould his reaction to it, as well as ensuring reasonable acquiescence in whatever might finally be decided. More than anyone Augustus knew how vital it was that he should not lose touch with upper-class opinion or seriously alienate it. Yet however open to advice he might appear, it always remained awkward for members to be confident of his purpose, or to judge the point at which they might be considered to have overstepped the mark in risking a frank statement of views. In this dilemma the majority preferred to take no risk at all, and the Senate as a deliberative body suffered.
Altogether Augustus' impact upon the Senate proved a mixed one. He showed it the greatest respect. While reducing the size of the membership, he raised its moral and social standing, he promoted regular attendance by a variety of means, and codified (though hardly altered) procedure. But for all his assiduous consultation of the Senate, and his avowed encouragement of frankly expressed opinions, it was impossible for members to ignore his overriding supremacy in the state and his effective usurpation of certain major senatorial prerogatives. The senatorial
Tiberius' impact was equally mixed. Up to a point in the case of the Senate, as elsewhere, he merely continued Augustus' approach. While this is by no means an unfair assessment, it perhaps fails to give due weight to our sources' emphatic claim that the widest possible range of issues, public and private, great and small, was brought before the Senate by Tiberius, at least in the earlier part of the reign. Discreet warnings against such openness from Augustus' confidant, the
Crispus, were ignored. Moreover the Senate could feel that it enjoyed greater freedom to handle all this business, following the radical step taken by Tiberius on his accession: he was not content merely to reduce Augustus' senatorial
The Senate received a further boost during the early weeks of Tiberius' reign when elections to magistracies were transferred to it from the popular assemblies (though the latter continued to meet for the purpose of ratifying the choice of candidates). To what extent this development was an idea of Augustus rather than of Tiberius is obscure: but on present evidence there is no sign that the former ever wanted to do more than give the upper classes a prominent role in assembly elections, while at the least there can be no question that the dming of the change must have been decided by Tiberius.16 The Senate, of course, gained no formal power from it. Neither was there any relaxation of the existing constraints imposed upon both candidates and voters by the emperor's interest. For the consulship he condnued to support as many candidates as there were vacancies. For all other magistracies, however, his candidates would usually comprise no more than a proportion of the vacancies, so that there was genuine, fierce competition for the remaining places. Thus the transfer still gratified members, and did offer the corporate body a regular, active function to which much significance was attached.17 The details of how far in advance magistrates were elected thus in the Julio-Claudian period, and at what times of year, remain almost a blank: in all probability no set pattern emerged until a later date. An attempt by Gaius to return the elections to popular assemblies was frustrated by senators and soon abandoned.
Even more welcome to members was the trend which Tiberius more or less consciously encouraged whereby the Senate should exercise a regular jurisdiction as a high court.18 It had never done this during the Republic nor during the reign of Augustus. Rather, in his scheme of things this function was to be fulfilled by the jury-courts (
16 Brunt 1961 (c 47); 1984 (d 27) 429. 17 Talbert 1984 (d 77) 202-4 and 34>—5•
18 Bleicken 1962 (d 248); Garnsey 1970 (f j;); Talbert 1984 (d 77) ch. 16.
9- the senate
constitute regular jurisdiction, while many more
Established senatorial procedure required little adaptation to accommodate judicial hearings, especially as the Senate had long been accustomed to entertaining pleas and applications, and adjudicating disputes. It is unlikely that its regular jurisdiction was ever sanctioned formally by law: none was necessary if the development enjoyed the emperor's support. While in theory the Senate as a supreme legislative body claimed the right (unlike a
The further convention seems to have developed that the emperor remained aloof from
334
less and less to control the bringing of
No less harmful was his withdrawal to Capri in 26, which turned out to be permanent. Up till that time his attendance - at debates and trials, as president and private member, even on election days — had been outstandingly conscientious. He had participated actively in proceedings too — suffering insults, being drawn into embarrassing exchanges, and even on occasion finding himself outvoted. Taken together with his other measures this behaviour understandably increased the Senate's confidence in the nature and value of its role, so that the effect of the emperor's isolation from the corporate body after 26 was all the more damaging.
Gaius' declaration20 at his accession that he would never write to the Senate (and thus by implication would always attend in person) did indicate a fleeting initial reaction against Tiberius' behaviour during the previous eleven years. But it was left to Claudius to make a serious effort in this regard. While perhaps never as assiduous as Tiberius had been, he did none the less regularly attend meetings and trials, both as president and private member, and was an eager participant, bringing much business before the corporate body. He seems also to have been exceptionally severe in insisting upon good attendance by others. The ban on unauthorized private travel beyond Italy (and after 49 Sicily and Narbonese Gaul) by senators was stringently enforced. Nero's personality and lack of experience led him to attend the Senate much less than Claudius, in particular towards the end of the reign when he became more and more estranged from it. But strikingly Vitellius' background and training led him to revert to the example of Augustus, Tiberius and Claudius. Tacitus21 notes that during his brief reign in 69 he made a point of attending the Senate even when the items on the agenda were only trivial.
Of all the emperors between 37 and 69 it was Claudius who made the most lasting impact upon the Senate by widening its membership. It is true that he stressed to the Senate itself the desire of both Augustus and Tiberius 'that there should be in this
by emperors to respectful senators of distinguished ancestry, many old families soon ceased to be represented for a variety of reasons.23 As a result there was room for a steady influx of
Hostile emperors like Gaius and Nero inflicted no more than short-term damage upon the Senate as a
23 Hopkins 1985 (a 46), ch. 5. 24 Halfmann 1979 (d 44).
25 Talbert 1984 (d 77) ch. 4 sect. 2; Gonzalez 1984 (в 234) 76.
for Romans, it was the institution which continued to be seen as the permanent embodiment of the ancient
II. SENATORIAL AND EQUESTRIAN POSTS
No
The proconsuls of the senatorial provinces were still chosen according to the traditional method of the lot to serve for just a one year term, which would normally be expected to begin between our Easter and mid-summer. The arrangements for drawing lots, and the timing, are mostly obscure. Appointment as proconsul of Africa or Asia came to be offered to the senior
Apart from these ten or so proconsulships, all governors and all legionary commanders were appointed by the emperor to serve for as long as he required. The same in effect applied to most of the new
я Talbert 1984 (d 77) ch. 10 sect. 3 and App. 8.
PRAEFECTUS
FRUMENTI DANDI29 CURATOR VIARUM»
PRAEFECTUS AERARII Management of state treasury SATURNI28
Distribution of corn dole at Rome
Management of roads in Italy (though precise scope of functions remains obscure)
CURATOR AQUARUM31 Management of aqueducts of Rome
by lot Board of uncertain composition
3 notionally chosen by lot, comprising i
29 to 23 в.с. and from a.d. 56
2 from 22 b.c., 2 more
added in 18 B.C. From 20 B.C.
From 11 в.с.
Function carried out between 2 3 в.с. and a.d. 56 by praetors and quaestors in office
Regular assignment 6f one or more named main roads to an individual senatorial
PRAEFECTUS AERARII Management of military treasury 3
From a.d. 6
Archaic office permanently re- instituted in new form from a.d. 13
PRAEFECTUS URBI33 Oversight of law and order in 1 senior
senatorial posts within Rome and Italy established on a permanent basis by Augustus and Tiberius, albeit with the Senate's approval. Although these posts (set out in Table i) without doubt represent a haphazard growth, rather than a planned series, none the less all were equally intended to improve public services and thereby strengthen the emperor's own position. At the same time the creation of one or more posts with a particular responsibility did not deter him from still taking personal initiatives in the same sphere from time to time.
Not only did adjustment and experiment continue, as Table i shows. Senators might also be called upon at any time to assist in tackling some short-term crisis or difficulty. But all the same it can be seen that the substantial group of new senatorial administrative posts within Rome and Italy was largely organized by early in Tiberius' reign. To some extent the same may be true of the new posts throughout the empire to which
Already during the late Republic certain officerships in the army were normally held by
Like any republican magnate Augustus needed procurators to manage estates which he could not see to himself and to represent him in the courts. He generally asked
39 Hirschfeld 1912 (d 13); Stein 1927 (d66); Pflaum 1950(0 56); 1960-1; 1982 (d 59); 1974 (d 58). Many of Pflaum's dates for the creation of new posts should be viewed with caution.
notable among the latter was the prefect of Egypt, who was regarded as the senior equestrian official during the Julio-Claudian period, and whose immediate subordinates (even the commanders of the two legions stationed outside Alexandria) were all
In Rome Augustus handed direct command of the praetorian cohorts to a pair of equestrian prefects from 2 в.с. A few years later crises in two spheres prompted him to tackle their persistent problems much more decisively than hitherto. First, after a serious fire in a.d. 6 he took the step of appointing an equestrian
It should be stressed that the growth of all these equestrian posts was as much an unco-ordinated response to immediate problems as in the case of the senatorial appointments already outlined. There was no equestrian 'civil service' whose members were guaranteed permanent employment within a planned career structure which encouraged them to develop a particular expertise.46 Augustus' general reasons for turning to the equestrian order for the assistance which he sought seem easy enough to conjecture. On the negative side, it might not have been diplomatic to appoint senators to some of the posts concerned, even had there been sufficient members of their class; there may have also been instances where senators' competence was doubted. On the positive side, while
All the same it is less easy to be sure why he specifically chose members of the equestrian class to occupy particular posts. In Rome for example, the prefectures of the fire brigade and of the corn supply (both spheres formerly of general concern to senatorial magistrates) could seemingly just as well have been senatorial appointments. Among provinces it is impossible to find convincing general characteristics which distinguish the diverse areas entrusted to
It may be more satisfactory to admit that Augustus' motives for choosing to employ
47 Tac.
pressure did develop on a number of grounds for
PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION AND TAXATION
ALAN K. BOWMAN
I. ROME, THE EMPEROR AND THE PROVINCES
The reorganization of provincial government which began with Augustus' so-called first settlement in January 27 B.C. gave to the imperial administration in the provinces a fundamental structure which it was to retain for more than three centuries. Its basis can only be fully appreciated in the light of the developments of the late republican period.1 In the East the Roman organization of Greece and Asia had taken advantage of the urban legacy of hellenization and set the pattern of which the far-reaching arrangements of Pompey's eastern settlement were a logical extension. Here, the ubiquitous phenomenon of organization through the hellenized
1 See САН ix2, ch. 1The evidence for provincial administration under Augustus and the Julio- Claudians is mainly inscriptional, supplemented by scattered references in the literary sources. No attempt is here made to provide exhaustive documentation. Care is needed in using the more abundant documentary and literary sources for the period from the Flavians to the Severi which are likely to reflect a more highly developed provincial administration than that which existed between 4j b.c. and a.d. 69. Some later items of evidence are cited in what follows, but only those which seem unlikely to be seriously anachronistic.
344
economic scale, then
The patterns of provincial government established in the late Republic certainly survived the triumviral period, although it is difficult to see whether the political and military disturbances entailed any long- term disruption on more than a local scale. From the point of view of Roman magistrates and officers serving in the provinces, the arrangements enunciated in the Lex Titia of 27 November 43 в.с. and emended after Philippi offered the triumvirs the opportunity to exercise patronage and appoint supporters to provincial governorships and legateships; the more general implication was the evoludon of 'spheres of influence' which gave them access to the military and financial resources provided by the provinces in their areas.[504] But it would be mistaken to deduce from this that either the constitutional power or the influence of a triumvir was limited by any 'iron curtain'. Antony might write to the
The enduring administrative arrangements made at the beginning of 27 B.C. will certainly have owed something to the experience of the previous fifteen years, even though it was politic to suppress any overt appeal to triumviral precedents. The assignation to Augustus of a large
New provinces, by their very nature, demanded assignation to the emperor. Distinctions of rank existed within the categories of governors of 'imperial' and 'public' provinces, the major military imperial provinces being entrusted to men of consular status, the lesser to praetorians, the Senate appointing ex-consuls only to Africa and Asia, ex- praetors to the remainder. For those imperial provinces normally entrusted to
It is essential to emphasize that under Augustus and his successors practice remained flexible. It allowed provinces to be governed in groups, a province to be transferred from the control of a proconsul to that of a senatorial
The evolution of this 'system' shows that the implications were far- reaching, although not in any sense which imposes a misleading division of the empire into two halves or two separate methods of government. Augustus could have claimed, if he were ever asked, to be entitled to act in his own and in the public provinces in virtue of his consular
governed by procurators, then transferred to legates in the second century; for the relationship between the prefect of Judaea and the legate of Syria see Joseph.,
Extended tenure of legateships: Tac.
R
13 EJ2 311.1-40, Tac.
Growth in the emperor's influence and control may also be illustrated by observing his relations with governors. In 22 в.с. public embarrassment was caused by Augustus' role in the misbehaviour of the proconsul Primus in Macedonia, brought to book for waging war on the Thracian Odrysae outside his province.14 Obscure though the details of the affair are, it is evident that Augustus' advice to Primus carried so much authority that it might have helped him avoid conviction for treason
The gradual establishment of patterns of control was as much a process of trial, adaptation and evolution as design. The flexibility is most obvious in the emergence and definition of new provinces during the early Principate but it is no less significant in those acquired earlier. An established province could be defined as a specific geographical area: sometimes its boundaries were clearly delineated by natural features, but often there was no clear border, and then the province would be defined as comprising the communities in it and their dependent
On the other hand, the picture is far from uniform within the provinces, except for certain broad features of the military establish-
Dio liv. j. 1-4; for the uncertainty over the date see above, p. 84.
EJ2 311.40-55, Tac.
ment. In many provinces, even those of long standing, the degree of military control was incomplete in less civilized regions; there could be no blanket of administrative organization and hence the role of the towns and cities was crucial. The provincial superstructure did not cut across or invalidate other pre-exisdng or developing institutions and relationships; rather, 'Romanization' went beyond simple intrusions like the building of arteries of communication or the introduction of the Roman currency and encouraged the persistence or development of certain kinds of insdtutions, fostering and moulding the relationship between Rome and individual community, between disparate elements within the provincial communities. Thus, established city-foundations in the eastern provinces might have their subjection to Rome tempered by a treaty written in the language of 'freedom' or of 'friendship and alliance', their aristocracies encouraged to undertake the burdens of civic government in return for the prospect of prestige and social advancement.16 Even in the less urbanized province of Egypt, the district capitals
Roman control did not end at provincial boundaries. As important as the patterns of control within provinces, from the point of view of the consistent desire to create the conditions for further annexation of territory, are the tentacles which reached out beyond the frontiers, signs of a presence designed to impress Roman power upon tribes and client kings. The methods used outside provinces hardly differed from those used inside and must surely have emphasized the insignificance, in important respects, of the frontier between 'Roman' and 'non-Roman'
20 Tac.
35° io. provincial administration
territory. In Germany, for instance, occupation of military sites in sensitive areas beyond the frontiers is probable for a few years after the defeat of Quinctilius Varus and the loss of three legions in a.d. 9, and again in a.d. 47, but it is only part of the story. Neighbouring tribes supplied soldiers; Segimundus, the son of a Cheruscan chief, was appointed priest of the imperial cult at Ara Ubiorum, though still domiciled on the east bank of the Rhine, and Arminius' nephew Italicus was educated at Rome in the reign of Claudius;
For provinces and their towns, villages and individual subjects, as for client kings and tribal chieftains, the embodiment of Roman power and authority was in practice inescapably and increasingly identifiable as the emperor. It is important to emphasize that he was far more than a mere figurehead, for his administrative role was always an active one. His position as a magistrate could be invoked (if it were ever necessary) to justify the issuance of edicts and
It is not difficult to see how groups of communities and individual communities and persons naturally perceived the emperor as the prime focus of power and tended to direct embassies and requests to him, normally, though not always, through the filter of the governor, as the most natural source of effective action and patronage. This impression will have been further reinforced by the evident interests of the emperor and his property
ii. structure
The functioning of the administrative system in the provinces depended upon a superstructure of military and civil officials, appointed to their positions by the central government and directly responsible to it. The relatively small corps of senators and
Governors of all ranks, legates, proconsuls and prefects or procurators, exercised the full range of administrative, military and judicial powers within their provinces which their
There was a variety of officials in direct subordination to the provincial governor. As far as the routine work of the governor's
28 J.H. Oliver,
passed, in other imperial provinces too.29 From these officials the governor was relatively free to select those who would assist him in their own areas of expertise by sitting on his advisory council (
The evidence for subdivision of provinces into regional administrative units is patchy and sporadic and it is impossible to imagine anything like a general pattern. In newly acquired or less Romanized areas special arrangements might be appropriate. In the Alpine regions in the early imperial period we find military
® Below, pp. 682-4. 30 EJ2 243, 244. 31
32 Egypt, below, p. 682; Thrace, below, p. 567-8; the Decapolis, 1СRR 1 824, cf. Isaac 1981 (d 93); Pflaum 1970 (e 75 5).
their Greek or hellenistic legacy of
The structure of government in the provincial
MW4J4, cap.LIII, cf. Mackie 1983 (e 25i)ch. III.
The best known is the Jewish community of Alexandria, see
the ubiquitous public services (called liturgies in the East and
Although the cities normally enjoyed a primal position in relation to the villages of their
» EJ2 31 i.j5-62,
36 Anauni and Tridentum,
larger villages made with increasing frequency in the second and third centuries.
This sketch of the governmental system as consisting of a central bureaucratic structure and the local administrative institutions ignores one feature which deserves mention in this context - the existence of leagues of cities and provincial federate assemblies
Effective links between the central and the local administrative structures, nevertheless, did exist. As far as function was concerned, the main feature is the way in which the provincial authorities of the central government exercised a supervisory or controlling interest over the local, sometimes under the pressure of requests from the communities themselves. This is illustrated in more detail in the following section, but it is worth noting here first, that even if such intervention frequently went beyond what the central government would have chosen to do of its own accord, this possibility was always inherent in the relationship between Rome and the provincial community and second, that the inability of the communities to exercise their autonomy satisfactorily foreshadows the situation in the later Empire when the higher echelons of the local administration were effectively incorporated in the central bureaucracy; in the early Empire it might occasionally be expedient to send a person who already enjoyed influence at the imperial court back to his native city to regulate its affairs, as happened to Athenodorus of Tarsus under Augustus.39 Intervention by central government and the
MEJ2321. 39 Strab. xiv.j.i4 (674c).
use of local people was greatly facilitated by the opportunity for local magnates or their descendants to enter imperial service, perhaps availing themselves of the patronage of provincial governors or other powerful contacts; in doing so, they thus effectively withdrew from direct participation in local government, and deprived the communities, in the long run, of the use of their administrative capability and the resources upon which it was based. This may be seen as an inevitable consequence of the opening up of the equestrian status to the wealthier provincials. Antecedent to this might be the opportunity for a local magistrate, such as Lampo of Alexandria, to assist the provincial governor in his court or to sit on his
III. FUNCTION
In contrast to the relative formality of the bureaucratic structure, an attempt to describe how provincial administration worked in practice must take account of the flexibility which the structure permitted and observe the patterns and relationships which developed in the early imperial period. A useful analysis of the working of provincial government can be presented in terms of the role of the various elements in the structure — emperor, Senate, the provincial governor and his subordinates, communities, institutions and individuals - the relationships between them and the factors which limited or determined the scope and nature of their action. Their functions can be illustrated by examples which show what kind of action they were free to take in what kind of situation and how different kinds of situations affected the complex of their interrelationships.
Here it is perhaps best to begin at the bottom of the structure and discuss the villages first. In general, they seem to have enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy in communal affairs (though this doubtless varied from region to region), electing boards of magistrates from amongst the local landholders to manage village funds, gifts and bequests, the administration of markets, temples, public buildings and common property. The democratic element in local government survived quite vigorously in the form of village assemblies which discussed substantive matters as well as making corporate dedications and honorary decrees.41 Detailed evidence for village affairs can be found only in
Egypt but we should not underrate the significance of what we know of a village like Tebtunis in the Fayum (an area particularly affected by large- scale settlement of Greeks in the Ptolemaic period) where, for instance, documents of the reign of Claudius show the administration of the village record office which kept detailed account of contractual transactions between villagers and the activity of the local guild of salt- merchants in organizing members' rights to ply their trade in and around Tebtunis.42 Here government officials played a significant supervisory role as a matter of course and, as in other provinces, the links with larger towns in the region may normally have been quite tenuous except in so far as the towns functioned as the nuclei of their regions for the purposes of taxation. Even where there were significant links with the towns a degree of tolerated independence and autonomy was not precluded but the lack of clearly defined status and privileges will have meant that small communities were more readily subject to interference and control by a provincial governor and his subordinates.43
The more abundant evidence from the provincial towns and cities naturally affords a more detailed picture. The status of the urban communities varied a good deal and the privileged cities were, at least in the early period, relatively few, of the 399 towns enumerated by Pliny the Elder in the three Spanish provinces, for instance, 291 were merely
from
Differences between the old-established
City government was thus essentially oligarchic. From the beginning of the second century, as the attractions of civic office faded, effective power was concentrated in the hands of an ever-smaller group which, by the later Empire, became institutionalized and appears in the legal texts as the
Autonomy in internal administration conducted through the bouleu- tic or curial class allowed economy in the number and function of government administrators. The areas in which self-government was theoretically exercised add up to an impressive list. The regulation and organization of the councils and magistrates and other communal institutions such as
The ways in which the autonomy of communities in internal government were restricted and limited were nevertheless effective and significant. It was subject to general regulations applicable to a province as a whole, such as those embedded in a
Explicit interference in city autonomy by government officials tended to become more frequent in the course of time, partly because the nature of the ruling classes in the cities was always potentially factious; when the community itself did not have the means or the power to resolve internal difficulties which resulted, it would be likely to resort to an appeal to the central authority. The invitation to intervention was bound to weaken the confidence of the Roman government in the ability of the communities to govern themselves peacefully and efficiently, and ultimately to lead to erosion of their independence.
The phenomena which most frequently demanded the attention of cemtral government were the inability to resolve internal conflicts, the reaction of communities to attempts to erode their privileges, and disputes between communities. Internal conflict evidently underlies the fourth of Augustus' Cyrene edicts, which attempts to deal with the problem of the bias of Romans against Greeks in juries dealing with noncapital cases, or the criminal accusation brought by a Cnidian embassy in 6 в.с. to Augustus and referred by him to the proconsul of Asia.55 Attacks on communal privilege are illustrated in an inscription which records the fixing of boundaries for the town of Histria and the area of
Augustan emendation of the Lex Pompeia: Pliny,
Egyptian veterans,
M EJ2 511.33-62. 55 EJ2 311.62-71.
operation for a contractor of customs dues by decision of the governor of Lower Moesia, Laberius Maximus, in a.d. ioo. Earlier letters of three legates of the Julio-Claudian period are quoted, repeatedly asserting the rights of the town to revenues from fish-pickling and pine-forests in its area. One cannot but conclude from the frequency with which these rights were upheld that they were constantly under threat, presumably from contractors collecting taxes for the imperial government, as the letter of Laberius Maximus implies.[519] As for disputes between communities, reference has already been made to the case referred to the Thessalian League by a governor in the reign of Tiberius. Greater detail is to be found in a decree of a.d. 69, issued by the proconsul of Sardinia, Helvius Agrippa, dealing with a dispute between the Patulcenses and Galillenses over territorial boundaries. These had originally been established by an adjudication of a republican proconsul, recently reiterated by an equestrian governor in a.d. 66/7, apparently acting in accordance with the advice of the emperor Nero. It was this situation which the Patulcenses wished to have upheld, but the Galillenses had been encroaching on their property and had informed Agrippa's predecessor that they could produce a document (presumably the original judgment) from the imperial archives in Rome which would support their case and, by implication, invalidate whatever local documentation the governors were using. However, after two adjournments they had failed to produce it and Agrippa's decree ordered them to vacate the disputed territory.[520]Internal self-government was not the only important aspect of the role of the cities. They also functioned as guarantors of the fulfilment of obligations imposed upon them by the central government. The overall assessment of the burden of direct personal and property taxes on a province was imposed
It is not difficult to see how the interests of the central government weighed heavily on the independence of the cities in these areas, where close monitoring and liaison with provincial officials were essential. The inscription from Messene, mentioned above, states that the apportionment of the tax burden by the magistrate was carried out in the presence of the praetorian legate.60 Evidence of tax-payers failing to meet their obligations could lead provincial officials into direct intervention, either on their own initiative or at the request of the local authorities. These same officials, or sometimes the civic authorities themselves, might take opportunities to exact taxes and services above the quota, and complaints about such abuses might, on occasion, attract the attention of the provincial governor or even of the emperor; it was abuses of this kind,
The areas in which the central government exercised direct administration were very broad. The responsibilities for the military establishment, for financial affairs and for the administration of justice were interlocking and any implied division may be misleading unless it is borne in mind that, apart from the strictly military command and use of troops, a matter falling most obviously into one of these categories might also involve elements relevant to the others. The powers of officials subordinate to the governor tended to be defined by their function; a legate with judicial responsibility (
Organization of the functions and upkeep of the military establish-
w Mitchell 1976 (в 155), cf.
Rights of procurators and
ment in a province involved a variety of tasks, normally the responsibility of the military legates, the junior officers (tribunes and
The administration of provincial finances was complex. Proconsuls had quaestors with responsibility for public finances, but in the imperial provinces this task fell on the equestrian or freedman procurators and their staffs and the regional provincial officials. The conduct of the provincial census was fundamental to the taxation system and to the general management of the controls applied to the population by fiscal means. The census, which may well have occurred at fixed intervals in all provinces although it is only sparsely attested, was probably the regular responsibility of the governor and his staff. Records of property ownership and personal status must have necessitated periodic large- scale revision, and there are likely to have been arrangements which allowed for running amendments. It was also of vital importance to maintain effective liaison with provincial communities and with the collectors and transporters of direct and indirect taxes. In some provinces management of the leasing of public land to state tenants and the collection of rents was also in the hands of provincial officials but it is impossible to make anything like a general estimate of the amount of land which fell into this category.[523]
In all provinces the procuratorial officials were responsible for supervision of the interests of the imperial property
The very wide interests of the fiscus in Egypt are early attested in the Code of Regulations of the Special Account (
The much debated question of the relationship between
Evidence for agricultural estates and other imperial properties collected by Crawford 1976 (d 125), Millar 1977 (a 39) 175-89. 67 See above, ch. 8.
from other areas of administration. Provincial governors, legates and some procurators had jurisdictional powers in both criminal and civil matters. Governors and their legates, usually acting with the advice of a
In matters dealt with at the highest level, procedure was relatively clear-cut. The first and second Augustan edicts from Cyrene present a fairly straightforward picture of the emperor responding to a provincial embassy and regulating the composition of jury-courts which heard cases delegated by the governor, and dealing with an individual sent from the province, perhaps under suspicion of
'о EJ2 311.1-55- the governor Felix and sent Paul under armed escort to Caesarea. The trial before Felix was inconclusive and Paul was held in detention. Two years later the Jews again initiated a prosecution before Festus, the successor of Felix. On this occasion Paul produced his famous appeal to Caesar and Festus, after consulting his advisers, felt compelled to allow it. But a few days later Festus took the opportunity to discuss the matter with the client king Herod Agrippa II, the upshot of which was a second hearing for Paul before Festus and Agrippa. After Paul's defence Festus and Agrippa conferred and concluded that Paul had done nothing to merit death or imprisonment and Agrippa remarked that he could have been discharged if he had not appealed to the emperor.71 Earlier episodes in Greece emphasize the blurring of the lines of demarcation between the jurisdiction of the civic authorities and that of the provincial officials. At Philippi Paul and Silas had been brought before the local magistrates in the market-place by the owners of a slave girl and were ordered to be stripped, beaten and thrown into jail. Later, however, alarmed by the discovery that they were Roman citizens and therefore entitled not to be punished in this way, the magistrates ordered their release. At Corinth it was the Jews who had taken Paul before the proconsul's court but Gallio, who happened to be on the spot, considered it a matter of internal Jewish Law, refused to judge the case and disregarded the beating of the synagogue leader.72
The incoherence of the system, if it can be called such, has recently been described in terms to which the evidence of the Acts of the Apostles gives point: 'The process might involve individuals of the same or differing status, Roman or non-citizen, local communities or officials, Roman officials or any combination. No matter, either, that all manner of processes jostle each other: in trial by jury in the provinces or at Rome on charges established by statute; inquiries into conduct alleged by informers to be criminal; civil cases brought by litigants; arbitration between communities and decisions administrative rather than legal; police action .. ,'73 From the government's point of view it had two outstanding virtues: it was very flexible and economical with the time and energies of the officials available and, by and large, it worked.
IV. CONCLUSION
From one point of view, the provincial administration can be analysed in terms of the complex of coexisting relationships between the different elements, the emperor, the provincial governor and his subordinate officials, the province, the provincial communities as a group, the individual community and finally the individual subject. There is a
71 AA 21.j1-26.52. 72 AA 16.16-40, 18.12-17. 73 Levick 198) (d 98) 46.
temptation to argue (especially on the basis of the more abundant evidence for specific detail from the Roman East) that policy-making was not part of the dynamics of this complex of relationships, that the empire was governed, in effect, by a series of
It is notoriously difficult to extract from the items of evidence which illustrate specific cases and different relationships in action any coherent notion of an emperor forming or implementing a 'policy of provincial administration'; even less do we have programmatic statements which explicitly set out any such broad view, except in terms of general benevolence or intention to rectify known abuses. If consistent themes and policies are to be observed in the Julio-Claudian period and credited to the vision of particular emperors, they have to be drawn from disparate individual items of evidence, unevenly spread in time and space, or from observable trends: the spread of Roman citizenship, particularly in the reigns of Augustus and Claudius; the encouragement of urban communities and their aristocracies (especially in the West, where it was intimately linked to the spread of citizenship through the spread of colonial and municipal status); growth of communicadon systems; integration of the economic structures of town and country; the fostering of trading links within the structure of a relatively coherent
SICILIA SARDINIA
HISPANIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-consul
TARRACONENSIS
BAETICA
Proconsul
Ex-praetor
LUSITANIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-praetor
NARBONENSIS
Proconsul
Ex-praetor
AQUITANIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-praetor
LUGDUNENSIS
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-praetor
BELGICA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-praetor
GERMANIA SUPERIOR
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-consul
LYCIA-PAMPHYLIA
CYPRUS
SYRIA
Proconsul Proconsul
Ex-praetor Ex-praetor
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Proconsul
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Procurator
Ex-praetor Ex-praetor Ex-consul
JUDAEA
GERMANIA INFERIOR
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-consul
ALPES MARITIMAE
Procurator
ALPES COTTIAE
Procurator
ALPES POENINAE
Procurator
BRITANNIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-consul
RAETIA
Procurator
NORICUM
Procurator
DALMATIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-consul
MOESIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-consul
THRACE
Procurator
MACEDONIA
Proconsul
Ex-praetor
ACHAEA
Proconsul
Ex-praetor
ASIA
Proconsul
Ex-consul
BITHYNIA-PONTUS
Proconsul
Ex-praetor
GALATIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-praetor
CAPPADOCIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-praetor
Coupled with Alpes Poeninae until a.d. 47
Cf. ch. 13h
Governed by
Until the reign of Domitian, these were military commands rather than provincial governorships, cf.
ch. I}/
During Nero's Parthian War governors were ex-consuls. At the beginning of the Flavian period the governor was an ex-praetor but the post was later upgraded again.
Included Cilicia Campestris from
AEGYPTUS
Praefectus
CRETE-CYRENE
Proconsul
Ex-praetor
AFRICA
Proconsul
Ex-consul
NUMIDIA
Leg.Aug.p.p.
Ex-praetor
Cf. ch. i 3
MAURETANIA
Procurator
Coupled in a.d. 68/9 and again
CAESARIENSIS
(under a Leg.Aug.p.p.) in
MAURETANIA
Procurator
a.d. 7ĵ
TINGITANA
fiscal and taxation system in which (it has been argued74) the volume of currency was adjusted in a rational manner; a military establishment which infused new urban, social and economic structures into new provinces and a frame of mind which always aimed to ensure the security and peaceful development of territory in possession whilst keeping open the options for further expansion.
74 Lo Cascio 1981 (d 144).
CHAPTER И THE ARMY AND THE NAVY
LAWRENCE KEPPIE
i. the army of the late republic
By the middle of the first century B.C. the Roman army had developed over centuries of all but continuous warfare into a professionally minded force. At least fifteen legions (a total of about 60,000-70,000 men) were maintained in being each year, their manpower drawn from all Italy south of the Po. Military service was the duty of every Roman citizen aged between seventeen and forty-five. Those who enlisted were usually held for at least six years of continuous service, after which they could look for discharge. In law they remained liable for call-out as
At first, military service had been viewed as an essential public duty: only men with substantial property were permitted (or could afford) to serve. However, the property-requirement was gradually reduced, and from the time of Marius no more is heard of it. No pay was at first considered necessary, but from the early fourth century a payment
1 Knowledge of the length of servicc rests on Polvbius (vi.19.2), but the text is corrupt. The manuscripts give ten years in the cavalry and six in the infantry as the normal scrvicc requirement. The latter figure is generally emended to sixteen, given that it should be
371
to 225 denarii.[524] Out of this sum the soldier had to pay towards his food, clothing and weaponry.[525] Soldiers were armed with an oval shield
The individual legion was a body of some 4,000-5,000 men divided into ten cohorts; in battle these could be arranged in three lines, but other dispositions are known. Each cohort was made up of six centuries, each commanded by a centurion. The centurions were soldiers of many years' experience, normally promoted from the ranks. The legions were given numerals on formation, and might remain in service for several years; but there was no permanent 'army list'.
The legions of a province came under the direct control of the proconsul or propraetor who was its governor. The legions raised each year were distributed according to current needs; some provinces had no legions at all, and might lie exposed to unexpected attack. The legion had no individual commander, but day-to-day responsibility lay with the military tribunes, six to each legion, who held command by rotation in pairs. This lack of a single permanent commanding officer in the legion had not seemed very important when armies were small and under the direct eye of the proconsul or propraetor, but as armies grew in size and the geographical extent of provinces and areas of military operations increased, some delegation of responsibility became essential. From the later third century legates were appointed, to act as assistants to the magistrate. These legates were senators, varying in age and military experience, to whom some part of the military or juridical duties could be delegated. Legates were placed in command of one or more legions, but had no long-term link within any particular unit.
No rewards were envisaged at the end of the individual's military service; men returned home to their families, to take up the threads of civilian life. Only in exceptional circumstances might they be specifically rewarded for their years of service, with a cash donative at the time of a triumph, or with a land grant on discharge, should their commander make a special effort to obtain it.
The legions had always been supported in battle by contingents drawn from their allies. Up till 90 в.с. these consisted mainly of detachments from the towns of Italy, grouped together to form
Just as the size of the army fluctuated according to the needs, of the moment, so also did the navy. Only a few ships were maintained in permanent commission in Italian ports or in dock, to be supplemented by the summoning of squadrons from allied states in the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean. A governor might appoint one of his legates to command such fleets; the ships' captains offered him professional advice. The lack of a navy adequate to keep sea lanes open was particularly evident in the 70s в.с. when pirate squadrons from bases in Cilicia operated openly and with success in the Mediterranean.
ii. the army in the civil wars, 49-30 b.c.
The onset of civil war in 49 в.с. between Caesar and the legitimate forces of the Republic brought a swift military build-up. The legions then serving under Caesar in Gaul, numbered in a set sequence from V to XIV, formed the basis of his army thereafter. In the months following the invasion of Italy and during his consulship in 48, Caesar formed many more legions, probably numbered I—IV (the numerals traditionally reserved each year for the consuls to use) and from XV to about XXXIII. After Pompey's defeat three or four more were formed out of the latter's soldiers, so that by 47 в.с. the number of legions in service stood at a minimum of about 36-8; all but a few had been raised or reconstituted under Caesar's direct command. With the ending of effective resistance, Caesar's longest serving legions (composed of men who had been with him in Gaul and who had over the years agitated several times, and with good cause, for release) were discharged and settled in colonies in Italy and southern Gaul. New legions were raised to replace them. Caesar evidently intended a tight grip over Roman territory, some of it newly won. Sixteen of the legions, drawn largely from the garrisons of Macedonia and Syria, were to participate in the planned Parthian campaign.
But fate decreed otherwise. Caesar's assassination was ill-received by the serving legionaries and by the discharged veterans, most of whom had by now received the promised allotments and were settling to a new life. In the months following Caesar's death several of the protagonists, jostling for position and power, drew to their side groups of Caesar's veterans; many, perhaps all, of the recently disbanded legions were
SCALE
0 2SO 500 750 1000 km
Syria
i
Fig.
reconstituted. Much emphasis was placed on their glorious antecedents; they formed the backbone of the triumviral army for the Philippi campaign and played a significant role in the victory.
After Philippi Caesar's veterans, together with time-served men of the extensive levies of 49-48 B.C., who had now fulfilled the six-year service norm, some 40,000 men in all, were released and given land in Italy. Many of the towns selected (e.g. Capua, Ariminum, Bononia)6 lay at important road junctions, controlling access to Rome. Eleven legions were formed now from those who had not yet served the six-year minimum; many bore the old numerals and titles of formations which had been prominent in the service of Caesar and subsequently the triumvirs, and had fought at Philippi. Those legions, with their battle- honours, titles and emblems, had become household names and were important as visible supporters of the triumvirs, the natural successors of the dead and deified Caesar. After the sea battle at Actium, in which the legions had played little part, a week of negotiation ensured that Antony's soldiers received adequate rewards for their long years of service: land in the provinces, but probably not in Italy itself. Some of the most senior of the Antonian legions were accepted intact into Octavian's army. Octavian could pose as reuniting the old Caesarian army under himself as the dictator's intended heir. His own legions received land in Italy, in twenty-eight colonies.7 The legions which emerged from the civil wars were to remain in permanent commission throughout the following three centuries or more, unless disgraced or destroyed in battle.
Bodies of native infantry and cavalry serving with the legions on campaign in the civil wars of the later first century в.с. are repeatedly mentioned in the literary sources. They were numbered in thousands, and formed an important adjunct to the armies of each protagonist. Bodies of slingers, foot-archers, horse-archers and even elephants are reported. Caesar's wide-ranging campaigns carried Gallic, German and Spanish troops to the furthest corners of the empire; 10,000 Spanish and Gallic cavalry participated in Antony's Armenian campaign.8 Octavian continued to recruit auxiliaries from the western provinces under his control. In the East Pompey, the Liberators and later Antony were able to draw on the armies of client kings in Thrace, Asia Minor, Syria, Judaea and Egypt, summoned to service by virtue of treaty obligations or
Seapower and the ability to transport troops overseas became important in the civil wars. Substantial fleets, gathered by Pompey, and later by the Liberators, Sextus Pompeius and Antony from the allied states of the Aegean and the eastern Mediterranean, made a formidable force. Octavian had much less opportunity to gain access to warships from these traditional sources, and was forced to build up his own navy almost from scratch. After initial setbacks through inexperience and ill-luck, this new fleet was to prove superior in the end, at Mylae, Naulochus and Actium.9 In the mid-30s, in preparation for an offensive against Sextus Pompeius, Agrippa saw to the construction of a major harbour and stores complex at Lake Avernus on the Bay of Naples; it was given the name Portus Iulius in honour of Octavian. Foundations of some of its quayside buildings have been located below the shallow waters of the bay.10
Squadrons of ships with legionaries on board acting as marines cruised in the Mediterranean; some civil-war legions even adopted the title
III. THE ARMY AND NAVY OF AUGUSTUS
By the middle of Augustus' reign the number of legions in service stood at twenty-eight. Almost all had seen service in the civil wars. They were numbered from I to XXII, with some numerals duplicated, the result of the acceptance into an already complete sequence of Antonian legions after Actium. The highest number in the sequence is XXII, a legion surnamed
® For a Cilician navarch who served Octavian and was suitably rewarded, see P. Roussel,
10 Strab. v.4.5 (244c); Veil. Pat. 11.79.2; Virg.
12 Plut.
incorporated into the empire. The Augustan sequence of legions had thus reached its final form by that date, and older theories about the gradual increase in forces throughout the reign, and especially at the time of the Pannonian revolt and the Varian disaster, can be set aside.
The legions were disposed in the frontier provinces of the empire, mostly in those provinces controlled by Augustus himself through his legates. As new provinces were added under Augustus, the legions moved forward to aid in the conquest. The precise areas of service of many legions are unknown in the Augustan period; much movement of forces can be assumed as provinces were pacified or extended. For a time Egypt had three legions; by a.d. 23 the garrison was reduced to two.13 Spain in the 20s в.с. had upwards of seven legions; by about a.d. 14 the garrison had been cut to three.14 The loss of three legions (numbered XVII, XVIII and XIX) on the Rhine frontier in a.d. 9 with Varus led to substantial westward transfers to fill the gap.15 In all, twenty-five legions were in service at the close of the reign. The total had not been increased to match the enlargement of the areas to be controlled, or to make good the losses of a.d. 9: the financial burden was simply too great.
Throughout the late Republic the length of service required of a man joining the legions had been a minimum of six years. But the civil wars witnessed a lengthening of the period spent with the standards. Sometimes, it is clear, men were willing to remain under arms, but others certainly were not, and made their feelings clear whenever the opportunity arose. In 16-14 B-c- Augustus and Agrippa oversaw a substantial programme of colonization and land-settlement in the provinces, very probably to cater for men who had enlisted in the aftermath of Actium. Qn his return to Rome in 13 Augustus ordained that army service in the legions should in future be for a fixed term of sixteen years (which had in any case been the republican maximum, though not the norm), and that those who survived would obtain a cash reward, in place of the land allotments which had become common in recent decades, especially during the civil wars. Cassius Dio's report16 indicates that the soldiers would still have preferred land, but it was no longer politically acceptable to establish colonies in Italy itself, with the attendant ill- feeling and disruption. The sixteen years of service were to be followed by a further four years in reserve. (This too had a republican precedent, as men could be asked to serve a maximum of twenty years in times of special danger.)17 In a.d. 5 the service requirement was further increased, to a minimum of twenty years, plus five in reserve. There is no record of the amount of gratuity fixed in 13 b.c., but Dio's account of the new regulations implies that in a.d. 5 it was
13 Strab. xvii.1.12 (797-8C); Tac.
15 Syme 19}} (d 238). 16 uv.2j.5- 17 Polyb. vi.19.4. 18 DioLV.23.1.
Centurions were paid at much higher rates, and could become wealthy men. To deal with the problem of financing the army, Augustus in a.d. 5 began by proposing that public funds be allocated annually for military pay and rewards.19 This proposal came to nothing, and in the following year he took the initiative in establishing an
During Augustus' reign changes were introduced in the command structure of the legions, which took account of the fact that they had become permanent, self-perpetuating formations. Legates, usually ex- praetors, but sometimes ex-quaestors, ex-aediles and ex-plebeian tribunes, began to be appointed by Augustus directly to command a specific legion and held office, with the title
Dio lv.24.9.
Dio Lv.24.9; Suet.
RG 17. 22 Corbier 1977(0 123).
Below, p. 379; cf. also Suet.
Dio lx.24.3; Campbell 1978 (d 172). 25 Suet.
added to its complement, seemingly for escort and scouting duties.[527] The size of the legion, at full strength, was probably about 5,000-5.2°° men.
Some alterations in equipment can be detected from the archaeological and sculptural record: the oval shield gave way to a curving rectangular or near-rectangular shield, and the shirt of chain mail to a cuirass of articulated iron strips (the
Augustus had introduced fundamental changes, which were not universally popular. In a.d. 14, when his death was announced to the legions on the Rhine and in Pannonia, the legionaries saw a chance to voice their grievances: long service (well beyond the limits set down by Augustus), low rates of pay, harshness and corruption of the centurions, and a prospect for the survivors of settlement on poor upland soils far from home.29 The legionaries asked to be released at the end of sixteen years (the old republican maximum) and to have their
The task of maintaining the integrity of the empire did not fall on the legions alone; it was shared between Rome and her subject peoples. With the close of the civil wars, many of the regiments formed from tribal groups and allied kingdoms were disbanded or went home, but others, whose lifespan had been lengthened out by the civil wars and had acquired a permanence akin to the legions, seem likely to have been retained to act in support of the legions in the wars of Augustus' reign.31 Such forces were normally supplemented, in time of active war, by substantial bodies of troops drawn from client states and tribes in close proximity to the theatre of operations; there was at this time no clear dividing line between the two categories. These
Fig. 3. Rodgen, Germany: ground-plan of Augustan supply base. (After Schonberger and Simon.) A growing number of installations have been identified east of the Rhine, which can be related to the various campaigns between 13 b.c. and a.d. 16. The supply base at Rodgen had an area of 3.3 hectares (8 acres). Within a rampart and double ditch were a number of timber-framed buildings: three granaries (a-c), a headquarters or commandant's house (d), and barracks (e). There were 4 gates (1-4); the chief entrance lay on the east side.
were formed (now, if not earlier) into
The auxiliaries of the early Empire were usually drawn from the non- citizen populations of newly won provinces of the empire, often those under the emperor's direct control. Regiments attested under Augustus or his immediate successors were drawn from Gaul, Spain, the Rhine- land and the Alpine territories, Dalmatia, the Danube lands and Thrace, north Africa and the East. Recruitment (initially, it must be supposed, under treaty obligations), served to draw off the young tribesmen and harness their vigour in the empire's defence.32 Often, regiments were stationed in, or close to, their area of origin, and local deployment was taken for granted. The
Tacitus, in a valuable comment, notes the strength of auxiliary forces in a.d. 2 3 as about the same as the legions, i.e. some 15 0,000 men.33 It was not, he felt, worthwhile giving the numbers in each province, as these did not remain constant; indeed the total in service fluctuated according to the needs of the moment. Few regiments in service under Augustus can be identified by name from the epigraphic evidence, and the listing of provincial garrisons hardly becomes possible before the Flavian period. Conditions of service at this time are not well attested: whether or not auxiliary regiments supplied under treaty obligations always received pay from Augustus is uncertain. There may have been no standard length of service - some auxiliaries are known to have served over thirty years. It is unlikely that any gratuity was automatically payable on completion of service, but individuals might be rewarded, with citizenship, privileges and cash bounties.34
Legions and auxiliaries operated in tandem on campaign: Varus in Germany in a.d. 9 marched with six cohorts of infantry and three
Regiments of
32 Dio Liv.22.5. 33 Tac.
Often the prefects were tribal nobles, though the closeness of the link with their tribe is sometimes obscured by the Roman names they bore as a result of an individual grant of citizenship. Arminius, later to spearhead the successful resistance to Roman domination east of the Rhine, had gained Roman citizenship and equestrian status in return for his military exploits, probably as a
Excessive reliance on the military potential of recently subjected peoples entailed some risk. Loyalty to the communities from which they had been raised might prove stronger than to Rome. The Pannonian revolt in a.d. 6 was fuelled by an unwise concentration of Dalmatian auxiliaries for the campaign against Maroboduus, when the auxiliaries saw a chance to throw off the Roman yoke.[532]
Regiments were formed on the Roman model in the territories of client kings, especially in the East. Herod used Roman officers to command his forces, which included Gauls and Germans.39 Maroboduus, on the fringe of the Roman world, based the organization and training of his own forces on the successful Roman exemplar.[533] Rather later, during the reign of Tiberius, cohorts nominally serving a client king in Thrace mutinied on the rumour that they were to be posted away from their homeland, and their ethnic homogeneity diluted; fierce fighting ensued before they admitted defeat.[534]
A few auxiliary cohorts were raised among Roman citizens. Under the Empire there are records of at least six
The value of retaining a substantial fleet in permanent commission had been amply demonstrated during the civil wars. Two major bases were established by Octavian in the years immediately following Actium: one was placed at Cape Misenum, at the western end of the Bay of Naples (replacing Portus Iulius, which was abandoned, despite the considerable efforts expended on its construction). The other base was at Ravenna, near the head of the Adriatic.46 From 31 в.с. (or even earlier) a squadron was maintained at Forum Iulii (Frejus) on the south coast of Gaul where substantial storage and administrative buildings have been postulated; but the base there soon ceased to have a major role.47 From later evidence it seems that ships based at Misenum patrolled the western Mediterranean and the coastline of Africa and Egypt, while those at Ravenna had a more restricted role in the Adriatic and the Aegean. Both major fleets had out-stations on Corsica and Sardinia, at Ostia and at Rome itself.
The combined strength of the two major fleets can be estimated only roughly, at about 15,000-20,000 men, perhaps manning some 75-100 ships. Their crews formed a useful source of trained manpower within Italy. From epigraphic sources and sculptured reliefs it can be seen that the ships were mainly triremes, with a few quadriremes, together with some light vessels, known as liburnians. The ships were individually named, after rivers, gods, goddesses, and personifications, male and female. Individual ships were commanded by trierarchs, squadrons by navarchs, and each of the major fleets by a
In the Republic a magistrate on campaign in his province regularly formed a small bodyguard from the troops at his disposal. It was given the name
After Actium, Octavian continued to employ
During the civil wars the manpower of praetorian cohorts had been drawn from time-served veterans, or men of long experience, heavy with
48 Caes.
51 Tac.
honour and medals.54 They were thus an elite force made up of specially chosen individuals. However under Augustus (and later) the praetorians were recruited directly from civilian life, in Italy itself; at first recruits were drawn chiefly from Latium, Etruria and Umbria, and from the old colonies of the Republic.55 In 13 в.с. service in the praetorian cohorts was fixed at twelve years, later increased in a.d. 5 to sixteen years.56 Pay was set at well above the legionary rate; by a.d. 14 it had risen to 750 denarii per year.57 The legionaries far away in the frontier provinces of the empire soon became jealous of the privileged position and higher pay of the praetorians.58
The nine cohorts of the guard (if we may use this term, which has no Latin equivalent) were each commanded by a tribune; most tribunes had already been
To match the three praetorian cohorts stationed at Rome itself, three
In a.d. 6, seven
For his personal protection Augustus established a small body of
N
'•■-._ ; Pannonia
.ВЦ
Spain
. \Мое[536]1а_
О'
*—"V"
SCALE
• Egypt
О 260 500 750 1000 lim 0 250 600 miles
Fig. 4. Distribution of legions, a.d. 14. (After Keppie.)
mounted bodyguards, the
iv. army and navy under the julio-claudians
When expansionist policies were abandoned late in Augustus' reign, the empire settled to a generation of peaceful development. The army was stationed largely along the outer limits of the empire, and was principally engaged in the consolidation of Roman control. As time passed, large concentrations of military forces, assembled at strategic points along the frontiers in preparation for further advance, gave way to a more even distribution. Temporary encampments gradually took on a more permanent air. The role of the army became increasingly defensive, greater attention being paid to preserving the integrity of those areas controlled by Rome against attack from without. This attitude was to lead, from the later first century onwards, to the physical construction of frontier lines which in some areas constituted a clear demarcation line between land under full Roman control and the tribes beyond.
The distribution of the legions at the death of Augustus can be fairly well defined, though the location of individual legions within a province may remain somewhat uncertain.63 The army of a province could consist of up to four legions (Syria and the two German 'districts' each had four), along with auxiliaries in perhaps a roughly equal number. Some provinces, less threatened by external foes, had a garrison consisting of auxiliary
Bellen 1981 (d 160); Speidel 1984 (d 256).
Tac.
Tac.
Legion
Station in a.d. 14
Station in a.d. 70
I Germanica
Lower Germany
(disbanded a.d. 70)
I Adiutrix
(formed a.d. 68)
Upper Germany
II Adiutrix
(formed a.d. 69)
Britain
I Italica
(formed a.d. 66)
Moesia
II Augusta
Upper Germany
Britain
III Augusta
Africa
Africa
III Cyrenaica
Egypt
Egypt
III Gallica
Syria
Syria
IV Macedonica
Spain
(disbanded a.d. 70)
IV Scythica
Moesia
Syria
IV Flavia
(formed a.d. 69-70)
Dalmatia
V Alaudae
Lower Germany
(?disbanded a.d. 70)
V Macedonica
Moesia
Moesia
VI Ferrata
Syria
Syria
VI Victrix
Spain
Lower Germany
VII Claudia
Dalmatia
Moesia
VII Gemina
(formed a.d. 68)
Tarraconensis
VIII Augusta
Pannonia
Upper Germany
IX Hispana
Pannonia
Britain
X Fretensis
Syria
Judaea
X Gemina
Spain
Lower Germany
XI Claudia
Dalmatia
Upper Germany
XII Fulminata
Syria
Cappadocia?65
XIII Gemina
Upper Germany
Pannonia
XIV Gemina
Upper Germany
Upper Germany
XI Apollinaris
Pannonia
Pannonia
XV Primigenia
(formed a.d. 39-42)
(disbanded a.d. 70)
XVI Gallica
Upper Germany
(disbanded a.d. 70)
XVI Flavia
(formed a.d. 69—70)
Syria66
XVII
(lost with Varus, a.d. 9)
XVIII
(lost with Varus, a.d. 9)
XIX
(lost with Varus, a.d. 9)
XX Valeria
Lower Germany
Britain
XXI Rapax
Lower Germany
Lower Germany
XXII Deiotariana
Egypt
Egypt
XXII Primigenia
(formed a.d. 39-42)
Lower Germany
a.d. 14
a.d. 70
Total in service:
28 or 29
task-forces, to be sent to another province; this avoided leaving a long stretch of the frontier devoid of its garrison.67 Major campaigns could still lead to the creation of new legions, which were normally raised in Italy itself: under Caligula or Claudius two new legions, XV and XXII Primigenia (First-Born) were formed, to release seasoned troops for the projected invasion of Britain; in a.d. 66 Nero formed a new legion, I Italica (Italian), for his planned expedidon to the Caucasus.68 Otherwise
65 AE 1983, 927; D. van Berchem, MH 40 (1985) 185-96. « /fov/.
67 Saxer 1967 (d 228). 68 Ritterling 1925 (d 223) 1758, 1797, 1407; Suet.
the number of legions in service remained constant, until the particular requirements of the civil war after Nero's death led to the formation of new legions and its aftermath to the disbandment of several long- established entities (see Table 3).
The legions of the Republic had been composed of Italians, the traditional manpower source, though during the civil wars all the protagonists from Caesar onwards succeeded in augmenting their forces by forming 'legions' from the non-citizen populations of their provinces and by training and arming them in the Roman manner. Though Octavian sent home non-Romans found serving in Antony's legions, he was prepared soon to accept XXII Deiotariana into his permanent army, and later in his reign he had recourse to non-Roman sources to fill out the ranks, especially in the East.69 Italians who had been prepared to serve in the civil wars for a fairly short term proved unwilling to spend a span of twenty-five years or more, much of their adult life, in a frontier province far from home. Greater emphasis was placed on seeking recruits in the provinces, where (it seems clear) men were eager and willing to serve, and saw in legionary service a route to social advancement.70 Some of these men would be citizens, sons of Italian families long resident there, or of colonists of the Caesarian and Augustan periods, but it is suspected that increasingly non-citizens were enlisted, and given citizenship and Roman names on enlistment. By the close of the Julio-Claudian age it is likely that less than half of all legionaries throughout the empire had been born in Italy; in the East the proportion was probably very small indeed.
The realization that the empire had all but reached its manageable limits deprived the army of its traditional role. Long decades of relative peace could easily sap morale, as Corbulo discovered in Syria early in Nero's reign.71 Energetic commanders occupied the troops' energies with route marches and manoeuvres; the troops were much involved with the internal security of the provinces in which they were stationed. The army also formed a useful reserve of disciplined manpower, to be drafted in to undertake construction and labouring work, a role the soldiers deeply detested.72 The very presence of the army had a substantial impact on the developing economies of the provinces; the soldiers had to be fed and clothed, and had money to spend. At the close of their military service (which between 40 per cent and 50 per cent might be likely to survive), most legionaries received a gratuity in cash, but some were settled (as of old) with land grants in colonies, in or near the provinces where they had served, and constituted bulwarks of loyalty to the system which they had once served. Under Claudius
" /L.f248} = EJ2 261. *> Tac. Ляя. iv.4. 7' Tac.
72 Plut.
Fig. 5. Vetera (Xanten), Germany: ground-plan of a double legionary fortress, Neronian date. (After Bogaers and Riiger.) By the end of Augustus' reign the chief control points along the west bank of the Rhine had been established. Little is known of the fortress built at Xanten at that time, or about Tiberian or Claudian successors. The Neronian fortress was 56 hectares (138 acres) in size. Note: stone-built headquarters (a), two houses for legates (b, c), workshops (d), tribunes' houses (e) and hospital (f). Tacitus vividly describes the siege of Vetera by rebels in a.d. 69, after which the fortress was resited in a more commanding position.
veterans of the legions stationed in Britain, then newly added to the empire, were settled at Colchester (Camulodunum), those of the Rhine legions at Cologne and those of Syria at Akko (Ptolemais). An attempt by Nero to resume colonization in Italy itself met with little success.[537]
While legionary organization and service conditions under the early Empire were more or less fixed by the time of the death of Augustus, the auxiliary forces and the fleet took longer to reach their permanent form. An important stage in the integration of auxiliaries into the armed forces of the empire belongs under Claudius, who regularized the system of rewards for honourable service: citizenship after twenty-five years of that service (which might continue longer), and the regularization of any marriage contracted during service, so that children already born obtained citizenship, as well as any born to the same couple in the future. These grants were recorded on pocket-sized, folding bronze tablets called diplomas, presented to the soldier as documentary proof of his privileges.74 These grants were seen as an important inducement to enlistment and made a useful contribution to the spread of citizenship in the provinces, which was seen as allied to loyal service to the emperor. Regiments continued to be formed, mainly in newly acquired territories such as Britain. When a client kingdom was absorbed, its army might be taken over into the Roman service.[538] By the death of Nero the total number of auxiliaries under arms, or available for service, was probably near 200,000. We still cannot name all the
As the legions began to be spaced out along the frontiers of the empire, so too we find a more piecemeal distribution of auxiliary regiments placed singly or in pairs. The earliest recognizable ground- plans of forts, at such sites as Valkenburg, Hofheim and Oberstimm, belong under Claudius. It was perhaps about this time (if not earlier) that fixed rates of pay were established for auxiliaries. For the Flavian era, the figures of ^ or I of the legionary's pay have been proposed, but these seem over-generous for the Julio-Claudian age.76
Furthermore, Claudius regulated the sequence of commands held in auxiliary units and defined more precisely who should hold them. He ordained that command of auxiliary regiments should be given solely to equestrians (to the exclusion of
* ^fmt.- — -
- ."4 ::;]
50
1 I I I I I m
Fig. 6. Valkenburg, Holland: fort-plan,
non-citizen auxiliaries. Some examples of this sequence can be documented within Claudius' reign,78 but it did not become universal: by Nero's death (or at least in the aftermath of the civil war of a.d. 68-69) had become normal for the tribunate of the legion to be held between the two prefectures rather than after both. Centurions were excluded from these commands, but a set sequence of tribunates in the cohorts at Rome became the preserve of the
sĵŝ - - с г: г..-Та
ii
A.D. 70
of the praetorians. These avenues of promotion could lead in due course to the higher posts in the equestrian civil service as procurators. The prefectures of the fleets at Misenum and Ravenna were seen as having a place in the same developing hierarchy; military expertise was not considered a prerogative for these two posts, which were mainly administrative, and sometimes an imperial freedman, having the special trust of the emperor, held one of the fleet prefectures.
It may also have been Claudius who fixed the length of service for fleet personnel at twenty-six years, with citizenship and regularization of marriage on discharge, though the earliest secure evidence on the duration of service belongs under Vespasian.79 Small locally based naval squadrons came gradually into being, some perhaps already under Augustus, to police the Rhine, English Channel, the Danube, the Black Sea, Egypt, Syria and the coasts of north Africa.
In Rome itself the early years of Tiberius saw the concentration of the nine praetorian cohorts and the three Rome-based urban cohorts in a fortress built on high ground in the north-eastern outskirts of the city, beyond the old Servian Wall. It was named the
v. the roman army in a.d. 70
Two detailed accounts survive of the Roman army in action in the last years of the Julio-Claudian era. Firstly, Josephus provides an appreciation of the Roman army of the eastern provinces, supported by auxiliaries and levies from the adjacent client kingdoms, engaged in traditional warfare against rebellious subjects, the Jews, and a full account of the reduction of successive military strongholds between a.d. 66 and 73; archaeological evidence of siege-camps round Masada and at other sites offers dramatic confirmation of the historical record. The second account is from the hand of Tacitus, the surviving portion of whose
393
»• Nash 1968 (e 87) 22iff. к ae 1978, 286; C. Letta,
'Judaea
SCALE
О г» 500 750 1000 km
Fig. 7. Distribution of legions, a.d. г}.
over a hundred years was turned against other legionaries, with similar tactics and weaponry deployed on both sides.
To the Roman public, the army of a.d. 69-70 probably seemed little different from its counterpart in the days of Julius Caesar. The legionaries wore familiar equipment and marched behind the silver (or sometimes gold)
A blurring of the traditional distinctions between branches of the army can be observed. Physical and mental attributes would soon become more important in determining whether a man became a
83 Tac.
85 Tac.
legionary or an auxiliary than his cultural or ethnic antecedents! In the crisis of a.d. 68—9 the manpower of the major fleets was utilized to form two new legions, I and II Adiutrix ('Supportive'), which became a permanent part of the imperial army. Galba formed a new legion in Spain, at the time of his bid for power. Many legions were given fresh postings after the civil war of a.d. 69—70, with those legionary bases nearest Italy in the secure hands of Flavian legions.
Until a.d. 69—70 many auxiliary regiments had retained close contacts with their tribe or area of origin, sometimes being stationed at no great distance. It was only after the events of a.d. 69-70, when several Gallic and Rhineland units deserted
The Roman army of the later first century a.d. could still look on occasion to forward movement (for example in Britain and Germany), but for the most part it was settling to a static role of frontier defence. The era of rapid advance and easy victories was over.
CHAPTER 12 THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
H. GALSTERER
i
The following chapter is concerned with the application of law, not with law and justice itself. We shall have to deal with the different courts and officers of law, with judges and procedure, with actions and punishment; the development of law from the late Republic to early Empire, its pre- classical shape and the birth of Roman legal science are described in chapter 21 of this volume.1
The limits of time given for this volume are irrelevant insofar as law and administration of justice are concerned. Caesar was killed before he could start on any reform programme he may have planned,2 and the civil wars which began after his death postponed any serious reform until peace was restored by the new
There will be many 'probablys' and similar expressions in the following pages, too many perhaps in view of the fact that the period between Cicero and Tacitus is one of the best known in ancient history. But it is a lopsided picture we get, overstressing Rome and the upper classes. Legal literature on the other side is transmitted to us mostly in the pruned state passed down by Justinian's lawyers, who eliminated or altered many subjects no longer valid in the sixth century. This concerns municipal jurisdiction especially. But other fields too are less well known than one would like to think.
The best introduction 'to get a feeling' of how Roman law worked in practice, is probably still to read over large parts of the
Suet.
397
ii
It is best to start with the city of Rome, as the administration of justice there is best known, and with civil jurisdiction.[539] In the final years of the Republic the main law officers of the
The consuls, whose
The procedure at the praetors' and the aediles' court was what is called the formulary system, at least for most cases (cf. Crook САН ix2, ch. 14). Roman jurisdiction was from the beginning bipartite — the praetor (or aedile) examining the case in the presence of both parties, as to whether it was admissible according to the law, and then transferring the factual decision to a private judge.
Now the praetor could, and progressively did, accept cases not foreseen by the written laws or slightly different from the situation presupposed in these laws. If he did so, the case no longer depended upon civil law
Let Titius be
A civil suit began
The plaintiff and the defendant, or their representatives, had to be present. Normally they had made an appointment, a
If both were present, the praetor in discussion with the parties and their counsel and with the help of
There was ample opportunity given to the parties to state their points, and there was probably much discussion in this stage already, when questions of law were deliberated, but in the end it was the praetor who decided — he was never a simple referee between parties' claims.
With the naming of the
TabPomp XIV. The translation is by Crook 1967 (f 21) 75.
Schiller 1978 (f 689) 439? with commentary.
The
The parties could in principle agree upon any fit person to act as judge,13 but most cases seem to have gone to these
It was up to the judge to find out the facts in the law suit, to find out whether Numerius Negidius really owed the 10,000 sesterces to Aulus Agerius or what the circumstances were in the sale, if there was any, of the slave Stichus. As an additional difficulty the judge in most lawsuits had not only to condemn or acquit, but also to assess the value of something to be given or to be done, and (to complicate things still further) there were no acknowledged rules of relevance to restrain the
8 As Augustus decreed a minimal census of 200,000 sesterces for members of his new, the fourth decuria, and
Behrens 1970 (d 245) with Galsterer 1973 (d 253). Readers should be warned however that Behrens' interpretation is not accepted by all, cf. W. Eder,
Excluded were slaves, women, the mentally ill and those persons who had been convicted of certain delicts, cf. Kaser 1966 (f 661) 140, and below, n. 20.
Gell.-ЛМ xiv.2; Pliny,
parties and their counsel from burying the evidence as much as possible under heaps of irrelevant statements — some of Cicero's speeches (e.g. the
After judgment, the duty of the
hi
So far civil jurisdiction in the city of Rome. Criminal justice had not much altered since the days of Sulla, at least before Augustus.17 The main organs of this justice were the courts of law erected by statute and dealing each with specific crimes, with extortion (
Procedure in the
Beside this upper-class justice of the
IV
Jurisdicdon in Italy in the last century B.C. was shaped mainly by the consequences of the Social War, when all communities up to the Rubicon became citizen towns. Few will subscribe today to Rudolph's theory that the Italian municipalities received their own jurisdiction only by a law of Caesar instituting municipal jurisdiction.22 Latin colonies and cities of
There were still — down to Augustus —
Differences in jurisdictional competence between colonies and
In criminal law it seems as if at the beginning of our period municipal juries existed and still enjoyed far-reaching competence. It is difficult to avoid the impression from Cicero's speech for Cluentius that there were local
Procedure in the Italian towns probably followed Roman practice, i.e. formulary process with the chief magistrates in the role of the praetors at Rome. They too had been called praetor from the beginning, so it seems, because their main duty was in jurisdiction, and when later this title seemed too grandiloquent for small town magistrates, now they were simply named
v
Finally jurisdiction in the provinces, originally areas under the supervision of magistrates or pro-magistrates with
The governor used formulary jurisdiction as did the praetor at Rome. The recently published inscription of Contrebia shows the governor of Hither Spain giving in 87 в.с. a
Jurisdiction in the provinces had one further peculiarity too, in that the governor did not reside all the time in one city where people had to go if in need of him but, following a certain calendar, he toured the main cities of his province where people from the surrounding areas could come to bring actions before him and to transact other legal business.[545]From the 'coming together' of plaintiffs, defendants, witnesses, judges and business people of all sorts this meeting was called
VI
The introduction of one-man rule affected the different branches of the administration of justice in different ways. The mainstay of civil jurisdiction remained the two praetors' courts at Rome. The number of praetors was augmented by Caesar to between ten and sixteen and remained the same number under Augustus. Later they oscillated between twelve and eighteen, with twelve more or less the norm.30 Some of them were presidents of the
But the republican courts were still functioning and were reorganized by Augustus in a couple of very detailed laws, the
The old jurisdiction by praetor and private judges was hemmed in now in two ways. One we will deal with later, the now regular use of the juridical competences of the consuls, acting with the Senate as their jury and functioning mostly as a peers' court for delinquent senators. More important and ever more increasing was the role of the emperor. Using the
Augustus, as we are told, was a most diligent judge who sat until the end of the day, very lenient according to Suetonius or, if we believe Cassius Dio, most severe.33 Another emperor of outstanding zeal in jurisdiction was Claudius, but of him too people doubted whether he did
31 For the arguments about the codification of the
not do so only to have an outlet for his natural cruelty.34 Of one of his reforms in jurisdiction we have first-rate evidence, a papyrus giving parts of what is probably a speech by Claudius in the Senate on the minimum age of
VII
The administration of justice continued to develop with the Principate. In civil jurisdiction at Rome the
The emperor's main activity lay of course in the field of appeals. Regular appeal from the sentences of ordinary judges or courts had not existed in the Republic:
viii
The co-existence of different courts became much more problematic in the field of criminal justice. When Cn. Piso in a.d. 20 was accused of (among other crimes) poisoning Germanicus, the
As the
As courts multiplied, so did fines and penalties. In the Republic, with the exception of some rather archaic punishments, like burying alive the Vestal Virgin who was found guilty of unchastity, or the drowning of parricides in a sack, together with snakes and other animals, there were either pecuniary fines or capital punishment, execution or voluntary exile, which involved
The emperor besides giving judgement in the first instance and functioning as judge of appeal from all his delegates (and more and more Roman officials came to be in public and in their own opinion the emperor's delegates!) became the heir of the
praetor. It is only in the later years of Augustus, that we hear of the Senate acting as a court, as a possibility from Ovid in a.d. 8 and, with concrete cases, in a.d. i 2 and 13, cf. Talbert 1984 (d 77) 460-87. Already in 4 B.C. Augustus had, in the fifth edict of Cyrene, given the Senate jurisdictional competences in less important, i.e. non-capital, cases of
Cf. Talbert 1984 (d 77) 47of.
Paul in his commentary on the
The younger Pliny's opinion 'licere senatui, sicut licet, et mitigare leges et intendere' (iv.9.17) was still at the beginning of the second century opposed by other senators, cf. also 11.1 l.ifi and B. Levick,
16 Tac.
password now of the Roman citizen, whose immunity from torture and from execution on the spot was even guaranteed by the Augustan law on
IX
In Italy jurisdiction in the
Criminal justice in Italian towns probably declined even earlier than civil jurisdiction. It used to be maintained that capital jurisdiction had never been given to the
Acts 25:12.
The relevant chapter is 69, which in the Lex Malacitana gives 1,000 sesterces as the upper level, in the otherwise identical Lex Irnitana 500 sesterces.
Cf. G. Purpura, Tabulae Pompeianae ij e Ĵ4: due documenti rclativi atprestitio marittimo, Atti /7. Congr. Intern, di Papirol. (Napoli, 1984) 1245-66.
AE 1947,47, cf. Kaser 1966 (f66i) i 29, r 34. Manumission at Herculaneum was inferred by V. Arangio-Ruiz,
C. W. Bruns, Foutes Iuis Romani Autiqui7 (Tubingen 1909) 1 ;8 nr. 33.
x
In the provinces the jurisdictional duties of the governor became more and more important as the waging of wars became the exception.54 After 27 в.с. the distinction between public and imperial provinces was relevant for jurisdiction because
The governor could, as before, use
52 AE 1971, 88f and Agennius Urbicus (in Corp.Agrim. p. 47 Th.), implying that all cities had
Cf. Garnsey and Sailer 1987 (a 34) 54-40.
Another question concerns the
Cf. Burton 1976 (d 89). The inscription from Cos (AE 1974, 629) is relevant too for people trying to evade municipal jurisdiction.
were introduced, as has been shown lately by models for an
Municipal jurisdiction in the provinces was different, depending on whether a city had Roman or Latin rights or was simply non-Roman,
xi
According to Velleius Paterculus, the loyal historian of Augustus and Tiberius, after the end of the civil wars laws, juries and Senate regained their former authority: 'restituta vis legibus, iudiciis auctoritas, senatui maiestas'.61 So it might seem, and senators would be happier and certainly fared better if they believed in this phraseology. Tacitus knew otherwise: the emperor slowly began to arrogate to himself the functions of Senate, magistrates and laws, without meeting opposition.[549] As in politics, so in the administration of justice the old institutions first operated next to imperial jurisdiction and then slowly withered away, first in the provinces, then in Italy and finally in Rome, first in criminal justice, then in civil jurisdiction. Senators in the capital might, in the period comprised in this volume, still sometimes try to live under the illusion of the old
ITALY AND ROME FROM SULLA TO AUGUSTUS
M. H. CRAWFORD
I. EXTENT OF ROMANIZATION
The enfranchisement of peninsular Italy in and immediately after 90 B.C., and of Transpadane Gaul in 49 B.C., was the culmination of a process which had begun in the fifth century b.c.1 Similarly, the Romanization of Italy and the 'Italianization' of Rome, although both proceeded at an accelerated pace in the generations which followed the Social War, were phenomena whose roots lay deep in the past. In offering an interpretation of the essential features of the changing relationship between Rome and Italy from Sulla to Augustus, one must perforce take for granted much of their earlier history.2
A few words, however, by way of introduction. Within both the insurgent and the loyalist areas in 91 b.c., there were substantial variations in the extent of Romanizadon. Thus, of the Samnites and the Marsi, who both rebelled, the former still spoke their own language and used their own alphabet, the latter wrote and spoke Latin. The linguistic diversity of rebel Italy is indeed perfectly reflected in its bilingual coinage. The Samnites moreover remained directly acquainted with Greek cultural models down to the outbreak of war, for the Marsi these had probably long been mediated through Rome.3 Similarly, of the Etruscans, whose part in the rebellion lay somewhere on a scale between the minimal and the non-existent, the southern peoples had largely ceased to speak Etruscan or to funcdon as autonomous centres of artisdc production in the third century B.C., the northern cides remained Etruscan in their language and in their art.4
A similarly variegated picture emerges if one looks at other areas of activity. Traditional forms of agriculture survived in some parts of Italy
I should like, with the customary disclaimer, to offer my warmest thanks to Dr A.K. Bowman, Professor P.A. Brunt, Dr T.J. Cornell, Miss А.С. Dionisotti, Professor E. Gabba, the late Professor A. Gara, Mr Ph. Moreau, Dr J.A. North, for their comments on earlier drafts of this chapter. I should also have liked it if my thanks had been able to cross the Styx to Martin Frederiksen, without whose fertility in ideas and generosity with them this chapter would have been a much poorer thing.
I have tried to lay out its essential features in Crawford 1986 (e 27).
See Crawford 1981 (e 26). 4 Torelli 1976 (e 130).
414
in the second century B.C., against a general background of the spread of plantations and also of pastoralism oriented towards the market;5 by way of contrast, the whole of peninsular Italy had come to use the same coinage and the same system of reckoning within a generation or so after the end of the Second Punic War.6 The coinage which the insurgents struck in 91—89 в.с. was a coinage of denarii, with one issue of
Romanized and non-Romanized, insurgent and loyalist, all had a common citizenship from (let us say) 86 в.с. Attempts had been made in the immediate aftermath of the Social War to limit the distribution of the new citizens either to a small minority of the existing Roman tribes or to a small number of specia'ly created additional tribes; and Sulla had tried to deprive some Italian communities of full Roman citizenship. But once these manoeuvres had failed, the whole of Italy south of the Po, perhaps with the exception of some parts of Liguria, formed in theory a single political unit centred on Rome. Even if they remained subject to the jurisdiction of the governor of Gallia Cisalpina, the citizens of the former Latin colony of Placentia were fully entitled to vote in elections at Rome. Entitlement and practice, however, need not coincide and it would be rash to suppose that the orientation of men's political consciousness necessarily changed very much or very fast. One small piece of evidence suggests that it did begin to change. Unknown on inscriptions outside Roman territory and of extreme rarity outside Rome itself before the Social War, consular dating formulae begin to turn up in all parts of Italy with some regularity (see Appendix I, p. 979).
Let us consider first, then, the problem of political structures. Censors were elected for 86 B.C., but they evidently did no more than nibble at the problem of compiling a list of all those who were now Roman citizens. No further census was held for sixteen years; for Sulla certainly took steps to ensure that the Republic could function without censors, whether or not he intended or directed that the census should disappear and whether or not he hoped or wished that the vast mass of new citizens should not be registered.8 Even the censors of 70 B.C., in the context of an abandonment of some of the more conspicuously objectionable features of the Sullan settlement, failed to register more than a propor-
5 Lepore 1981 (e 7j). 6 See Crawford 1985 (в }2o).
Map j. Italy.
tion of those whom they could in theory have registered. No further census was completed before that of Augustus in 28 b.c. But this was not the only problem. The sheer size and dispersion of the citizen body now made plain what had long been the case, namely that no assembly at Rome could be regarded as reflecting the views of the citizen body as a whole; no longer could even the Roman system of group voting be regarded as achieving this end, despite the fact that if a few people from Arpinum travelled to Rome to vote, they could in some sense be seen as the representatives of their section of the
Let the
Of course, in the age of Cicero, the
A sense of the tensions emerges in the passage in which Velleius Paterculus singles out for praise the help given to Rome in the Social War by his ancestor Minatius Magius of Aeclanum, who was himself the descendant of a man of Capua loyal to Rome in the Second Punic War; Velleius was well aware that the Italian cause was just, but that loyalty to
Rome was an overriding obligauon, that Rome granted after the outbreak of war what she had denied in time of peace (11.16.1-2):
The most important leaders of the Italici, however, were Popaedius Silo, Herius Asinius, Insteius Cato, C. Pontidius, Pontius Telesinus, Marius Egnatius, Papius Mutilus. Nor will I from modesty subtract a particle of glory from my own family, while continuing to tell the truth; for tribute must be paid to the memory of Minatius Magius of Aeclanum, my
The poignancy of the juxtaposition, Minatius Magius beside the insurgent leaders, speaks for itself. We should also pause for a moment to stand before the Arringatore, a splendid bronze statue of an orator in full flood, now in the Museo Archaeologico di Firenze; belonging to the early Julio-Claudian period, he represents perfectly these men who stood between their two worlds, with the
But it is more than doubtful whether such men pursued their careers in the context of any kind of systematic policy in favour of administrative centralization or social conformity. It is true that there are a few coin- types which seem to advertise the
Demougin 1988 (d 37) 781; M. Cristofani 1986-7 (f 338).
Crawford 1974 (в 319) i nos. 391 (C. Egnatius Cn.f. Cn.n. Maxsumus), 392 (L. Farsuleius Mensor), 403 (Kalenus, Cordus).
E.g., Galsterer i97Ĉ(E52) 13-14; for the ideology of a modern nation state, see e.g., E. Weber,
Beard and Crawford 1985 (a 3) ch. 2.
witnessed the beginning of large-scale grants of citizenship in the provinces, massive colonization overseas and the emergence of Rome not simply as a world power, but also as a world state. It is in this context significant that the possibility of holding Roman citizenship along with that of a foreign state emerges for the first time in the age of Caesar.[552]Contrasts between Italian communities formerly of different statuses will perhaps have seemed secondary to the need to create and conserve a sense of Italian identity against the background of a rapidly changing outside world. It is worth noting that when Augustus seized power in Rome and served as a focus of loyalty to Italy and the empire alike, the privileged status of Italy was carefully preserved.
Against this background, Cicero captures for us towards the end of his life both the awareness that much had changed in Italy in the previous generation and a sense of the constraints on change
'... this is my and my brother's real country
The central problem, then, is to try and understand just how far, and why, the different local cultures of Italy, in the sense of shared and transmitted practices and values within particular regions, survived into and beyond the age of Augustus.
One point must first be made, namely that the tenacity of Greek culture in some cities of the south cannot be taken as typical. Its survival was helped by two factors, the existence outside Italy of thousands of cities of Greek language and culture, contact with which reinforced Greek culture and institutions in Italy, and the value attached by the Roman elite to Greek culture, which served to nurture those centres of Greek civilization which lay close at hand.[554] This factor had probably already begun to operate before the Social War. And the Greek cities of Italy were largely exempt from the convulsions which we shall shortly see to have played a major part in the Romanization of Italy in general. It is in this context that we should understand the hesitation of Neapolis and Heraclea before accepting Roman citizenship when they were offered it in 90 B.C.; the survival of local issues of coinage at Heraclea, Velia and indeed Paestum;19 and the persistence of the Greek language and of Greek institutions in general, at Neapolis, Velia, Rhegium, Tarentum, Canusium.20 It is curious that the two Latin municipal charters of the republican period which we possess come from the Greek city of Tarentum and from a shrine in the territory of Heraclea; Heraclea drifted quietly out of existence in the age of Augustus; but Tarentum continued as a recognizably Greek city in the early Empire. And the separateness of the south in the age of Augustus is reflected in the fact that Strabo discusses Bruttium, Lucania and Magna Graecia in the context of a Greek tradition which contrasted the archaic and classical periods with the hellenistic and Roman, but saw the whole as the single history of a separate area.21 Even so, and despite the disappearance of much evidence — C.T. Ramage, an intrepid Scot who walked the length and breadth of Magna Graecia just after the Bourbon restoration, saw a Greek inscription of the second century a.d., now lost, recording an agonistic festival at Scolacium - there is no good reason to suppose that any part of Italy remained recognizably Greek beyond the middle of the third century a.d.22
Of local practices, and of men's attachment to them, Cicero preserves a couple of rare glimpses. The first is no more than a casual reference to the occasion, 'cum eius in nuptiis more Larinatium multitudo hominum pranderet', 'when at his marriage according to the custom of the people of Larinum a large number of people were dining together' (
" Crawford 1985 (в 320), 71—2; for isolated survivalsof non-Roman units of reckoning, weights and measures, see
20 A provisional statement in Crawford 1978 (f 20) 195 n. 12; note a statue of a Greek in a toga at Velia, de Franciscis 1970 (e 40); and see Sartori 1976 (e 118); Keuls 1976 (e 67); Lepore 1983 (e 76); see Appendix II, p. 981. It will not do to talk in the same breath of Tarentum and the rest of Italy as does Torelli 1984 (e 132) 42-3. 21 Prontera 1988 (e 99).
comes from a letter of the emperor Marcus Aurelius to Fronto in the middle of the second century a.d., recording how a nauve of Anagnia knew and cared enough to explain to him, when he visited the city, that a religious formula inscribed in Latin above a gate of the city used a technical term of Hernican origin (Fronto, 66—7 Naber = 60 van den Hout).
The survival of such pracdces was no doubt favoured by the extent to which the communides of Italy not only administered their own cities, but also performed tasks which other sociedes assign to central structures. The main lines for the government of Italy were presumably laid down in the immediate aftermath of the Social War, in order to cope with the incorporation of half the communities of Italy into the Roman citizen body. But it is also important to remember that the age of Cicero was in addition a period which saw the normalization of the government of communities which had long been Roman. Capua, deprived of the right to govern itself in 211 b.c., became a colony in 5 9-5 8 b.c. A constitution was given to Cingulum by T. Labienus on the eve of the outbreak of war in 49 b.c. The constitution of Arpinum was revised in 46 b.c., with the support of Cicero, by his son and his nephew and a colleague. The same period saw the progressive elimination, by promotion to municipal status or by incorporation in another
It is perhaps not very important to decide whether these were imposed by measures passed at Rome or introduced by the men who provided the new communities with their charters, drawing on the shared experience of centuries of giving constitutions to communities in Italy or overseas. The Lex lulia itself must have imposed the rule that a community must vote to accept the Roman citizenship; it may also have laid down the obligation that the new
23 For particularly interesting cases of
been
Surviving fragments of charters alas often pose more problems than they solve. The only straightforward text is the Lex Tarentina, the preserved part of which makes it clear that the text relates solely to Tarentum; it contains the remains of chapters dealing with the improper handling of
See the Lex Irnitana, Gonzalez 1986 (в 235), ch. 31, where 'quod ante h(anc) l(egem) rogatam iure more eiius municipi fuerunt' is clearly the result of imperfect adaptation of a chapter of a general statute; the charters of the Flavian
Paci 1989(6260) 125-33; the phrase is echoed by Cicero,
in the Lex Tarentina, though, since much more is preserved, there are many aspects which are not represented at Tarentum; but two of the chapters at Tarentum reappear at Urso, as also in the charters issued by the Flavian emperors to the new Latin
The communities of Italy did not possess capital jurisdiction after the Social War;[557] but it is striking that they preserved some military and police functions, not only in the late Republic, but even beyond. Archaeological evidence reveals substantial wall-building in the late Republic, for instance at Spoletium and Ferentinum, not surprising in the disturbed circumstances of the period and carefully to be distinguished from the symbolic walls with which Augustan foundations like Saepinum or Augusta Bagiennorum were equipped.[558] And an inscription from Praeneste refers to the building of
It is then not surprising that these largely autonomous local administrations of late republican Italy should have invested heavily in building programmes in general, to create an urban centre where none existed before, to provide for the administration of the newly constituted community, simply as an expression of civic pride.40
And naturally enough also, the existence of local administration in the late Republic and in the imperial age was reflected in the inscription of lists of local magistrates and priests and in the erection of
II. SURVIVAL OF LOCAL CULTURES
The following discussion, then, of the survival of local cultures concentrates on what seem to be four important identifying features of any ancient culture with a claim to be individual and distinctive: language, religion, family structures, disposal of the dead. We shall of course never know in detail in what ways the behaviour and mentality of the peasants of Etruria or Samnium changed during the century which
3' Zevi 1976 (e 142) 56-60. For the overly zealous police of Saepinum in the second century a.d., see now Lo Cascio 1985-90 (e 79); Brunt 1990 (a 12), 427-8. 40 Gabba 1972 (e 44).
Fasti:
Harris 1977 (e 56); Linderski 1983 (e 78) (the resolution of the letter N); there are isolated examples of the same phenomenon at Feltria, also at Interamna Nahars, Bovillae and Puteoli
saw the collapse of the Republic and the establishment of the Empire. But the four themes discussed have the merit that the evidence for them carries us to a level far below that of the inner core of the elite. And, in principle, the catalysts which were at work should have affected all levels of society in largely equal measure.
The only two indigenous non-Latin languages of Italy for which there is any significant evidence later than the Social War are Etruscan and Oscan, though little of the evidence for the latter comes from Samnium, because of the ravages of Sulla.43 Furthermore, the process of transition seems to have been extremely rapid; there is only one Oscan bilingual inscription; and even in the case of Etruria, where the phenomenon is on a somewhat larger scale, it is actually quite restricted.44 As for late texts in Etruscan, apart from a gem from Tarquinii, which may have migrated after being inscribed, and a stone from Pesaro, which certainly did so, the thirty or so texts, mostly of the very end of the second and the first half of the first century B.C., all come from the region of Clusium, Arretium, Perusia and Volaterrae, mainly from Clusium. No local language can be shown to have lasted in public use much into the first century a.d.; only Etruscan survived in some form for a time, a preserve of scholars and antiquarians. It is in this context significant that the family of Urgula- nilla, wife of Claudius, emperor and Etruscologist, was quite untypical in the extent to which it consciously kept itself Etruscan.[560]
We simply do not know to what extent Rome willed the disappearance, at any rate at an official level, of languages other than Latin. If we could hold that the Lex Osca Tabulae Bantinae fell after the Social War, we should have an indication that Latin was not prescribed for municipal charters. But it is almost certainly earlier (see above); and the municipal charter of the indubitably Greek city of Tarentum was promulgated in Latin, probably sometime in the 80s or 70s b.c. In any case, it is unlikely that in Italy after 90 b.c. Rome recognized any language other than Latin for her own purposes; and certain institutions, such as ethnic contingents in the Roman army, which will have helped to preserve local languages before the Social War, disappeared at or soon after the same date.[561] The literary language of late republican and early imperial Italy is remarkably uniform, despite the diversity of origin of those who wrote it.
The evidence suggests a similar change in the orientation of religious practice. First, calendars, whose centrality to Roman (as well as Greek) religion needs no emphasis. We know from a variety of antiquarian sources that in early times a number of Italian communities, even some close to Rome, had calendars substantially different from each other and from that of Rome (Varro,
... but in the town of Lavinium one whole month was assigned to Liber ...
and (Solinus 1.34 (so also August.
... for before Augustus Caesar they reckoned the year in different ways, since in Egypt it contained four months ... in Italy at Lavinium thirteen, where the year was of 374 days . . .
We know also that communities could and did change their calendars.[562]And they seem on the whole to have changed them systematically in the direction of abandoning local peculiarities. Thus, a local calendar is last attested epigraphically in Etruria at Ferentis in 67 B.C., that of Furfo in 5 8 в.с.[563] The next stage was the massive diffusion in Italy under and after Augustus of copies of the Julian calendar.[564]
The Romanization of the religious map of Italy had indeed long been under way. It had been the
It has been established ... that all ceremonies and temples and images of the gods in Italian towns are under the control and power of Rome.
and (Frontinus, 5 6 L):
(... sacred groves in Italy), whose territory indubitably belongs to the Roman people, even if they are within the boundaries of colonies and
The position described by Tacitus and Frontinus was no doubt the result of the enfranchisement of Italy; but it had been prepared by a long process of growing Roman involvement in the religion of Italy.
Evidence for change in religious practice is also provided by the pattern of votive offerings in the rural shrines of Italy, small and large alike. Here the evidence is now sufficient in bulk to show that the frequentation of rural shrines in Italy is a phenomenon which largely comes to an end at the turn of the eras (for some examples see Appendix V, p. 987).
Naturally, this is not to be regarded simply as a consequence of a process of Romanization, not least because it also affected shrines situated in areas which had long been
None the less, a shift of population and power from country to town is neither the only nor perhaps the principal factor at work. Rather, as we shall see, the social transformation of Italy in the last generation of the Republic and the age of revolution was responsible. Rural shrines were necessarily dependent on supporting social structures; and it was precisely these that were destroyed, in Roman and Italian territory alike, but with far more devastating consequences in the latter.
It is in the sphere of religion, moreover, that we are confronted with specific evidence for the adoption in Italy of Roman models. One of the most important recent discoveries relevant to the religion of the late Republic has been the excavation of the
To turn to the third theme, we are told by Aulus Gellius that the enfranchisement of all Latin communities after the Social War meant the disappearance there of actionable
To take three examples, a traditional Etruscan practice was to give the mother's name; this practice of metronymy is still attested on some bilingual inscriptions or texts in Latin only of the late Republic and then dies out.59 Oscan practice was to give the father's
M. Torelli,
See also Rawson i978(e 106), citing Philodemus on Stoicism in'what was once Etruria'(not to be taken as a way of referring to Rome).
Gell.
Moreau 1983 (e 85) 117-18.
As held by Humbert 1978 (e 61) 305 n. 71a, whom 1 originally followed (n. 3), 155.
genitive, after the
On one level, the explanation of the changes we have just been considering is to hand. With the enfranchisement of Italy, the Roman civil law was the only system which a magistrate could apply; and when a man was listed in the Roman census, he was naturally obliged to use the Roman system of nomenclature. But we have already seen that the first complete census of Italy was that of Augustus in 28 B.C. and there is in any case no a priori reason to suppose that a man would describe himself in the same way to a Roman censor (whether via a local magistrate or not) and on his own tomb; and one should not overestimate the effectiveness of enfranchisement in spreading the Roman civil law.[569]Rather, much deeper convulsions in Italian society are to be invoked, as we shall see.
Here, if anywhere, we should expect conservatism of practice. Yet it is precisely here that the late first century B.C. and the early first century a.d. see the disappearance of dozens of local styles of funerary monument and the abandonment of cemeteries with centuries of use behind them.
The phenomenon was originally identified by M.W. Frederiksen, publishing a group of funerary monuments characteristic of Capua and the immediate vicinity, which cease to be produced with the coming of the Principate.[570] A few kilometres away, the area between Pompeii and Nuceria Alfaterna had a quite different type of monument, equally characteristic of the locality and equally doomed to disappear. In Latium, a type of monument characteristic of the Volsci has a similar chronology. North of Rome, the great Etruscan cemeteries go out of use in the age of Augustus or shortly afterwards (for documentation of some examples see Appendix VI, p. 987). In one particular case, we can link the abandonment of a family tomb with Romanization in its most complete form: the tomb of the Salvii at Ferentis was abandoned in 23 в.с. as the family transferred to Rome.[571] We shall see in a moment what came after.
It is time to return to Cicero. 'Hinc enim', he observed of Arpinum, 'orti stirpe antiquissima sumus, hie sacra, hie genus, hie maiorum multa vestigia', referring surely to the cults, the long family history, the tombs of his ancestors.[572] His characterization of what was to him distinctive of Arpinum coincides precisely with those aspects of local culture, omitting language, in which traditional local practices were abandoned during the late Republic and the early Empire.
The evidence of material culture, when not embedded in religious or funerary practice, naturally needs to be handled with caution. Yet surely, in the light of what we have seen so far, it is legitimate to point also to the uniformity of building styles in early imperial Italy as further evidence of cultural assimilation.[573] Further striking evidence of integration is provided by an altogether humbler artefact, the red-gloss table-ware that graced the tables of the middle classes of Augustan Italy. Whereas the black-gloss table-ware of the Republic had been produced in dozens of kilns the length and breadth of Italy, the age of revolution witnessed concentration of production at a relatively small number of centres, of which the best known is that of Arretium. Diffused from these centres throughout Italy, the pottery in question is clear evidence of a considerable degree of economic integration and the counterpart of the process of cultural assimilation discussed above.[574]
It seems likely then that Augustan (and early imperial) Italy was more homogeneous than at any time before or since. Her unity was expressed in the creation by Augustus of a single system of administrative regions, seven in peninsular Italy and four in the Po valley, whose boundaries regularly cut across earlier ethnic and cultural boundaries, placing Ligurian Luna in Etruria, Campanian or Samnite Caudium in Apulia, Latin Tibur in Samnium.[575]
This reladve unity of Augustan Italy, however, remains to be explained. In part the answer must lie in the nature of military service in the years after the Social War.[576] The legions consisted of men from all over Italy, probably without wives or families until after their period of service, removed from their homes, insofar as they had them, for long periods, further mixed by the drafting of reinforcements to existing legions, all with Latin as their only common language. We have already seen that the use of ethnic contingents came to an end with the Social War. The unity of Augustan Italy was surely in part forged on the battlefields of the late Republic.
Yet that is not all. The late Republic and the age of revolution are periods when on a quite unparalleled scale men were removed from their homes not simply for long periods, but for ever, and resettled as individuals or in colonies at the other end of Italy.[577] The process begins with Sulla, accelerates with the
Nor were soldiers the only people affected. Generally speaking, we have no idea of what happened to those who were dispossessed to make way for the veterans settled after 42 B.C. For it is a mistake to suppose that the
Archaeological evidence allows us a gUmpse of men who clung to some of their ancestral traditions in their new homes. Within the general uniformity of the grave monuments of early imperial Italy, stelae or altars, there are for instance traces in Gallia Cisalpina of the funerary practices of the central Apennines; or of those of Rome in Umbria or Sabinum (for some examples see Appendix VII, p. 989). It is also important to remember that the convulsions just described must have affected equally the elites of the communities of Italy; in large numbers, their members joined the armies of the late Republic, to serve as junior officers. It is these men who, survivors of and enriched by the murderous battles of the civil wars, diffused in central Italy the habit, limited to the early Julio-Claudian period, of erecdng lavish monumental graves decorated with 'fregi d'armi', friezes portraying weapons and armour.[581]They also no doubt played a large part in the diffusion of grave monuments with Doric friezes;[582] it should come as no surprise to observe that such monuments are unknown in Magna Graecia, but it is interesting that they are equally unknown in much of Etruria.
With these convulsions in mind, let us return to problems of family structure and religious practice. The total abandonment at Ateste, at the turn of the eras, of traditional Venetic practice over nomenclature, at the same time as traditional funerary customs, was not simply the result of enfranchisement and the passage of time. Rather it must have been largely the result of the brutal injecdon into the community of the veterans of the Fifth and Eleventh Legions, along with some others, after the Battle of Actium. We should be surprised, not that there was some change, but that the worship of the Venedc Dea Raetia continued at all.[585]
As far as religious practice is concerned, we should surely, in considering the abandonment of rural sanctuaries which had attracted worshippers for centuries, attach great importance to the way in which the period between Sulla and the reign of Augustus saw Italian community after Italian community lose its own young men for ever, rich and poor like, often to suffer in addition the enforced settlement of total strangers.79 This is the process which created the reladve unity of Augustan Italy. We have for the Roman world no documents comparable to those available to the modern historian. But it is not hard to project back into the Roman world the situation of the villages of France in our own century:80
The war of 1914-18 was different. As Father Garneret described it for the Franche-Comte, it was 'the bloody break that struck our villages such a blow: 20 dead for 300 inhabitants and all the customs shattered'.
" Compare Coarelli 1981 (e 18) 242-4, for the disappearance between Republic and Empire of a group of families installed there earlier in the republican period. 80 Weber,
CHAPTER \ЪЬ SICILY, SARDINIA AND CORSICA
R. J. A. WILSON
Shortly before his death in 44 в.с. Iulius Caesar granted Latin rights
The Sicilian communities duly celebrated their new status in a number of coins and inscriptions recording
1 Cic.
3 Wiseman 1971 (d 81) 22-3, 190; Sherwin-White 1973 (a 87) 306-7. Cf. also Fraschetti 1981 (e 159). 4 Cic. 11
5 E.g.
434
significantly, with the exception of the occasional coin legend, the language used was still Greek (
How disastrous this period and its aftermath were for Sicily is uncertain, but although the surviving sources, which depict Sextus Pompeius as a ruthless freebooter determined to exploit the island to further his own ends, are undoubtedly biased, it is hard to paint a rosy picture of life in Sicily under Sextus Pompeius.[587] The sudden blockade of the corn supply to Italy from 43 until the Misenum accord with Octavian in 39,[588] with the resultant slump in demand and, presumably, in income, together with the enlistment of Sicilian farmers in Sextus Pompeius' legions, can hardly have been good news for Sicilian agriculture; nor can the cities, for all their tacit acceptance of Pompeian control (with the notable exceptions of Messana and Centuripae) have fared much better, pressed to supply money and men for Sextus Pompeius' army and fleet. Yet more upheaval was caused by the arrival of thousands of fugitive slaves and the victims of triumviral proscriptions and confiscations in Italy, who found a haven in Pompeius' Sicily. When the final showdown came in 3 6 it was a bitter encounter, causing further devastation. Lepidus landed in the west and stormed several cities, although Lilybaeum, protected by her newly strengthened defences, resisted him; he then marched across Sicily to meet up with Octavian, who had narrowly escaped with his life when Sextus Pompeius surprised him at sea off Tauromenium.[589] Octavian's final crushing victory came off Naulochus, and culminated in the capitulation of Pompeius' land forces; in its aftermath Messana was looted and burned. In the autumn of 36 Octavian at last found himself master of Sicily, but of a province in disarray.
Octavian was in no mood to be forgiving. A massive indemnity of
Map 4. Sicily.
i,600 talents was levied on cities which had actively supported Sextus Pompeius, and his leading supporters were rounded up and executed. Land was confiscated and some given as a reward for loyal service, such as Agrippa's Sicilian holdings managed by Horace's friend Iccius; the remainder formed the nucleus of what was later to become the huge imperial estates in the island. The unfortunate inhabitants of Taurome- nium, who had championed Pompeius' cause and vigorously supported him in the fighting of 36, were summarily deported.10 But Octavian's feelings towards the Sicilians were expressed in most telling fashion by his decision to strip the Sicilians of the Latin right (
No ancient testimony specifically tells us that Sicily lost the Latin right in 36, but it is implicit in the changes that were made fifteen years later in 21 B.C., when Augustus (as he now was) returned to Sicily (which in the reorganization of 27 had become one of the provinces of the Roman people, governed by a proconsul) at the beginning of a provincial tour. Whether these changes involved the abolition of the tithe system
Indemnity: App.
Cf. P. Garnsey in Garnsey, Hopkins and Whittaker 198 3 (d 130) 120-1, and P. A. Brunt,
Dio Liv.7.1. Foundation dates at Panormus and Tauromenium are uncertain: for the latter, modern scholarly opinion is equally divided between 36 and 21 B.C. (Diod. xvi.7.1 and App.
almost certainly based on an Augustan census, the unavoidable conclusion is that the wholesale grant of Latin rights had been revoked, presumably in 36,[590] and only later, in the settlement of 21, was it restored to certain chosen communities. Four further cities (Halaesa, Haluntium, Lilybaeum and Agrigentum) are known from coins and inscriptions to have gained municipal status before a.d. 14,[591] presumably at a date later than that of Pliny's source.
The availability of Sicilian land confiscated from supporters of Sextus Pompeius and the island's proximity to Italy made her an obvious and no doubt popular choice for veteran settlement, and the influx of settlers further swelled the Italian element of the population, an element already proportionately larger than in any comparable area of the Greek- speaking world. The foundation of
The
The choice of places for colonial settlement is also significant. Most possessed excellent harbours and extensive fertile
Little was done, therefore, by either Augustus or his successors, to foster urbanization in the interior of Sicily. The decay of the old hill- towns is hardly surprising, for life on a lofty and often waterless mountain top (Ietas, for example, is 8 5 2m high) was neither comfortable nor convenient, and made no sense once security ceased to be a factor in determining the location of nucleated settlement. Urban decay in the interior, however, did not represent depopulation in real terms, for it is likely to have been matched by a corresponding growth in the prosperity and importance of the sprawling agricultural settlements and market centres, which had began to be established in the well-watered valleys and along the trunk roads from the end of the third century в.с. onwards. Sicily under the Empire was dotted with such settlements, the fully fledged towns being far apart and mainly on or near the coast. This was a land fully geared to maximum agricultural production. Africa and Egypt were now more important producers and exporters in terms of quantity, but that grain condnued to be produced in Sicily on a huge scale in the early Empire is not in doubt.21 Local and imperial coinage advertises the symbol of Sicily (a Medusa head with
Gabba's case for a considerable reduction in Sicilian grain production is not persuasive (Gabba 1986 (e 160) 79-80).
Coins: Sutherland and Kraay 197; (в 359) no. 1088 (Panormus);
Mamertine: Strab. vi.2.3 (268-9C), cf. Pliny, HNxiv.66and 97; Vitr.
as all over Sicily, and sulphur from the Agrigentum hinterland, the Roman world's only major supplier.24
About the pattern of land use and the farming economy we are largely ignorant, in the absence of detailed archaeological investigation. That Sicily continued to be an island where large estates were commonplace is not in doubt: its fertility, its relative accessibility from Rome, and the concession which enabled senators to travel there without special permission, all combined to make the province an attractive area for land investment. The interest of Italian
In the countryside the Romanizing influence detectable at the towns in the early Empire hardly made itself felt. Buildings were still erected in traditional Greek fashion, with mud-brick walls on stone foundations.28 The Sicilian Greek calendar remained in use, as indicated by an inscription of a.d. j 5 from the rustic sanctuary of Anna and the Nymphs
24 Wool: Strab. vi.2.3 (268-90); 2.7 (224-50). Timber: Strab. vi.2.8 (275-40); cf. Diod. xiv.42.4, and G. Manganaro,
26 Strab. vi.2.6 (272-50). 27 Bejor 1975 (e 147); Bejor 1985 (e 148) 565-72.
и Wilson 1985 (e 195).
at Buscemi in south-east Sicily;29 and Greek remained the spoken language, Latin inscriptions being rare. In the far west Punic influence may have lingered on, as Apuleius in the second century described the Sicilians as
Sardinia and Corsica were culturally very distinct from Sicily. Greek influence in both islands was negligible, but in Sardinia there was a considerable legacy of Carthaginian culture in the principal cities of the west coast, which had started life as Phoenician foundations. Both islands received a generally bad press from Roman writers. Corsica (Latin Cyrnus) was a wild land, its inhabitants wilder than animals claimed Strabo; much more rugged than Sardinia, its only decent plains are near the east coast. Although Diodorus mentions Corsican honey, milk and meat, her sole significant asset was timber, Corsican pine and box being especially prized.32 Sardinia was far more fertile, though less so (and more mountainous) than Sicily, and was likewise a major corn supplier of Italy at the time of the late Republic; herein lay her sole political importance.33 Yet her inhabitants were not to be trusted, banditry was rife, and the climate notoriously unhealthy. Strabo in particular paints a gloomy picture of a land 'plague-ridden in summer, especially in the most fertile regions, which are continually laid waste by mountain peoples'.34
Inhabitants: Strab. v.2.7 (224-jc), contrast Diod. v.14.1. Produce:
Cic.
Strab. v.2.7 (224—jc), cf. Livy, xxiii.34.11, Pompon. 11.123; Paus. x. 17.11; Tac.
The importance of Sardinian grain to Italy is highlighted by the events of 40-58 в.с. The cutting off of the Sicilian supply since 43 was bad enough, but when both Corsica and Sardinia were occupied in Sextus Pompeius' name in 40 by his lieutenant Menas[598] and Sardinian corn also blockaded, the starvation of Rome loomed, a political weapon that could not be ignored. Hence the Misenum accord of 39 with Octavian, by which Sextus Pompeius' control of the three islands was duly recognized, and Sicilian and Sardinian grain shipments to Rome resumed. Early the next year, however, on the defection of Menas, Sardinia and Corsica passed firmly under Octavian's control.[599]
In the provincial reorganization of 27 в.с. Sardinia and Corsica were reckoned peaceful enough to be made, like Sicily, a province of the Roman people, administered as a single unit under a proconsular governor. It proved a miscalculation. In a.d. 6 we hear of serious restlessness among the peoples of the Sardinian interior and of piracy in the Tyrrhenian sea.[600] Troops were sent to the island, and both Sardinia and Corsica passed to the emperor's control; the organization of the islands as two separate provinces, each probably administered by an equestrian
By 67 Nero thought Sardinia quiet enough to be handed back to
Map j. Sardinia and Corsica.
senatorial control, the province being given to the Senate as a consolation prize when the cities of Achaea were granted freedom and immunity from taxation.[604] Corsica, however, remained separately administered, since the Decimus Pinarius
With both islands so unsettled it is hardly surprising that the progress of Romanization was slow. Corsica in particular remained largely undeveloped throughout antiquity, and we can sympathize with Seneca's gloom about what he saw as a dismal place of exile.[608]
Sardinia in time became more developed. Many of the cities on the western seaboard retained a distinctly Punic flavour down to the late Republic, with neo-Punic inscriptions and
48 Ptolemy (
Sardinia's economic importance lay of course, as already noted, in grain. Always less productive than Sicily, she too declined in importance as a wheat exporter when Africa and Egypt took over in the early Empire as central Italy's most important suppliers; but as in Sicily there is no hint of a decline in Sardinian agriculture, or any suggestion that cereal production-levels did not remain high. About the details of the agricultural economy of the early Empire we are ignorant, as in Sicily, in the absence of excavated villas of the right date or of reliable field-survey evidence; the notion of ubiquitous
Away from the coastal regions and the main towns, Romanizadon made little impact under Augustus or the Julio-Claudians. Sard remained the everyday language of the mountainous interior, and although it was something for the dedicators of a building near Zeppara to have erected in a.d. 62 a tablet inscribed in Latin, their names (Mislius, Benets, Bacoru, Sabdaga) are wholly un-Roman.[616] A significant proportion of the nuraghic village settlements continued to be inhabited down into imperial times. Religion, not surprisingly, remained conservative, and Punic cults in particular continued to flourish, often with the thinnest of Roman veneers. The cult centre at Antas of the deity Latinized as Sardus Pater (formerly worshipped as Sid Baby) enjoyed a long and faithful following throughout the Republic and early Empire, but it was only in the early third century that his temple took on recognizably Roman form (tetrastyle and prostyle, raised on a podium) in the Ionic order; while shrines elsewhere, including Mulciberus (Vulcan) at Nora, Tanit disguised as Demeter-Ceres at Tharros and Narcao, and Bes-Eshmun at Bitia, all show survival well into the imperial period.[617] The
CHAPTER 13c SPAIN
G. ALFOLDY
i. conquest, provincial administration and military organization
The Iberian peninsula, the first overseas country in which Roman rule had been established (in 218 B.C.), became one of the most important areas of the empire at the beginning of the imperial period.1 This was due above all to the fact that the wars of conquest gave it an increasingly important military and political role. At the end of the Republic and during the triumviral period, when nearly two centuries of almost constant warfare had passed, and Roman civilization had struck root particularly along the eastern coast and in the south of the peninsula, north-western Spain, with its hardly accessible mountainous regions, still resisted Roman rule. From 39 B.C., there was a single proconsul with consular rank for both Hispanic provinces, Hispania Citerior and Hispania Ulterior (the 'consular era' of Hispania Citerior was later reckoned from 38 B.C.); he held the army command and was responsible for the civil administration under the mandate of Octavian/Augustus. Until the time of the last proconsul, Sextus Appuleius in 28/27 BC-> these governors were constantly occupied with war — in the Fasti Triumphales six triumphs are recorded for proconsuls of this period. But it was the first
* This chapter was written in 1987 and revised in 1988. In 1991 the author requested some supplements and changes. It was unfortunately not possible to include these and the editors bear the responsibility for the fact that this does not reflect the current state of research. It can be noted, at least, that two parts of
1 The literary sources for Roman Spain are edited by A. Schulten
449
new Corpus containing all inscriptions
CONQUEST
where his presence, after the provisional settlement of the new regime, might raise political problems.
In the spring or the summer of 27 в.с. Augustus went to Gaul and thence to Spain. At Tarraco (Tarragona), the new capital of Hispania Citerior, which had replaced the republican capital of Carthago Nova (Cartagena), he entered his eighth and ninth consulships on 1 January 26 and 25 B.C., respectively, and received embassies. Tarraco was thus for a short period the scene of political decisions of the highest importance and thus the centre of power. The attention of the Roman world turned to Spain, where in 26 B.C. the
The successful wars which made it necessary to concentrate six or more legions and numerous auxiliary units here, and, above all the presence of Augustus for two years and the administrative work which brought him there again for a period between 16 and 13 B.C., clearly emphasized the importance of Spain in the Roman empire. It is symptomatic of its importance that during the early Principate a large number of Spanish communities enjoyed the patronage of leading senators at Rome and even of members of the imperial family.2 In continuation of a republican tradition, social and political contact with Spain was a highly esteemed source of presdge and influence.
Augustus established in the Iberian peninsula, as elsewhere, a system of provincial administration which was to undergo only a few modifications during the following three centuries.3 From 27 B.C., the representatives of the
The province of Baetica, formerly a part of Hispania Ulterior and also known as Hispania Ulterior Baetica until the early second century,
Cf. M. Koch,
451
See Albertini 1923 (e 198) 25-42; Alfoldy 1969 (e 201) above all 285-96.
comprised Andalusia, minus the eastern part of the region which belonged to Hispania Citerior. While both other provinces remained under imperial control, Baetica, with Corduba (Cordoba) as its capital, was a public province. The governor was a proconsul with the rank of a senior ex-praetor, appointed to his office annually by the procedure of
A further new element of the provincial administration was the subdivision of the provinces into
4 Strab. 111.4.20(166c);
Scallabis (Santarĉm). While some scholars assign the establishment of these
According to Strabo, the main task of the procurators in Spain was to supply the army.[620] At the beginning of the Principate Spain was one of the most important military areas of the empire. In the wars of the conquest of north-western Spain at least six legions participated, namely the
After the conquest had been completed, Augustus decided to leave three legions to hold the Iberian peninsula, concentrating them in the reorganized Hispania Citerior. The disposition of these legions, which from the reign of Tiberius lay in a bow-shaped formadon in the northwestern part of the high plain of Castilla la Vieja, facing the Cantabrian and Asturian mountains, clearly demonstrates that the main task of the army in the early Principate was to control the recently subjected areas.
Asturia; later
The concentration in north-western Spain of all these troops, particularly of the legions recruited in Italy and, in increasing measure, from the inhabitants of Spanish
One of the tasks of the army was to engage in the construction of public works, primarily a road system. During his second stay in Spain, between 16 and 13 B.C., Augustus initiated the systematic establishment of a road network. The Via Augusta, which led from the Coll de Perthus in the Pyrenees along the eastern coast of Spain to Tarraco and Valentia (Valencia), and from here through the south of the peninsula, passing Corduba, to Gades, was constructed at least partially under Augustus, and was marked by milestones in the following years, in Baetica, for example, in 2 B.C. This road which, according to Strabo, was of cardinal importance, was still called
II. URBANIZATION
Conquest, pacification, reorganization of the provincial government and the road network were only a part of the Augustan achievement in Hispania. Because of its enormous impact on the political system, social order, economy and cultural development, urbanization, that is, the foundation of
Baetica nine
Unfortunately, our sources, in particular Pliny's lists of cities, the inscriptions and the local coinage of several towns, do not allow us to establish an exact list of the
Of the nine
Considerably less clear is the number of the Augustan
The extent of this urbanizing programme in Spain at the end of the Republic and under Augustus can be contrasted with the fact that the Julio-Claudian emperors did not consider it necessary to extend colonial and municipal status to other communities of the Iberian peninsula on a large scale. One of the few
Senate of Rome. It was the Flavian dynasty which took over the task of completing the urbanization of the peninsula.
III. ECONOMY AND SOCIETY
The numerous municipal foundations at the end of the Republic and under Augustus changed the situation in Spain fundamentally. The juridical status of several communities was elevated. Apart from the existence of communities of Roman citizens in the older and the newly founded colonies, a high number of peregrine communities of the native population now received autonomous status. In contrast with their former status, which had allowed the local authorities self-government only to a limited extent, they achieved the status of
The degree to which the owners of mines and other economic resources could enrich themselves during the early Empire, can be demonstrated by the example of Sextus Marius, probably from Corduba, who was, according to Tacitus,22 the richest man of his time in Spain. After he had been put to death in a.d. 33, his enormous wealth, consisting particularly of gold-mines and other mines, was taken into the imperial
At the same time, it was due above all to the new local elites that towns received magnificent public buildings. Some of these were gifts from emperors and from members of the imperial family, such as the marvellous theatre at Emerita Augusta, given by Agrippa, or the amphitheatre of the same colony, a donation by Augustus; but public buildings were normally paid for by local magistrates or by other rich citizens; in the reign of Augustus, for example, the
The accumulation of wealth entailed changes in the social structure. A local elite developed in each town, comprising the rich land-holders in the
Tac.
F. Beltran Lloris,
not only from the official distinction of
The most emphatic sign of social differentiation in the context of the Roman social order was that the richest and most distinguished members of the urban elites could enter the equestrian and the senatorial orders. It may be symptomatic of the general level of Romanization in Spain and of its importance in the Roman empire, that the first Roman senator of non- Italian origin, Quintus Varius Severus,
The evolution of urban life, particularly the rise of the upper classes of the urban society, also created the conditions for cultural development. Over and above the spread of literacy, several towns offered good opportunities for education and stimulated intellectual ambitions — especially in Baetica with its high concentration of urban centres. As in northern Italy and southern Gaul, the elites of the urban society in
24 Slavery in Roman Spain: See now V.M. Smirin, in: E.M. Staerman
26 On Roman senators from Spain, including the persons mentioned here and below, see, above all, Le Roux 1982 (e 229) (Hispania Citerior); Castillo Garcia 1982 (e 214) (Baetica); Etienne 1982 (e 218) (Lusitania).
Baetica produced under Augustus and the Julio-Claudian emperors not only an increasing number of new equestrian and senatorial families, but also, from exactly the same social environment, men at the peak of contemporary intellectual life. The family of the Annaei from Corduba, with Seneca the Elder, the
iv. the impact of romanization
The political, economic, social and cultural development of Spain in the period between the collapse of the Republic and the end of the Julio- Claudian dynasty was enormous. The Iberian peninsula, once a field of continuous resistance to Rome, became, in spite of its geographical situation on the periphery of the Mediterranean world, an area of central importance in the Roman empire. But it would be wrong to believe that all the changes which took place in the period covered in this volume produced a uniform picture in the Iberian peninsula by the end of the period. On the whole, it may be less important that some older trading centres of the Mediterranean coast did not participate in the general boom: Emporiae (Empuries), for example, an amalgamation of Greek colony, native settlement and Roman town, was not able to compete with the flourishing harbour cities of younger foundations, such as the colonies of Tarraco or Barcino.28 There was an immense contrast between the intensively urbanized regions of Baetica, the eastern parts of Hispania Citerior and southern Lusitania on the one hand, and the backward areas in the interior and in the north west on the other. In the latter areas, where less favourable geographical conditions and, above
21 On the rise and importance of these 'colonial elites' from Roman Spain; cf. R. Syme,
all, a very different historical background presented a framework for further development of a kind quite different from that in the south and in the east, Roman influence was by no means as deep as it was in the regions early Romanized. Literary, epigraphical and archaeological evidence here shows a continuity not only of the nadve population, but. also of its social order and culture.[636]
Indigenous nomenclature and local cults were preserved in the interior and particularly in north-western Spain not only during the early Empire, but also later. The social framework was provided by the
In spite of the survival of native traditions, the impact of Romaniza- tion was also evident in these backward areas in the Julio-Claudian age. Apart from the construcuon of roads and the consequences of contacts with the Roman population of the peninsula through trade, administration and military control, the main method of Romanization was, as elsewhere, to make at least the upper classes of the native population see that their interests coincided with those of Rome. At the beginning of the imperial period, the recruitment of the youth of native tribes into the numerous auxiliary units raised from the populadon of the backward areas, was also a safety measure; it contributed, moreover, for the first dme to educating people in the Latin language and Roman
On the whole, a century after the establishment of the Principate at Rome and after the conquest of north-western Spain by the first
CHAPTER 13
C. GOUDINEAU
I. INTRODUCTION
Caesar's conquest of Gaul fundamentally shifted the balance of the Roman world, up until then based on the Mediterranean, with the single exception of the Black Sea. The 'new territories' represented a vast addition to the empire, comprising some 30 per cent of its land area apart from Italy. Exposed to central Europe, and especially to the German barbarians and other groups, amongst them the Cimbri and Teutones, who had already left their mark on Roman history, they stretched to the northern oceans, and to Britain, which Caesar had abandoned, after suffering his only failure. The occupation of the new provinces demanded, in the short term, that the Alps and the Pyrenees be subjugated and that control be established over the Rhine and the Danube. The Gallic Wars had utterly and irreversibly transformed the geopolitics of the ancient world. Conversely, the history of Gaul reflected its new environment, and the new strategic geography formed by the German frontier and the proximity of Britain, with all the attendant social and economic repercussions.1
1 Despite the enormous amount written about Gaul, the bibliography of the subject is limited, most of all because no one has been brave or foolish enough to revise and update Camille Jullian's great
464
But it is impossible to understand ancient texts or decisions, such as those that created the administrative structure or the road system, if we continue to base our analyses on present-day cartography. It is important to remember that as late as Pliny, and perhaps as late as Ptolemy, geographical knowledge remained extremely approximate. Book iv of Strabo's
epigraphy, law, cities, monuments and art history at the expense of research into regional analysis, stratigraphic sequences, rural studies and everyday life. The economy has been studied only through the medium of pottery, the importance of which has consequently been greatly exaggerated, and more recently other categories of small finds, including glass and metalwork. It has proved much more difficult to win acceptance for subjects such as landscape archaeology, research into field systems, pollen analysis, environmental archaeology and the study of human and animal bones. Fieldwork in France has for a long time been conducted on a piecemeal basis. In some areas that continues to be the case, but in recent years the demands of rescue excavation have led to some very large-scale projects in some of the more important Roman towns and also some programmes of rural survey in advance of motorway construction or the extension of the high speed rail network. Before these developments, the majority of excavations had been in small urban centres, albeit ones of some historical interest, such as Glanum and Alesia. Rescue archaeology has changed all that, but the conditions under which it has to be undertaken mean that much of the enormous new database it has generated remains unpublished.
Texts: Duval 1971 (E332) Lerat I977(E4I5). Inscriptions: the basic material is to be found in
The
Surveys of work on Gaul continue to appear in
2 Caes.
Map 7. Gaul.
The map shows only Roman sites within the Gallic, German and Alpine provinces and not those in Spain or Britain.
Fig. 8. The geography of Gaul according to Strabo.
opposite that of Gaul, from the mouth of the Rhine as far as the Pyrenees, and the channel between Britain and Gaul is said to be 3 20 stades (some 50 km) in width. All the distances are wrong, some of them by a huge margin.
Finally, our sources are both poor and uneven in coverage. Literary sources provide a certain amount of information for the period 43 b.c. — a.d. 69, but it mostly relates to the German Wars or to just a few episodes, which, as a result, tend to be accorded disproportionate importance. From then on, the silence of the texts is almost unbroken for a century and a half. Epigraphic evidence is distributed very unevenly: inscriptions are common in Narbonensis in the Julio-Claudian period, but rare in the Tres Galliae, and mostly later than the first century a.d.
In what follows, I shall treat Narbonensis (formerly Transalpina) separately from the Tres Galliae (formerly Comata). This distinction contrasts with that of traditional histories that present Gaul as a unity. Is there any point in it?
From the Augustan period, neither texts nor inscriptions ever use the term Gallia except in a purely geographical sense, as we might say South
America or the Far East. Sources always speak of the Gauta (Galliae), conveying no impression of a homogeneous whole extending from the Mediterranean Sea to the Channel. Narbonensis is always considered to be a separate entity. This was not just because it had been conquered for eighty years at the death of Caesar. It was also a familiar zone, part of the Mediterranean world and long part of its history, largely through the agency of Marseilles. Beyond the Cevennes and Vienne, however, were more northern lands, the harsh climate of which had made its mark not only on the countryside and its products but also on its human inhabitants. Accounts of it did not always systematically emphasize the savagery of these 'barbarians', but it was never far from the minds of Romans. This was a new world, as yet ill understood if not unexplored. The distinction between Narbonensis and Comata thus goes back to the sources.
Was Comata itself conceived of as a single entity? The Augustan division of it into three provinces (Aquitania, Belgica and Lugdunensis) might suggest that it was not. But, at least until the beginning of Tiberius' reign, the three provinces were organized as a single command, and, in
In fact, administration should be distinguished from psychology. Gauls never represented themselves, in all the honorific and funerary inscriptions they set up, either as Gauls or as members of a given province, but rather as belonging to the
3 For a different view on the date of the dedication of the altar see above p. 98.
Claudius allowed the Silvanectes to establish their own
There was no Gaul then, except in the sense of the conceptual geography of the ancients. The Three Gauls constituted administrative divisions, loosely based on a faulty ethnography which did not itself correspond to any more ancient population. The divisions we see, even if they may have exercised some slight influence on the emergence of a new identity, were as artificial,
Did Caesar's death in 44 B.C. mark a turning-point? The question is not as naive as it appears. There is no doubt that it influenced the course of events, even if we do not know the dictator's plans. One clear example may be cited. Towards the end of 45 B.C., just a few months before he was assassinated, Caesar had sent Tiberius Nero, the father of the future emperor, to 'found colonies in Gaul, among them Narbonne and Aries'.8 In the case of Narbo Martius, founded in 118 B.C., this amounted to a refoundation for the benefit of veterans of the Tenth Legion (Decuma- norum), while at Aries it was a new foundation for veterans of the Sixth (Sextanorum).
Suetonius' expression 'among them'
ordered Lepidus, the governor of Transalpina, and Plancus, who was in charge of Gallia Comata, 'to found a city for those who had previously
What does this text mean? Had colonists been installed at Vienne and then ejected by the Allobroges? If so, when? The most likely occasion is as follows: Tiberius Nero founded a Latin colony at Vienne in 45 B.C., then, on the death of Caesar, the Allobroges drove out the colonists, who took refuge among the Segusiaves at the confluence of the Saone and the Rhone. The expulsion was a serious matter, which the Senate took steps to rectify, but it was unable to force the Allobroges, (whose military power made a considerable difference in time of civil war) to implement Caesar's decision. As the result of a compromise, a colony was founded at Lyons. What is important in this context is the indirect evidence of violent disturbances following the death of Caesar. They were shortlived, but Rome's representatives were only able to retain control of the situation thanks to the personal links that the dictator had fostered, and which were taken up by his lieutenants, Plancus and the triumvir Antony, and then by his adopted son Octavian. Even more importantly, Iulius Caesar's direct descendants continued to rule the world for more than a century. Continuing loyalties,
The nature of the evidence and the issues that arise from it lead me to make two preliminary observations. First, it is pointless to make Romanization the main theme of this account. The Gallic provinces
10 Tac.
behind them. Second, rather than treat in turn two periods with very unequal evidence in
I. GALLIA NARBONENSIS
Despite one ambiguous reference of Cicero,11 it seems that the term Narbonensis is Augustan in origin. Its first occurrence is in the
Some adjustments were probably made in 13 B.C., in the case of Convenae, for example, after the completion of campaigns of pacification in the Pyrenees. Similarly, other changes followed the conquest of the Alps, marked by the Tropaeum Alpium at La Turbie which was set up while Augustus held tribunician power for the seventeenth time, that is between 1 July 7 в.с. and 30 June 6 в.с. Three new Alpine districts were set up (Alpes Maritimae, Alpes Cottiae and Alpes Graiae) which were not part of the Gallic provinces and so will not be treated here, but as a consequence it was necessary to establish boundaries between those areas belonging to the new districts, those of Narbonensis and perhaps those attached to Italy. The state of Antibes, previously part of Italy,14 was incorporated in Narbonensis at this point while Cemenelum, in the immediate vicinity of Massilia's old trading post Nikaia, became the capital of the new district of Alpes Maritimae.
The Tropaeum of La Turbie, contrary to what is commonly written, did not mark the frontier between Italy and Transalpina, or Narbonensis. It was set up at the most western point reached by the campaigns of conquest of the Alps 'a mari supero ad inferum', that is from the Adriatic to the Ligurian coast of the Mediterranean.15 Set up on the Via Iulia Apta that ran from Italy into Narbonensis, it marked the conquest of the mountains and the freeing of that road from banditry. It was probably conceived as the twin of the trophy set up by Pompey at the Pyrenees, also on the road linking Spain and Italy. It is almost certainly that trophy which has recently been found on the col de Panissars, straddling the present day frontier between France and Spain. It symbolizes the permanent control established from then on over communications
11 FflOTX.25. 12 C7Lxi7J53- !3 Dio Lin.22. 14 Strab. iv. 1.9 (184c).
15 Pliny,
between Italy and the western provinces. From this point on, Narbonen- sis, like Tarraconensis and Baetica, was completely integrated into the Roman world, to the extent that no historical event worthy of mention is recorded until the Neronian crisis.
A comparison of two key texts provides a convenient starting-point for an analysis of the province. If we are to believe Cicero's
The two texts are separated by 140 years, about six generations, which is a short space of time, in pre-modern conditions, for such a fundamental transformation. Pliny emphasizes the scale of the change, as he felt it, in another passage when he describes the marvellous silverware of Pompeius Paulinus, the son of a Roman
The importance of the preceding period makes it necessary briefly to summarize developments. We know little of the stages by which the province was originally set up, although we may presume that Pompey played an important role in the years between 78 and 75 B.C., but it is clear that several states had been granted individual civic statuses by various Roman politicians, among them C. Valerius Flaccus, Pompey and, of course, Caesar. Despite Cicero's rhetoric, examples of litigation, 16 Pliny,
such as the charges made against Fonteius, show that a 'pro-Roman' elite had emerged. In the course of the Gallic War, Caesar included on his staff several of the sons of southern
The growing integration of
No attempt at colonization had been made since the founding of Narbo Martius, despite the hypotheses that have been advanced, on no evidence, for foundations at Vienne and Valence. Caesar began a new colonial programme with the refoundation of Narbonne, the foundation of Aries and the Latin colonies, the abortive foundation at Vienne described above, the colony at Nyon in Switzerland and others as well, probably one at Nimes and certainly one at Valence.
It is against this background that the activities of Caesar's successors must be seen. Octavian renewed the colonizing programme by founding in his turn Roman colonies at Beziers, Orange and Frejus, although the dates of these foundations are controversial. Most importantly, several imperial decisions promoted the integration of the elites of Narbonensis. The province was 'returned to the Roman people' around 22 b.c.,19 that is to say the emperor handed over its administration to the Senate, and it no longer played any strategic or military role. Augustus and Tiberius together decided in a.d. 14, just before the former's death, to grant the right to stand for election to magistracies in Rome to
Roman colonies. Another symbolic, but important, decision in a.d. 49 allowed Roman senators to move without permission not only to Italy and Sicily but also to Narbonensis.
It is worth assessing the extent of this juridical integration, too often obscured by a litany of famous names. The names are always the same: knights like Pompeius Paulinus, who served as prefect of the
The emperor Augustus' main concern during his stay at Narbonne in 27 в.с.20 was, according to Dio,21 the organization of the areas conquered by Caesar, in other words non-Mediterranean Gaul. As for Narbonensis, he must simply have put the final touches to the organization already set up by Caesar, with a few adjustments, in particular the colonial foundations of the triumviral period. The
Although this
20 Livy,
adding that 'they paid it tribute',22 which suggests that Rome gave Nimes the privilege of collecting taxes for its own benefit. That measure must date to the Augustan period, perhaps during Augustus' visit in 16— 13 в.с. No later date can account for the agreement between Pliny and Strabo.
The number of Latin communities with their own legal identity was thus drastically reduced, by nearly 60 per cent. On the other hand, some of the
The replacement of a large number of tiny communities by a small number of unified states was a feature of the Augustan period. These developments demonstrate the emperor's desire to promote urbanism, to concentrate the elites in the larger centres and perhaps to limit the channels by which individuals might automatically become entitled to Roman citizenship. The case of Nimes is the most striking: even if the city was already the capital of the Volcae Arecomici and even if federal magistrates already were based there, Nimes had only been one among twenty-five Arecomican communities. Augustus attached the twenty- four others to it, politically and fiscally, paid for its circuit wall,23 and established or authorized the mint which produced the famous 'crocodile' series of
Tradition also exercised an influence at the institutional level. The new
22 Strab. iv.i.ii (186-7C). 23
The record of personal promodons in legal status, elevations to the senatorial and equestrian orders, shows that the majority did not come from Roman colonies, but from Vienne and Nimes. Together with Narbonne, these cities are also those which have left the largest numbers of inscriptions. Strabo's source Posidonius, writing at the beginning of the last century B.C., mentioned those two centres, and them alone, as 'capitals' of great peoples, the Allobroges and the Arecomici respectively.24 The
How can this be explained? One factor might be the participation of the Allobroges and the Arecomici in the military expeditions of the last century в.с. Perhaps the ability of their
Ever since the conquest, Italians had been accumulating land in Narbonensis. Cicero's
24 Strab. iv.1.11 and 12 (185-70). 25 Strab. iv.i.12 (186-7C).
26 Cic.
29 Caes.
Although no text mentions it, mining seems to have been important from the first conquest of Transalpine Gaul. Dressel i amphorae have been found beside mine shafts and galleries at Corbieres, at la Montagne Noire, in the valley of the Tarn and in the Pyrenees. Silver and copper, rather than gold, were probably extracted at these sites. The oldest mausoleum known on French soil portrays a mounted warrior of the first half of the last century B.C., who must have presided over the silver mines at Argenton in the Alps. The place-name Argenton is itself significant.
But land was the real objective of the Caesarian colonizations of Narbonne, where the territory was surveyed and redivided, and of Aries. Did the same apply to the Latin colonies, which I argued above were probably set up at Vienne, Nimes and Valence? Recent studies of land divisions, based largely on finds from Orange, tend to support this hypothesis. The explanation for the foundations at Aries and at Nimes is found in the fact that after the siege of Marseilles in 49-48 B.C., all the Phocaean city's lands were confiscated, apart from its immediate territory, the Lerin Isles and the city of Nice. As usual, this confiscated territory was distributed as gifts to individuals and communities, but more importantly it enabled Caesar to settle veterans and auxiliaries at a period when the need for land for this purpose was particularly acute.
Between 40 and 28 B.C., Octavian settled veterans of the Seventh Legion at Beziers, of the Second at Orange and of the Eighth at Frejus. If we are to believe Dio, he also gave colonists land in Gaul between 16-14 B.C., after he had taken the title Augustus.30 The only way of accounting for this is to suppose that he added new contingents to colonies he had already founded: he himself says that he compensated cides that had suffered from this fresh influx.31
The main difficulties arise not so much from interpredng the social impact of this colonization as from assessing its economic effects. The notion that the arrival of so many new families invigorated agriculture in the south has now given way to a highly sceptical view that sees little, if any, development in this area. A more balanced perspective seems preferable.
For many years, the land divisions of Narbonensis have been the object of considerable research. These studies have necessarily advanced mainly through the development of new methods of analysis. But the first results, based on the Rhone valley and the Languedoc, seem to indicate that patterns of land division aligned on different orientations were laid out contemporaneously in adjoining areas, rather than being superimposed on each other on a variety of occasions. So one set of divisions would be laid out on one orientadon, perhaps to fit in with the
» Dio liv.2j. 31 r
relief or else aligned along a road or some other direction. But it would be abutted by a second set of divisions, which would continue the cadastre but following some other orientation, which in its turn was determined by a different constraint or convenience, only to be met in turn by some other division ... and so on. The first cadastradon might divide up the best lands, those easiest to farm, the second might apportion the second best fields and so on.
Cadastre В of the well-known marble tablets from Orange, marks out the best lands, those assigned to the veteran colonists; the lands let out by the colony; and finally the lands 'returned to the Tricastini' (
Romanization also promoted the development of bigger and more diversified landholdings. Archaeology, and particularly aerial photography, makes it possible to identify the cultivated lands, usually based around a villa, but not the property divisions. But epigraphic evidence reveals nobles who were honoured in more than one
But the major problem is to assess the significance of these changes for the transformation *of the economy as a whole, and in particular the importance of changes in commerce.
Earlier interpretations were based largely on the evidence of pottery. The Augustan layers of every excavated site produce large numbers of sherds of
That view has been abandoned for two reasons. First, it was realized that pottery, always being a cheap commodity, could hardly indicate the workings of a global economy. Second, recent research has shown that Italian potters actually moved workshops and equipment (moulds for decorated wares) to Gaul around 20-10 B.C. and set up branches at Vienne, at Lyons, to which I shall return below, and probably at Narbonne and other centres. In other words, Italian producers made determined efforts to decentralize production. The only possible explanation is in terms of a reorganization of the global trade in Italian produce. Why then did their workshops so quickly stop production, in favour of those of Montans and La Graufesenque?
The evidence of amphorae is even more difficult to interpret. Up until about 30 B.C., wine, mostly Italian, was transported in amphorae of the type known as Dressel . A large number of shipwrecks loaded with these containers have been located and huge numbers of amphorae, sometimes hundreds of thousands, have been found in excavations of settlements, of mines and of what might be termed market
So the thirty or forty years following the imposition of the
Most importantly, agricultural practice did not undergo any sudden
ijd. gaul
transformation. It takes time to improve soils and introduce new crops like vines and olives. The changes do not, in any case, become important until the middle of the first century and even then were not dramatic in scale: Narbonensis never became a major wine- or oil-producing region, far from it.
Trade, on the other hand, was transformed. The best explanation proposed for the dramatic fall in the number of Italian amphorae is a sociological one. The Augustan reorganization had put an end to the Celtic tradition of great banquets given by the chiefs, who were encouraged to engage in euergetistical benefactions instead of making gifts of food and drink. All the same a great deal of traffic passed through Narbonensis, some following the Rhone valley to Vienne and Lyons, other goods going via Narbonne to Toulouse and Bordeaux. A number of different trade routes were created. The pottery producers of Montans were linked to Toulouse and so, no doubt, to the Atlandc seaways, while La Graufesenque was more closely tied to Languedoc, where its products were distributed along with other commodities.
The most astonishing discovery of recent years has been made at Vienne. The city straddled the Rhone and recent excavations there have uncovered warehouses (
Archaeological evidence privileges commerce above all, and we must be aware of this source of bias. All the same, there can be no doubt that some towns in Narbonensis were important centres of redistribution in the first century a.d. and that trade intensified both with Comata and with the Mediterranean world. But much more important to the
480
Unlike many of the areas conquered by Rome, southern Gaul had a long tradition of nucleated settlement, which had been accentuated over theprevious two hundred years. Settlements were medium sized, on average about 3 hectares in area, with populations in the hundreds or less commonly the thousands, consisting of the peasant cultivators of nearby fields together with some artisans and members of the elite. Some principles of urban organizadon are suggested by the ramparts, town planning and main streets revealed by the recent excavation of sites such as Entremont, Nages, Lattes, Ambrussum and Enserune. The public buildings are mysterious in nature, consisting of porticoes decorated with sculpted reliefs. Domestic structures consist of a mixture of one- or two-room houses and some larger buildings arranged around little courtyards, sometimes with a second storey. Some settlements, under the influence of Marseilles and her outposts, may already have developed 'proto-urban' features. Impressive circuit walls and towers that dominated the landscape as did that of Nimes, built in the second half of the third century and later transformed into the famous Tour Magne, may have been symbols of this new urban pride.
Urban archaeology has recently contributed to the debate by demonstrating examples of settlement continuity, that may be set against the picture of great Roman foundations
In fact, the Augustan reorganization replaced medium-sized centres based on limited territories with much larger urban sites. This was both a result of the processes of colonization and
Some towns did develop more slowly, it is true. The original town plan laid out for Frejus covered about 50 hectares, and it took time to fill in the area north of its
32 Strab. iv.i.ii (185-6Q.
never built on in antiquity. The
The urbanization of the south was not just a product of the institutional linkages created between social mobility, the rise of local elites and urban lifestyles. Those links would not have been enough on their own, and an important part was played by encouragement of all sorts, for example of the kind that Tacitus describes being given in Britain.33 The lead might be given by prominent Romans like Agrippa, but the most important example was set by the emperors, either through the gifts they gave from their own resources to sponsor large public works or else through incentives, the details of which are unclear, but may have included tax exemptions. So, for example, an inscription on the Augustan gate at Nimes tells us that the emperor himself had provided the city with walls and gates (
The early date at which huge monumental programmes were begun in honour of the imperial cult and in particular of Augustus, has only just become clear. The most striking example is Nimes, where the hillside of Mont-Cavalier provided the setting for an
The power of the imperial cult had sociological, monumental and financial implications. The city constituted the fullest expression of a well-ordered and magnificent universe, the safety of which was guaranteed by the
33 Tac.
of the
The fact that theatres were built so early on, often located, as at Aries and Orange, in the immediate environs of the
Can we go so far as to say that the cities of Narbonensis were so many perfectly ordered little universes? It is difficult to be sure since no Roman town in southern Gaul was 'fossilized' and preserved from the ravages of history. Every town has been transformed on numerous occasions since, in the course of the medieval and modern periods. But it does seem that the southern towns only conformed to a limited extent, to regular orthogonal grid plans. In some cases the reason was pre-Augustan settlement, in others it derived from features of the terrain: that was the case at Vienne, squeezed between the Rhone and the valley slopes, while at Nimes a number of different street plans had been laid out since the Iron Age. Vaison-la-Romain, on the other hand, had a completely unconstrained development.
Besides, with the passage of time, many towns underwent predictable changes. At Aries, part of the circuit wall was demolished when the amphitheatre was built, and at F re jus, houses spilled over onto the streets and a section of the walls went out of use to make way for the entry of an aqueduct. Quite often the construction of new buildings, bathhouses in particular, disrupted a neighbourhood, and the construction of the warehouses of Vienne required a huge terrace to be built on the banks of the Rhone.
The towns must have presented bewildering contrasts. The ruling classes directed their attention to public areas, which probably absorbed most of the resources in terms of architectural specialists, prestigious materials and imported techniques, like
The urbanization of southern France may have been slower and less uniform than it has often been presented, but all the same it represented an irreversible transformation in this period. Secondary urban centres did develop, often arising from pre-Augustan centres. Some, like Glanum or Die, developed around sanctuaries while others like Uger- num (modern Beaucaire) grew up at road junctions or at a major crossing. Yet others developed within huge
The beginnings of urbanization thus provoked a major shift. Inspired by the emperor or elite members, the rapid expansion of some cities attracted town-planners, architects, wall-painters and sculptors, each with their team of specialists and a local workforce. In so far as they stayed in the cities, they attracted in their turn trade and service industries. The monuments were not just architecture: they provided the framework for a new kind of society and a new way of life.
But it is important not to draw a false distinction between town and country, since all the evidence suggests that the relationship between the two was an indmate one. Some towns, like Beziers, were surrounded by rings of
Even though Rome had conquered the
All the same, Latin seems to have spread rapidly from the Augustan period on. It does not seem so surprising in high society, where it promoted the rise of famous orators like Domitius Afer from Nimes and Votenius Montanus from Narbonne, of poets like Varro Atacinus and of historians like Trogus Pompeius. The elite played an important role in the development of epigraphy as well, but the phenomenon makes no sense unless inscriptions could be understood by a reasonable proportion of the population. Probably, like Trimalchio's friends,36 the urban population could read inscripdons (
It is well known that changes in burial customs are an important component in acculturation processes, so it is particularly interesting to see the speed with which Roman practices were adopted. Cremation had, to be sure, been common throughout Transalpina for a long time, but up until the Augustan period, each particular style of tomb and each variety of burial rites was restricted to a relatively narrow area, such as the lower Rhone valley. Besides, the fact that so few burials are known - less than 200 from Narbonne to Nice from the last two centuries B.C. - suggests that human remains were disposed of informally, in some unknown manner. But from the time of Augustus, cemeteries appear on the outskirts of towns, along the roads, with tombs organized and ordered in a hierarchy of mausolea, groups of chambers and individual graves, marked by headstones and scattered within a wide area, which from a.d. 50 was usually enclosed. At the same time the great mausolea came to serve as landmarks, while the smaller graveyards fitted neatly into the centuriated landscape, as they did at Augusta Tricastinorum, Saint-Paul- Trois-Chateaux. Some regional variations remained but major changes were attested by the grave goods, by the design of the tombs and by the presence of
Finally, the imperial cult. There is no evidence for its official inauguration in the province comparable to the evidence available from the East, or, in the West, from Tarraco. But some inscriptions from Nimes suggest that from 25 B.C. it existed as part of the sanctuary of the Spring, the monumentalization of which began between 20 and 10 b.c. Two temples were dedicated to Rome and Augustus at Glanum around the same date, while the Maison Carree at Nimes, the temple of Augustus at Vienne, the portraits of Augustus, his relatives and his successors all combine to give the impression that cult appeared early and was performed with enthusiasm, at least in the more dynamic cities.
Narbonne, in particular, contributes notably to the record of the imperial cult. Around 25 b.c. a private individual dedicated an altar to the
37 See above, n. 34.
the
The institutions set up as part of the imperial cult, like the flaminate and, from Tiberius, the
The new political framework had been rapidly put in place: by the reign of Tiberius, at the latest, collegiate magistracies of the Roman type were installed in every
ill tres galliae38
Gallia Comata, which had been organized as a single province since Caesar, was divided into three by Augustus, probably in 27 в.с. Several passages of Strabo show that this was the period at which the Loire and the Pyrenees were fixed as Aquitania's final boundaries.39 The same did
38 In memory of Edith Wightman. 39 Strab. iv.i.i (176-70); iv.5.1 (191-20); iv.4.5 (196-70).
not apply to Belgica or Lugdunensis, which ran east—west in parallel. Belgica included all the peoples bordering the Channel and the North Sea, while Lugdunensis grouped together those who lived 'in the central plains' as far south as the courses of the Loire and the upper Rhone. One boundary that survived from this initial organization was the distinction between the military districts of Germania Inferior and Germania Superior, which corresponded to the boundary between Belgica and Lugdunensis. At some point, perhaps at the beginning of Tiberius' reign, the system was reorganized and Belgica was allocated the north east of Gaul, and Lugdunensis acquired the remainder.
These changes show how the provincial organization was, to begin with, fairly arbitrary and based on very rudimentary geographical knowledge. The aim was simply to create three provinces of roughly the same size. The adaptions made to the initial plan show the importance assumed by the Rhine frontier and problems with the Germans after 27 B.C. So much, at any rate, for those theories that saw these divisions as designed in part to separate the three most powerful peoples of the late Iron Age, the Arverni, the Sequani and the Aedui, into different provinces. Nor is it certain that Reims, which Strabo cites as capital of Belgica,[641] retained this position after the reorganization. Lyons was capital of Lugdunensis, but we are not even sure of the identity of the provincial capitals of Belgica and Aquitania. The latter may have been ruled from Saintes, then Poitiers and perhaps, later on, from Bordeaux. Nor is the number of
Three balanced provinces, then, each containing powerful peoples with strong traditions and fertile lands. It might be expected, then, that they would undergo parallel developments, especially since the unbelievable wealth of Gaul was one of the recurrent cliches of both literature and official discourse at Rome.42 But the image presented to us by archaeological evidence stresses sharp differences between them.
It is only possible to guess at a few of the consequences of the Gallic War and of Caesar's policy. Tens of thousands were killed or taken prisoner and reduced to slavery, and many chieftains and their reladves saw their wealth diminished or even confiscated in order to enrich those who had supported Caesar within their own tribes or abroad. Seeing as the city of Massilia[643] and individual Allobroges[644] had been given land and the revenues (
Caesar's death had given rise to fears in Rome of a
The problems in the north east and the south west explain the planning and construction of the road system described by Strabo51 and attributed to Agrippa. The intention was to construct two lines of communications starting from Lyons, one leading to the Rhineland and the north and the other going to Aquitaine, in the old, pre-Augustan sense of the area south of the Garonne. The plan for these two strategic routes, designed for troops coming from Italy, must have been fixed at a fairly early date, perhaps during Agrippa's first term in Gaul between 40 and j7 b.c. They required engineering works, in particular bridges, and must have absorbed considerable time, resources and manpower, perhaps encouraging the growth of some towns in the process.
One of the most important Roman actions in Gaul before the reign of Augustus was the foundation of Lyons (cf. above, p. 469-70). The founder, L. Munatius Plancus, established Raurica in the same year, which was to become Augusta Rauricorum, modern Augst in Switzerland. But if Augst had been a strategic colony, which is far from certain, it soon fell behind Lyons, which in only a few years acquired a key role, as the linchpin of the Agrippan road system, then as capital of Lugdunensis, the location of a mint and of the federal sanctuary of the Three Gauls.
The main events of Augustus' reign, except for those in Aquitaine, centred on the Germanies and the eastern frontier, where the troops were concentrated. Does this imply that the rest of the country was completely pacified? In the absence of any literary documentation, various scholars have argued that the distribution of Arretine ware or concentrations of Gallic coinage struck in this period indicate the presence of Roman troops. But the theory is completely untenable. Several military installations have been found, at Aulnay in Saintonge, at Mirebeau near Dijon and at Arlaines and other sites on an axis linking Reims, Soissons and Amiens. But the chronology of these sites is unclear, perhaps Tiberian or even much later. All the evidence suggests that the
The major historical event recorded in the first century a.d. is the revolt of a.d. 21, described by Tacitus54 and, in a few lines, by Velleius Paterculus.55 Tacitus' account is very romantic in flavour. Two descendants of the most noble families of the Gauls gather together a motley crew of criminals and debtors in secret meetings. The Andecavi of Angers and the Turones of Tours are the first to rise up but are easily crushed. Iulius Florus with the Treviri, and Iulius Sacrovir with the Aedui, armed as best they can, are defeated in their turn, again without any difficulty. Both Velleius and Tacitus point out that 'the Roman
52 Dio LIV. 19.6. " Veil. Pat. 11.129. и Ляя. 111.40-47. 55 Veil. Pat. 11.129.
people heard that they had won before they heard they were at war'. But while Velleius tells the story in praise of Tiberius, Tacitus makes it the basis of complaints, that the Senate of Rome had been kept in ignorance and that the revolt had been caused by the heavy burden of taxation, by usury and by the high-handed behaviour of the governors.
The significance of this episode has been over-estimated by historians of Gaul. Quite apart from the tendency to invoke it to explain archaeological destruction layers, for example burnt layers in the east, all sorts of sociological inferences have been drawn from these incidents. Either it represents the last revolt of the
In fact, the story of Florus and Sacrovir clearly shows just how difficult these two nobles found it to stir up support among their peers. With the help of the hostages captured from Autun, they were just able to secure their neutrality, but the Gallic ruling classes were thoroughly implicated in Roman structures and only a tiny minority took up arms.
The reign of Claudius was marked by renewed activity on the Rhine frontier. Two projects seem to have been important, first the cutting of a canal between the old Rhine and the Meuse and second, in a.d. 50, the foundation of Cologne, the colonia Claudia Ara Agrippinensium. The conquest and colonization of the south of Britain must have stimulated trade between Britain and Gaul, especially with , the west. Claudius' energy and influence were felt in every sphere. New roads were built, towns expanded and secondary urban sites were set up including Martigny in Switzerland (Forum Claudii) and Aime in the Tarentaise. Euergetistical construction of civic monuments was actively encouraged. The emperor's relationship with the Gallic elite is expounded in the speech he made to the Senate[647] proposing that Gauls who were Roman citizens should be allowed access to the Senate and to stand for magistracies in Rome. Opposition was bitter, and in the first instance only the Aedui, Rome's oldest allies, were allowed to enjoy this dispensation. The anecdote shows how differently the Three Gauls were regarded, in senatorial circles, from Narbonensis, the inhabitants of which had possessed this right from a.d. 14.
Apart from a reference to a census,58 only a few anecdotes survive about Gaul in Nero's reign. A statue of Mercury was built among the Arverni and there was a fire in Lyons in a.d. 65.
Some general observations emerge from this brief survey. For most of the period, the major events centred on the north east where tens of thousands of troops were stationed, an equivalent population, in ancient terms, to that of a number of cities. The troops acted as a huge economic magnet but also a political magnet in so far as emperors and members of the imperial household visited the area frequently. The other region affected by military activities at this period was Aquitaine, in the narrow sense of the area south of the Garonne. Agrippa's road system, decided on very early but constructed over a long period of time, accorded importance to both the north east and the south west. Finally, regardless of misinterpretations of the events of a.d. 21, the strong links established by Caesar between the 'Julian' aristocracies and the imperial power showed no signs of weakening.
Attempts to assess the impact of the conquest and of the imposition of new structures on Gaul run up against a major problem. On none of the sites that were to develop into Gallo-Roman towns, are there any archaeological levels datable to the period between the end of the Gallic Wars and about 20 B.C., or even later. The most striking examples are the three colonies founded by Caesar and Plancus. At Nyon, the colonia lulia Equestris, nothing has been found dating from before 15 b.c., at Augst, Augusta Raurica, the earliest levels date from the end of the reign of Augustus and at Lyons the first traces apart from defensive ditches, perhaps those of Plancus' camp, date from between 30 and 20 B.C. Dendrochronology has dated the first encampment at Petrisberg in Trier to 30 b.c., but there is no contemporary material. The few exceptions are often ambiguous. There have been a few sporadic finds at Reims, where two ditched and banked enclosures have been found, remains of settlement are known from Metz, thousands of Gallic coins have been found at Langres and the excavations of 'ma Maison' at Saintes in the south west, have produced some sherds of 40—30 B.C.
Should we conclude that the first towns took their time to appear? In fact, the argument
The birth of urbanism can only be traced from the Augustan period, and then only from the end of his., reign, since almost every town site produces sherds of Arretine ware and then of early Gaulish
The case of Autun is rather different. The late Iron Age capital of the Aedui had been Bibracte, mentioned several times by Caesar who had stayed there. It was located on the summit of Mont Beuvray, some 20 km from Autun. Excavations in the nineteenth century, which have recently been resumed, uncovered public zones, a wide variety of private housing, including some huge houses of Roman design, and artisan quarters, all surrounded with a massive rampart. The whole town was moved to Autun, and the population transfer must have been fairly rapid as the finds from Bibracte hardly go beyond the turn of the millennium. The name Augustodunum expresses Augustus' desire to bestow his personal favour on Rome's oldest allies. Plenty of other evidence shows his favour in action: Autun was surrounded by the only circuit wall built in the Three Gauls in this period, crowned with towers and adorned with four ornamental gates, enclosing an area of some 200 hectares. Autun was also the home of the famous 'universities' for young aristocrats from
all over Gaul, and of the school for gladiators. Built from scratch with a regular orthogonal street plan from the first, Autun was
Other towns in Gaul had very different experiences. In Switzerland, orthogonal grids were laid out at the very start, and filled in little by little by buildings constructed of wood and earth. Spaces were reserved for public use, but monuments were rare: Augst was partly enclosed by a circuit wall and had a theatre and Nyon had a building of basilica-type. It is possible that the colonial status of Augst and Nyon exerted an influence on other centres like Avenches.
The road network must also have played a part. For some time now, excavations in the towns on the main route to the south west have been revealing Augustan layers and Augustan street grids. These are towns like Limoges and Clermont-Ferrand, the Roman names of which alone suggest an early origin.59 Recent discoveries at Feurs, Roman Forum Segusiavorum, support this picture, revealing an Augustan street plan, a
The same applied in the north east and the east. Langres, Metz, Trier and Amiens all grew up at key points on the road system. So too did less important centres like Bavai, or nearby sites like Paris. When the road junctions were also on navigable rivers, towns developed even earlier and became even more important. For example, Amiens had a town grid based on the
Almost everywhere else is it difficult to reconstruct the earliest stages of town life. The best known of the towns of the south west is Saintes, Mediolanum Santonum. The town is famous for the family of Iulii descended from the Gaul Epotsoviridus, whose great-grandson C. Iulius Rufus built the amphitheatre of the Three Gauls at Condate, and in a.d. 18 or 19 put up the arch of Germanicus in his own city. But the Augustan town itself is haphazardly laid out, with tiny winding streets and both houses and workshops built of wattle and daub and only 20 to 30 square metres in size.
At Bordeaux, the late Iron Age 'emporium' covered an area of at most
A number of Gallic towns had names beginning in Augusto-, for example, Autun, Clermont, Limoges, Troyes, Bayeux and Senlis; in Caesaro-, for example,Tours and Beauvais; or in Iulio-, for example, Lillebonne and Angers. In other cases the element Augusta was followed by the name of the people, as in the cases of Trier, Saint-Quentin, Soissons and Auch. The names might have been granted as a favour at any point during the Julio-Claudian period.
5 or 6 hectares on a promontory surrounded by soft ground on the banks of the Garonne. The Roman conquest had no impact on the site until the beginning of the Christian era. At the end of Augustus' reign and the beginning of Tiberius' the city expanded outwards to cover some i
To put it another way, perhaps we should imagine many of the
Epigraphy and architectural elements can be used to elaborate the picture a little, although there again the evidence concentrates in Switzerland, in the north east and in the south west. At Langres, a text refers to a temple of Augustus vowed by Drusus in 9 в.с. The Princes of the Youth received epigraphic or monumental honours in Lyons, Sens, Trier and Reims, where there was a cenotaph. In 4 в.с. Bavai, Bagacum, acclaimed the
The forty years between the accession of Tiberius and the death of Claudius corresponded, in most of the towns discussed above, to a period of growth and monumentalizadon. The street plans were systematized and in many places, especially in Switzerland, masonry began to be used. The first trunk roads were built, like that linking Saintes, Poitiers and possibly Paris. Amphitheatres were built at Saintes, perhaps at Senlis as well, and in Perigueux, where it took the family of the Auli Pompeii, whose first member was called Dumnotus, three generations to complete the task. Public baths were constructed, aqueducts were built as at Bordeaux, and houses were bigger and decorated with wall-paintings based on the Pompeian Third Style. At Lyons, excavations at the site of le Verbe Incarne show that the plateau of la Sarra was levelled to allow the building of a temple, surrounded with porticoes resting on cryptoporticoes, and dedicated to the imperial family. Also at Lyons, a monumental fountain, supplied with water by a new aqueduct, was dedicated to Claudius and a major programme of reclamation made the tongue of land between the Rhone and the Saone habitable and suitable for a trading district.
New towns appeared and others expanded to become real urban centres most of all as a result of greatly improved communications, affecting many regions but especially the west. Claudius' reign witnessed large scale road building projects, especially in the Loire valley, but also supplementing road networks in the north, the centre, Brittany, Normandy and elsewhere. The conquest of Britain stimulated development all along the Atlantic strip. This was also the period of the great expansion of Poitiers and Bordeaux, as well as of the growth of Tours, Bourges, Angers, Rennes as well as of many other centres which would not all become quite so successful.
Why was it that urbanization was such a slow and often such a limited process in the Three Gauls? The Celtic
Does this mean that, in general, apart from those regions affected by colonization and perhaps by proximity to Narbonensis, the Gallic landscape was structured not so much by the new constraints introduced by Roman rule, but by longer term factors? We need to know more about these long-term structures before that hypothesis can be assessed and the notion of 'tribal survivals' should be shunned. But it does seem likely that the influence of the local territories predominated over the impact of the Roman
The Latin right had been granted to all communities in Narbonensis in the Caesarian period, and although some juridical complexities had been introduced by granting some
An almost complete absence of epigraphy makes it very difficult to trace the development of governmental institutions within the
As we have already seen, Roman citizens from the Three Gauls did not have the right, before the reign of Claudius, to stand for the magistracies in Rome. But they could gain entry to the senatorial order by imperial favour. It is surprising that only three senators are known before a.d. 70, all of them from Aquitaine. The small number of
It is difficult to define the exact role played by the federal sanctuary, and the ceremonies that took place there each year, beginning on 1 August, the date of the fall of Alexandria and the festival of the
ij
transmutation of them. The place was different, as were the forms of the meeting, but important business was transacted there and it was the occasion for equals to recognize each others' paramount prestige. The creation of the Ara Ubiorum for the Germans living west of the Rhine, and of a
It is necessary to return, once more, to the scarcity of inscriptions. The usual explanation given is that it represents resistance to the Latin language, although it may be more a sign of psychological difficulties surrounding the use of writing, perhaps deriving from the circumstance that in the late Iron Age the Druids had monopolized writing and it had therefore never been publicly displayed. On the other hand, Gauls made a major contribution to the Roman army. Before a.d. 68 they provided twenty-eight cavalry divisions and seventy-six cohorts, that is to say about 65 per cent of the auxiliary strength of the western provinces. Many also served as legionaries: 25 per cent of the inscriptions found in Gaul, including Narbonensis, from the reigns of Claudius and Nero, are those of legionaries. The return of substantial numbers of men who had served for years in the Roman army must have had all sorts of consequences for both the language and more generally the 'civilization' of the Three Gauls.
Assimiladon had begun, albeit slowly, not only among the elite but also among other groups lower down the social scale. The process is
5<эо
67 Sue.
often described as being accompanied by extensive economic and commercial integration, but this is unlikely to have been the case. Recent numismatic studies have shown a shortage of coin that seems to have grown progressively more severe until the Flavian period. Local coinages were accepted at least until the end of the last century B.C., and after that forgeries multiplied and the countermarks designed to authorize money as official were themselves being forged under Claudius and Nero. The implications are that central government was not concerned to create an integrated monetary system, nor any real kind of economic organization. As a result
Mortuary studies show that cremation was widely used, but also reveal a number of local peculiarities. Around Lyons, Briord and Roanne inhumation was none the less important, and it is virtually the only rite used in some cemeteries along the Seine between Paris and Rouen, and especially in Paris itself. By contrast, the inhumations found in the centre-west of France, in Poitou and Saintonge, are those of'high status' women, buried either in stone sarcophagi or in huge wooden coffins. These tombs are very rich in grave-goods. In the same way, the isolated tombs of the Berry, that date to the period between Augustus and Claudius, contain either inhumations or cremations but also very rich assemblages of amphorae, ceramic table services, tools, weapons and bronze objects including wine pourers, bowls, plates and
I will not deal with religion here except briefly to summarize the argument I will develop at greater length in САН xi. The slender evidence we have suggests two main lines of inquiry. First, although the literary evidence tends to focus on the banning and then the suppression of Druidism, recent excavations are turning up more and more temples with concentric plans, temples of the type called
Compared with other areas incorporated into the Roman empire, the Tres Galliae stick out like a sore thumb. The Gauls were marked out as different by their climate, by memories of ancient Gallic invasions and of Caesar's war, by their closeness to the Germans, and by their image as barbarians, possessed of great riches, but indulging in human sacrifice. Archaeology makes clear just how much rhetoric there was in Claudius' speech to the Senate, better preserved in
CHAPTER 13e BRITAIN 43 B.C. TO A.D. 69
JOHN WACHER
I. PRE-CONQUEST PERIOD
Rome's first formal contact with Britain came with the expeditions of Iulius Caesar in 5 5 and 54 в.с.1 By then, most of the major late Iron Age migrations from Gaul to Britain had already occurred, although within Britain much political and cultural movement was still to take place. Caesar named only six tribes, among which were the Trinovantes and Cenimagni (Iceni?), with four more unnamed in Kent, and with the implication of a nameless eleventh, probably the Catuvellauni, ruled by the leader of the British opposition, Cassivellaunus. Other tribes which were to play a part in the period between Caesar and Claudius and immediately thereafter were the Brigantes, Corieltavi, Cornovii, Dum- nonii, Atrebates and Dobunni in present-day England and the Silures and Ordovices in Wales. The Atrebates arrived in Britain after the Caesarian episodes, brought over by their king Commius, who, at first an ally of Caesar, later unwisely joined the unsuccessful rebellion of Vercingetorix in Gaul; the Dobunni are usually considered to be an offshoot of the Atrebates.2 The Catuvellauni gradually emerged as the most powerful tribe in south-east England, occupying an area roughly equivalent to the kingdom of Cassivellaunus. In addition, the four tribes which inhabited Kent eventually merged to form the single tribe of the Cantiaci. Apart from the tribes mentioned by Caesar and some other literary sources, most of our knowledge of their existence and geographical positions is gained from detailed study of the coinage which they minted.3
Caesar's expeditions, even if they bore no long term success, nevertheless made Rome more aware of Britain's existence. This is partly to be seen in the greatly increased volume of trade between the island and the Roman empire, now expanded to the Channel. The trade is mentioned by Strabo4 and attested archaeologically in the numerous goods found especially on sites in the area north of the lower Thames. Politically and
1 Caes.
Allen 1958 (в 505) 97-508. It must be admitted, however that some modern authorities view this list of coin distributions with suspicion, e.g. Collis 1971 (в 317) 71-84.
Strab. I v.). 1-4 (199-201С)
503
Map 8. Britain as far north as the Humber.
militarily, Caesar left unfinished business in Britain, and Augustus three times, in 34, 28 and 27 b.C., planned expeditions; all were called off because of needs elsewhere. Deprived of military conquest, Augustus aimed at the maintenance of a balance of power between the major tribes, at first befriending Tincommius, son of Commius of the Atrebates, so as to balance the waxing strength of the Catuvellauni. But this diplomacy did not prevent the latter from invading and occupying the territory of the Trinovantes, an act which was contrary to the terms of the old Caesarian treaty. It appears to have been quite deliberately timed,
An alternative theory on his origin sees him, however, as a Trinovan- tian monarch who had gained ascendancy over the Catuvellauni; certainly his capital was at Camulodunum near modern Colchester, in Trinovantian territory.6 This view strains the information which we have beyond logical bounds. The Catuvellauni and not the Trinovantes were, by implication in Dio's account of the Claudian invasion,7 the prime enemy of Rome. By implication also Cunobelin had been their king. It is extremely unlikely that he would have abandoned his own tribe's name in favour of that of an enemy, whether conquered or not.
Despite the apparently anti-Roman bias of some of Cunobelin's early actions, he seems to have given a temporary stability to the tribal affairs of Britain. In Rome's eyes all was well so long as his deeds were balanced by the friendly presence, south of the Thames, of its allies the Atrebates. Unfortunately, following the death of Commius and the accession of his son, Tincommius, the kingdom was rent by fraternal squabbles, Tincommius being ousted by Eppillus, and he in turn by Verica. In each case, Augustus recognized the successful claimant, despite the appeal of Tincommius for help towards reinstatement; both Eppillus and Verica seem to have been acknowledged as client kings.
Cunobelin was not averse to allowing even more flourishing trade to grow between his kingdom and the empire, since, with its extension to the sea, he now controlled the lucrative trade routes from the Rhineland and elsewhere. His anti-Roman attitude also seems to have abated sufficiently for him to send embassies to Rome, and he may have been among the British rulers who set up offerings on the Capitol.8 But with the death of Augustus and the succession of Tiberius, he resumed in the
s Suet.
8 Strab. iv.5.3 (200-1Q.
next fifteen or so years the expansion of his kingdom, adding the rest of Kent and penetrating into the middle and upper Thames valley. Pressure was also applied to the Atrebatic kingdom for the first time and it would appear that its centre at Calleva now became part of the Catuvellaunian domain. Tiberius apparently did not react to this provocation, although it is unlikely that it was carried out without protest to Rome.
Tiberius died in a.d. 37 to be succeeded by Gaius. By then Cunobelin must have been sinking into old age and he was perhaps losing his grip on tribal affairs, a factor which was aggravated by the growth to manhood of his sons. The apparent philo-Roman outlook of one of them, Adminius, may well have led to his expulsion and flight to Gaius to support his reinstatement. Gaius was then in Germany and was persuaded by Adminius that Britain could easily be conquered. Gaius assembled an army at Boulogne in a.d. 40, but a mutiny prevented it from sailing; Gaius thereupon called off the enterprise. But the expulsion of Adminius showed that all was not well among the Catuvellauni, a situation which was made worse by the death of Cunobelin and the division of the kingdom between two other sons Caratacus and Togodumnus.
Ambitious, hot-headed and possibly resentful of Roman influence in Britain, they set out on a policy of unlimited aggression which led, not only to the partial, or even total, absorption of the Dobunni, but also to the overrunning of the Atrebates, forcing their king, Verica, to flee to Rome for help, and finally to the total alienation of Rome. Verica was a client king and Roman ally, so that his expulsion could be interpreted as an insult to Rome, which, if left unavenged, would have called into question a whole area of foreign policy at a time when Rome very much relied on client rulers to maintain peace on or near the frontiers. The situation was, moreover, exacerbated by a demand for Verica's extradition and, when this was refused, by aggressive action being taken against Roman merchants in Britain and possibly even against the coast of Gaul. Verica's expulsion, therefore, served as the polidcal vindication for the direct intervention of Rome in Britain in a.d. 43.
causing many adherents to seek refuge across the Channel. There was also the question of military strategy; if Britain were not invaded, the coast of Gaul would require protection from a hostile force controlling the other side of the Channel. To protect it would mean raising the strength of the army to dangerous levels in the western mainland of the empire and no extra territory would be gained to provide its food. If the same army were placed in Britain it would be safely isolated, with fresh sources of food and other supplies. Whatever the reasons, Claudius decided to invade. A force composed of four legions and auxiliaries, altogether amounting to some 40,000 men, under the command of Aulus Plautius, until then governor of Pannonia, was assembled at Boulogne. That part of the Annals of Tacitus which included the account of the invasion is lost, and for literary evidence we have to rely on the later account of Cassius Dio,9 which is neither exhaustive nor entirely clear in its descriptions. The evidence of archaeology helps a little, but is again restricted, pointing definitely to only one landfall at Richborough.10 Yet Dio stresses that the force was divided into three sections; consequently three possibilities can be envisaged. The whole force could have landed at Richborough in three consecutive waves; but it must be admitted that the fortified beachhead there is not nearly large enough to contain so many men, while no other encampment has yet been found nearby. Secondly, it has been argued that whilst one division landed at Richborough, the other two landed at Dover and Lympne respectively; it should be noted, however, that there is no evidence at all from either site of an early Roman presence. Thirdly, it has been ingeniously argued that one division at least was directed to a landing in the neighbourhood of Chichester, in order to carry out the very necessary reinstatement of Verica as soon as possible in his kingdom.[651] The balance of probability would seem to favour the first hypothesis.
The landing was apparently unopposed. After some slight skirmishing inland, in which Togodumnus was probably killed, the first major action against the Britons was at the crossing of the river Medway, where the Roman army was victorious; it then advanced to the Thames. At this stage Caratacus is said to have fled to Wales. After a pause to allow Claudius to arrive on the scene, the advance was resumed and the emperor was able to enter the Catuvellaunian capital in triumph. There then ensued further campaigns which carried the Roman advance to a position marked roughly by a line drawn from the Humber to the Severn, where for a time it ceased. It has been claimed that it was always the intention of Rome to conquer the whole of Britain.12 If that was so, it is very difficult to explain why, having reached the line established by c.
9 See n. 7. 10 Cunliffe 1968 (e 553) 232-4. 11 Hawkes 1961 (e 545) (see n. 2) 62-7.
12 e.g. Mann 1974(0 286) 529-31.
iĵe. britain 4j b.c.-a.d. 69
a.d. 47, another twenty-three years elapsed before the major advance into Wales and the north was resumed. The army lacked neither the manpower nor the capability to advance immediately.
It seems more likely, therefore, that the original intention was only to seek a pragmatic solution to the Catuvellaunian problem by conquest and occupation; the line at which the advance stopped did just that. That it also raised a new set of military problems, which in time required their own solutions, cannot have been endrely foreseen in a.d. 43.
The limit of the advance was marked by the construction of a road, the Fosse Way, for lateral communication from Lincoln to Exeter and by the sidng of forts and fortresses along it, to the front and to the rear of it, forming a broad military zone to protect the newly conquered territory. Most of the forts were occupied by auxiliary regiments but some at least contained battle groups consisting of detachments of
But not all remained peaceful, even after the primary objective had been reached. Caratacus stirred up his new Welsh allies to attack the province in a.d. 47 just as Ostorius Scapula was taking over the governorship from Aulus Plautius. A campaign against Caratacus was preceded by the disarming of tribes within the new province, an act which itself caused trouble and led to a minor revolt among the allied Iceni. Once started, the campaign against the Welsh tribes was interrupted by disturbances among the northern Brigantes, whose queen Cartimandua professed a pro-Roman outlook. Indeed Caratacus, after his defeat in Wales, fled in vain to Cartimandua for protection, only to be handed over to Rome.13 There followed some years of almost continuous but confused and ill-recorded fighting in Wales and occasionally in Brigantia, the only permanent result of which was the advance of the frontier zone to the Welsh Marches, probably executed by Ostorius. Then in a.d. 60, a much more serious threat faced the province, which nearly resulted in its loss through the rebellion of Boudica, queen of the Iceni, together with the neighbouring Trinovantes.14
Much has been written about the causes of the rebellion. It is generally accepted that among them were the forcible reduction of the Iceni, following the death of the Roman client king, Prasutagus, and the refusal of Rome to recognize his queen or daughters as successors. The
Tac.
5<э8
Tac.
reduction was carried out in a heavy-handed and arrogant way by the provincial procurator, Catus Decianus, which led to the flogging of Boudica and the rape of her daughters. A contributory cause was the requisitioning of Trinovantian land, including their principal religious site, for the
In the ensuing decade, attempts were made to restore the province. A new and more enlightened procurator, Iulius Classicianus, replaced Catus Decianus, who had fled to Gaul at the outbreak of the revolt, while a succession of milder governors ended hostilities and helped to placate the natives. So successful were these measures that the province was deemed sufficiently safe for
15 Webster 1978 (e 564).
5 io 13«. britain 43 в. е.—a.d. 69
fill loyalty and it was not until the early 70s that he was able to take remedial action.
iii. organization of the province
Once the midland frontier zone had been created, much of the south east seems to have been demilitarized, and by a.d. 49, with the dispatch of
In the remaining area of the south east, through which the Roman army had passed rapidly, it is possible to detect the establishment of three
iv. urbanization and communications
The foundation of the
Some other urban centres had their beginnings in the years immediately after the invasion. Canterbury, a recognized Iron Age site, early became the capital of the
23 Sen.
512
ije. britain 43 b.c.-a.d. 69
of the first and second centuries. But the final street plan may owe some of its irregularities to the lines of earlier streets and existing buildings.[655]London was recognized by Tacitus as a flourishing trading centre even before the Boudican rebellion;[656] houses and shops of the first town, burnt in the rebellion, have been uncovered over a wide area, but litde is known of any public buildings. There are indications of an embryonic street system in the area north of the Thames bridge, the possible northern abutment of which has been identified in excavations in Pudding Lane.[657] There is also evidence to show that at least some provincial administrative functions were centred on London, possibly even before the Boudican rebellion, and certainly after it. The procurator, Iulius Classicianus, died in office and was buried at London; his ornate, altar-style tombstone was found reused in the later town wall on Tower Hill.[658]
Verulamium, like Canterbury, was also founded on the site of a major Iron Age centre, the probable sometime
Two other embryonic urban settlements may be considered as belonging to this period and both lie within the likely kingdom of Cogidubnus. The site of the town at Chichester, in the kingdom's heartlands, had an early military presence, but it is not known preciselyhow long it lasted. Yet, alongside the military base, or after it, there is evidence for a major public building dedicated during Nero's Principate.33 Probably slightly later, the Cogidubnus inscription34 displays advancing Romanization, not only in the existence of a temple to the purely classical cult of Neptune and Minerva, but also to social organization in the
Communications rapidly came to play a crucial part in the development of the new province. Roads, such as Watling Street, Ermine Street, Stane Street and the Fosse Way, were primarily constructed for military reasons, but, once in existence, would have been used by all.38 They linked a series of burgeoning ports such as Richborough, Dover, Fishbourne, Colchester and London, which provided havens for the increasing number of merchants wishing to exploit the new markets. No doubt the major rivers were likewise pressed into service; it is worth noting that water transport was much cheaper.39 It should also be remembered that the main roads, even with their straight alignments, metalled surfaces and good drainage, probably degenerated into a series of muddy potholes in winter, possibly making road transport in Britain, apart from pedestrians and pack animals, a seasonal affair which was confined mainly to the summer. The upkeep of the road system, together with its ancillary structures such as bridges, devolved upon the local magistrates of the town or
514 I 3 BRITAIN 43 B.C.—A.D. 69
Verulamium, Colchester and London, and in the kingdom of Cogidubnus. It has, indeed, been claimed that in these rural areas the pace of Romanization outstripped that in the new towns, with better quality housing appearing in the countryside at an earlier date.40 It may be, though, that these first ventures into Romanized country life were not the work of native Britons, but of migrants from Gaul or further afield, eager to invest in the new province. Such villas as Eccles (Kent), or Angmering (Sussex), both probably of late Neronian or early Flavian date, would seem to fit best into this category, but the early foundation at Rivenhall (Essex) is held to have been built by a rich native landowner.41 The stimulus given by the Roman occupation to increased agricultural production was at first twofold: the demands of the tax-collector and the food requirements of the army. Whenever or wherever troops have been stationed in foreign or occupied territory, they have always created a demand and have become a source of accessible wealth for the local populations; the Roman army in Britain was no different. It is unlikely that British farmers could have immediately supplied all the food needed by the army. Total requisition would probably not have been a workable policy for an army of permanent occupation, since it would have left the producers to starve. Nevertheless, it must be reckoned that, within a reasonable time, production would have been stimulated sufficiently to meet most needs. This could only have been done by increasing the areas of arable land, the clearance of which would have helped in supplying the sudden demand for the huge quantities of timber required for constructing the many new military and urban buildings. Once production had begun to expand, it must have occurred to many British farmers that there were profits to be made by increasing it still further, in order to supply other markets offered by the new towns. This, or something like it, will have been the economic base on which, in time, the villa system grew.
in southern Gaul, and other fine wares from places like Lyons;[660]
vii. religion
The new province was already well served by its native cults, which tended to be localized; yet there is evidence from the Roman period for the existence of tribal deities, such as Brigantia,46 and for sites which had more far-reaching significance, such as Bath with its deity, Sulis, presiding over the hot springs.47 In most instances, Celt and Roman possessed a common basic level of superstition.48 Consequently, the introduction of classical cults would have struck an immediate response; Celtic and Roman deities often shared similar areas of supernatural influence, so that Minerva could be identified both with Sulis at Bath and Brigantia in the north. But totally foreign to British religious practice was the introduction of the imperial cult, with its physical centre at Colchester. This provided a common element in the empire which had
13«. BRITAIN 43 B.C.—A.D. 69
an enormous diversity of religious practice and at the same time incorporated expressions of loyalty to the imperial household. It required an expensive commitment on the part of the leading inhabitants of the province - the size and magnificence of the temple of Claudius attracted unfavourable comment even in Rome. Yet the concept had worked well in Gaul, with its great centre at Lyons, and there was no reason to believe that it would not work in Britain; that it was to become one of the causes and focal points of the Boudican rebellion could not have been foreseen.
5i6
The account given above suggests that the process usually described as Romanization in Britain was very uneven in place, time and depth. Although the Romans encouraged
CHAPTER 13/ GERMANY
С. RŬGER
I. INTRODUCTION
After 50 B.C. when Caesar left Gaul, Gaul's eastern and northern border lay on the Rhine.1 The aim of securing the Roman north west against migratory movements and wild attacks from north and east by means of a border line that could be precisely marked out was achieved. In the upper Danube region of central Europe, to be sure, the policy was limited to gaining control over the alpine passes through which for almost 300 years uncontrollable attacks on Rome's alpine approaches, indeed attacks on the city itself, had been launched.
Caesar's conquest of Gaul had an effect on the migratory movements which had obviously been taking place for centuries in the north-west part of the European continent. Caesar would not countenance the continued crossing to the left bank of the Rhine by Germans. But Germani Cisrhenani were already present on the left bank of the river. According to Caesar's own definition the latter included the Eburones in the area between the Rhine and Maas and the Caerosi, Paemani, Segni and Condrusi who inhabited the Eifel and the Ardennes. But the epithet Germani might never have meant more to him than 'stern warriors'. Geographically one must include the Texuandri to the west of the Dutch and Belgian river Maas. Although the amount of Celtic in their languages seems easier to isolate and define than the Germanic, which was still at its earliest stage of development, we can identify some characteristics of primitive Germanic character, like the doubling of
1 The main literary sources for Germany in this period are Cassius Dio (Books liv-lvi), Velleius Paterculus (11, 60-132) and Tacitus
517
Map 9. Germany,
certain consonants or throaty pronunciations unknown to the Celtic speaker.2
To north and west these tribes were hemmed in by Belgic tribes who had, according to Caesar, a Gallic character - the Menapii, the Nervii, the Remi and Treveri. The last-named made considerable play of their Germanic origin, according to Tacitus, something which is difficult to reconcile with the 'Germani qui trans Rhenum incolunt' involved in Caesar's Helvetian affair.3 Linguistics and archaeology have brought to light little or nothing Germanic in the territory of the Treveri, or in the territory which later became the Agri Decumates - nothing at least that can be measured against the culture of the Weser and Elbe Germans as revealed by archaeology, or by the findings of Celticists in the fields of genetic affiliation and linguistic geography. Were the Treveri involved perhaps in the 'Germanic' tribal thrust into the heart of Gaul after 113 B.C., or that of 109 which brought defeat to the ex-consul, Marcus Iunius Silanus, or were they among those who eventually settled in the heart of Gaul after 115?4
How ancient can tribal traditions be? What was the Germanic element that made the Tacitean Treveri allegedly so proud of their origins? It is to be found according to linguists and archaeologists as sparsely in the Moselle area as on the right bank of the Rhine in south-west Germany, where language survivals from the pre-Germanic occupation (i.e. in the period before the Alamannic raids of a.d. 233) show next to no Germanic traits. That is also true of the Nemetes, Triboci and Vangiones who moved under Caesar or in the post-Caesarian period to settle on the left bank of the Rhine. Nervii, Menapii, Eburones and Treveri mark the northern edge of the
The names of soldiers (such as Chrauttius) at Vindolanda, garrisoned by Tungrian and Batavian units at the end of the first century a.d., appear to be the earliest evidence of this kind, see A.K. Bowman, J.D. Thomas, J.N. Adams,
Tac.
5 Tac.
Chattan dependency has proven to be obvious for the Batavian coinage in La Тёпе D2.[663] We can say nothing, however, about other material remnants of a migration which occurred a generation after Caesar, although one might expect these people to have had the ability and experience to produce pottery and to have brought with them the techniques of production which would leave their mark, for at least a generation or two, in the type of ware and the shapes of the vessels.
The setdement of these tribes in the north west of Caesar's Gaul took place with or without Rome's approval and supervision. The literary sources for the period between Caesar's departure and the arrival of troops on the Rhine under Augustus (16 в.с.) make repeated comments, particularly with reference to the time between M. Agrippa's two periods of activity in this region (39/8 and 19/18 b.C.), which lead to the conclusion that there was a deliberate policy of settling right-bank Germans on the left bank of the Rhine. And many a commander on the Rhine claimed prestige at Rome for a victory 'de Germanis' or for outstanding feats of military engineering such as the digging of canals or the re-routing of waterways. Of course the post-Caesarian forces in Gaul were distributed according to plans which were in no way directed to give them a function protective of the Rhine zone, as is shown by both the literary and the archaeological evidence for the deployment of winter garrisons throughout the interior of Gaul. Tiberius and Claudius provided for that for the first time between a.d. 17 and 47. Moreover, a miserable defeat, like that of the general Lollius in 17/16 в.с. ('maioris infamiae quam detrimenti', 'involving more ignominy than actual damage'),[664] demonstrated the tactical deployment of the post-Caesarian army as a striking force. That left the Germans on the right bank enough time to settle down, even without Rome's blessing, in the devastated land formerly belonging to the Eburones and the Menapii who had been pushed to the Channel coast.
The north-west European lowlands reveal that cultural movements spread from south to north, doubtless for the whole of post-Neolithic prehistory and particularly during the Hallstatt and La Тёпе periods (800-50 B.C.). The most northerly evidence for large-scale tribal organization and aristocratic tradition can be traced in Treveran territory. The war coalition of the Eburones fell apart again immediately after their defeat by Caesar. The name of the Eburones is no longer found in the Roman period. Their heartland on both sides of the Maas is for the well- informed elder Pliny a diffuse tribal area, 'pluribus nominibus'.[665] The impoverished isolation of the north, which until the third century в.с.
enjoyed an 'epilithic culture', using old-fashioned stone topis and implements, can only be explained in terms of lack of local metal resources and the lack of economic opportunities for obtaining metal by exchange. It was very difficult in the first millennium в.с. for the new technology to gain a foothold in the poor diluvial geology of north-west Europe. In the rich south of the area, as in central Gaul, we come across names of local aristocrats whom we can recognize as the
In the north such pre-Caesarian involvement with Rome as an important instrument of Romanization is missing. There are no lowland finds of early first-century amphorae of type Dressel ia in the continental north west.9 Diplomatic contact with the German king Ariovistus went as far as the exchange of exotic royal gifts in hellenistic style.10 Caesar did not change the system, but with frontier security in mind emphasized the difference between cis- and trans-rhenane people. Here there arises a curious dichotomy between archaeology and linguistics on the one hand and ancient (and also modern) historiography on the other. To judge by the canons of typology and language the north—south divide follows an east—west line north of the Eifel and Ardennes, while historians place it east and west of a north-south line along the Rhine. This division takes the form of a cross - it is, quite literally, a crux. All the models advanced to account for the popular groupings and process of ethnogenesis in the north-west quarter of this crucial field, such as the idea of an independent north-west block that differs from the Germanic and Celtic and represents a genuine third force, have so far proved unsatisfactory, despite all the efforts of historians and archaeologists.
The establishment of Roman rule in north Gaul can be seen archaeolo- gically at central places like the great Treveran
9 Roymans 1987 (e 588). 10 Caes.
11 See Heinen 1985 (e 580) 27-50.
Ahenobarbus (cos. 122 b.C.), after his victory over the Allobroges in 121 b.C., which saw the end of tacdcal deployment of elephants on the European continent. The final type in the Treveran coin series was issued by the freedman Germanus, mint-master of an aristocrat Indutil- lus in about 10 b.C., and thereafter it was perhaps minted in the new Treveran capital of Augusta Treverorum.12 Interestingly, a Roman garrison was posted on the Titelberg from 29 B.C. until the Augustan offensive of 16 B.C., without causing the abandonment of the surrounding
A number of other matters bear on the question of Romanization. It is useful and valid to adduce Roman nomenclature in the north west as an indicator of Romanization. It can be emphasized that we know many Iulii, Tiberii and Claudii in our area of interest. The list of the north-west Gallic nobility from the Ubii, Treveri, Batavi and Cananefates caught up in the revolt of a.d. 69/70 is full of these names. Their families will scarcely all have received Roman citizenship in Caesar's time - perhaps not even the majority did so. It seems that the Romanization of Gaul after the second triumvirate will have followed the same course as it did in the East, where
12 See Heinen 1985 (e 580) 19-30, 58-9.
the Aemilii and Antonii. Obviously in Octavian's territory and during the interregnum the same process took place in the name of the Iulii as a reaction to his adoption. One must not underestimate the vivid memory of Caesar expressed in myths about him in eastern Gaul and the Rhineland. The temple of Mars at Cologne for example possessed a sword of Caesar's, a precious relic steeped in omens:13 in the frontier lands of eastern Gaul there was a noble whose pedigree reflected descent from a liaison of Iulius Caesar with his maternal ancestor.14 As early as the time of Agrippa's presence and under the later governors of both Germanies, bridge building over the Rhine — and much else besides — must have had its origins, at least to some extent, in emulation of Caesar
Agrippa, the most intelligent and promising of Augustus' generals, did not see himself in a leading role. Both his periods of activity in this region, that of 39/38 B.C. and that of 19/18 B.C., served less to give him a high profile in Gaul than to reinforce the posidon of Octavian/ Augustus. The most important date for the establishment of the ideology of the new Caesar was the erecdon at Lugdunum of the Pan- Gallic altar, the Ara Galliarum, traditionally dated to 12 B.C., the year of Agrippa's death.15 There followed, probably in the first decade a.d. the foundation of an Ara Ubiorum along the same lines as the ideological centre of the cult of Rome which had already been provided for the Gauls at the confluence of the Saĉne with the Rhone at Lyons. But the Ara Ubiorum was not brought into being until a firm basis had been laid for the occupation of the land between the Rhine and the Elbe, a development designed to protect Gaul and to create a new province north of the Alps which bordered Caesar's old conquests.
The period between 16 в.с. and the defeat of Varus in a.d. 9, or rather to the final abandonment of the policy of conquest east of the Rhine in a.d. 17, is characterized by a long-term strategy of pincer manoeuvres. On the Rhine and on the North Sea coast, on Lake Constance and on the Hochrhein, on the Lech and Danube, these depended on amphibious tactics. The precondition was the collection of military and geographical intelligence from a base on the Rhine; the compilation of such information could well have been started by Agrippa, given his geographical interests, in 39/8 or 19/18 в.с. Likewise the alpine passes from the south and on the east flank of the zone of occupation were secured by the annexation of the kingdom of Noricum.
It is an attractive hypothesis that Camp A at Novaesium/Neuss, so far the only camp dated to between 16 and 12 b.C., was built principally for this intelligence-gathering operation. The construction of all other fortresses and forts seems to have taken place after 12 B.C. and may be supposed to have followed the establishment of the reconnaissance camp at Novaesium/Neuss c. 16 B.C. This camp lies at the end of an important road that links the continental north west with the Mediterranean, the Rhine with the Rhone. It leads from Marseilles, up the Rhone via Lugudunum/Lyons to Andematunnum/Langres and Divodurum/Metz, then down the Moselle to Augusta Treverorum/Trier and through the Eifel-Ardennes range via Beda Vicus/Bitburg, then down the river Erft to Novaesium/Neuss. After about 5 B.C. a branch road was built which later became more important - the road from Belgica Vicus/Billig to Ara Ubiorum/Cologne.16
The troops were transferred from the interior of Gaul to their operational base camps on the Rhine. The most important role in the scheme was played by the sites which lay opposite the mouths of the tributaries which flowed into the Rhine north or east of Cologne: Mogontiacum/Mainz opposite the mouth of the Main, Novaesium/ Neuss opposite the Ruhr, Vetera/Xanten opposite the Lippe, Novioma- gus/Nijmegen opposite the Yssel, perhaps also a site opposite the mouth of the Neckar, another in the area of Basle and certainly Fecdo/Vechten as a base for amphibious operations towards the North Sea.
The major events of the period between 16 в.с. and a.d. 17 on the Rhine are in the mainstream of imperial history: here we are mainly concerned with the important stages in the Romanization of this area. Four lines of penetration from the Rhine have been identified. The first is the line from Nijmegen via Vechten along the Frisian and Chaucan coast to the mouth of the Weser; the second is the line from Xanten up the Lippe towards Cheruscan territory and the Weser; the third a line from Mainz northwards through the Wetterau towards the middle Lahn, Fuld
16 For bibliography see Racpsaet-Charlier 1975 (e 587) 92-3.
and Werra towards the Weser and Elbe. A fourth line of penetration appears to have had its base of operation south of Mainz in the territory of the Vangiones and to strike west-east into the territory of the Marcomanni, touching at a tangent the two southward bends of the river Main; the evidential support for the existence of this line is, however, still poor. In addition, there is another line of penetration leading from the Basle area by way of Dangstetten and Hiifingen to the north east and the Danube.
The result of the offensives along these routes was the conquest of the area by Drusus and Tiberius in the period up to 8 B.C. when the protection of Gaul seems to have been secured by a German buffer zone. Between 6 в.с. and a.d. i Domitius Ahenobarbus as commander-in- chief would have used the operational routes out from Mainz to reach the Elbe. Perhaps the recently found traces of a Roman camp in the vicinity of Wiirzburg are evidence for his activities in the settlement of the Hermunduri in southern Thuringia and north Franconia.[666]
Various enterprises were launched at this time by Roman commanders using the pressure of annexation, as well as the practice of securing the allegiance of the nobility through attachment to the army. This is the period when chieftains' sons like Arminius obtained officer rank in the Roman army and Roman citizenship for themselves, and when Ahenobarbus became involved in the internal affairs of the Cherusci by attempting to reintroduce political refugees.[667]
The disturbances which broke out in a.d. i, described by the eyewitness Velleius Paterculus as an 'immensum bellum', demanded renewal of the measures taken in the previous generation.[668] Tiberius took energetic action. An amphibious army and fleet operation on the old pattern took place again up to the Elbe. While the land between Rhine and Elbe had, on the face of it, been restored to dependency on Rome, a new threat in the guise of the Marcomannic Empire of King Maroboduus arose on Tiberius' eastern flank. The combined troops of Germania, Raetia and Illyricum were mobilized against him. Once more the line of advance from Mainz through Chattan territory, up the Main towards the Saale and Elbe was used as the western offensive route against Maroboduus. The identity and location of the easternmost fortress belonging to those forward thrusts seems now to be confirmed by the recent discovery of a military base at Marktbreit on the river Main, 2 5 km east of Wiirzburg.20
In or before a.d. 7 P. Quinctilius Varus took over the command of the army in Germania. Varus was married to a daughter of Agrippa and Claudia Marcella senior, and so belonged to the immediate circle of Augustus and Agrippa.21 After Augustus' eastern journey of 21 B.C. he came to the
The result was an immediate abandonment of the strong points built between 8/7 b.C. and a.d. 9 along the lines of communication. Nevertheless, the bridgehead on the right bank of the Rhine opposite Mainz was held, as also, perhaps, was a bridgehead on the right bank opposite Vetera.
On the right bank of the Rhine the influence of the Elbe Germans was now strengthened. The latter took over the area round Bad Neuheim and Wiesbaden, with its important salt reserves, as their administrative centre. It had previously been occupied by the Ubii who had now migrated to the left bank of the Rhine. This immigrant element of the Chatti, the Mattiaci, is also described by Tacitus as German,23 but all the traces of their language which we can recognize are Celtic. They have this in common with the Nemetes and the Triboci, tribal units with Celtic names, who likewise crossed to the left bank of the Rhine; in this area only the Vangiones are linguistically Germanic. Of the Elbe Germans, contingents of the great tribal coalition of the Suebi setded on the upper Rhine on the right hand side of the river. Perhaps they were sections of tribes from Maroboduus' realm who migrated under Roman pressure to the vicinity of the Rhine.
The earliest Romanizing tendencies revealed by the historical sources concern only the high Germanic nobility of the area between the Rhine and the Elbe. Thus, members of the right-bank aristocracy served as priests at the Ara Ubiorum. The Romans, probably consciously, made the decision not to erect another provincial altar on the Lugdunum pattern between Rhine and Elbe; indeed, the altar founded among the Ubii in the last decade b.C. remained the ideological cult-centre for the newly conquered territories. When Gaius and Lucius Caesar the grandsons and adopted sons of the emperor died, institutionalized commem-
21
oration of them in cult form (perhaps at dynastic altars, inscriptions from which have been found in several north Gallic cities) served to reinforce the presence and impact of Rome in the newly conquered territory.
iii. the period of the establishment of the military zone(a.d. 14—90)
The overall command of Germanicus over the armies of both Upper and Lower Germany came to an end in a.d. 16. The separation of the two armies (
The Gallo-German nobility on both sides of the Rhine, whose allegiance Rome as the occupying power sought to secure through individual grants of citizenship and absorption into the ranks of the
24 Tac.
constantly breaking out, as it did in a.d. 21 with the revolt of the Treveran and Aeduan nobles, Iulius Florus and Iulius Sacrovir; the pro- Roman element among the Treveri was led by Iulius Indus.25 As always, the Treveran affair ended in victory for the occupying power and its supporters. The losers were penalized by loss of land on the Rhine between Bingen and Koblenz, a loss which affected the whole of the Treveran
The second category of obviously reliable allies of the Roman occupation were the native east-Gaulish long distance traders, often identical with the shipowners on the Gallic and German inland waterways. We meet them in shippers' guilds on Lake Geneva, on the Seine, in the warehouses of Lyons and as wealthy, self-confident riverine carriers on the Rhine. Here they present themselves, somedmes proudly, on the monuments as non-citizens, like the
Parallel to the assimilation of the nobility through a deliberate policy of granting citizenship, and through favours shown by the military to local
Tac.
Chattan War: Tac.
Citizen
J.L. Weisgerber 1969 (e 600) 87-102 =
first under Augustus and then more intensively under Claudius. Vespasian slowed down the process in the left-bank area of the frontier zone and concentrated on the Agri Decumates, but Trajan and Hadrian again forced the pace.
North of Lyons in the direction of the Rhine two colonial settlements came to prominence, Iulia Equestris (Nyon) and Augusta Raurica (Augst) both in northern Switzerland. In their cases the government seems to have been more generous with its grant of colonial rights than it was to Lugdunum/Lyons itself, which was first raised to colonial status under Claudius. Equestris and Raurica must therefore be seen as genuine military
The development in the north seems to have run along similar lines. Trier was founded by the emperor as Augusta Treverorum in the second decade b.C., but not at first raised to the status of
Under Claudius Trier perhaps and Cologne certainly were raised to the status of
31 Dio xlvi.jo, cf. ch. i j
the Rhine between the legionary garrisons. There was consequently a strong enough veteran presence nearby for it to have been taken into consideration. Many of the first generation of Cologne's new citizens, Mediterranean by origin, certainly migrated to the south again. Perhaps there were later addidons to the citizen body of Cologne under the Flavians and Trajan. Perhaps the 'domino' effect which we have seen under Claudius was behind the capital of the Cugerni or Ciberni at Xanten (PCibernodunum) obtaining the status of a
The elite core of the Roman army, the Rhine legions, remained completely Mediterranean, while the east Gaulish-Rhenish nobility could only aspire to Roman citizenship through serving in the higher ranks of the auxiliaries. If, in Caesar's case, fear of the adversary was still a factor, it soon ceased to be. Even the catastrophic defeat in the Teutoburg Forest (a.d. 9) did not re-awaken the old Cimbric terror of the Germans. The decision against conquest as far as the Elbe was clearly taken on fully rational grounds;
The official view of the German opposition across the Rhine, particularly in the northern sector, was the logical reverse of that attitude: there was no broad defence in depth in the hinterland. The left bank which had been the old springboard for the conquest of Germania served everywhere as a defensive line against a possible German attack. To deploy the troops 'per ripam Rheni', as it was probably expressed, without the tacdcal support of the legionary reserves on the lines of penetration to the south into the heart of Gaul, meant (assuming, as we surely must, a realistic evaluation by the Roman military planners) that for the Roman army the German opposition on the right bank of the Rhine represented a negligible factor: land and adversary were simply not worth the trouble of occupadon, and any hostile movements close by could be easily reconnoitred from bases on the Rhine itself. Accordingly no legionary garrisons were required in Besan^on or Trier, in Tongeren or Bavay; the only exception was the legionary deployment on the upper Rhine, a shifting pattern between Vindonissa/Windisch on the Aare, Argentorate/Strasbourg and Mirebeau, an earlier posting of the Strasbourg garrison south-westward toward Langres. All that seemed necessary was to hold auxiliary garrisons in north-east Gaul to extinguish possible local uprisings in the Gallic hinterland of the frontier. This tactical deployment came to an end in the 80s. In general the idea of maintaining in reserve a striking force drawn from the legionary garrisons away from the frontier was kept for the more serious opposition in Britain, Syria and north Africa.
The result of the Tiberio-Claudian arrangement along a river frontier stretching over 1,000km from Basle to Valkenburg (with offshoots on the right bank for military advances in Upper Germany) would have been a handicap if the enemy had been really strong. Not just in a.d. 69/ 70, but in 260 and 274 too, the frontier line was successfully penetrated; the attacks were driven home deep into the heart of the Gallic provinces and, in 274, right through to Spain. This frontier system was not designed against a powerful enemy.
The situation among the tribes on and in the vicinity of the left bank of the Rhine, even under Nero, remained one of considerable variety, so increasing Romanization is hard to recognize among those ranked below the aristocracy whose members had been given grants of Roman citizenship. Cananefates and Batavi were at first treated as
The Frisians in the north had co-operated with the Romans from the beginning. In the 20s there was a visible tightening of the Roman administrative grip on this area, but even under Tiberius interest in the area relaxed. In a.d. 47 Cn. Domitius Corbulo again attempted to bring about the formal subjection of the Frisian area. Though achieving some success, this development was no longer in accord with the imperial policy of Claudius, and the emperor ordered all military garrisons back to the left bank of the Rhine.32 A chain of forts which is now attested in the archaeological record was built along the Oude Rijn in Holland and the Niederrhein in Germany. It can be recognized as a Lower German
North of the Lahn the Mattiaci (who like the Batavians are obviously of Chattan origin) and the pro-Roman Germanic population of the Wetterau appear on the scene as early as Germanicus' time. There are archaeological indications of settlement by Mattiaci round Wiesbaden in a
The Upper Rhine in contrast to the Lower Rhine clearly represents a single settlement zone which has its western border in the Vosges and its eastern on the Black Forest ridge. As a result, from Augustus' day the Rhine was not conceived as a frontier, but was constantly being crossed by troops and controlled civilians. That continued to be true until the definitive establishment of Roman government in the Agri Decumates, that is the area between the Rhine and the Upper German
The frontier situation in the two German provinces was characterized by and large by an effective Roman border control and good trading contacts with the Germans on the right bank of the Rhine. At the same time there was an absence of any strong Roman pressure for a thoroughgoing Romanization. The framework of native society in the Germanies was comparatively strong. The impact of Romanization on them, however, was very weak: in default of that, control was maintained by the iron grip of a large concentration of Roman forces along the whole riverbank. After the death of Nero both German military zones were the stage for a three-year drama, an internal upheaval which
32 Tac.
35 Tac.
was supported by right-bank interests and is known by the name of the Batavian revolt.
The revolt demonstrates the surprising talents of the native leaders among the nobility of the left-bank tribes, from the Cananefates to the Lingones. They looked to their own special interests and those of their respective followers, often with great adroitness, and so far as the Batavian ringleader Iulius Civilis is concerned, perhaps also with some political success. This shows that either Rome did not succeed in suppressing, or the military leadership on the Rhine did not choose to suppress, or neutralize, the political gifts and instincts of the rich Rhenish nobility. There can be no question but that the interests of the left-bank tribal nobility lay in the maintenance of imperial unity, though Tacitus felt able to declare the revolt to be a 'bellum externum' in view of the particular form of the treaty arrangement between Rome and the Batavians.[669] So it may be seen that Romanization was making good progress among the aristocracy, at least after the reigns of Claudius and Nero. The strong Mediterranean element in the culture of the military rested like a thick blanket over every archaeologically tangible expression of the indigenous substratum. In the course of the second century, however, the army took on a strongly Gallic character and this period affords us our first uninterrupted view of a Germanic and Gallo-Roman civil population.
CHAPTER 13^ RAETIA
H. WOLFF
At first glance it is an astonishing fact that Rome did not conquer the Alpine region and the southern German foothills of the Alps before 15 B.C., although she had already seized power over northern Italy more than 200 years before. This was, however, perfectly in accord with the Roman conception of security and foreign policy: principally it required reaction to military threats, which could manifest themselves either in hostile attacks on Rome or on her allies and would thus provoke a military crisis, or simply in the form of a mere display of power by an alien nation, that is one which only potentially jeopardized Roman security interests. As a rule, Rome did not take the initiative in attempting to obtain possession of specific areas as a consequence of internal policy decisions, although exceptions occur with increasing frequency during the late Republic. As a matter of fact, there was no important power in the region of the Alps and their northern foothills on which Roman foreign policy might focus. Apart from raids by small bands, which could radiate from the prehistoric tribal world at any time and in any place, the Alpine tribes had never threatened northern Italy.
The peoples of the Alps were dissipated into a multitude of smaller tribes or valley dwellers, who were in fact partly interconnected by linguistic and cultural bonds, although not by significant socio-political ties. No larger tribal agglomerations (such as a single tribal unit of all Raetians) had developed and there had been no bigger settlements of an urban type except in the Vindelician area north of the Alps. These tribes had learned literacy from the Italians, especially the Etruscans, and they used it for dedicatory, burial and building inscriptions. But this literacy was apparently not accompanied by the development of a system of administration.
Rome had at least conquered some of the valleys to the south of the Alps during the first century B.C. Particularly noteworthy is the growth of Tridentum, a
535
» Wefienbur-a
— ?NBub*im Oberstirrin [Worhofe*^*
haardori Щ
AislinflMi^ II BoicKhjrui
J Augusta Vindefrpui ^ujiiurjl ^ Friedberg / iRederina jsei
СРаыли)
."LlTM
ra
4
■J i
E!
' О -frt Berthing-
f
"i Pons Aeni / Mwiihf .
Я
Map io. Raetia.
Tulliassi, who lived in the western side-valleys of the Adige (Etsch), had been attached to the 'town' by
In 15 B.C. Rome's interests in the central Alps and the Alpine foothills were only indirect. This was a consequence of the change in policy concerning Germany east of the Rhine — a redefinition which had primarily been caused by the defeat of M. Lollius: in order to deny the Germans the possibility of escaping southwards to Italy when attacked, Rome had to control the central Alps and their foothills. In contrast, the attacks of the 'Kammunioi' (Camunni) and the 'Vennioi' on the one hand and of some Noricans and Pannonians further in the east on the other (countered by P. Silius Nerva as proconsul of Illyria in 16 B.C. and avenged with the subjugation of the three Alpine peoples)[671] had probably played only a peripheral role of specious justification for the campaign of 15 B.C.; this gave Tiberius and Drusus, the two stepsons of Augustus, the opportunity of winning military glory cheaply and easily.
I. 'RAETIA' BEFORE CLAUDIUS
The military details of the campaign of conquest in 15 B.C. are fiercely disputed in scholarly literature and cannot at present be conclusively elucidated with the evidence available. The principal difficulty is that the order of the defeated tribes as listed in the only detailed source, the inscription of the Tropaeum Alpium at La Turbie (near Monaco),[672]cannot be definitively interpreted, because in too many cases the precise location of the tribal unit is unknown. From the evidence of Cassius Dio, Horace and other authors[673] it is nevertheless possible to reconstruct at least some essential features of the Roman action, which, because of the geographical conditions in the Alps, must have consisted of several independent and well-co-ordinated operations. Drusus and the main body of his forces attacked advancing from the Adige valley, where he fought the first major battle up-river from Trento. From there he moved forward into the valley of the Inn, certainly using the Reschenscheideck as well as the Brenner Pass. Possibly one of his subordinate commanders penetrated into the Alpine Rhine valley over the Spliigen Pass or the Maloja-Julier from Lake Como. A little later, Tiberius advanced by an unknown route, on which he had to face Raetians of the interior Alpine region, towards other hostile tribes, against whom he is assumed to have fought at Lake Constance and elsewhere. In a day's march from Lake Constance he is supposed to have reached the headwaters of the Danube (whatever is meant by this). On i August, the anniversary of the capture of Alexandria,5 the two brothers defeated the remaining enemies in a major battle. These might have been the Vindelicians and other tribes of the Alpine foothills, of whom, if we may believe Strabo,6 the Rukantioi (Runicates?) and the Kotuantioi (Cosuanetes?) belonged to the Raetian language-group. Of the tribes of adjacent Noricum, the Ambisontes were subdued by Drusus, possibly in the Salzach valley. Thus, in the course of a single summer's campaign Roman arms reached their target, and the two stepsons were able to bring the laurel of victory to Augustus in Gaul — giving Horace sufficient reason to praise the three of them to the skies. After that war we know of no anti-Roman revolts. The Alpine peoples wisely bowed to the superior power of Rome.
The most important political result of the campaign was the establishment of Rome's military presence in the northern Alpine foothills. For a few years - at most from about 15/14 b.c. to 8 b.c. - the greater part of a legion, probably the Nineteenth which later perished with Varus in the Teutoburg Forest (Wiehengebirge), was moved, together with auxiliary troops, to Dangstetten on the northern bank of the upper Rhine (opposite Tenedo/Zurzach). Further, a line of communication running along the Limmat, the Zŭrichsee and the Walensee to the Alpine Rhine valley was secured with several watch-towers. After the death of Drusus Dangstetten was abandoned and at the same time - an important weapons site (Oberhausen, now part of the city of Augsburg) was founded at the confluence of .the Wertach and the Lech. It existed until about a.d. 9 (or perhaps even a.d. 14-17) and should perhaps be explained in connexion with the recently discovered legionary fortress of Marktbreit-upon-Main. The Alpine foothills and the southern German region in general, however, were apparently not an important base for the attempted pacification of free Germany. The insignificant amount of military precaution in evidence seems more likely to have been intended for flank defence, a role which was assigned to the Upper German army. Surprisingly, the eastern part of the Bavarian Alpine foothills, especially the region where the river Inn flows out into the diluvial hilly country,
5 Hor.
remained unnouced (just as the northern part of Noricum received no attendon in the Augustan period): for unknown reasons, the Suebi and other German bands seem even in the Caesarean and Augustan periods to have been more attracted by the region now called Suebia.
As regards the imposiuon of an administration, the organization of newly annexed areas proceeded slowly and hesitantly during the first two generations after the conquest. In this respect Raetia can again be compared to Noricum: for the period of legionary occupation, we have evidence for a
" If the
the western Alps, therefore, the most sensible solution was to join the Valais (
For military reasons the central Alpine region urgently needed roads. Drusus had already marked out the later Via Claudia Augusta from the Po to the Danube. This might similarly have been the case for the roads over the Splŭgen or Julier Passes. Even the road leading from Bregenz through Kempten, Epfach and Gauting and finally to Iuvavum/Salz- burg, belongs to those early years. Whatever the details, according to Strabo at any rate,13 Augustus was responsible for fundamental improvements to the Alpine roads and the passes.
Continuity of occupation by the pre-Roman population cannot be demonstrated in the archaeological record. But Cassius Dio14 specifically tells us that the conquered area was highly populous and that Rome for that reason recruited most of the young men into auxiliary formations and posted them out of the region, leaving only sufficient manpower for agricultural work. Amongst other tasks they fought under Germanicus against the Germans. In contrast, Rome seems to have shown great restraint in reforming the civil institutions of the tribal units. Nor did she attempt to promote the legal or socio-cultural Romanization of the Raetians and the Celts. There is no foundation of colonies, and even the construction of urban centres for the established tribes progressed only slowly. Not until the second decade after the conquest do archaeological discoveries attest the beginnings of urban settlements. As far as we can see, these were not developments of pre-Roman settlements, and the artefacts which have come to light give the impression of the presence of Roman manual workers and traders, who seem newly to have immigrated from the Mediterranean. These settlements are mostly situated on the northern side of the Alps: Chur (Curia), Bregenz (Brigantium), Kempten (Cambodunum), Auerberg (probably Damasia), Epfach (Abo- diacum), Augsburg (Augusta Vindelicum) and Gauting (Bratananium). Brigantium, Cambodunum and Damasia had, according to Strabo,15 been the
» iv.6.6 (204C). •« liv.22.5. "5 iv.6.8 (206C).
all during the reign of Tiberius by Roman occupying forces - the closest military force was the legion which was stadoned in the fortress of Vindonissa/Windisch after a.d. 16/17. Nor do we know of any new setdements in the Augustan—Tiberian period in the Inn valley, the upper Adige valley, the eastern part of the later province of Raeda, or along the Danube. In the early imperial period the centre of Raeda lay in Suebia.
From the economic and fiscal point of view, what was to be the province of Raeda was not endcing - apart from a certain strategic importance for the German campaigns this area was apparently of no genuine worth to Rome.
ii. the claudian province
It was probably Claudius who abandoned Rome's reservations with regard to the Alpine region, assuming that we refuse to credit Caligula (who is supposed to have planned to build a city high up in the mountains)16 with such a degree of practicality and astuteness. One reason for the change in Roman attitudes may have been the more advanced state of development in Upper Germany and Pannonia, which gave an increased importance to the communication lines on and along the Danube. By now a massive dislocation of auxiliary units along the Danube had taken place and it was probably more logical to place the Raetian units under their own provincial governor. An attempt to improve the organization of the administrative machinery fits our general impression of the emperor Claudius and his interests.
Claudius sent an equestrian procurator to Raetia and Vindelicia. Because the troops which this official had under his command at this early stage included Roman citizens (at that time at least the
16 Suet.
Glarnisch, passing between Zŭrichsee and Walensee to the north, then crossing the Rhine west of Tasgetium (Eschenz) and finally reaching the Danube east of Tuttlingen.18
The fortifications along the Danube were possibly first created at the end of the 30s a.d., even before the formal establishment of the province; in that case, the legion stationed at Vindonissa was probably in charge of this construction, because the line of fortresses had the function of safeguarding its right flank. The fortress of Aislingen together with the two small fortresses of Nersingen and Burlafingen are the earliest camps on the Danube so far known, dating back to late Tiberian times. Not very much later, in about a.d. 40, or between 40 and 50, the entire chain of fortresses from Emerkingen to Oberstimm (perhaps even as far as Weltenburg) was built. But again we have no evidence of camps in the interior Alpine region, which suggests that Roman rule was not threatened by internal unrest. Together with the camps, in whose surroundings soon civilian settlements
The most important issue for our understanding of the civil administration is the question of how long the tribal units (
18 Many of the precise details of the route are open to dispute. Since its course had to be traced in a variety of sources covering the entire Roman period (some as late as the sixth century a.d.), it is impossible, except in the case of the frontier with the external tribes, to specify precisely what changes in the position of the borders may have occurred from time to time.
Licates:
Cf. Heuberger 1932 (E621) 149-67. Strab. iv.6.8 (206Q.
local units and to deal with the local administration of their own citizenry even as late as the middle Empire.22 Most of them obviously did not develop urban centres and perhaps for that reason have left no inscriptions. It is consequently impossible to locate all of these tribes accurately; we may only argue with some degree of probability that those of the Licates who were not absorbed by the
The Illyrian customs stations
Similarly we know scarcely anything of the political history of the province. In a.d. 14 the Suebi are supposed to have threatened the Alpine foothills and veterans of the rebellious German army were therefore sent against them.24 In the year 69 the province was inevitably dragged into the struggles for power between Otho, Vitellius and Vespasian. The decision of the Raetian troops in favour of Vitellius and the Norican troops in favour of Otho and Vespasian was connected with the respective commitment of the German and Pannonian armies: until long into the second century the orientation of Raetia was to the West. For that reason in 69 the Raetian troops, including the local militia of the province, were instructed to attack the rebellious Helvetians25 and were probably then removed to Italy. Later the Raetian and Norican troops found themselves facing each other across the Inn, though without
For another possible solution see Wolff 1986 (e 645) i66f.
Pflaum i960 (d 59) 150
coming to blows.26 And after Vespasian's victory, when the Norican troops were moved to be deployed in the area of the Batavian revolt,27 they may have destroyed the hostile Raedan camps as well as Augsburg, Kempten and Bregenz. At least, that is one conclusion which scholars have drawn from the existence of destruction levels at these sites. The reality may have been much more complicated but such uncertainty is characteristic of the politically marginal situation of this province, of which the historiographic tradition tells us hardly anything, except incidentally.
24 Tac.
THE DANUBIAN AND BALKAN PROVINCES
J.J. WILKES
I. THE ADVANCE TO THE DANUBE AND BEYOND, 43 B.C.-A.D. 6
'Magnum est stare in Danubii ripa' proclaimed the Younger Pliny to the emperor Trajan. An approach to the river, either dilated in the plains or surging awesomely in one of its several gorges, rarely fails to stir the imagination. The river Danube figures in some of Europe's oldest myths, some from remote prehistory, such as the tale of the returning Argonauts sailing upstream from the Black Sea to the Adriatic. Throughout history conquerors and their armies have exulted at gaining the river, though perhaps none more emphatically than the emperor Augustus who boasted in his
1 Greek and Latin authors and inscriptions on stone are the principal sources for the Danube lands in the Julio-Claudian era. For the narrative of conquest Appian's lengthy description of the campaigns of 55-33 b.c.,
The evidence from inscriptions increases towards the end of the period. There is little for the wars of Augustus, save for passages in the
545
Map 11. Military bases, cities and settlements in the Danubian provinces.
between Europe and the Middle East, via Zagreb, Belgrade, Niŝ, and Sofia to Istanbul, or south from Nis via Skopje and Thessalonica to Athens. For nearly four centuries this highway was the principal military axis of the Roman empire, notably in the recurrent episodes of civil war, from the turmoil of a.d. 68-9 which followed the end of the Julio- Claudians to the great conflicts of the fourth century which troubled the dynasties of Constantine and Valentinian. Theodosius I, the last to rule over a united Roman empire, was in a.d. j 94 the last reigning emperor to travel the overland route between East and West.2
The province of Pannonia, and within it above all the region of the lower Drava and Sava around Mursa and Sirmium, was the keystone of the empire's defensive arch against the northern peoples between the Black Sea and the northern Ocean. When that fell the interests of the eastern and western halves of the empire soon diverged. In the pact at Brundisium in 40 в.с. the Illyrian town of Scodra near the Adriatic had been designated to mark the boundary between Octavian's West and Antony's East.3 In reality the frontier was the near impassable mountain barrier of the north-south watershed through Bosnia, Montenegro and Albania. It became evident that these areas and their sturdy inhabitants could only be subdued by approaches from the encircling plains to the north, from the direction of Zagreb and Belgrade. That could not even be attempted until the overland route across the middle Danube basin had been secured. By the middle years of Augustus this had been achieved, a notable success for the new army recruited after Actium. Its
Noricum, Pannonia and Dalmatia, are sufficient to indicate the identities and locations of legions and auxiliary units, while the military production of stamped bricks and tiles appears to commence around the same time. The inscriptions from the Danube lands were first assembled by Th. Mommsen for volume hi of
Archaeological investigations, most undertaken since the Second World War, have furnished evidence for the plans, principal buildings and adjoining cemeteries of several Roman cities, though many important discoveries have yet to be fully recorded and published. Many military sites along the Danube have also been examined, although the earliest levels of occupation are rarely penetrated. In recent years there has been a great deal of valuable work on the classification and distribution of important Roman pottery, including amphorae and
1 Pliny,
strategic value was to be amply demonstrated when it held firm, though only just, during the rebellion of Pannonia in a.d. 6-9. While the deeds of Drusus, Germanicus and Arminius stirred the imagination of poets and panegyricists the truth was that in the reckoning Germany beyond the Rhine was expendable and was finally discarded in a.d. 15/16. Not so Illyricum and the Danube.
The Balkans witnessed the death-agony of the Roman Republic in the aftermath of Caesar's murder. The Senate granted command in Illyricum, Macedonia and Achaea, to Brutus, who delegated his authority to Q. Hortensius Hortalus, proconsul in Macedonia. Caesar's former lieutenant P. Vatinius ended his operations against the Delmatae around Narona and returned to Rome, where he celebrated an Illyrian triumph on 31 July 42 B.C. The republicans found allies among Illyrians and Thracians, although a rash attempt to march from northern Italy to Macedonia by Decimus Brutus met its inevitable end among the Iapodes. The pact at Brundisium in September 40 в.с. left Illyricum under Octavian and Macedonia under Antony. The latter ordered attacks on the Illyrian Parthini, the allies of Brutus, and the Dardani, a perpetual menace to Macedonia. For victories over the Parthini a triumph was awarded to Asinius Pollio but neither the commander nor the outcome of Antony's
In the domain of Octavian the expansion of Dacia under Burebista had reawakened in Italy the old fear of invasion from the north east. It was no accident that the reported schemes of Philip V of Macedon to direct the ferocious Bastarnae overland against Italy figured prominendy in the history of Livy, a native of Patavium. Burebista was now dead and his realm divided between four or five rulers, most no more than shadows in the historical record, Comoiscus, Coson, Cotiso and Dicomes, the first three ruling in south-west Dacia, the last in the south east. The triumvir's belated victory over Sextus Pompeius at Naulochus on 3 September 36 B.C. was acclaimed far away among Roman settlers in Illyricum[675] but it was not to be long before that region became the scene of Roman campaigning. Caesar's heir devoted two full seasons of operations against peoples beyond the Adriatic (see p. 172), though for reasons largely unconnected with affairs in that quarter. In 35 в.с. a march through the Iapodes and Pannonians left a garrison of twenty-five cohorts at Siscia. There was some talk of an advance against the Dacians, and this may have been the occasion of a reported contact with Cotiso, which provoked Antony's subsequent alliance with Dicomes. In the next year the Delmatae were attacked and some hard fighting in the valleys and forests behind Salona won a capitulation and return of the standards captured from Caesar's luckless general A. Gabinius at Synodion in 48 B.C., though not before a winter blockade in 34/3 B.C. maintained by one of Caesar's leading field commanders. The register of surrendered peoples suggests that the entire coast and hinterland between Istria and Macedonia were now in Roman hands, though no advance had yet been made against the Pannonian peoples across the mountains, in the valleys of Bosnia, the Drava and the Sava.
For nearly twenty years following victory over the Delmatae, which furnished Octavian with the first instalment of his triple triumph on 13 August 29 B.C., almost nothing is reported of events in the Danube lands. The exception is Dio's unusually full record of the campaigns in 29 and 28 B.C. by M. Crassus, proconsul in Macedonia with an army of four legions. The first season saw victory over the Bastarnae near the Danube at the river Ciabrus (Cibrica), in which the proconsul killed King Deldo in personal combat. A triumph was decreed, though the title
During this period the troubled affairs of the kingdom of Thrace drew Roman armies more than once into the area, a recurring pattern being conflict between the* Odrysae of the more setded east and the powerful Bessi of the mountainous west. Though the Sapaean Rhoemetalces (I) may have gained sole power in Thrace for his desertion of Antony before Actium, he was to prove an effective ruler, whose long and prosperous reign is reflected in a silver coinage minted to the standard of Roman
' Dio li. 25.2-27; cf. P/R2l i 86, with Mocsy 1966 (c 289) 511. The Dacian prisoners who fought with Germans in the arena at Rome a few days after Octavian's triumph, Dio li. 22.6-9, tnay have been supplied by Crassus' victory over the army of Cotiso, Hor.
denarii.7 The affair of M. Primus, the governor of Macedonia accused of making war against the Odrysae, reported by Cassius Dio under 22 B.C., remains no less obscure in its Balkan context than it is in politics at Rome. We are on firmer ground with the activities of the consular M. Lollius, whose intervention on behalf of Rhoemetalces, perhaps in 19/18 в.с., may have been the occasion for the transfer of the Macedonian army to the new command of'Thrace and Macedonia'. Lollius' successor may have been L. Tarius Rufus, the consul of 16 B.C., who fought with the Sarmatians, the first reported collision with these Iranian horsemen.8 The Balkan command may also have been entrusted to Tiberius following his Alpine campaign in 15 B.C., for operations which brought the Scordisci around Sirmium into a Roman alliance that was to prove crucial in the subsequent conquest of the Pannonians. It is possible that the engagement of the Balkan armies in the far north west caused the task of crushing a major uprising by the Thracian Bessi to be assigned to L. Piso with an army from the East. The bloody Thracian war lasted three years, probably 12-10 B.C., during which the Romans recovered from defeat to gain a victory which rewarded the commander with triumphal honours.
Illyricum, not among the territories assigned to Caesar Augustus in 27 в.с., will presumably have been administered by proconsuls, though none happens to be recorded. Dio's summary of recent events under 16 в.с. refers to the operations of P. Silius Nerva against peoples of the eastern Alps, in the course of which his legates repelled an attack on Istria by Noricans and Pannonians. The province of Silius was not, it seems, Illyricum but rather Transpadana which included Istria and Liburnia. In the same passage Dio refers to an uprising in Dalmatia that was soon dealt with, presumably by a proconsul. The overland connexion between Italy and the Balkans was achieved by Tiberius in the
7 On the identities and relationships of the rulers of Thrace, see Sullivan 1979 (e 698). The numbering of rulers follows that in the entries of U. Kahrstedt in
• Dio Liv.20.3. The reading of an inscription recording construction of a bridge over the Strymon at Amphipolis, AE 1936, 18 = /LGR 230, is not sufficiently clear to determine whether Tarius Rufus was proconsul or legate.
Dalmatians' that had lasted for more than 220 years, reckoning, that is, from Rome's first Illyrian war in 229 в.с.[676]
The conquest of Pannonia, along with the takeover of Noricum which evidently followed the operations of Silius (see above), brought control of the Drava and Sava valleys that enabled the Romans to dictate the fortunes of most peoples in the middle Danube basin. How that power was exploited is not reported, since the historical record for the middle years of Augustus is seriously deficient, though the Dacians come again into prominence. Late in 10 в.с. a raid across the frozen Danube had frustrated an intention to close the temple of Janus, and the Roman response may have been the operations of Cornelius Lentulus, perhaps successor to Piso in the Balkan command, against Dacians, the same group who surrendered to Crassus in 29 B.C., and their Sarmadan mercenaries. Lentulus' successor may have been the unknown general (though likely to have been M. Vinicius) whose activities beyond the lower Danube involved the Bastarnae and contacts, not necessarily hosdle, with lesser peoples to the west of Dacia.[677] The scale and direction of these operations suggest considerable confidence on the part of the Romans towards their new Danubian conquests, which is also reflected in the appointment
What is reported of the activities of Roman commanders in the Balkans implies a control of the lower Danube that may, from time to time, may have been extended through use of the fleet to the Black Sea. At Callatis, a Greek city of that region which had been a Roman ally for more than half a century, the praetorian legate P. Vinicius, under whom the historian Velleius Paterculus served as tribune, is named on an honorific inscription.14 Both the Romans and their allies will have been aware of the movements of new peoples, caused by turmoil in remote Asia, westwards across the Pontic steppes and into the plains beyond the lower Danube. There had already been conflict with Sarmatians, steadily roaming westwards, on at least two occasions. Some peoples pressed up hard against Roman territory were evidendy begging admission, to which a response could be postponed, though not indefinitely. Late under Augustus Strabo records that Sex. Aelius Catus allowed 50,000 Getae to cross the river and settle in Roman territory.15
In the mean time the later years of Augustus' Principate were marred by misfortunes, none worse than the rebellion of the Pannonians.
ii. rebellion in illyricum and the annexation of thrace (a.d. 6-69)
When the warriors of the Daesitiates and other Pannonians had assembled in a.d. 6 for the expedition against Maroboduus they were minded instead to turn their arms against the Romans (p. 176-8). Led by Bato of the Daesitiates and Bato of the Breuci they attacked Roman settlements, the colonies on the Adriatic and even penetrated to Macedonia. Sirmium near the mouth of the Sava, the key to the middle Danube, was saved by the Balkan army and the Thracian cavalry under Rhoemetalces, while in the west the army of Illyricum held fast at Siscia. There in the following year the two armies were briefly united and were directed in concert by Tiberius until the Pannonians surrendered at the river Bathinus (Bosna?) on 3 August a.d. 8. In the next season the Pannonians between the Sava and the Adriatic, including the Daesitiates and Pirustae, were attacked until the surrender of Bato at Andetrium (Muĉ), near Salona in the territory of the Delmatae, brought the terrible war finally to an end. Tiberius, back in Rome at the beginning of a.d. 10, was soon called to the Rhine by the disaster of Varus and the Illyrian triumph was postponed until 23 October a.d. 12. The celebration of victory, marked by salutations as
14 The Callatis treaty,
very little booty taken'.16 Less than two years after his triumph Tiberius was again in Illyricum, though he had barely arrived when news of Augustus' final illness drew him back to Italy.
For long after the Pannonian revolt the provinces of Pannonia and Dalmada, formed by a division of Illyricum probably in a.d. 9, were placed in the charge of senior consulars. The fighting had caused the loyalty of the legions to be strained until, on hearing news of the death of Augustus (19 August a.d. 14), the army of Pannonia mutinied. The legions demanded better and more speedy reward for what they had endured in the recent wars. Even the appearance on the scene of Drusus, the son of Tiberius, did not bring an end to the disorder until a lunar eclipse in the early hours of 27 September, followed by a break in the weather, undermined the morale of the rebels and impaired their mobility. Drusus on his return to Rome was praised for his resolute conduct, though, observes Tacitus, the concessions made by Germanicus to the mutineers on the Rhine were extended to the army of Pannonia.17
Three years later the attendon of Romans in Illyricum, in which the direction of affairs had been assigned to Drusus, was diverted to turmoil among the Suebic Germans, where the long supremacy of Maroboduus among the Marcomanni was coming to an end. Challenged first by the great Arminius in A.d. 17 he was expelled the following year by his kinsman Catualda and accepted an exile at Ravenna where he lived on for eighteen years. The followers of Maroboduus and also of Catualda, who was himself speedily removed by the Hermunduri and consigned by the Romans to an exile at Forum Iulii in Gaul, were settled beyond the Danube between the rivers Marus (March) and Cusus (perhaps the Vah) in southern Slovakia. Here they became subjects of Vannius, whose thirty-year reign over the Suebic Quadi gave the Romans a generadon of peace in this quarter. It may have been around this time that the Romans permitted the Sarmatian Jazyges to occupy the plains between Pannonia and Dacia, though their presence is not recorded undl a.d. 5 o, in the service of Vannius (see below). On 28 May a.d. 20 Drusus celebrated the award of an ovadon granted in the previous summer for the recepdon of Maroboduus and other achievements. Only a renewal of strife among the Thracians now disturbed the
16 Suet.
18 Tac.
The role of Roman forces in the region of the Danube delta, beyond the presumed formal limits of Roman territory, is described in the
In a.d. 44 the unified Balkan command of Moesia, Macedonia and
» Ov.
» Tac.
Achaea, formed at the beginning of Tiberius' reign, was broken up. The latter two were returned to the charge of proconsuls appointed by the Senate, while Moesia was formally constituted a province under a consular legate.[680] The new arrangement was evidently bound up with the annexation of Thrace following the murder of Rhoemetalces (III). The takeover, which met with a degree of resistance requiring the presence of the legions, was directed by A. Didius Gallus, first governor of Moesia. His activides also embraced the Crimea, where the kingdom of the Bosporus had long-standing connexions with Thrace. In his first year Claudius had revoked Caligula's award of the Bosporus to Polemo of Pontus, son of Antonia Tryphaena, and confirmed the authority of Mithridates, stepson of Gepaepyris the widow of King Aspurgus (died c. a.d. 37/8). The new king's over-assertive policies brought his replacement by his half-brother Cotys whose coins commence in a.d. 46/5 (342 of the local era), when he was installed by an expedition under Didius Gallus. The attempt by Mithridates to recover his kingdom was defeated by a Roman prefect in charge of some auxiliary cohorts stationed in the Bosporus, aided by the Sarmatian Aorsi, who roamed the plains between the Tanais (Don) and the Caspian. The deposed king was consigned to an exile in Italy until executed by Galba on suspicion of plotting. Though the army of Moesia took part, it seems that the Roman interest in this quarter was directed from Pontus in Asia Minor rather than from the lower Danube.[681]
The affairs of Pannonia and Dalmatia after a.d. 9 present a notable contrast to those of Moesia and Thrace. The hold on the Danube was now secure and there is no record of trouble among the Pannonians. During the Principate of Tiberius their governors were senior consulars, retained in office for exceptional terms. The tenure of the Balkan command by C. Poppaeus Sabinus was ended only by his death after twenty-three years, and his successor Memmius Regulus remained for a decade. L. Munatius Plancus held Pannonia for seventeen years, while Dalmatia knew only two governors, P. Cornelius Dolabella until a.d. 20 and L. Volusius Saturninus. The extent of Roman confidence towards the area is indicated by the transfer of a legion from Pannonia to Africa for the campaign against Tacfarinas in a.d. 20—4, and by the permanent removal, without replacement, of the same legion IX Hispana for the expedition to Britain in a.d. 43. An attempted rebellion by the governor of Dalmatia in a.d. 42 ended after five days when the legions returned to their allegiance and a grateful Claudius rewarded them (VII and XI) with the titles 'loyal and faithful' (
The middle and later years of Nero saw a storm gathering on the lower Danube. An unusually full record of the activides of a governor of Moesia from around this dme tells how 'he brought across, with the object of keeping up the payment of tribute, more than 100,000 of Transdanubian peoples, along with wives and families, chiefs or kings'. 'He nipped in the bud a growing threat from among the Sarmadans, even though he had sent the greater part of his army for the expedition into Armenia.' 'Kings hitherto unknown or hostile to the Roman people he brought to the river bank to pay solemn respect to the Roman standards. To the kings of the Bastarnae and Roxolani he restored their sons and to the king of the Dacians his brothers, whom he had either captured or rescued from enemies; from other rulers he received hostages. By these measures he strengthened and extended the security of the province.' He was busy also in the Crimea: 'he pushed back the kings of the Scythians from a blockade of Chersonesus (near Sevastopol), which lies beyond the river Borysthenes (Dniepr). Finally, 'he was the first to obtain from the province a large quantity of wheat for the grain supply of the Roman people'. For these achievements Ti. Plautius Silvanus Aelianus was not awarded triumphal honours until years later under Vespasian, though it came then with marks of special favour. Moreover, by that time disasters suffered by the Romans on the lower Danube will likely have served to cast a more favourable light on what appear to have been largely diplomatic comings and goings.[683]
The reported schemes of Nero's later years in the direction of the
Black Sea, involving annexation of Bosporus and Pontus and the raising of a new legion for an expedition to the Caucasus, may have been in part a response to an increasing threat from the Sarmadans and other Iranians. Rebellion within the empire brought them to an end and when the Sarmadans attacked the Roman world was on the point of being engulfed by civil war. In the winter a.d. 67/8 the Roxolani had cut to pieces two auxiliary cohorts and in the following winter they crossed the river for a raid on Moesia. A sudden thaw put the Sarmatian horsemen at a disadvantage when attacked by a legion and its auxiliaries, and a victory had been reported to Rome by 1 March a.d. 69, for which the emperor Otho made generous awards to all concerned.[684] A second attack later that year found the province almost devoid of troops, and even the legionary bases were in danger until the dmely appearance of Mucianus and the eastern legions on their march to Italy. Legion VI Ferrata was diverted to deal with the invaders, who were Sarmadans rather than Dacians, since it was for victory over the former that triumphal honours were later awarded to Mucianus.[685] During the following winter, with Moesia evidently still disorganized after the civil war, the Sarmadans came again, killed the governor and ransacked the province from end to end. A new governor could do no more than chase off a few stragglers.[686]Now there began a comprehensive reorganization of the defences of Moesia which marks the beginning of a new era in the history of the Roman Danube.
iii. the danube peoples
Within little more than a generation a large tract of the Danube lands, extending across the north of the Balkan peninsula, had been added to the Roman empire. Control of the river Danube, achieved first through the conquest of the Pannonians and extended through the annexadon of Thrace, gave to Rome the means of encircling and securing the mountain ranges, some rising to over 2,500m, and the dense forests that covered most of the Balkans. In the east the lower basin of the Danube is defined by a semicircular chain of mountains formed by the southern Carpathians and the Stara Planina, through which the river forces its way out of the Hungarian plain, once a great inland sea. In the west the undulating plain of Pannonia, to the west of the Danube, is bounded on the south by the rivers Drava and Sava. Further south the Dinaric watershed and several ranges run mainly from north west to south east, parallel with the Adriadc coast, and continue south through Montenegro and Albania and the Pindus range of Greece. The south east is dominated by the mass of the Rhodope mountains that extend across the central Balkans, throwing out spurs towards the Black Sea and the Aegean. Most of this area and its peoples could only be approached and controlled from the direction of the Danube via its major tributaries.
Europe's greatest river flows more than 2,800km from the Black Forest to the Black Sea. Since Roman times the Danube has rarely served as a political frontier, save for that between Bulgaria and Romania in modern times. That has rather been the role of several major tributaries, while the great river has been more the highway for movement across Europe. In the upper and lower basins, bounded by Alps, Carpathians and the Balkan mountains, the south bank tends to be higher, sometimes with cliffs where ranges of low hills meet the river. The north bank is generally lower, marshy and hard to approach, save when ice covers both marshes and river between January and March. Below Belgrade passage between the upper and lower basins is obstructed by a succession of gorges for nearly 130km, formed by the southward continuation of the Carpathians. Fast currents, rocks and whirlpools combine to form such a barrier that in antiquity the upper and lower courses of the Danube were treated virtually as separate rivers. The lower gorge (Donja Klisura), where the river narrows to 150m in the Kazan defile, is more difficult than the upper (Gornja Klisura). A distance of 5 km downstream from the gorge comes the great barrier of the Iron Gate (Prigrada), where a wall of rock across the bed of the river blocks any form of passage. Here a stretch of 5 km, where the river boils through shoals and cataracts, was eventually bypassed with a canal in the year of Trajan's first invasion of Dacia,29 a precedent imitated by Austro- Hungarian engineers at the end of the last century. The decision to hold to the river after a.d. 9 was to make permanent an occupation of the great plains along the upper and middle Danube. Later, when the river had become a fortified line of defence, it was in the lowlands of Pannonia and Moesia that the empire was vulnerable to sudden invasion, especially when the river was bridged with ice.
The indigenous peoples of the Danube lands at the time of the Roman conquest fall into four groups, whose languages all belonged to the Indo-European family.30 These were Celts in the north west, Illyrians in the west, and Dacians and Thracians in the east, respectively north and south of the Danube. The brief comments regarding their social organization and material culture to be found in the ancient sources can be supplemented by epigraphic and archaeological discoveries. Inscriptions of the Roman period have been the basis for the study of personal names, family structures ^nd other groupings. The Thracians were
29 Saŝel 1973 (e 692). 30 Polome 1982 (e 687).
Map Geography and native peoples of the Danubian provinces.
believed to be the oldest stratum of the population and once appear to have extended west as far as the Adriatic, though in historical dmes they were bounded by the lower Danube, the Black Sea and Aegean coasts and, on the west, by the river Strymon. In the west of their territory dwelt the Dentheletae and Maidi in the Strymon valley, also the formidable Bessi of the western plain and the Rhodope mountains. In the more fertile and settled east were the Asti and Odrysae, from whom originated the ruling dynasties of Thrace. North of the Haemus mountains (Stara Planina) dwelt the associated Moesi and Triballi in the west and, east of the river Utus, the Getae of the Dobrudja, who were akin to the Dacians. Thracians dwelt in fortified villages and hill forts. In earlier times they had imported fine metalwork and pottery which was consigned in large amounts to their burials in mounds
On the west of the Thracians, and bounded in the central Balkans more or less by the valley of the Morova, lay the Illyrians. That name had once been applied simply to the immediate neighbours of Epirus and Macedonia but was later extended to include Delmatae, Liburnians, Iapodes, Pannonians and others. Epitaphs of the Roman period found in Albania, Yugoslavia and Hungary, have permitted the identification of distinct groups among the Illyrians, notably the Illyrians 'properly so- called', as the Elder Pliny described them, dwelling in northern Albania, the Delmatae and associated peoples of the middle Adriatic, the Pannonians of Bosnia and the Sava and Drava valleys, the Iapodes, and the Liburnians around the northern Adriatic.[688]
'The Dacians and the Getae speak the same language' notes Strabo.[689]Some ancient writers clearly confused the two peoples, until the Dacian regime of Burebista rose in the first century в.с. to dominate the Danube lands. In the west the once powerful Celdc Boii and Taurisci were humbled and on the east the Black Sea ciues from Olbia to Apollonia came under Dacian influence. The dictator Caesar is said to have planned an expedition to Dacia though the death of Burebista, which occurred around the same time as Caesar's, saw his kingdom soon broken up between four or five rulers. In material culture the Dacians moved ahead of the other Danubian peoples, as Celdc influences stimulated a natural talent for metalworking in a land exceptionally rich in minerals. Long familiar with imported goods from the hellenistic and Roman worlds, jewellery, pottery, wine and oil, their commerce with the latter may also have involved slave-trading on a large scale, for which large quanddes of Roman coins reached the area around the middle of the first century в.с.34
Celdc peoples had moved into the middle Danube basin during the fourth century в.с. They were soon in conflict with Illyrians and early in the third century they reached the southern Balkans, on one famous occasion (279 B.C.) all but destroying the kingdom of Macedon. Later they dispersed, some bands moving to Asia, others returning north to settlements near the Danube.[690] Survivals of the Celtic migradons included the Scordisci around the lower Sava, who were prominent in the middle Balkans during the late second and early first centuries B.C. Settlements of Celts are suggested by place names apparently of Celtic origin on the lower Danube, such as Ratiaria, Durostorum and Novio- dunum. Celts remained dominant along the middle Danube, in Noricum and in Pannonia, where remnants of the Boii and the Eravisci are found separated by the Illyrian Azali, the latter perhaps transported there during the
Not a great deal is known of the economy, social organization and material culture of the majority of the Danube peoples, although it is now possible, in some measure, to put forward the necessary correcdve to unflattering stereotypes in the ancient sources, 'ignorance' of agriculture and viticulture, 'intemperance' in drinking and sexual behaviour and 'uncivilized conduct' among themselves and towards foreigners. In several areas more is now known of the layout and general character of settlements. In the south, among the Illyrians, Greek influence is evident in the fortified settlements of the Illyrian kingdom, at Lissus, Scodra and elsewhere.[692] The centre of the Illyrian Daorsi at Oŝaniĉi near Stolac possessed walls and towers reminiscent of Greek work.38 Along the Adriatic coast from Istria southwards are found the remains of many fortified hill-settlements, the so-called
Among the Iapodes, some of the hill-settlements in the northern Lika attacked by the Romans in 35 в.с. have been identified, notably Monetium, Avendo and Arupium, and excavated; further east, in the Una valley around Bihaĉ, some large cemeteries, most of cremations, have been explored. Their grave goods include tradidonal types of pottery, weapons, brooches and jewellery dating from early Iron Age to Roman times. Unique to the area are the dozen or so stone cremation chests, suggesting some Etruscan or Italic influence, with an incised decoradon of warriors, horsemen, funeral processions and dances, in a style that shows little classical influence, although some are clearly of Roman date since they bear also Latin epitaphs.[694] The influence of seaborne contacts with other peoples is evident in the material culture of the Liburnians, notably in the extensive cemeteries excavated around Zadar and Nin. The Liburnian settlement at Radovine had stone houses built to a regular plan, imported Greek and hellenistic pottery and dry- stone, later mortared defences, and remained inhabited throughout the Roman era.[695] Several of the larger Liburnian hill-settlements were transformed into Roman towns when city institutions were introduced in the Julio-Claudian period.
The warrior-led Celts in the Danube lands are identified with the spread of fortified settlements (
iv. provinces and armies
By early in the reign of Claudius the Danube land§ had been organized into five provinces. The core consisted of the three great commands of Pannonia, Dalmatia and Moesia, each in the charge of a consular legate and with armies totalling seven legions along with their equivalent auxiliaries.[697] In the north west and south east lay the smaller provinces of Noricum and Thracia, once ruled by native dynasties but now in the charge of procuratorial governors.
Noricum lay astride the Tauern Alps of Lower Austria, between the upper Drava and the Danube, and was bounded on the west by the river Inn.[698] Though narrow gorges make travel difficult in several places, some broad valleys are inviting for settlement, notably the Drau (Drava) and the Zollfeld around Klagenfuhrt, the Mur around Graz and, north of the watershed, the Traun around Wels. The main route into Noricum from Italy crossed the Saifnitz saddle (812m) into Carinthia and continued north to the Danube via Neumarkt, Ovilava (Wels) and Lauriacum. A branch fropi the road heading for the Brenner Pass entered Noricum from the west via the Eisacktal and the Pustertal, while that from the south crossed the Karavanken by the Loibl (Lubelj) Pass. Routes along the Mur and Drava valleys led to the main Pannonian Highway at Poetovio (Ptuj) on the Drava. Though a seasonal route crossed the High Tauern via the Hochtor (2,5 00m) the principal crossing was via the Katschberg
The boundary between Noricum and Pannonia down the east side of the Alps left in Pannonia territory that had once been reckoned part of Noricum, including most of the Pannonian Highway (part of the 'Amber Road' of prehistoric times) between Aquileia and the Danube via Emona, Celeia, Poetovio, Savaria and Carnuntum. The boundary between Pannonia and Dalmada along the south edge of the Sava valley probably went back to a strategic division of command in Illyricum following the Pannonian surrender in the late summer of a.d. 8.[699] The long course of the Danube through the Hungarian plains marked the northern and eastern limits of Pannonia, between Vindobona and Singidunum (Belgrade) where Moesia began at the mouth of the Sava. In terrain, climate and material culture there were differences between Pannonia north and south of the Drava. The former was largely a continuation of the Great Hungarian plain, with some more favoured areas near Lake Balaton, in the Bakony hills nearer the Danube bend and around Pecs in the south east. In the south the overland routes between Italy and the Balkans branched off the Pannonian Highway at Emona and Poetovio to follow the broad and fertile valleys of the Sava and Drava. Further north the two principal routes across northern Pannonia led from Poetovio to Aquincum (Budapest) via Balaton, and from Savaria along the Arabo (Raab) to Arrabona (Gyor). There was at this period no road along the Danube bank in Noricum or Pannonia.
The greater part of the southern boundary of Moesia followed the northern foothills of the Haemus.[700] Though a towpath was constructed at least through the upper part of the Danube gorge by the Moesian legions under Tiberius,[701] there is no evidence at this time for a unified route along the Danube between Radaria (Archar) and Aegyssus at the apex of the delta. The most direct approach from the south to the centre of the province, that is 'Moesia et Triballia' around Ratiaria and Oescus, followed the Strymon (Struma) valley to Serdica and the Iskur valley to Oescus. A longer and more difficult route followed the Axius (Vardar) and Margus (Morava), via Scupi and Naissus, and then the Timacus (Timok) to the Danube near Ratiaria.
Though an 'unarmed province' before the end of the first century a.d. Dalmada embraced a great tract of forests and mountains which had seen hard fighting during the Augustan conquest.52 In the south the waterless and bare limestone karst of the hinterland makes a contrast with the coast and islands, almost everywhere green with Mediterranean vegetation.
From the Julian Alps in the north to the valley of the Drin in the south routes to the interior are uniformly difficult. Beyond the watershed of the Dinaric ranges the Bosnian rivers flow north to the Sava, from east to west the Glina, Colapis (Kulpa), Una, Sana, Vrbas, Bosna and Drina. Hardly a single trace of Roman influence can be observed in this area during the Julio-Claudian period, though Roman forces crossed and re- crossed it as military roads were driven across the land.
Most of what may be termed provincial administration in the Danube lands under the Julio-Claudians was intended to secure military ends, the conquest, pacification and exploitation of native peoples, and the security and support of the occupying armies. Until 27 в.с. Illyricum and Macedonia (which also included Achaea) were administered by proconsuls chosen from ex-praetors or ex-consuls. After that date Macedonia, which included Epirus and Thessaly, and Achaea were constituted separate provinces, each under a proconsul of praetorian rank, residing normally at Thessalonica and Corinth respectively. Illyricum, also proconsular, may not have extended north of the river Titus (Krka), leaving Liburnia still grouped along with Istria and Transpadana. Even when later part of Dalmatia, Liburnia retained its separate organization for the imperial cult.53
As for the arrangements in Thrace, Macedonia and Moesia, the view here accepted is that after more than one Thracian crisis a new Balkan command was constituted with the legions of Macedonia, perhaps by M. Lollius in c. 19/18 B.C. (see above, p. 5 51), and perhaps titled 'Thracia Macedoniaque'. It may be presumed, though there is no proof, that Macedonia was subsequendy restored to administration by proconsuls, though no longer with undefined military responsibilities. In a.d. i 5 Macedonia and Achaea, having suffered many burdens during the recent wars, were added to the emperor's Balkan command, which by now may have been known as 'Moesia' or 'Moesia et Treballia' to assist recovery from the effects of those wars. This arrangement continued until a.d. 44 when Moesia was constituted a separate province and Macedonia and Achaea were returned to their proconsuls.54 Newly annexed Thrace was placed in the charge of a procurator, a form of administration evidently favoured by Claudius for former client kingdoms. The Roman governor resided on the coast at Perinthus, rather than inland at the former capital Bizye, but the royal system of administration by districts was retained. The Thracian Chersonese (Gallipoli), an imperial possession since 12
Cf. p. 22J3.
54 Veil. Pat. 11.101.3; "Гас.
B.C., retained its separate administration, while Byzantium was included in the Asian province Bithynia. Not long after the annexation of Thrace that city appealed successfully for a remission of taxes in recognition of its contribution to the Roman war effort. A similar regime was introduced for Noricum, with a procuratorial administration based at the new city of Virunum in the Zollfeld.[702]
In several areas military conquest was, in typical Roman fashion, followed up by driving new roads though areas of mountain and forest. The Via Claudia Augusta across the eastern Alps via the Resia Pass was completed under Claudius,[703] and roads across the Alps in Noricum may have been built around the same time. In Dalmatia at least five major roads, radiating in all directions across the province from Salona, had been completed by a.d. zo.[704] In Pannonia the road across the Julian Alps from Aquileia to Emona was under construction in a.d. 14.[705] In Moesia a towpath through the upper gorge of the Danube was complete by a.d. 33/4, and was repaired under Claudius and doubtless on several other occasions given the conditions on the river when the thaw comes and the ice breaks.[706] In Thrace the early procurators were occupied with building police posts on the main roads across the Haemus to the Moesian legions on the Danube.[707] The organized construction of defensive walls for Roman colonies also indicates the essentially military character of these new foundations (see below).
Only among the enfranchised communities of southern Liburnia is there evidence for administration of a more civilian character. Under the governor Cornelius Dolabella a survey of the region was completed
Since the victory over Mithridates of Pontus the Greek cities along the Thracian coast of the Black Sea had come steadily under Roman influence and one, Callatis, is known to have entered a formal alliance. For centuries the cities of the Dobrudja had, under the leadership of Histria, exploited the resources of the delta and had managed a profitable commerce with the peoples of the interior. The five cities along the coast south of the delta, Histria, Tomis, Callatis, Dionysopolis and Odessus, formed together the Pentapolis of the 'Left Pontus'. Down to the Principate of Nero a common coinage had been produced for local circuladon, and the Pentapolis was incorporated into the province of Moesia. An assembly for religious ceremony and matters of common interest met at Tomis under a pontarch. This city had taken over from Histria as the principal port of the region and since the dme of Augustus a flotilla had been stationed there under a 'prefect of the sea-coast'.62 They were the local agents of Roman authority and acted as intermediaries between the cities and higher authority. For the exiled Ovid at Tomis the freezing of the river between January and March brought the danger of attack, but the poet also describes the peaceful transit in winter by the lumbering carts of the Jazyges and other Sarmatians over the newly bridged river. When Getae threatened, the cities of the Dobrudja looked to Rome for protection although, as we have already seen, this tended to arrive after the damage had been done. Ovid's advertised feeling that his safety depended on the Roman general and his legions was no doubt heartfelt, and his private shrine to the imperial family was likely, in part at least, a compensation for his feeling of insecurity. Further north in Histria the erection or repair of a temple to Augustus in his own lifetime testifies to the increasing ties between Rome and this region before it was formally incorporated in the province of Moesia.63
Some indication of how these cities fared after the imposition of direct rule under Claudius is furnished by a document, inscribed in at least two copies, that defined the territories and economic privileges of Histria early under Trajan, to which was appended a dossier of letters addressed to the city from earlier goverriors. When Roman taxes were imposed along the lower Danube the Thracian Bank
On the matter of military deployment, that is apart from the presence of armies on expeditions, little is known until the army reforms of
62 Danoff 1958 (e 6j9) (Pentapolis), and Vulpe and Barnea 1968 (e 704) 66. The walls of Odessus (Varna) were repaired under Tiberius,
Augustus which resulted in the standing provincial armies of legions and
The evidence is summarized in Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 92—5, and Mocsy 1974 (e 677) 42—4.
Emona: Ŝaŝel 1968 (e 691) 562-5. Carnuntum: Kandler, in Stiglitz, Kandler and Jobst 1977 (e 695); cf. Zabehlicky-Sheffenegger and Kandler 1979 (e 710) 1 j. Tilurium: Wilkes, 1969 (e 706) 97. Poetovio: Klemencand Saria 1956 (e 671) 56; cf. Curk 1976 (e657) 64. Siscia: ŜaSel 1974 (e 693) 734. Oescus: Gerov 1967 (e 667) 87-90. Naissus: P. Petroviĉ,
Later alterations in legionary deployment were caused by events elsewhere in the empire. Legion IX Hispana departed finally for Britain in a.d. 4j and was not replaced at Siscia, leaving the garrison of Pannonia with two legions. When VIII Augusta moved to the lower Danube in a.d. 44/5 its place at Poetovio was taken by XIII Gemina, transferred from the upper Rhine. With VIII Augusta possibly at Novae on the Danube below Oescus the army of Moesia now comprised three legions. Late under Claudius IV Scythica was moved to the East and its place taken by VII Claudia, perhaps first stationed at Scupi, then later on Viminacium on the Danube above the gorge, and the army of Dalmatia was now reduced to a single legion. In a.d. 62 a crisis in Armenia saw two legions withdrawn from the Danube, XV Apollinaris from Carnun- tum, its place being taken by X Gemina from Spain, and V Macedonica, which was not replaced at Oescus, leaving Moesia temporarily with two legions until, late under Nero, III Gallica arrived for its brief sojourn on the lower Danube.
Though perhaps yet to be fully organized with permanent bases, Roman fleets on the Danube and its tributaries played a major role in military operations and their logistics. The attack on Siscia (Segesta) in 35 B.C. (see p. 550) was effected with ships provided by the allies, but Roman fleets participated in expeditions against the Dacians under Augustus and also, slightly later, in the incidents on the lower Danube described by Ovid. The west coast of the Black Sea was also patrolled by a Roman flotilla stationed at Tomis. Under Claudius the Roman fleet patrolling the Danube was on hand to rescue Vannius from his kingdom, and the reported activities of Plautius Silvanus Aelianus on the lower Danube under Nero (see above) would not have been possible without a fleet in control of the river, not to mention the excursion to the Crimea. The Pannonian and Moesian fleets, later based at Taurunum and Noviodunum — in each case the last harbour proceeding downstream — will have functioned quite separately as long as there was no through passage at the Danube gorge and the Iron Gate. In the Black Sea the Pontus fleet was based on the coast of Asia Minor, and for the Adriatic Ravenna on the coast of Italy remained the principal naval base, with stations elsewhere, including one at Salona.67
Most of the auxiliary units in Dalmatia were placed in the territory of the Delmatae. Several were in or close to coastal colonies, with two cavalry
67 Starr i960 (d 237) 23 and 125-41.
unlikely to have been in garrison there simultaneously. Other stations along the road linking the legionary bases Burnum and Tilurium were Promona (a cohort), Magnum
In Moesia auxiliary units may have preceded the legions in their later bases at Singidunum (Belgrade) and Viminacium. Signs of early occupation have been reported in the forts of the Danube gorge at Boljetin and Donji Milanovac. On the lower Danube some early epitaphs, though no precise dating is possible, indicate cavalry units at Augustae (Hurlec), Securisca, Variana, Utus, Oescus and Nikopol. Infantry units were stationed on main roads in the interior, at Timacum Minus (Ravna) in the Timacus (Timok) valley, at Naissus and possibly already at Montana (Mihailovgrad), the later station of the
V. ROMAN COLONIZATION AND THE ORGANIZATION OF THE NATIVE PEOPLES
Long before the time of Caesar, Roman merchants and settlers had reached Macedonia and Illyricum but the formal institution of Roman colonies in both areas began only in the aftermath of civil war between Caesar and Pompey. Colonies were established following the decisive battles at Pharsalus in 48 B.C., Philippi in 42 в.с. and Acdum in 31 в.с. Subsequently, new colonies of Roman citizens were rarely instituted and then only for legionary veterans from the same or adjacent provinces.70 Foundation dates of the early colonies remain uncertain, especially of those in Achaea and Macedonia where the evidence often consists of a few locally minted coins. Several colonies were evidently refounded with an infusion of new settlers along with the conferring of new titles. No overall strategic scheme is evident in the places chosen for new settlements, though major harbours and overland routes were doubtless a consideration. Caesar's foundadon at Corinth (Laus Iulia Corinthien- sis) was more a commercial enterprise than a settled colony and later dominated the rest of Achaea. Patrae (colonia Aroe Augusta), a veteran setdement from legions X Fretensis and XII Fulminata and strengthened by deportations from southern Aetolia, was the main port for traffic with Italy. In spite of more than one attempt at settlement, a colony at nearby Dyme was later absorbed by Patrae. The new city of Nicopolis on the Gulf of Ambracia, founded to commemorate the victory at Actium, was not a colony but rather a concentration of several existing settlements to form a new city. Further north, Caesar's new setders may have contributed to the later prosperity of Buthrotum (Butrint) on the coast opposite Corcyra and in the same area the Augustan foundation at Byllis (Gradisht) overlooking the river Aous also flourished.
The five colonies in Macedonia originated in reparations following civil war.71 Cassandrea on the Pallene isthmus of Chalcidice and Dium on the Thermaic Gulf were first setded on the orders of Brutus, Philippi with veterans by Antony after the battle. After Acdum Octavian permitted Antonians dispossessed in Italy to settle at Dyrrhachium, Philippi and other places. The titles Iulia Augusta suggest that these may have included Cassandrea, Pella and Dium, in addition to Philippi. Dyrrhachium, formerly the Corinthian colony Epidamnus, lay at the
70 Vittinghoff 1952 (c 259) 85-7 and 124-9; Brunt 1971 (a 9) 597-971 Papazoglu 1979 (e 682) 357-61.
western terminus of the Via Egnatia and, like Philippi, Dium and Cassandrea, possessed a large territory. The exceptional privilege of 'Italian status' (
Along the Adriatic coast of Illyricum the few Greek colonies, Issa, Pharos, and Corcyra Nigra being the principal settlements, had been threatened by the growth of Roman settlement. By the time Pliny wrote of 'several Greek cities and powerful communities of fading memory' the early Roman settlements
In Liburnia the colony at Iader boasted of Augustus as its creator
Pliny,
destructive raid by the Iapodes. The Italian status enjoyed by several Liburnian communities may have been conferred in recompense following their inclusion in the province of Illyricum in n b.C., following a period when Liburnia had been administered along with north-east Italy. Those with
The postponed discharges of veterans from the armies of Illyricum caused by the wars of Augustus' later years are reflected in the high totals of years of service (
75 Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 107-15. 76 Alfoldy 1987 (d 159) 298-512.
Sa5el 1968 (e 691) 564-5.
Mocsy 1974 (e 677) 74 (Scarbantia), 76-9 (Savaria). Pliny,
the territory of Salona may have preceded the foundation at Aequum and have been a special provision for members of V Macedonica after service on the bleak wastes of the lower Danube.79
In Celtic Noricum five of that province's eight
The third book of the Elder Pliny's
In Illyricum an earlier scheme of administration had included a judicial district (
75 Pliny,
80 Alfoldy 1974 (e 65 2) 91-6. 81 Mocsy 1974 (e 677) 5 3-4; Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 482-6.
and can be located with reasonable precision, while others were new Roman groupings of several smaller communides, some of whom are also named by Pliny.
The Delmatae, with 342
The thirteen communities of the Narona
East and south of the Daesitiates, among the mountains around the upper Drina, Piva, Тага, and Lim valleys, dwelt the formidable Pirustae, 'almost unconquerable on account of the position of their strongholds in the mountains, their warlike temper and, above all, the narrow defiles in which they lived'.82 Though named by Ptolemy they do not appear in the list of Pliny and, for reasons of security, had evidently been broken up into the hitherto unknown Siculotae (24) and Cerauni (24). The former may have included Delmatae transferred from the coast and perhaps occupied the area of Pljevlja in what is now northern Montenegro. Perhaps also once part of the Pirustae, though Ptolemy lists them separately as the Skirtones, were the more numerous Scirtari (72) who dwelt close to Macedonia, probably in northern Albania around the middle Drin. Also part of the Pirustae may have been the Glintidiones. As they are recorded also to have surrendered in 33 в.с. they were evidently more accessible than the rest and could have occupied the region of Foĉa in the upper Drina valley. The possible record, dating to the second century a.d., of a
Nothing on reladve strength or
и Veil. Pat. и.115.4.
83 Alfoldy 1964 (e 646). The reconstruction has been rejected, on various grounds, by Papazoglu 1978 (e 681) 371-8.
major rivers: along the Danube the Boii, Azali, Eravisci, Hercuniates, Andizetes, Cornacates, Amantini and Scordisci; along the Drava the Serretes, Serapilli, Iasi, Andizetes and, between Serapilli and Boii, the Arabiates; along the Sava, the Catari, Latobici, Varciani, Colapiani, Osseriates, Breuci, Amantini and Scordisci. The Belgitae named by Pliny cannot be placed. A later addition was the
The identification and location of native communities in Moesia is hindered by an almost total lack of inscriptions earlier than the Flavian period. It can be assumed that Roman occupation and organization of Moesia was attended by less drastic measures towards the native population than had been the case in Illyricum. Pliny's list of peoples derives from the period before Moesia was extended to the Black Sea following the annexation of Thrace under Claudius and comprises Dardani, Celegeri, Triballi, Timachi, Moesi, Thraces and Scythiae 'adjacent to the Black Sea'.84 Since the arrangement is geographical rather than alphabetical it may not be the official register of
u Pliny,
Tricornenses of Tricornium (Ritopek) replaced the Celegeri, the Picensii of Pincum (Gradiŝte) at the mouth of the Pincus (Рек) the Timachi, but the Dardani in the south and the
Like that of Moesia the organization of Noricum as a Roman province appears to date from Claudius but a much earlier record of the native peoples under Roman rule are the dedications set up at the Magdalensberg in 10/9 b.c. to the three ladies of Augustus' family, Livia and the two Iulias.86 The eight peoples involved were the Norici, Ambilini, Ambidr(avi), Uperaci, Saevates, Laianci, Ambisont(es) and Elveti. Ptolemy's list of the Norican peoples is broadly similar but adds the name of the Alauni. The Norici occupied the heartland of the old kingdom around Magdalensberg, perhaps the ancient capital Noreia, in Carinthia and part of upper Styria. The Ambilini, whose name suggests that they lived on both sides of a river, have been placed in the Gail valley, and may be linked with a place Ilouna somewhere in south-west Noricum. The Ambidravi were obviously along the Drau/Drava, and the Uperaci perhaps on their east in the direction of Pannonia, where they may be connected with a place named Upellae somewhere north of Celeia. A place named Sebatum appears to locate the Saevates in the Pustertal. These at first were grouped in a single
85 Mocsy 1970 (в 676) 29 n. 32, citing
south and west of the province. A suggestion that the total may have been thirteen, to match the number of niches in the 'meeting-hall' at Magdalensberg has been received with some scepticism.
The
All valid indicators combine to testify that Romanization, that much
observed process of material and cultural diffusion during the early Principate, made little or no headway among the Illyrians in the Julio- Claudian era.91 The same holds good for most of the Thracians, notwithstanding their contacts with the Greek and hellenistic world, and perhaps also for many of the Celdc peoples in the north west, where their early adopdon of what has been called the 'epigraphic habit' may have led to an overestimation of Roman influence as a whole.
It is a fact that around the middle of the first century в.с. hellenisdc and Roman coins were entering the Danube lands in some quantities, while several local groups among Thracians, Dacians, Illyrians and Celts were producing their own coins to imitative standards. On the other hand, it seems reasonable to accept the view that neither imports nor local issues appear in sufficient quantities and nor do they exhibit a range of denomination to indicate that there was a genuine economy based on a circulating coinage. The many coins of Dyrrhachium and Apollonia that appear in the area from c. 100 в.с. onwards may, as has been recently suggested, relate to a slave trade, perhaps to meet the demands of a Roman slave-based pastoral economy which had existed in the southwest Balkans since the defeat of Macedon in 167 в.с. Similarly, the many Roman denarii which appear in Dacia around the middle of the first century в.с. may also derive from a traffic in slaves, in this case Burebista's Dacia acting as a much-needed procurement agency after Pompey's suppression of Mediterranean piracy in 67 B.C. Moreover, when Burebista's powerful Dacia had gone and Rome had advanced to the Danube, the amounts of Roman silver found beyond the river suggests that supplies of slaves had then to be sought from beyond the river. Roman coins came first to Illyricum with the armies and their followers. Hoards are found along the Pannonian Highway, at Emona, Celeia and Poetovio, and in the area of Mursa and Sirmium on the lower Drava and Sava, all undoubted military centres in the time of Augustus. A similar origin is likely for hoards found among the Delmatae, at Bastasi and Livno, and among the Iapodes at Ribnica in the Lika, though a more authentic economy is indicated by coin hoards from the more settled areas near the coast, Zadar and Kruievo in Liburnia, Ĉapljina and Narona in the Narenta valley and on the island Pharos at Hvar and Gajine.92
Italy's commerce with the north east was based on Aquileia and the road from there across Pannonia to the Danube. Across the Julian Alps a Roman trading settlement (
" Note, however, Velleius' comment on the widespread knowledge and use of Latin among the Pannonians, 11.110.5; discussed by A. Mocsy in Hartley and Wacher 1983 (c 274) 235-7.
92 Mirnik 1981 (в 345); Crawford 1985 (в 320) 235-7.
maintained their own customs station.93 In addition to the traffic in slaves, cattle, hides and amber from the Baltic, Aquileia was also the focus for the wholesale import of finished metal products from Nori- cum. By around 50 B.C. a terrace (920m) below the summit (1058m) of the Magdalensberg was the site of a flourishing Roman emporium. Its prosperity is perhaps best signified by the lifesize bronze of the Celtic god Mars Latobius, dedicated by merchants from Aquileia, including one of the well-known Barbii family. Iron, copper, lead, zinc and brass (an alloy of copper and zinc) were all traded in quantities of finished utensils. Some of the timber-framed houses of Roman merchants exhibit a high standard of interior decoration. On the walls of some of the cellars, which were filled with debris c. 35 B.C., each with its own shrine of Mercury in a niche, were scratched inventories of finished wares; of iron or steel, rings
Far from being precursors to Roman political and economic domination, the Roman settlements in Illyricum of the late Republic had little or no impact on the native peoples. Some
я Tac.
94 Piccoctini 1977 (e 68)) and for the graffiti, Egger 1961 (e 662). « Cic. Fear. v.9.
component. By contrast the Julio-Claudian urbanization of Liburnia and Noricum owed litde to Roman setdement, civil or military.
In the matter of town-planning and civic architecture the early Roman cities were far from uniform. Narona (Vid) retained the character of an emporium on a hill enclosed by pre-Roman walls but containing some fine buildings and monuments, many erected by prosperous freedmen. Here the landowning class, if it figured at all in the life of the city, chose to reside in the elegant and well-appointed residences known to have existed in the surrounding country during the first century a.d. At Salona a new
Though some vestiges of hellenistic traditions survived in the Adriatic cities, the Roman cities in the Danube lands as a whole exhibit a wholly Roman and Italian character. Throughout the Julio-Claudian era bricks and roof-tiles produced in large factories around Aquileia, at least one of which (the Pansiana) was imperially owned, were shipped down the Adriatic, although the army began to make its own bricks and tiles locally under Claudius.[712] The Danube armies stimulated local production of ornate tombstones, especially in the fine limestone of the Dalmatian coast. Some early legionary monuments in Dalmatia are in the style of the 'door-stone', a type originating in Asia Minor favoured by recruits of eastern origin, notably in legion VII. The most popular form, both among soldiers and in the cides, incorporated the 'window- portraits' of the metropolitan Roman fashion within an architectural frame of pediment and columns in relief on a standing tombstone, with the framed panel for the epitaph below. A similar version became popular in Noricum and Pannonia, where Celtic and Roman funeral images appear in combination. Roman epitaphs are found on the Liburnian circular tombstones, a native tradition which remained popular in the new
Before the conquest was completed Thracians, Illyrians and Celts were being recruited for service in the Roman
Conquest and retention of the Danube lands was, in the military sphere, the distinguishing achievement of Augustus' Principate. A harsh, underdeveloped and for long intractable part of Europe brought no profit and much loss. Yet completion of the task was essential for a strategy -which deployed the new standing armies around the borders and far from the centre of affairs where their presence nearly always posed a threat to order. The Via Egnada no longer saw the passage of armies to fight civil wars, and only the fall of a dynasty drew the legions back to the heart of the empire from their remote bases along the Danube.
* Illustrations in Wilkes 1969 (e 706).
" Kraft 19)1 (e 67a); Starr i960 (d 237) 7).
100 Certainly Liburnia had links with some leading senators in the first century. The consul of 16 B.C. L. Tarius Rufus may be of Liburnian origin, and the distinguished jurist of the Flavian era L. Iavolenus Priscus had Liburnian family connexions. See Alfoldy 1968 (e 6; 1) 100-16.
ROMAN AFRICA: AUGUSTUS TO VESPASIAN
C. R. WHITTAKER
I. BEFORE AUGUSTUS
If the province of Africa under the Roman Republic was not quite a land without a history, as Mommsen described it, it was certainly not central to Roman interests. The administration from the Punic town of Udca was rudimentary, largely a matter of supervising the local communities and contracting out the taxes. Nor is there much evidence of a military garrison apart from the small contingent with the governor. This did not, of course, prevent Roman and Italian immigrants from coming, whether as settlers on the land or as businessmen and tax-farmers. But the impression we get is that the numbers were not great, even in the coastal towns, where Roman enclaves formed.1 The official foundadon of the colony of Carthage in 122 в.с. had been a disaster that had left stranded we do not know how many on its territory. Conservative Roman sentiment had resented the expense of the province and had feared to send out colonists. Evidence of Romans and Italians being settled by Marius is so thin that it is unwise to guess too much about their numbers, although some immigrants probably did arrive.
The only exception to this was the Gaetulian veterans of Marius, settled beyond the far borders of the province, who proved a valuable aid to Iulius Caesar in his campaigns in Africa in 46 B.C., and who were to be an important element in the new Augustan dispensation.2 During the civil wars between Pompey and Caesar a fair number of Romans took refuge in Africa. But even so, the Pompeians were hard put to it to raise 12,000 men and, even after reinforcements of 10,000 from Cyrene, they almost certainly had to include native Africans, slaves and freedmen to raise a force of 40,000.
If immigration was relatively light, economic interest in the Roman province of Africa and the adjacent territories of the Mauretanias was considerable — in particular because of the fertile land, the corn and (probably) the slaves. By Cicero's day Africa was regarded as a 'bulwark' of Rome's food supply. Beyond the provincial borders Libyan cities like Vaga (mod. Beja) and Cirta (mod. Constantine) were teeming with
1 Cf. Caes.
Italian
Precisely what Iulius Caesar intended or achieved during the brief period of his dictatorship between 46 and 44 в.с. is not always clear. Massive indemnities were laid upon the coastal cities of Byzacium (south-eastern Tunisia) and Tripolitania, the latter being required to pay an annual tax of 1 million litres of oil, which probably continued until the third century a.d. The adjacent territory of Numidia was organized into a second province named Africa Nova, which Caesar announced would pay 8,000 tonnes of corn in tax, to the acclaim of the Roman people. New settlers came, too, not only to the province of Nova, with its curious annex around Cirta, but also to other places in the old province. Many were veterans of the civil war, hastily demobilized to avoid trouble. But many were surely some of those 80,000 inhabitants of the city of Rome whom Caesar sent abroad. Africa's land and food continued to excite Roman interest.[714]
Here we run into intractable problems of identifying and dating the colonial foundations which absorbed many of these settlers. While there can be little doubt about Caesar's intentions to reorganize the African province, there is no way of proving whether the final act of foundation was Caesar's or his heir's. The best evidence we have of Caesar's work is an inscription from the
The foundation of the colony of Carthage illustrates perfectly the difficulty we have in separating Caesar and Augustus. By the end of Augustus' rule Carthage had become the administrative capital of the united provinces of Africa Vetus and Nova and a city of some size and
Rornem road
Provincial boundary
— — Appcoxirnete limit oleorrtrol
® Town witti colonial w municipal flatus Ъу AD 1+ о Other town ■ Military sire
Land over 1.00C metr-as
no 30Ĵ
4
4
4 \ -
AFRICA-
¥
TaucHn mnino*\j
T
TRIPOLITANIA
CYRENE
j fWdrtOfWII
vt
IS
(PROCONSULARISI^ ~f — V- ^
Map t). Africa.
splendour. The territory or
But when after 44 B.C. this happened is impossible to be sure. An enigmatic statement by the Christian theologian, Tertullian, two centuries later, claimed that it was 'after the violent abuse of Lepidus and after long delays by Caesar, when Statilius Taurus set up the walls and Sentius Saturninus pronounced the religious rites'. The most plausible date is perhaps 36 or 35 B.C., when Cassius Dio records that Octavian sent out Statilius Taurus as his agent to win over 'both the Africas'. The old provinces were evidently not yet united and were 'in need of a settlement'. Taurus accomplished both, at a time when Octavian's army was racked with mutinous troops demanding their rewards and just after the two governors of Vetus and Nova had been fighting each other. The grant of municipal status to Utica in 36 B.C., presumably after adjustment of its boundaries, adds some corroboration that this was the period of reorganization for the whole territory.7
The most cogent objection to such a date is that the prestigious cult of the Cereres fertility gods in Carthage, for which we have a lot of inscriptional evidence in later periods, adopted a system of dating its priesthoods which probably went back to before 35 B.C., although the evidence is not entirely consistent. It is not, however, compellingly self- evident that the start of the cult, which had had a long Libyan history before this, and the foundation of the Roman colony were linked.8 Nor is it difficult to accept the evidence that the final colonial charter and 'freedom' of the city waited until 29 or 28 B.C., since delays between the award of status and the adoption of a charter are not unknown elsewhere.9
7 Tertull.
* Fevrier 1973 (e 731),
9 Dio ui.43.1. A sensible summary of the evidence is in Van Nerom 1969 (e 734).
II. AFRICA AND THE CIVIL WARS, 44~J I B.C.
The civil wars which broke out after the death of Iulius Caesar in 44 B.C. inevitably sucked in not only the two provinces of Africa Nova and Vetus but also the allied kings of the Maghreb who depended on the favours of Roman politicians but were not above profiting from their rivalries.10 The Libyan prince Arabion, for instance, returned to central Mauretania in 44 B.C. and, encouraged by the sons of Pompey in Spain, killed Caesar's old ally Sittius, who had been settled with his mixed bag of followers at Cirta. Having arrived at an accord with the remaining Sittiani, he brought them over in support of the senatorial governor of Vetus, Q. Cornificius, against the Caesarian governor of Nova, T. Sextius — only to switch support completely in favour of Sextius against Cornificius as the luck of Caesar's murderers ran out in 42 в.с. He subsequently resisted Octavian's nominee, Fango, but was executed by Sextius (by now a supporter of Antony) on the suspicion of his too great ambition, which caused his supporters to change sides yet again in support of Fango. Sextius finally drove the whole lot out of the African provinces.
Further west in Morocco a similar power struggle was being played out between King Bogud, who supported Antony against Bocchus when the latter gave his support to the revolt of Tingis (mod. Tangiers) against Bogud. For his opportunistic action Octavian rewarded Bocchus with Bogud's kingdom plus the rest of western Mauretania from Tingis to Cirta. This large territory Bocchus ruled undl his death in 3 3 B.C.
The events of the civil war are confusing and confused. After Brundisium the two African provinces were allotted to Lepidus in 40 в.с. as his share of the triumviral dispositions and he built up an enormous army there of sixteen legions for the invasion of Sicily in 36 B.C. against the Pompeians. This massive army group certainly included many native recruits and must have denuded Africa of its defences. After the disappearance of Lepidus, Octavian — as we saw - realized the pressing need to restore order and sent one of his iron men, Statilius Taurus, in 36 B.C. to do the job. The archives record three triumphs
But the wars were also partly the consequence of the death of Bocchus in 3 3 B.C., who had controlled the Mauretanias as Octavian's nominee. Dio claims that Octavian actually annexed this vast territory, and this has been taken as explanation of the anomalous fact that later, after a new puppet ruler, Juba II, had been installed in 25 B.C., we find a number of
10 The complex narrative is mainly in App.
Roman veteran colonies existing within the native kingdom. On balance it seems unlikely that Octavian went this far. There is no allusion to Mauretania as a province in the account of the settlement of 27 B.C.; nor to the name of any governor. Whereas the fact that some new colonies were founded in western Mauretania, probably in 3 3 B.C., is no proof of Octavian's intention, since we know that later, after 25 B.C., the Mauretanian colonies were administered from Spain, which shows that such an arrangement was not an institutional impossibility.11 To install Juba as ruler in 33 B.C., after he had been raised at Rome in Octavian's own household, would have provoked a violent reaction among the Mauri (as indeed happened later) just at a point when the civil war was at its most critical. But so too would annexation. Octavian simply shelved a decision until 25 B.C., when, after his expedition to Spain, he saw the pressing need for action. Juba, as we shall see, was an important agent of what Augustus intended for the whole of the African settlement.
iii. augustan expansion
Very little is known of the details of the Augustan expansion. We have to be content with names on triumphal lists plus a few names in the literary sources, some of them inadequate for positive identification. Wars are recorded in 21 b.c., 19 в.с.,
Much speculation has gone into just how far beyond this line the Roman armies advanced, fuelled by an intriguing report full of mysterious place-names from the Elder Pliny concerning a desert campaign against the southern Garamantes by L. Cornelius Balbus, who triumphed in 19 в.с.13 There are also some briefer references to a victory over the Gaetulians, after they had rebelled against Juba, won by Cossus Cornelius Lentulus in a.d. 6. Between these two dates we also learn of a victory gained by a certain Quirinius over the Marmaridae and Gara-
DioxLix.43.7, liii. 12.4-6; Pliny,
CIL viii 10018; EJ2 290; ILAFr 654 - Asprenas ... pr.cos ... viam ex castris bibernis Tatapes municnAam curavit. legio III Augusta (Tаса pes is an indeclinable variation of Tacape — here 'to Tacape').
ч Pliny, HNv.3j-8; Flor. 11.31; Dio lv.28.3-4. Pliny's names are analysed by Daniels 1970 (e 725) 13-16 and Desanges 1957 (e 727).
mantes (see ch. 13/, p. 635-6) and of triumphal
The appointment of Juba II in 25 B.C. over a huge territory that extended not only to the Mauretanias (roughly central Algeria to Morocco) but also in theory along the whole Gaetulian or Numidian borders of the Roman province as far as Cyrenaica, provoked a chronic and violent response from the various 'nomadic' peoples, as Strabo calls them.14 Some of these peoples in loosely confederated groups traditionally migrated up onto the plains of Constantine and to the Tunisian Dorsal, recognizing no artificial frontiers. An inscription recording disturbances, which was set up by a Roman settler about a.d. 3 near the colony of Assuras (mod. Zanfur) in the rich Tunisian corn-lands, perhaps reflects the problem this caused. At all events, Cossus is said to have 'held back the Musulami and Gaetuli in their widespread wandering to a restricted territory and forced them through fear to keep away from Roman frontiers'.15
References to the Marmaridae, who are normally associated with Cyrenaica, and to the Garamantes of the Fezzan in modern Libya show how far eastwards these African borderlands extended - so much so that there have been hypotheses that Tripolitania was temporarily detached from the province of Africa to that of Cyrene and that there was a joint strategy conducted by the two governors. If so, it was brief and little of permanence was achieved, since the archaeology of the Fezzan and Libyan Valleys reveals no Roman contact with the hinterland before the Flavian period.16 But we can be sure that Juba's kingdom was regarded as an integral part of the defences of Africa and it was his inability to handle such a large remit that drew the Romans southwards.
The southern tribes saw Juba for what he was, a Roman agent, and they did not in any case recognize the authority of super-kings. It is not hard to see what they were fighting for. The Musulami, one of the principal names mentioned in the campaigns, controlled a region near Ammaedara, and it was here that the legion's headquarters was finally
Strab. xvn.3.7 (828c); cf. vi.4.2 (286-8C). 'Nomades' in Greek can also mean Numidian. For Juba's kingdom, see Desanges 1964 (e 728).
The UNESCO Libyan Valleys Survey has been reported in successive volumes of
established. The road running from the base to the Gulf of Gabes constituted a check to the traditional, seasonal movements northwards of the Gaetulian Libyans from the oases and Chotts (salt marshes) of south-eastern Tunisia. Further east, Tripolitania needed protection from the Garamantes of the Fezzan and the Nasamones of the Syrtic Gulf and both must have seen the road that was completed soon after Augustus' reign along the eastern Jebel Nefoussa as a threat to their independence.[716] Whether Augustus really had in mind a grand design or was merely reacting to protect the provincials is discussed later. It is clear that he did not solve the problem.
iv. tiberius and tacfarinas
Armed resistance after the initial conquest was fairly typical of the process of pacification in most western provinces, the revolt of Sacrovir and Florus in Gaul, Boudica's rebellion in Britain, the attempt of Civilis in Germany being obvious examples. A variety of reasons for this resentment against Roman rule is given in our sources; hatred of arrogant or corrupt officials, dislike of military recruiting officers. Often, no doubt, it was sheer opportunism when Rome seemed to be otherwise engaged. But above all it was the imposition of Roman taxation on land which caused the greatest anger.[717]
The revolt of Tacfarinas must be seen within the context of the Roman advances, which brought with them steady appropriation of land, the imposition of an ordered tax system and obligations to provide recruits. Although little is known about the tax arrangements, an undated dedication by forty-four
The cadastration of southern Tunisia for tax purposes, completed in a.d. 29/30, was probably begun as soon as Ammaedara became the legionary headquarters, since the
It is hard to believe that the war between Tacfarinas and Rome, which eventually developed in a.d. 17 and lasted until a.d. 24 was a serious threat to Roman power in Africa. Velleius Paterculus, a contemporary, barely mentions it and, apart from brief references in later epitomators, it is only really Tacitus who gives the episode any prominence, because he was obsessed with the story of the emperor Tiberius, in whose reign the events occurred. He had little interest in the geography of the war and none in its causes. Various place-names are mentioned in the fighting - Thubuscum, Thala, Auzia, Cirta, Lepcis and the river Pagyda; various tribes like the Cinithii and Garamantes are said to have been involved.[721]But how much we can reconstruct out of this is very uncertain. Auzea, if the same as the later town of that name (mod. Sour El Ghozlane) south east of Algiers, lies 1,600 km west of Lepcis Magna. Thubuscum may be later Thubursicum Numidarum (mod. Khamissa) in east Algeria, or Thubursicum Bure (mod. Teboursouk) in Tunisia or one of half a dozen other like-sounding names. The basic fact, however, remains; the war was wide-ranging and it both implicated the Garamantes in the east and extended deep into Algeria in the west.
The fighting, which began with an attack on Thala near Ammaedara, extended to other 'cities'. This probably means that there was a series of hit-and-run raids or
The IX legion (or detachments of it) was posted from Pannonia,[722] partly to protect Lepcis Magna from the threat of the Garamantes and pardy, it would seem, to keep the Libyan peasants in check in the old province, since they erupted when the legion was withdrawn about a.d. 22. Blaesus' settlement, for which he was awarded triumphal honours that year, further deteriorated when Juba's son, Ptolemy, succeeded his father in a.d. 23 and alienated many of his Mauri troops. Despite this, Dolabella, an experienced commander on the Danube, finally trapped Tacfarinas at Auzia in Mauretania in a.d. 24, killing him and executing several of his Musulami leaders. Soon after this a Roman military prefect was set up over the
From now until the end of Tiberius' rule we hear of no more African resistance, although we may suspect there were continual troubles caused by the cadastration that was carried out by the army over a great breadth of land in south-eastern Tunisia. Judging by the existing, numbered marker stones, it extended over at least 27,000 square km, as far as the Chott el Fedjaj. Although this cadastration divided the land into large blocks for the purpose of tax, there is occasional evidence of centuriation into smaller units and probable allotment of land. By a.d.29/30 the main work of survey had been finished and the marker stones, of which we have twenty surviving examples, were set up by the governor С Vibius Marsus. Dolabella, who was almost certainly the initiator of the survey, for which he had recently had experience in Dalmatia, was not much honoured in Rome but he was remembered in Lepcis.[724]
The Tacfarinas episode is less important for the threat that it posed than for the information it provides about the character of African society and frontier relations in this period. Several features need explanation: the width of native territorial alliances, yet the feebleness of the resistance; the close relationship between the desert and the sown and the effect on this of Roman intervention. The use of general terms like
Tacfarinas was a Numidian or Gaetulian member of the Musulami 'tribe', who, having proved his leadership in war, established far- ranging but fragile alliances with other Mauri, Gaetulian and Gara- mantes groups, based on resentment of Roman rule. His own Musulami apparently maintained specific links with people on the Tunisian and Algerian uplands, as well as operating from winter bases in the regions of the southern oases and Chotts. We are told that peasants of central Tunisia supported him, and Tacitus says that he traded for the corn that grew there. His request for a land concession for his people could mean that he wished to become sedentary; but it could just as well mean a demand for free access to historic grazing grounds. We know from Massinissa's dispute with the Punic Carthaginians that access to the 'Great Plains' of central Tunisia, the fertile uplands where the main production of wheat took place, was regarded by Libyan nomads in those days as their historic right.[725]
Almost certainly Roman property rights and boundaries were concepts unknown in customary practice for southern groups like the Tacapitani or Nybgenii who had had little or no contact with either Punic or Roman republican powers. The Roman term for 'marking out'
v. gaius to nero
The emperor Gaius has been credited with two important changes in north Africa: the separation of the army under its
The annexation of Mauretania, the huge territory extending from Algeria west of the Ampsaga (mod. Oued el Kabir) to the Adantic, was the decision of Gaius' successor, Claudius, following the war which broke out after Gaius had executed Ptolemy in a.d. 40. Exacdy why Gaius did this is a matter for debate, since Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio, our main sources for the episode, had no love either for Gaius or for a native king and they let their prejudices show.[729] Suetonius gives us a childish story about how Ptolemy upstaged the emperor at a public spectacle in Lyons by appearing adorned in a purple cloak. Dio more realistically says there were fears that Ptolemy was becoming too wealthy. Tacitus portrays Ptolemy as a weak, unpopular fop, dominated by his freedmen.
The danger of the large kingdom of Mauretania to Rome always lay in a ruler who might become too independent to control. Ptolemy's striking of gold coins, very much an imperial prerogative, suggests his assertion of emancipation, just at the time when Gaius had been badly shaken by a plot of distinguished senators on the northern frontier, one of whose leaders was Cornelius Lentulus Cossus 'Gaetulicus', son of Juba's ally in a.d. 6 and therefore heir to his father's political friends. Ptolemy himself, no doubt fearing Roman penetration further and further into Numidia and Mauretania, became a willing target for conspiratorial plans. He was, after all, Antony's grandson and cousin to the emperor. It was no coincidence that Gaul was the place to which Ptolemy was summoned in a.d. 39, since Gaius had gone there to deal with the northern crisis. The bravado of the appearance confirmed that he must go. With him went the last of the great Libyan kings.
If Ptolemy had been as unpopular as Tacitus described him, his death would hardly have provoked a violent reaction in western Mauretania, much less a rebellion conducted by one of his 'freedmen', Aedemon. One suspects that Aedemon was in reality a vassal, one of the Mauri princes at court, and that many Mauri chiefs saw in Ptolemy a symbol of their
freedom. In later years Roman governors thought it politic to honour the name of Juba II and Ptolemy with commemorative statues and one Roman pretender in a.d. 69 even took the name of Juba to win local favour.[730] From archaeological evidence it would appear that the rebellion concentrated on violent attacks on towns of western Mauretania, centres like Tamuda, Lixus and Kouass where Romans were no doubt trading. At Volubilis, an important centre which may have had special treaty status, Roman citizenship had already been extensively granted to local families, as we know from two famous inscriptions commemorating M. Valerius Severus, son of Bostar, who raised a troop of irregular horse and was subsequently able to petition for privileges, including 'Roman citizenship' (meaning, probably, municipal status) for the town.[731]
The Roman campaign was a long and arduous affair, requiring supplies from Spain. The main details come from the Elder Pliny, a contemporary, supplemented by Cassius Dio.[732] It is clear, however, that Dio is correct against Pliny to date the war from a.d. 40 before Claudius' accession. In a.d. 41-2 the theatre extended down the Moulouya gap to the Middle Atlas and into the desert; but by 44 the campaign was over and the whole territory was annexed as two Roman provinces, Mauretania Caesariensis and Mauretania Tingitana, administered respectively from Caesarea (mod. Cherchel) and Tingis (mod. Tangiers).
The war against Aedemon may have been the spark to set off the Musulami once again, since we know that the future emperor Galba was appointed governor of Africa
One way of checking such outbreaks was by extending Romanization through colonial foundations of Roman veterans and individual grants of citizenship, for which Claudius was celebrated.[734] Tingis was refounded, Lixus was raised to colonial status and probably, though not necessarily, reinforced. A new veteran settlement was located at Oppi- dum Novum to protect Caesarea inland, while Tipasa and Rusucurru on the coast were granted municipal status with Latin rights. Caesarea itself
was given colonial status, though again this does not imply new setders. Volubilis, as we saw, did well out of its loyalty.
Why the two Mauretanias were administered by equestrian procura- torial governors is not easy to say, particularly since senatorial legates were appointed from time to dme (e.g. in a.d. 75 and 144) and procurators occasionally held command over a united territory
Nero's contribudon to the history of Africa lay, as far as we know, in a single acdon — the confiscation of a large amount of property in central Tunisia. With colourful exaggeration the Elder Pliny says that six owners had possessed half Africa before their execution by Nero. Some relics of this brutal change may be conserved on inscriptions of the second century a.d. from the middle Bagradas valley, where an estate named
Cruel execution of Africans, perhaps on behalf of Nero, was a reputation gained by Nero's last legionary legate in a.d. 68, L. Clodius Macer. Once the secret was out that an emperor could be created outside Rome, he developed imperial ambitions of his own having apparently already taken over as governor. In the rivalries which developed on Nero's death he tried to manipulate the grain supply to Rome for his own advantage, urged on by one of Nero's court friends.38 But he was assassinated on Galba's orders and, after Galba himself fell, the province became a prey to the rival supporters of Vitellius and Vespasian. Oddly enough three of the contenders, Galba, Vitellius and Vespasian, had served in the province, the last being the least popular. But, thanks to the independent power of the legionary commander of Africa, Valerius Festus, who favoured Vespasian, the proconsul, L. Calpurnius Piso, was killed — an act for which Festus received his due reward.39 It was said that
Sec the discussions by J. Marion and M. Euzennat in
Pliny,
» Plut.
39 Tac.
Piso, like Macer before him, had been tampering with the corn supply for Rome.
In Mauretania Galba during his brief rule had given the governor of Caesariensis, Lucceius Albinus, command also over Tingitana - perhaps to counter the influence of Macer. Having gathered a large force of 12,000 auxiliaries together, Albinus declared his independence after Galba's fall and prepared to invade Spain. Assassination, however, by friends of Vitellius ended his claim.
By the time the civil wars were over Roman rule in Africa was in need of reorganization. Rival sides had offered too many tax concessions. Cities in Africa had used the wars to pursue their own vendettas, like Oea which had called in the Garamantes against Lepcis. The tension between the legionary legate and the proconsular governor had to be resolved. And we may guess that the Mauri and Numidian tribes of the interior had not remained inactive, making it a necessity to increase the security of the frontiers. Above all, the importance of protecting and encouraging the production of African grain and, increasingly now, oil was underlined. That was all work for the new Flavian administration.
vi. the administration and organization
of the province
Whatever Caesar intended, there is litde trace of his actual achievement. The province of Nova was, of course, his creation, running probably from the old
The single province of Africa Proconsularis was therefore formed in 35 B.C., as argued earlier, to incorporate all the former territories, including that around Cirta. The only legion we know to have been permanendy stationed in the province was the III Augusta, not in fact recorded until a.d. 14, but obviously present earlier and stationed perhaps first at Carthage before moving to Ammaedara. There was almost certainly also a fair number of auxiliaries recruited locally, a normal obligation laid upon native communities in this period. But how many outside or local auxiliary units there were at this stage one can only
40 Dio li.ij.6, LIII.26.Z.
guess. At Ammaedara we have a pre-Flavian stela recording a
The problem of the relationship of the provincial governor to the army and the relationship of both province and army to Augustus himself is perhaps something that concerns us more than it did Augustus. Although Africa became technically a public province in the setdement of 27 B.C., the emperor's grip was always firmly on the army, where he could — and sometimes did — nominate the legionary legate, despite the theoredcal right of the governor to appoint his own legates. Furthermore, the emperor could always manipulate'appointments of governors when there was occasion for important military campaigns. Tiberius had no difficulty in 'persuading' the Senate of the wisdom of appoindng Iunius Blaesus to the post for the campaign in a.d. 18.42 Galba was appointed
It is impossible to talk about precise boundaries under Augustus when the territory was in the process of being defined. Some fifty years after Augustus' death the Elder Pliny preserved in his description of the Maghreb coast two undated and different lists of the colonies and towns, which have been thought to have had their origin in the early
For the taxes of the province we have only the guidance of the few inscriptions already mentioned recording the new land cadaster in the south. In the northern part of the province there are quite extensive signs of cadastration and centuriation along the lines of the republican orientation, which may have been the work of Augustan governors in distributing lots to new settlers, since the cadaster extends well beyond the
41 Legion - EJ2290 (a.d. 14);
« Blaesus - Tac.
о Pliny,
a few smaller ones in the coastal regions of Byzacium which could be the work of early emperors.[735]
But cadasters do not tell us much about how the tax was collected or assessed. Most probably in the Julio-Claudian period, at least, there was a condnuadon of the republican system, since some of the evidence suggests that the taxation units and the agents of the pre-imperial period persisted. In other words, the mixed system established by the Agrarian Law of 111 B.C. was maintained, whereby a fixed sum
If this is correct, taxes would have been farmed out from the quaestor's office to publican entrepreneurs, who bid for the contracts based upon block assessments of the native
As Roman rule extended southwards, the military districts were possibly regionalized in the same way, since an inscription commemorates the census of forty-three
VII. CITIES AND COLONIES[738]
It is a banality that the Roman empire was fundamentally no more than a collection of city-states, around which the emperor provided a protecting frontier that was paid for by their taxes. The city or
What changed all that was the civil wars and the Principate. The wars created a desperate need to demobilize and provided the land on which to setde veterans. Augustus possessed the will to order such events and the self-interest to know that his political survival depended on satisfying this need and on supplying the volatile population of Rome with regular food. Colonies, communities and corn were the informing principles of Roman imperialism in Africa.
Colonies first. Apart from Carthage, Iulius Caesar and Augustus between them founded some twenty-six to twenty-eight colonies the length of the Maghreb. They cannot all be assigned with certainty to the Caesarian and Augustan periods — some may have been founded just after Augustus' death.[739] Their names and those about which there is greater certainty than others, are marked on Map 13. Some of these setdements obviously had a defensive, military purpose that was usual when veterans were kept together in their original army units. Soldiers of the thirteenth legion were established at Thuburbo Minus (mod. Teboura) and at Uthina (mod. Oudna) as buttresses for Carthage, controlling the southern and western plains of the Medjerda and Miliana rivers. In the same way the colonies at Zuchabar (mod. Miliana) and Aquae (mod. Righa Hammam) protected Caesarea, Juba's capital, from inland raids in Mauretania. The colonies along the Algerian and Moroccan coast were useful ports of communication, just as the colonies along the coast of eastern Tunisia and Cape Bon controlled the former Punic ports. In former Africa Nova, the Punic town of Sicca Veneria is the only colony to commemorate Augustus as
After the annexation of the Mauretanias, Claudius continued the policy of colonial foundation (p. 598), although in many cases it was more a matter of raising the status of towns rather than actually sending out new settlers. This is testimony to the Romanization and unofficial immigration during the rule of Juba and Ptolemy. Oppidum Novum, which now became a colony of veterans, may have started life as a garrison of Roman auxiliaries to help Juba, since we hear of a
At Iol Caesarea (mod. Cherchel) Juba, in imitation of other hellenistic rulers, deliberately constructed a show-piece city, laid out on an orthogonal plan, with a number of monumental buildings.51 Most important were the temples, including a temple of Augustus, of which a colossal statue of the emperor survives, showing the deliberate political intention of bringing urban Roman culture to the Mauri, as well as organizing the resources of the countryside. The grant of colonial status did not necessarily involve any new settlement but Italian craftsmen may have come to produce pottery in the city. The many Roman names inscribed in the city, almost certainly from the period of Juba, include some who were probably Italian
As to the numbers of Roman settlers in each colony, best estimates suggest a figure of about 300 to 500 adult males, giving a total for the Augustan colonies of some 8,000-13,000 families. This is not counting Carthage or Cirta, which are discussed below. But a colony's territory was not only occupied by Roman settlers from Italy. The land cadaster from Arausio in Narbonensis and the manuals of Roman surveyors show that native inhabitants remained. Some of the elites were given citizenship and formed joint communities, as happened at the veteran colony of Emerita in Spain.52 Native wives of veterans were granted citizenship, too, quite apart from the fact that many of Caesar's and Augustus' veterans had themselves been local native recruits for the emergency of the civil wars in both the legions and as Gaetulian auxiliaries.53
51 Gseli 1930 (e 741) 206-84. Recent work is in Leveau 1984 (e 752) and Benseddik, Potter forthcoming (e 717).
s2 Brunt 1971 (a 9) 246-61; Romanelli 1959 (e 760) 207.
53 Grants to Octavian's veterans included citizenship
So we must not overestimate the cultural impact of the new foundations. Colonial status, Roman citizenship and often large plots of land — a third of a century, 16 hectares was the least an Augustan veteran could expect — created a privileged minority, loyal to the settlement and anxious to prove their Romanness. But they were men who were often linked culturally to the local population by language, religion and custom. We see how commonly the name of Iulius was taken by new citizens in a colony like Sicca Veneria - overall about 20 per cent of recorded names. At another colony, Simitthu, the name Iulius Numidi- cus (which occurs twice) speaks for itself.[740] The oldest inscriptions record religious homage from the Algerian colony of Rusguniae to the Mauretanian king, Ptolemy in a.d. 29 and to the African god, Saturn; but the latter is honoured in his Romanized form and the prominent families who make the dedications also betray their new Roman status by their names.[741]
Carthage was quite different from the military colonies on the coast. Appian, describing its foundation, says that he had 'found out that Augustus gathered together some 3,000 Roman colonists and the rest from those dwelling around
Archaeology gives us some idea of what the early colony of Carthage was like.[743] The most interesting feature is that, despite the earlier, different Gracchan cadastration, the city was refounded on the old Punic orientation and made much use of Punic foundations, building material and cisterns that had lain unused or in ruins since 146 B.C. The Punic citadel on the Byrsa was the central point for the centuriation of the town and the hill itself began the first stage of its transformation as the monumental focus for the city. Little remains of the Augustan city but there are signs that a start was made on the dramatic levelling of the citadel summit and infilling on top of Hannibal's city on the south side. It was on this site that a huge new
The monumental preparation of the Byrsa, however, contrasts with the tentadve and poor buildings of the shore and harbours. Mud brick and unpaved streets suggest that the early colony was quite a humble affair which grew only gradually. Some of the Punic ruins were not rebuilt for two generadons and the early Roman cemeteries were inside what was later part of the city street grid. Virgil's romantic portrait of colonists constructing Dido's first city — the great citadel, the paved streets, the gates and the theatre — which was probably written to celebrate the Augustan colony, did not exactly resemble the reality.
The difficult feature of the foundation for us to understand is how the rural settlements within the territory or
Some of these
Finally, there is the puzzling relationship between Carthage and a number of sites on the Tunisian coast which eventually became colonies bearing the title of 'lulia' in their names. The inscription of Phileros, examined earlier, records his career not only as a magistrate at Carthage but also twice as chief magistrate
As far as we can tell, Cirta also, was given a very large territory, administered by prefects and subdivided into
There is some suggesdon that this was the earliest form of organization at Sicca Veneria, too — the only one of Augustus' colonies in Africa Nova to figure in Pliny's list, antedating the colonies of Thuburnica, Simitthu and Assuras. Two of these later colonies are called
So what can be made of these scraps of information? There is no need to read into Carthage's foundation some sort of new, super-hellenistic model city, since contemporary Augustan colonies with similar extensive territorial
" EJ2 106; IL Tun 682; EJ2 iii.
63 The latter is argued by Gascou 1983 (e 759), against Beschaouch 1981 (e 719). The Phileros inscription above
- the latter also administered by prefects.
In addition to colonies and the
We can only guess whether Pliny's list was complete or what exactly the differences were between his categories. Lepcis Magna, for instance, the rich Punic centre of olive oil export, was only called an
Puzzlingly, on some early inscriptions we find small villages being called
Many of these small village communides were strongly Punicized and continued with their own Punic magistrate, called
We must not forget the southern territories of Tunisia, the land brought under Roman control by Augustus and Tiberius south east of the legionary base of Ammaedara. Pliny describes some of the communities as 'not so much
It is thought, too, that many of the later towns on the edge of the Tunisian dorsal, places like Cilma (mod. Djilma), Sufetula (mod. Sbeitla), Cillium (mod. Kasserine) and Thelepte, became Romanized through soldiers or veteran stationed there to control the routes in this period. That was certainly true of Thala, the former Numidian stronghold near Ammaedara, according to Tacitus, and perhaps of the oasis
Discussion of Punic
Macer
centre of the Capsitani at Capsa (mod. Gafsa), which had also been Punicized.[748]
Further west in Mauretania, in addition to the colonies, Claudius granted a limited number of municipal rights and recognized a few communities as
viii. romanization and resistance
Two conclusions follow from these administrative arrangements for the provinces of north Africa. First, since the number of new Italian immigrants was relatively small, their impact was less dramatic than has sometimes been supposed. Secondly, the local African elites, including those who were incorporated in the colonies, many of whom had long been Punicized, were those most readily integrated into the urban system. Both these conclusions contribute to our understanding of the process of Romanization.
The precise juridical status of a community made little difference to the realities of life in the small
Many of these Libyans simply continued to be peasants working on the lands of their former chiefs. Iulius Caesar had allowed his friend, C.
Iulius Massinissa, to keep land that probably belonged to his royal ancestor. In the
On the other hand the history of two former Numidian royal towns, Bulla Regia and Thugga, shows how quickly native towns adopted Roman styles of building and culture.[750] Bulla, recognized as a 'free town' in the Augustan province, contained many Romanized families bearing the name of Iulius, including some of the most prominent, that go back to the earliest period. Fairly soon we see the Roman reticulated technique being used for a public building in the centre, showing how urbanization was fostered by Roman rule.
Thugga, which had probably been Massinissa's capital in the second century b.c. and had long ago acquired administrative institutions, much influenced by Punic culture, plus a number of monumental buildings, was now increased by a Roman
The double communities of
The social and political benefits of the Augustan system for the elite had already become apparent in the Julio-Claudian period. Under Tiberius a citizen of Musti, L. Iulius Crassus, reached equestrian status and under Vespasian the first known African consuls, Q. Aurelius Pactumeius Fronto of Cirta and his brother Clemens, were created.76 All may have been Italian
Lower down the scale, too, the patronage of Roman officials must have encouraged Romanization. As early as 12 в.с. we have an inscription set up by 'the senate and people of the
The service of Africans in the auxiliaries, whether in ethnic units like
Thugga -
Iulius Crassus - CIL VIII I5)i9and 26475;
Two of the inscriptions are recorded in EJ2 334-5; for the set, see
the
The fact is that the pre-Roman culture of Africa, including the strong Punic and hellenistic elements, inevitably remained embedded in the make-up of the new provincial society, not just at the level of the poor but of the rich, too. The Thugga inscription noted above records a man who was priest of divine Augustus but also honorary
The emperor-cult, as we can see from these examples, was a vehicle by which local aristocracies demonstrated their Romanness and should not be regarded as insincere flattery or impositions by the state authorities. At Carthage, for instance, the altar of the
There has been much debate about the survival and continuity of African and Punic political organizations within the Roman provincial towns.80 Apart from the
4 Tac.
" Early imperial cult inscriptions -
10 Gascou 1976 (e 736), against Kotula 1968 (e 747). See also above, n. 67.
Thugga inscription above also refers to a decree voted by 'all the gates'
Similarly, the popularity of Afro-Punic cults in Roman Africa shows how a new amalgam of provincial culture was emerging.[752] The pre- Roman cult of the Cereres corn gods became one of the most prestigious in Roman Carthage, its priesthoods dating back to beyond the formal foundation of the colony itself. The cult of the earth goddess Tellus, which was probably practised near the altar of the
Whether examples like this represent a form of passive resistance to Rome or the steady progress of Romanization is to some extent a matter of semantics.[753] Advocates of the 'resistance' model regard Romanization like a layer of paint which was easily stripped off later when Roman rule deteriorated to reveal the true Africa lurking below the surface. Modern studies of acculturation, however, demonstrate not only how compatibility varies enormously according to the social class and the isolation of individuals, but how even in indigenous resistance movements (cargo cults and the like) the language is not so much that of the old culture surviving beneath a veneer as that of a new vocabulary which emerges from the fusion of two civilizations, preserving elements of both. Romanization and resistance were two sides of the same coin.
In the Julio-Claudian period there was still an active, physical resistance among the southern, semi-nomadic populations and the
ix. the economy
It is not easy to judge how much the economy - and especially rural production — changed during this period. Presumably the trends already in motion under the Republic continued. Not surprisingly most of the information from the late Punic and republican periods relates to the production of grain, which is also the subject of dominant interest in the early Empire. The extraordinary productivity of the soil of Africa, and notably that of Byzacium — the south-eastern coastal region of Proconsu- laris - was a byword in Rome. But the notion, derived from the Elder Pliny, that Africa was
The popularity of Mago's treatise suggests the influence of Punic farming methods on early Roman settlers. And that in turn indicates the principal development of this period — the growth of large estates and villas of the sort encountered by Iulius Caesar on the Byzacium coast. Sale of land under the Republic, plus the allocation or sale of confiscated land after the civil wars, must have accelerated the process which led the Elder Pliny to report that before Nero's confiscations half Africa was
Productivity - e.g. Varro,
Archaeology, van der Werff 1977/8 (e 769), Aranegui and Hesnard forthcoming (e 713). Mago — Heurgon 1976 (e 744).
owned by six landlords. Whatever the exaggeradon, it was to Africa that imperial writers regularly turned to illustrate a land of large estates. Petronius imagined Trimalchio and his guest as owners of vast properties in Numidia and Africa, while Seneca moralizes about the thousands of tenant
Many of these property owners were, like the emperor, absentees and it is not evident how their estates were organized in terms of labour or produce. Petronius talks of an army of slaves and Seneca of tenant farmers. The latter were certainly more common in later periods and there are a priori reasons, given earlier, for thinking this was always the more usual type of farm worker. But in neither case is there any real reason to believe that the growth of large estates radically altered - let alone ruined, as Pliny says - African farming methods or productivity. What it did was to change the social balance, by concentrating wealth in the hands of a minority and by providing them with the means to pay for the growing number of expensive, public buildings in towns such as Thugga, Lepcis Magna or Carthage, which have been noted already. That is, of course, when the profits did not leave Africa to pay for the expenses of the aristocracy and emperor in Rome. By expanding southwards and westwards the Roman-African economy was reaching a point where it was about to become a major supplier of the empire as well as of Rome.
x. roman imperialism
The Roman conquest of the Maghreb in the first century a.d. began as the by-product of civil war and ended up with the acquisition of new territories as African chiefs and princes were swept up in the turmoil. Octavian's defeat of Antony led direcdy to the southern 'Gaetulian' problem, drawing Roman arms as far as the pre-desert. The allied Mauretanian kingdoms of the west were an unstable solution to this involvement which eventually broke down under Claudius and led to the annexation of two more provinces.
The question is, did the Roman emperors have a coherent policy of imperialism that went deeper than this kind of reflex reaction to emergencies? Even in the republican period, when Africa was relatively neglected, we can see that the territory was regarded as a source of private wealth in land and of public food and oil. The climax was Caesar's public announcement of the acquisition for the Roman people of 8,000 tonnes of grain and 1 million litres of oil from the new province he had acquired, 'in order to impress the people with the size of his victory'.87
That tradition of public patronage was continued by Augustus who boasted in 23 B.C., for instance, that he had made a grant of one year's ration of corn to 1 million Romans, as well as claiming to have saved the city on various occasions from corn shortages. The emperor was fully aware of the 'fear and danger' which could lead to city riots if supplies broke down. In a.d. 51 the emperor Claudius came uncomfortably close to being lynched when it was correcdy rumoured that the warehouses of Rome were almost empty.88
Given this background of propaganda and need, it would have been surprising if the corn of Africa had not figured somewhere when emperors pondered the prudence of military campaigns, even if our sources do not specifically link it to southern conquest. Can it be only chance that the raids of Tacfarinas deep into the African province and the consequent wars between a.d. 19-24 coincided with a sharp rise in the price of corn in a.d. 19, which remained high until about a.d. 23 or 24? Tacitus himself was in no doubt about Rome's dependence on Africa (and Egypt) for her livelihood nor about the strategic importance of African grain in the civil wars.89 All Rome knew the value of Africa.
The central importance of African and Egyptian corn in supplying Rome is confirmed by two much discussed ancient texts. The first, referring to Nero's reign, states that Africa maintained the people of Rome for eight months of the year and Egypt for four; the second that Egypt in Augustus' rule provided 20,000,000
" Plut.
•> Augustus, RG j, ij.i;DioLv.26.1 - 27.3. Tac.
" Tac.
90 Joseph.
increased when property passed under imperial management or that free corn distributions dramatically increased under Nero at the expense of the market.
What is clear, however, is that African corn was always a vital imperial asset, a weapon of control in the emperor's hands and a commodity for which there was a chronic need in Italy. The unreliability and wild fluctuation of grain yields in the pre-industrial Mediterranean are well known. 'Poverty and uncertainty of the morrow', says Braudel, were endemic pressures in the Mediterranean world that underlay 'certain, almost instinctive forms of imperialism'.91 Augustus' and Tiberius' push to the southern pre-desert more than doubled the arable area of Roman Africa. Claudius' annexation of Mauretania added to the source of
CHAPTER 13/ CYRENE
JOYCE REYNOLDS AND J. A. LLOYD
I. INTRODUCTION
Modern Cyrenaica, in the Roman period variously named Cyrenae (from its chief city), the Cyrenaea, the parts around Cyrene, Libya around Cyrene, was bequeathed to Rome in default of an heir by its king Ptolemy Physcon in 15 5 B.C., and inherited by her on the death of his son, Ptolemy Apion, in 96 в.с.1 Rome freed the Greek cities (we are not told whether or not she also gave them immunity from taxation); she probably accepted ownership of the royal property at once (the estates
1 The literary evidence for the history of Roman Cyrenaica is limited and often terse and obscure. Archaeological discoveries, including coins and inscriptions add important new information, but it is often fragmentary and insecurely dated. A particular problem arises from the many inscriptions which were dated by reference to an eponymous priest of Apollo, for whose year of office we have no other evidence, or to an era which is not specified. The present writers have conjectured that after 96 b.c. the cities used an era dating from the Roman declaration of their liberty. It would be understandable if they started another era in 75/4 or in 67 (the latter has recently been proposed, although not quite proved, for Berenice). It is certain that Cyrene, and almost certain that Teuchira, took Actium as a new starting-point and likely (as is assumed here) that the other cities did the same. Even at Cyrene, moreover, many inscriptions of the Principate are dated in a year which is patently not Actian and is sometimes explicitly stated to be the regnal year of a named emperor. Unfortunately the texts often fail to specify the emperor whose regnal year they were using, thus making the precise chronology and sequence of events obscure to us. In general, see J. Reynolds, in Gadullah 1968 (e 780л) and on Berenicean practice. Bows к у 1987 (e 776). The main items of ancient evidence are the following:
Inscriptions
Coins Robinson 1927(8 347л); Chapman 1968 (в 3 i6a); Buttrey 1983 (в 315
Current archaeological discoveries are reported mainly in three journals which specialize in Libyan archaeology,
619
Map 14. Cytene
are first unequivocally attested in her possession in 63 b.c.). The Libyans of the region were perhaps regarded as dependants of the cities.2
By 75/4 B.C. it was clear that this attempt to exercise suzerainty at no cost had failed. To the literary evidence for Cyrenaican instability in the intervening years inscriptions have recently added vivid detail; there were dissensions and tyrannies within the cities, and sometimes, apparently, between them, attacks probably from Libyan raiders and certainly from pirates, famines, sieges, lootings.3 In this context a continuous Roman presence may well have seemed preferable to freedom, bringing a hope of peace and revived prosperity to the local population as well as to the Roman
If there had been hopes that annexation would revive prosperity, they were soon disappointed, for within a very few years Cyrenaica felt the impact of the Roman civil wars. Pompey took Cyrenaican corn to feed the troops he mustered against Caesar; after Pharsalus Pompeian refugees collected there - eventually, it is said, 10,000 of them - under Cato, who forced the reluctant to accept them and, indubitably, to provide supplies for them. It is not surprising that depression is written very clearly in the archaeological evidence for the middle of the first century B.C. recently discovered at Sidi Khrebish, Benghazi, a suburb of ancient Berenice.5
Plut.
Sail.
Caes.
The eastern and western limits of Cyrenaica were indicated by Ptolemy I as the Great Catabathmos, a steep pass near the modern Egyptian town of Solium, and Automalax, a fort on the Syrtican coast probably at modern Bu Sceefa, a little east of the traditional eastern limit of Carthaginian influence at Arae Philaenorum.[756] These were approximately the limits of the Roman province too in 44 B.C.
How far Ptolemaic and Roman suzerainty penetrated the interior is less clear. The forts established by the Tiberian period (see below) in the Syrtican approaches to the Cyrenaican plateau are clues to the location of the frontier zone there. Very recently Libyan archaeologists have found classical material in the desert south of Mechili, including part of a stone set up in a.d. 5 3/4 to mark the boundary of an estate inherited by the Roman people from Ptolemy Apion; if it belongs where it was found it indicates that Ptolemaic as well as Roman control was much deeper than has been supposed.[757]
The sub-Saharan climate and poor soils of the western and eastern Cyrenaican littorals render them for the most part unsuited to settled cultivation. However, certain areas favoured by underground water, and sometimes also by anchorage facilities, were developed in antiquity as road-stations and minor ports. Systematic survey in the Tripolitanian Syrtica suggests that the intensity of early Roman agrarian activity associated with them (no doubt accompanied by pasturage) has been seriously underestimated; the productivity of the Marmaric region, clo§e to the Great Catabathmos, in the late second century a.d. is illustrated by a cadastral papyrus which records a highly organized landscape given over to cereals, vines, figs and olives. Terracing, water collection and storage systems and irrigation contributed to effective husbandry in these marginal areas. A kinder environment in antiquity has not yet been proven.[758]
The chief cultivable area, and so the zone of the classical cities, small towns and villages, lies in the northern part of Jebel el Akhdar or Green Mountain and its coastal plain. The Jebel is a limestone plateau, cuestaform, which stretches c. 250km as the crow flies from Berenice (Benghazi) in the west to Darnis (Derna) in the east and slopes down to the Sahara in the south. Where it juts northwards into the sea (in the direction of the Peloponnese) it has distincdy Mediterranean qualities in its relief, climate, soils and vegetation. The coastal plain is usually narrow and sometimes interrupted where the mountain reaches the sea; except, therefore, where it broadens at its western end behind Teuchira (Tocra) and Berenice, it offers little room for cities and no possibility of a continuous coast road (the narrowness is accentuated by a rise in the sea level since the classical period but not, apparently, on a scale significant enough to change the essential facts).
The mountain rises steeply on the north, by two main escarpments from sea level to an upper plateau which reaches 500m over much of its length and nearly 900m at Sidi Mohamed el-Hamri a little south of Cyrene. The lower plateau, narrow at its eastern end, broadens towards the west where it accommodates the one extensive fertile plain in the country, controlled by the Greek city of Barka and its hellenistic successor Ptolemais-Barka. Outside this plain the landscape is frequently undulating, with soil often collected in comparatively small depressions and fields surrounded by rocky outcrops. Arable land is, however, quite extensive in the area of Cyrene. In general the soils of the north Jebel are deeper, heavier and more water-retentive than those of the coastal plain, although there are some stretches of thinner soil which are only useful for pasturage. They are also better watered. Rainfall, concentrated in the winter months, may be up to 650mm annually on the high ground; whereas in the coastal plain at Benghazi it is 250—300mm, which is close to the minimum for dry farming; the rate is variable, however, even on the mountain and there is everywhere danger of periodic drought. Moreover, much of the rainfall permeates the limestone and runs underground. It gushes out at points along the edge of the escarpments (as, very notably, at Cyrene); but permanent fresh surface water is rare. There was heavy dependence, therefore, on wells and cisterns, both in the cities and in the countryside; and some construction of aqueducts for cities is attested, at least in the Roman period. There are also a number of water-courses (wadis) which are dry for much of the time but fill briefly on occasions of winter flooding. They commonly run east—west in their early stages but later turn north to reach the coastal plain where they have often deposited good soil which attracted settlements. When broad enough, their beds were cultivated in their upper reaches, although it was necessary to build series of retaining walls across them, to limit the removal of soil by flood water. On their south-north sections, however, they have often cut deep ravines into the limestone, thus providing passes through which movement between the coast and the several levels of the Jebel is comparatively easy, despite the precipitous character of the escarpments. On the upper plateau too they might provide convenient routes for movement between the settled areas and the interior. Naturally, settlements often occur on their banks and at their exits at the sea end.
The most spectacular of the wadis, the Wadi Kuf, to the south and west of Cyrene, runs for much of its length in a deep gorge which sharply divides the territory of Cyrene in the east from that of Barka or Ptolemais-Barka to the west. Since it was not bridged until the twentieth century it had a marked effect on the settlement patterns and the system of communications. No doubt some ancient tracks crossed it at much the same point as the modern bridge-builders have chosen, but it seems very likely that the main ancient road from Cyrene westwards turned north to follow the east bank of the wadi which it crossed near the sea, where it becomes broad and shallow;9 and, since the mountain interrupts the coastal plain to the west very soon thereafter, the road then turned south again to run approximately parallel to the west bank for some distance before resuming a westward direction. An alternative, but probably minor, route by-passed the eastern end of the wadi by running south from Cyrene through what seems to have been Libyan tribal territory, before turning westwards. Both detours, of course, attracted settlements along their lines and in their proximity.
On the gentle southern slopes of the Jebel the soil is decreasingly rich and the rainfall steadily diminishing as the desert is approached. The main value of this steppe area lay in its production of the wild plant
Ancient accounts of the country are schematic and principally concerned with the Cyrene area but they show some appreciation of the configuration and its effects. Herodotus identifies three belts of land, which he says were harvested in succession: the coastal plain, a middle region of hills and the highest country behind. Strabo and Pliny describe a zone extending for about 15 Roman miles south of the coast in which trees could be grown, then a band of similar depth, devoted largely to cereal production. Diodorus notes that the land around Cyrene (which falls within the first zone) grew many crops (wheat, olives, vines and wild trees) and possessed'rivers (by which he probably meant the springs which gush out along the edge of the escarpments). Beyond, Pliny describes an area 30 miles deep and 250 miles across, in which the only crop was the
iii. the population, its distribution, organization and internal relationships
The ancient sources encourage belief that the Cyrenaicans were all Greeks or Greco-Romans; but the indigenous Libyan populadon was large and a significant element in regional history. Equally they tend to suggest that all Libyans were nomadic shepherds, little touched by civilization and usually at odds with the Greeks; but the realides were certainly much more complex.
Greeks, mostly Dorians, had come to Cyrenaica in a series of groups beginning in the seventh century B.C. Settling within the cultivable zone they had established, by the hellenistic period, four cities and an unknown number of villages. The hellenistic kings, who ruled Cyrenaica either as a dependency of or an appendix to Egypt, introduced additional settlers; certainly a number of hellenized Jews and perhaps also others of Macedonian, Thracian or Anatolian origin, to judge from the names associable with these peoples that appear in the later inscriptions. The evidence for the hellenistic settlers is clear in the cities, much weaker in the country; that some of them did settle in the country is certain, but it is rash to attempt an estimate of their numbers. There may have been yet more immigrants in the first century B.C., if it is right to deduce from an inscription at Ptolemais that in 67/6 B.C. Pompey authorized settlement of former pirates there. Moreover, there were certainly Italian
The indigenous Libyans, depicted by Herodotus as tribally organized, lived both in the cultivable zone and in the steppe to the south, no doubt moving between the two as the need for pasture and tillage required; but the tradition suggests that where geography favoured it some of them developed villages or even agglomerations of dwellings which might resemble towns; and this receives a little support from the discoveries of such Libyan 'townships' recently made in the interior of Tripolitania (no surveys on the same scale have yet been made in the Cyrenaican hinterland).[761] Those living in the relevant areas are said to have helped the first Greek settlers; and although later Cyrenaican history is punctuated by Libyan wars, it is probable that peaceful interchange, intermarriage and cultural influence in both directions were regular. Herodotus already reports it, and the process certainly continued after his time. It was furthered by the trade in
The
At the same time in the first century в.с. many Libyans apparently continued to live very much in their traditional way, even when they had accepted something from the incoming culture. That is doubtless true even within the more highly developed areas of the cultivable zone - traces of them there can be seen, for instance, (from as late as the Roman period) in the upper occupation strata of the cave called the Haua Fteah on the coast near Apollonia;16 more would certainly be found by systematic survey. Such people were often, no doubt, engaged in agriculture, some as dependent labour on land owned by Greeks, others, more probably, on land communally owned by their own tribes whose main locations were in the steppes but who would bring flocks and herds northward for grazing after the harvest. This system of transhumance was probably practised in ancient Cyrenaica on much the same pattern as was observed in the middle of the twentieth century. For the tribal groups in the steppe there is litde useful evidence. Plutarch shows a tribal chieftain in the area south of Cyrene in c. 87/6 B.C., in touch with aristocrats of the city and clearly able to communicate with them, in fact called in to help in the overthrow of a tyranny. Diodorus Siculus, in a passage which may in part have derived from a knowledgeable hellenistic source, wrote of four Libyan tribes in the region of Cyrenaica and of three Libyan life-styles. There were, he said, peaceable farmers and peaceable nomads (presumably transhumants whose seasonal movements were on fixed routes), both groups obedient to their chiefs, but a third group consisted of robbers living off the loot of their raids, and sometimes able to coerce the peaceable into joining them. Greeks, it is implied, were aware that many Libyans were acceptable neighbours and that the seriously disturbing element came from further afield.[765] It has become common recently to interpret much of Cyrenaican history as a series of cycles in which Greek expansion of sedentary agriculture threatened Libyan transhumance patterns and led to war, after which an imposed peace opened the way for renewed Greek expansion of sedentary agriculture. Events did sometimes occur in this sequence, but Diodorus' account suggests that it is not the key to all Greek-Libyan clashes. The Libyans were in touch via overland routes with kindred to the south, the east and the west; Libyan raids on Greek lands were certainly sometimes the result of social, political or climatic change outside Cyrenaica.
Some further information can be gleaned from the story of the plant
In the early second century b.c. there had been four Greek cities, Cyrene, Ptolemais (originally the port of Barka, but becoming its centre of government in the third century B.C.), Teuchira (called Arsinoe in the hellenistic period, but reverting to its original, Libyan, name under the Romans) and Berenice (the name given to the new harbour site to which the citizens of Euhesperides had moved in c. 246 B.C.). Between the early second century and 67 b.c. a fifth, Apollonia, was created through promotion of Cyrene's main port; and since hellenistic royal creations were normally given dynastic names it is possible that this was due to Roman intervention. Whatever its date the creation must have been disadvantageous to Cyrene, although perhaps less so than it might seem; it is clear in fact that a good deal of land near Apollonia had already been taken from Cyrenaeans into the possession of the king; and after 75/4 it seems likely that harbour dues there would all be collected for the benefit of Rome. Apollonia and Cyrene were in dispute in 67, but there is no evidence for tensions between them later. Apollonia soon became so much part of the Cyrenaican scene that the whole region acquired the name of Pentapolis, land of the five cities (first attested in the usage of the Elder Pliny).19
The cities, especially Cyrene, Barca and Teuchira, were sited with a view to exploitation of particularly extensive fertile areas. There were many other fertile and well-watered areas beyond their immediate environs to tempt exploitation, but not of a size to support a city. The settlers were also interested in coastal sites with a view to harbours, for connexions with Greece, for export and import and for the convenience of coastwise shipping by which movement eastwards and westwards was easier than by overland routes (see above). If good harbours are scarce on this coast, quite modest facilities would meet the needs of much ancient shipping; but in the coastal strip even modest harbourage rarely coincides with a sufficient hinterland to support a city. Both in the interior, therefore, and on the coast, there were far more villages than cities; in consequence, most city territories were unusually large. Some villages became substantial places, as road-stations where tracks crossed, for instance, and/or as collecting places for goods to be transmitted between the interior and the coast; but very few ever achieved the status of cities, even in late antiquity when this became easier to do.
There is little information about the government, of these Greek communities either before or after they came under Roman rule. A copy of a constitution established for Cyrene in 322/1 B.C. survives, but we do not know how much, if anything of significance, remained of it by 96,
18 Strab. xvii.5.2o(836-7c); Pliny, HNxix-i 5.5. «
much less 44 в.с. A decree of the first century в.с. at Teuchira shows that the number of voting citizens there at that time was very small; and that is likely to have been the pattern in all the cides. The Libyan residents in them presumably had no civic rights. Of their other inhabitants the group of Roman
Within the city territories many of the Greek villages were too distant from their city centres to allow of day-to-day administration from them. Most, therefore, must have had institutions not unlike those of the Jewish
In addition to the Greek villages we must envisage also a number of areas within city territories but not part of them. So 'king's land', which became
The relationship of the Greek cities one to another is also unclear.
Cyrene claimed to be the
It is a natural supposition that all the peoples and types of community described above were comprehended within the four categories, which Strabo is said to have distinguished in 'Cyrenaea' - citizens, farmers,
IV. FROM THE DEATH OF CAESAR TO THE CLOSE OF THE MARMARIC WAR ( C. A.D. 6/7)
In summer of 44 в.с. Cyrenaica was assigned to C. Cassius, as Crete was to M. Brutus. There is no sign that Cassius ever went near this province. After Philippi it naturally became part of Antony's command and was probably used by him, along with Crete, in the first place as a naval base. There is a series of coins, some minted in Roman denominations, and with parallel issues for Crete and for Cyrenaica, which have often been connected with this; but on present evidence few can be dated precisely enough for the connexion to be certain. By the 'Donations of Alexandria' Antony cancelled the Roman annexation of Cyrenaica and gave it as a kingdom to a Cleopatra, either Cleopatra herself or Cleopatra Selene; the discovery at Cyrene of a coin of 31 в.с. from an issue which features both Antony and Cleopatra herself has been taken to suggest that the whole issue should be attributed to Cyrene, with the implication that the new queen was Cleopatra herself. There is no indication that anything
22 Strab. xvii.3.21 (837c). 23
was done to reconstitute a royal administration however. Antony garrisoned Cyrenaica with four Roman legions under L. Pinarius Scarpus (coins have survived from several of the issues that he made to pay his men); and the cities must have borne the burden of providing supplies for them. After Actium, Scarpus was quick to change allegiance, refused Antony a landing and, in due course, handed over Cyrenaica and its garrison to Cornelius Gallus as Octavian's representative; surprisingly he had time to issue coins carrying the name of Octavian before he left. The recovery of Cyrenaica for Rome - mentioned in the
Octavian/Augustus introduced a new order, which was recognized in Cyrene by the use of a provincial era starting in 31 в.с. At any rate from 27 в.с. Cyrenaica was administered together with Crete, governed by a proconsul of praetorian status. He and the quaestor appointed with him, normally held office for one year, and divided their time between the two parts of the province. The provincial Fasti are full of gaps and uncertainties, so that it would be rash to generalize from them about the kind of men who served in the province and the kind of careers to which they proceeded, at any rate for the reign of Augustus, and indeed, for most of the first century a.d.
The provincial capital was at Cyrene; but it is likely that the governor also held assizes at Ptolemais where there are, as at Cyrene, a number of official inscriptions in Latin. These official texts include prayer formulae of the type used by the Arval Brethren at Rome on 3 January each year and certainly prove that Latin rituals (concerned with the preservation of the current emperor and his family) were conducted in the
Whatever had been the case earlier, the cities had now lost their freedom and the province was certainly taxed. Collection of
No imperial estates are at present attested in Cyrenaica in the first or second centuries a.d.; certainly no procurator is attested there before the early third century a.d. and there are no adequate grounds for accepting the view that the procurators of Crete also operated in Cyrenaica. One inscription of uncertain date at Ptolemais shows that there were, at some stage, members of the imperial household there; but at present we have no information at all about their function.[769]
The arrangements of Augustus provided, in the long term, for a reasonably stable and prosperous Cyrenaica; in the short term, new problems arose, recovery was certainly interrupted and the period of the reign cannot be regarded as an unqualified success. That is best illustrated at Sidi Khrebish where the district remained in a dilapidated and deserted state throughout it, although the one small temple there was receiving votives, and a channel aqueduct was constructed across it to carry water to a point beyond it, showing that developments were taking place nearer to the city centre. Of those we have a litde positive evidence in two inscriptions erected by the Jewish community of Berenice; they seem to show an active group, possessing a meeting house that is grandly called an amphitheatre, which one of the members could afford to redecorate at his own expense; nevertheless, and despite the inclusion of a few Roman citizens in the community, its financial competence seems to have been modest overall, since the stelae carrying the inscriptions are small.[770]
There is more evidence from the centres of the other cities, and although comparatively little of it can be firmly dated in the first three- quarters of the reign it seems to justify belief that normality was
653
CAESAR TO THE MARMARIC WAR
returning. At Cyrene that is demonstrated by a stela of c. 16-15 B.C. containing the end of a civic decree which conferred the annual priesthood of the cult of Augustus on Barkaeus son of Theuchrestos (we know that he held it in 17/16) and others relating to the will in which he bequeathed one estate to Apollo and Artemis for the use of their priests and another to Hermes and Herakles for provision of oil in the civic gymnasium. Prized amenities of city life were available to cidzens, then, and at least one rich citizen showed his patriotism in the traditional way by benefactions. Civic administration was proceeding as it should. In addition, imperial cult had been quickly established and integrated into the local system of honours (and, no doubt, liturgies); in fact we know from other inscriptions that at this period the name of the priest of Augustus was being used, along with that of the priest of Apollo, to date civic documents.[771]
Nevertheless the dated inscriptions on public Vorks suggest that an extensive programme of repair and new building was still needed in the last decade of the reign and was, in part at least, undertaken by Roman officials; that should perhaps be related to a series of problems that can be detected earlier.
The first of these problems to appear in the record concerns the Jewish communities. At a comparatively early date in the reign they complained that the cities were preventing the dispatch of the money that they offered annually to Jerusalem and harming them in other ways; Augustus responded with a letter to the governor confirming both their right to dispatch the money and their
When the cities of Cyrenaica, probably acting jointly, sent ambassadors to Augustus in 7-6 B.C., there were quite other problems to put to him, mainly concerned with the administration of justice in criminal cases, but involving also the relations of Greeks with Roman citizens and, to some extent, of Greeks with Greeks. The fact that the embassy was sent is, in itself, evidence for some enterprise in the cities (and perhaps for co-operation among them in a
The first striking point is that Roman citizens resident in Cyrenaica (most of whom were probably immigrants, judging by their nomenclature) had been successfully ganging up against Greeks, to procure sentences, including death sentences, on innocent men. They were aided by an obviously unsatisfactory system of jury-courts in which prosecution, witnesses and jurors might all be drawn from a very small group of resident Romans. The second edict may add a further insight if, behind its obscurely allusive formulae, we may see a plot by the three Roman citizens it names to involve Greeks in charges of disloyalty to Augustus.
A second point is the implication in Augustus' provisional proposals for reform of the jury system that Greeks could not always trust other Greeks to give them justice; he thought it wise to offer them the option of all-Roman juries in the courts for which he proposed that there should normally be mixed juries, and, in those for which he proposed all-Greek juries, advised that no juryman should be drawn from the same city as anyone directly involved in the case. It must be admitted that it is not certain that this was based on anything in the recent Cyrenaican record rather than on wider experience of Greek feuding, but it is not unlikely, given Cyrene's earlier reputation for violent
Thirdly, there are now clear indications of financial weakness in the province. The panel from which the Roman jurymen were drawn consisted of 215 names, all that could be found to meet a minimum property qualification as low as 2,500 denarii; Augustus proposed a minimum property qualification of 7,500 denarii for Greek as well as Roman jurymen and was conscious that there might be difficulty in finding enough men who could meet it. We should not, of course, suppose that there were no rich men in Cyrenaica, but must accept that there was no substantial number of reasonably well-off men even among the resident Roman citizens. A similar implication underlies Augustus' decision that a Cyrenaean Greek who received Roman citizenship must continue to fulfil his local obligations unless specifically given exemption from them at the time of his enfranchisement (and then only in respect of property that he owned at that dme).
It is hard to believe that there can have been any perceived threat of attack from outside at the dme when the embassy went to Augustus; and it is still hard when two years later the province received its copy of the fifth edict (setting out a new procedure for certain types of extortion and addressed to all provinces, not specifically to Cyrenaica), for Cyrene then decided, in an apparently carefree mood, to have all five documents inscribed on a marble stela for erecdon in the
The Syrtican forts provided a screen behind which the province could develop in security from desert raiders and their establishment marks a new phase in the history of Cyrenaica. The screen consisted of a series of strongpoints intended to protect the western and south-western approaches to Cyrenaica, each placed beside a major watering-point for the effective oversight of the populations using it and providing bases for patrols who moved further afield. The garrisons were drawn from auxiliary units of the Roman army and in some cases have left informative graffiti on fort walls and at local shrines. At Sceleidima and Msus (ancient names unknown) there were mounted as well as infantry soldiers, some of the men spoke Latin and several, to judge from their names, were recruited in Spain or Gaul. At Agedabia (ancient Cornicla- num) a number of men came from Syria, chosen no doubt because of their desert experience. At the same time, and along with the graffiti of men who were certainly regular auxiliary soldiers of the Roman army, there are also graffiti of men whose names are drawn from a recognizably Cyrenaican repertoire, and in their mixture of Greek, Libyan and Latin, recall the ephebic graffiti of Teuchira and Ptolemais. Their interpretation is uncertain. They might indicate one episode of military recruiting in Cyrenaica (such as is attested during the Julio-Claudian period), but since they very rarely include any reference to military status, they may be the work of ephebes or
v. a. d. 4-70
After the Marmaric War reconstruction in the cities was taken in hand quickly. At Cyrene a series of inscriptions of the last decade of Augustus' reign and the early years of Tiberius' shows Roman officials concerned with repairs to public buildings in the
the sanctuary of Apollo, in the temple of Zeus, and perhaps on the defensive walls of the acropolis (but that may have been earlier). In some cases the credit is attributed to a commander of a cohort, suggesting that it began before normal proconsular government was resumed, although it certainly carried on after that for some years.[774] The involvement of Roman officials in building, for which they presumably made funds available, could perhaps be compared with the help that Rome was beginning to give to provincials suffering from natural disasters; although there is no clear evidence that these repairs were necessitated by direct enemy action (failure to maintain the soft local building stone might be sufficient explanation). The inscriptions on the buildings are more often in Latin than might have been expected, which may reflect the presence of Latin speakers, not only soldiers but also the resident Roman
At Cyrene then recovery is clear. What little we know of Apollonia at this time suggests a similar series of developments there. For Ptolemais and Teuchira there is a different type of evidence. At present building inscriptions, civic decrees and dedications are rare in these cities, but there are plentiful ephebic graffiti and funerary inscriptions throughout the first century a.d.;40 that seems to show that there were quite sizeable citizen populations able to afford ephebic training for their sons and a literate, if often modest, memorial for themselves. For Berenice the evidence is different again. Aside from a few statues of Tiberian date which may have come from the city centre or nearby, it consists in what is shown by the excavation of Sidi Khrebish. At approximately the middle of the first century a.d. the whole desolate area was levelled, new paved streets were laid and new houses were built. These had ground plans and external facades like those of their hellenistic predecessors but more substantial foundations and some more elaborate features such as peristyle courtyards, underground cisterns and a little architectural decoration. At the least, they seem to imply that the population of Berenice was growing again and needed more living-space. A Jewish inscription of Neronian date from the city has been used independently of this evidence to argue for an increase in the size of the
In the villages too there appears to have been an increase in the number of funerary inscriptions erected, most of them quite modest, some very much so, but nevertheless evidence that more of the rural people valued a literate funerary record than before, and perhaps indicating an increased rural population. At any rate a military levy was held in Cyrenaica in the fifties suggesting that there was no perceived manpower shortage at that time.42
Evidence for Roman official activity is now limited. We know that
" Reynolds 1982 (e 802).
once in the reign of Tiberius the routine was broken and the tenure of a governor prolonged for three years - but perhaps for reasons connected with the fall of Sejanus rather than with Cyrenaica. Four times we hear that Roman officials provoked Cyrenaeans to prosecute them at Rome, usually for extortion. Only for two Roman initiatives, both due to Claudius, can anything more be said, one concerned with roads, the other with
It is generally held that there was already a good system of communications in Cyrenaica before the Romans came, Unking villages and cities, interior and coast, quite adequately. Its tracks may often be recognized as shallow cuttings in rock-surfaces, perhaps also showing deep wheel- ruts, and sometimes lined by rock-cut sarcophagi and other tombs; there is no sign that any other method of road construction ever superseded it. Neither construction of such tracks nor their repair (a simple process of cutting away a damaged surface) are datable. So although we might expect the Romans to have paid attention to the system quite early, even to have extended it in connexion with the Marmaric War, there would be no indication of that unless their work included the erection of milestones. On present evidence the earliest milestones in Cyrenaica are those erected in thn name of Claudius, on the Cyrene—Apollonia road, the crucial link between Cyrene and the outside world, and on the Cyrene—Balagrae road which led from the city towards some of her most fertile territory, from there on towards the cities of Ptolemais-Barka, Teuchira and Berenice and beyond them to the Syrtican forts.[778] We cannot be sure how much to put to Claudius' credit and especially whether he was responsible for the very important development which involved rerouting the road from Cyrene to Apollonia on a new line which was less steep and less subject to winter flooding than its predecessor. Nor do we know his reasons for action on the Cyrenaican roads; but he may well have been strongly influenced by his concern for the corn supply of the city of Rome, which should have giver, him an interest in Cyrenaican cereal production and in the movement of the grain from the interior to the coast.
'An interest in cereal production may also have been a factor, along with straightforward fiscal considerations, in his decision to appoint a praetorian senator, L. Acilius Strabo, as his legate with a commission to recover
In the circumstances it would not be surprising if some Cyrenaicans regarded the fall of Nero with regret. Their attitudes and fortunes during the course of the year of the four emperors are not recorded but it is fair to wonder how enthusiastic they felt about the accession of Vespasian, who had once been a quaestor in the province. If they did have doubts they were, in a sense, justified for one of his early acts was to resume the reclamation of
GREECE (INCLUDING CRETE AND CYPRUS) AND ASIA MINOR FROM43 B.C. TO A.D. 69
В. M. LEVICK
I. GEOGRAPHY AND DEVELOPMENT
The area to be dealt with here was in some senses a unity, in others, less important, diverse and falling into three regions, mainland Greece and the islands, western Asia Minor, and the Anatolian plateau.1 What unified it was geography — common subjection to Mediterranean geology and climatic conditions and the seasonal aridity that governs Mediterranean agriculture; language — it was all predominantly Greek- speaking; history - the entire area had come under the sway of Alexander the Great and then that of Rome; and devotion to common political ideals, those of the city-state (
1 The most important literary sources are the
am much indebted to Dr S. Alcock (Reading) for many helpful comments and suggestions, and especially for directing my attention to a number of useful books and articles.
PI.
641
Map i j. Grccce and the Aegean.
southern extension into Lycia and Cilicia Tracheia, a more continental type of climate takes over, with long severe winters and summers no less dry than those of Greece and the islands. Grain and the vine could be grown, but not the olive; cattle and above all sheep were the staple product, with minerals a potential source of wealth; textiles of all kinds were among the most important products of the entire peninsula. The Greek language had been carried from the mainland and the islands to the west, north and south coasts of Asia Minor by waves of colonists in the tenth and then the seventh and sixth centuries B.C., and hellenization had continued in the wake of Alexander's conquests. In the Anatolian plateau its advance was slow; Lydian, Mysian, Celtic, above all Phrygian and Lycian survived in the villages and tribes of the hinterland, the last two appearing even on inscribed monuments; but the Attalid kings promoted and consolidated Greek art and culture in the west, in what was to become in 153 в.с. the Roman province of Asia, making their capital, Pergamum, an outstanding example of the hellenistic city. Even in central Asia Minor cities with names such as Apamea and Antioch attest the activity of Alexander's successors as creators of
The manner and timing of the Roman acquisition of these regions was another important variable: mainland Greece fell first, in 146 B.C., after half a century of Roman protestations that it was to ensure Greek freedom that Roman troops had crossed the Adriatic, and after a bitter struggle that ended with many cities deprived of their freedom. In Asia Minor the first acquisition was the bequest of 133, the Attalid kingdom; Bithynia and Pontus were annexed, the first another bequest, the second after the wars with Mithridates the Great, seven decades later. Central Anatolia, as its geography made natural, was treated in the first century as a military problem under the name of Provincia Cilicia: a base for action against pirate strongholds in the mountains and a means of safeguarding the route from western Asia Minor to Syria. The islands of Crete and Cyprus were allowed to survive for longer outside direct control, Cyprus until P. Clodius Pulcher passed a bill for its annexation in 5 8 B.C., Crete in part at least until the end of the Republic.
The Romans were heirs of Alexander and his successors, and benefited from the urbanization achieved under them. In Greece proper there was little more to be done in that direction: it was more a question of preserving the
II. THE TRIUMVIRAL PERIOD3
The Greek East suffered more in the thirteen years of intermittent civil war that followed Caesar's death than in the swift campaigns that made him supreme. In Asia Minor devastation of the countryside, destruction of cities and their inhabitants, the imposition of fines and exceptional levies came successively at the hands of three parties. First the republicans: late in 43 Brutus forced Lycia to contribute to his war chest, stormed Xanthus, and, together with Cassius, robbed Rhodes (in spite of a plea from Cassius' old teacher Archelaus), Tarsus, and other cities. Client kings also suffered. Ariobarzanes II Eusebes Philoromaios of Cappadocia was executed, Deiotarus of Galatia brought to join the Liberators and send cavalry to Philippi under his secretary Amyntas. Even after the triumvirs' victories at Philippi and Naulochus, Sex. Pompeius' raiding of 35 damaged the area round the Propontis. A second factor was the Parthian invasion under Q. Labienus, 40—38: they advanced along the highway from Syria to Asia and, in spite of resistance from the brigand chief Cleon of Gordiucome, plundered the cities of Caria, notably Mylasa and Aphrodisias, where sanctuaries and private property alike were looted. Finally, Antony: on his arrival in Asia Minor in 40 his first demand was the same ten years' worth of taxes that had been produced for Brutus and Cassius. After Philippi there was the
3 For these events, see App.
disbandment of thirty legions to be paid for, and in 39—38 and 36—34 campaigns against the Parthians to be financed. The period ended with Antony's mobilization of the East against Octavian, when even the sacred grove of Asclepius on Cos was cut down to supply dmber for ships. The damage armies could do was limited and business carried on; but the effects of uncertainty on the availability of credit, cash loans and all long-term enterprise must be taken into account.
By the Treaty of Brundisium (40 в.с.) Greece from Scodra southwards was under the control of Antony (although in 39 the Peloponnese was abortively assigned to Sex. Pompeius), and so was the whole of Anatolia. Antony exercised patronage in the area, but so did Octavian, granting citizenship to individuals such as Seleucus of Rhosus,4 who continued as his proteges, and extending the privileges of cities. Through a well-placed intermediary who became the city's favourite son, Octavian's freedman C. Iulius Zoilus, 'Caesarian' Aphrodisias secured a decree of the Senate and a law of the People guaranteeing freedom, immunity from taxation, and enhanced asylum rights; an attempt was also to be made to recover looted property.5
The area under discussion falls into three regions. Rulers confronted with the problem of controlling each would be guided by political, military and economic factors. Mainland Greece, Crete and the Cyclades in political terms were well able to govern themselves; economically the mainland at least was an area in decline and depopulation, unlikely to make much contribution to the cost of running it and very unlikely to present any threat to security. Next, western Asia Minor and the adjacent islands: the provinces of Asia and Bithynia were long habituated to obedience as the subjects of Lydian, Persian and hellenistic monarchs; they, like the more remote southern coast, Pamphylia and Cilicia Pedias, had enormous economic possibilities: two-thirds of the cities coining in Asia Minor under Augustus and Tiberius were in the province of Asia. Third, the Anatolian plateau, politically and economically underdeveloped, in spite of Pompey's city foundations in Pontus, was daunting and as yet unprofitable. The three regions were accordingly handled differently both by Antony and by his successors in power, the emperors.
It was for sound political, economic and military reasons, then, that only Asia, Bithynia and Cilicia Pedias were governed as Roman provinces between 42 and 31 в.с. The rest of Asia Minor was subject to skilfully chosen client princes6 (Lycia was an autonomous federation of
4 EJ2 301. 5 Reynolds 1982 (в 270) 7-12.
6 For the vicissitudes of dependent rulers, see Magie 1950 (e 855) 427-515; Bowersock 1965 (c 39) 42—61; Jones 1971 (d 96) 110-214; Sullivan 1978 (e 878) 732—98; 1980 (e 879) 913—30; 1980 (e 880); stemmata at Sullivan 1980 (e 879) 928 and 1980 (e 880) 1136; Braund 1984 (c 254) for individuals. For Strabo's insight into the value of client kingdoms, that their rulers, unlike Roman governors, were always on the spot and armed, see xiv.5-5-9 (671c).
twenty-three cities7). They, not Rome, had the burden of defending and administering it and the duty of supporting their patrons, who could give, take, or trim their kingdoms as he chose. On Deiotarus' death in 40 his son Castor received Galatia and the interior of Paphlagonia; Deiotarus' share of Pontus, the coastal area, went to Darius, son of Caesar's enemy Pharnaces and grandson of Mithridates the Great; Amyntas received northern Pisidia, and Polemon I, son of Zeno of Laodicea, who had resisted Labienus, took Lycaonia, Iconium and the adjacent parts of Cilicia Tracheia; Pedias, like Cyprus, passed into Cleopatra's hands, Olba, west of Pedias, was ruled by the priesdy house of the Teucrids and the kingdom of the Amanus in the east was left under its hereditary ruler Tarcondimotus.
Antony rewarded success. On Castor's death in 37, Galada, Lycaonia and the Pamphylian coast were added to Amyntas' domain; Castor's son Deiotarus Philadelphus received Paphlagonia. Polemon, having to surrender Lycaonia to Amyntas and his possessions in Tracheia to Cleopatra, was given in return Pontus beyond the Iris river, with Phazemonids, Armenia Minor and Colchis; while Archelaus, son of the hereditary priest-ruler of Comana, acquired Cappadocia on the departure or death of its king, Ariobarzanes' brother Ariarathes X. Cleopatra was also given part of Crete, although Antony claimed to have found a Caesarian decree freeing it.8 The remaining cides were left to govern themselves and their territories.
III. THE AUGUSTAN RESTORATION9
Octavian's esdmate of the eastern regions that came under his sway after Acdum and the decisions he took about their future government were based in part on autopsy, as he passed through Asia Minor in 30 в.с. and wintered on Samos, while his further journey to Italy was broken at Corinth. Under the considered arrangements established in 27 only minor adjustments were made to the overall system devised by Antony, with two areas now brought under direct Roman control: Crete (only Lappa and Cydonia keeping their freedom) and Cyprus, which had no privileged cides.
There were further distinctions to be made: were any of the provincial areas to have Augustus as their governor, with his legate acting on the spot, or were they to be left to other senators selected on seniority and by the lot? Which of these latter, the 'public' provinces, were to have ex- consuls as their governors? The answers were determined by past tradition, present and especially military needs, and the
7 Strab. xiv.).}~9 (665cf). 8 Dio xi.ix.;2.4f; Cic.
9 See especially Strab. viii—xvn (552—840c), and Dio u-lvi.
security. All the areas were entrusted to governors selected by seniority and the lot except Cyprus. That was a place where a governor might see action, unruly perhaps after its second takeover by Rome; but the trouble it could cause was minor and in 23 or 22 it was returned to the lot, an unpromising assignment for its proconsuls; the copper-mines were to be handed over on lease to a client monarch, Herod of Judaea.10 Even Macedonia was normally to be a public province, although
How much was meant by the freedom accorded to leagues like the Lycian and that of the free Laconians (Eleutherolacones), to whole islands like Corcyra, to individual cides like Delphi, Athens and Nicopolis (some, like Mytilene,14 were in possession of treaties too), is a quesdon. Theoretically enclaves exempt from the governor's jurisdiction, they still had to reckon with the emperor. Augustus intervened in Athens and Sparta, where down to about 2 b.c. he had relied on a partisan, C. Iulius Eurycles, son of a privateer, to guide the state in his own and Rome's interests; he actually deprived Thessaly and Cyzicus of freedom altogether. Cyzicus lost its freedom for five years for executing Romans, though a proconsul of Asia declared Romans subject to local
Dio Liv.4.1; Joseph.
Tarius Rufus, cos. 16 b.c.: EJ2 268; L. Piso, cos. 15 b.c.: EJ2 199 with R. Syme,
Dio хых.14.5; for date and interpretation, sec Rigsby 1976 (e 867) 322-30.
Strab. xiv.3.2 (664c). 14 EJ2 307.
law on Chios. Other free cities learnt the lesson: in 6 в.с. Cnidus recognized the
Considering the third region, Octavian no more than Antony took it to be ready for direct Roman rule. Already during the tour of 30—29 he had made it clear that the dispositions of 36 would not necessarily be changed, although there had to be adjustments and it took a decade to achieve stability. Loyalty to Rome and himself brought rewards, but loyalty to Antony was not an unforgivable offence; indeed, it promised well, if it could be transferred to the new master. Amyntas of Galatia, like Deiotarus Philadelphus of Paphlagonia and Cleon of Gordiucome, who was promoted to the priesthood of Comana Pondca, secured confirmation by changing sides before Actium, and received part of Cilicia Tracheia. But Archelaus of Cappadocia was not displaced and, despite internal efforts to unseat him, retained his underdeveloped but lucrative and strategically important kingdom until a.d. 17, taking over in Tracheia after Amyntas' death. Polemon I of Pontus lost Armenia Minor to Artavasdes, a displaced claimant to the Parthian throne, but was to remain the chief support of Rome in the north of Asia Minor. He kept the southern shore of the Black Sea (an area that had been strengthened with settlements official and unofficial at Heraclea Pondca — a Caesarian venture that had not survived - and Sinope, which became Colonia lulia Felix in 47), Colchis, and the mines behind Pharnacea. Polemon was less successful in his charge of keeping the Bosporan kingdom on the northern side of the sea under Roman control, and perished there in 8 B.C. He was succeeded in his Anatolian possessions by his widow, Pythodoris of Tralles (she died in a.d. 7-8). In one of the marriages that created for Augustus a nexus of dynastic families and a supply of potential client rulers who were born to the job, Roman citizens, and educated at Rome, Pythodoris' daughter Antonia Tryphaena was given to King Cotys of Thrace — whose sons were also to become rulers in Asia Minor; she herself went on to marry Archelaus of Cappadocia.
Only in minor principalities did Octavian assert a conqueror's rights. At Heraclea Pontica, where Antony's nominee Adiatorix had massacred Caesar's colonists, there had to be a change, but the tyrant's elder son Dyteutes was given a compensating position, the priesthood left vacant through the untimely death of Cleon. Nicias the tyrant of Cos had to pay for his patron's depredations; at 'free' Tarsus the Antonian dynast and
14 Dio Liv.7.6, 23.7 (Cyzicus); EJ2 317 (Chios); 312 (Cnidus).
poet Beithys was replaced by Augustus' old tutor Athenodorus; and the kingdom of Hierapolis Castabala was kept from its natural heir, the son of the late Tarcondimotus Philantonius, undl 20 B.C. The same year saw Augustus achieving a stable settlement of Commagene, probably at his third attempt. The regime of the new ruler and his son Antiochus III survived until a.d. 17, like that of Archelaus and Tarcondimotus Philopator. Archelaus' kingdom was enlarged in 20 в.с. by the addition of Armenia Minor on the death of its ruler, and the Teucrids of Olba, the Cilician city devoted to Zeus, now resumed the priestly and secular power that their forbear, Aba the protege of Antony, had lost.
The core of the system was the Galatian kingdom, for its size, and because the main route from Asia to Syria passed through it. Not far to the south of that route was the untamed mountain area of Pisidia, which disjoined the plateau from Pamphylia. Amyntas lost his life carrying out the duties of his position. The Homanadenses of Pisidia captured and killed him, and by the end of 25 в.с. Augustus had created a third province in the peninsula, Galatia, of which only a part was inhabited by the Gallic tribes of the Tectosages and Tolistobogii (west of the Halys) and Trocmi (east of the river). The unwieldy kingdom was incorporated wholesale, with the exception of central Tracheia. Galatia like all newly acquired provinces was under the charge of Augustus, who sent a legate to deal with his new responsibility. M. Lollius had not yet held the consulship, but some later governors under Augustus were to be of consular rank and until a.d. 6 the province probably had a garrison of one legion (VII Macedonica) or even two.[779]
The particularly dangerous area of Pisidia was put under guard in 25 B.C. by the foundation of six veteran colonies, the chief being Pisidian Antioch. In 6 B.C. a road was constructed, the Via Sebaste, to link them, and probably within the next two or three years (rather than beforehand) the forty-four
When in 6 в.с. Deiotarus Philadelphus or his heir died, not only eastern Paphlagonia but Phazemonitis was joined to it. With the accession three years later of the region south of Phazemonitis and east of Galatia (including the city of Sebastopolis) another district hitherto under a dynast came into the province, making it the same size as Asia and twice that of Bithynia. The following year Amasia too passed from dynastic control into the province of Pontus, but eastern Pontus remained under the widow of Polemon I.
These were acute administrative decisions, taken some in the first months after the victory at Actium, others in response to sudden crises, others again after mature reflection. As the responsibility of one man and his advisers they may be considered as part of a policy, that of the gradual advance of direct Roman rule, when that was safe and profitable. But these decisions did not themselves solve the political, social and economic problems that Octavian inherited from the period of the revolution. Overall it is true to say that Roman rule was not popular in the Greek-speaking provinces and many communities (Athens is a single but the most distinguished example) had three times committed themselves to the losing side in civil war. Economic problems stemmed in part from these wars and, in Greece especially, from the Actium campaign — Plutarch's great-grandfather used to tell how the entire male citizen population of Chaeronea was carrying grain down to the sea under the whips of Antony's agents when the news of the battle arrived and 'saved the city'[781] — but also from longer term causes. If they could be relieved, political problems might also diminish, but there was an irreducible dissonance between the realistic, power-orientated Roman view of the empire and the idea of Greek
Greece and Asia Minor were to continue to receive personal attention from the
Whether close at hand or in Rome or the western provinces, Augustus and his successors were accessible to embassies (for the cities in their own estimation were conducting diplomacy) bearing letters and oral requests, as they were also to private individuals. Strabo tells how in 29 B.C. the tiny fishing community of Gyarus went to make representations to their new ruler about its tax burdens.21 Before he had been established as
Besides pleas for help and tax remission, questions of status and privilege were frequently the subject of embassies, as they had been (and were to remain) of concern to Aphrodisias: freedom, immunity, grant of a treaty, asylum rights; even, when communities of humbler status were involved, the right to become a
Greece in particular needed help. It had not suffered as parts of Asia Minor had done, but its natural resources were more meagre and the wealth that comes from empire had eluded Athens and Sparta three centuries previously. The prospect before it was one of economic compeddon with regions such as Italy and Spain which were better able to produce the same crops and manufactures. Strabo on Arcadia, Messenia and Laconia repeats a story of depopuladon already told in general terms by earlier writers; he says that except for Tanagra and
Strab. x.j.i (485c).
Suet.
Thespiae the cities of Boeotia (which had suffered heavily from Sulla and where the flooding of Lake Copais had played its part: a warning not to expect uniform conditions even over a single province) had become litde more than villages or (in the case of Oropus and two other cities) fallen into ruin. Arcadia, Aetolia and Acarnania are given over to ranching like Thessaly, and the copper-mines of Euboea had given out like the silver of Laurion. Looking back a century and a half later Pausanias wrote that the fortunes of Greece reached their nadir between the fall of Corinth and the reign of Nero.23
It is not surprising, then, that Roman intervention bordered on the invasive. A special effort had been made at Caesar's instance to restore Corinth by colonizing what remained of the city destroyed in 146 b.c. with civilian settlers from Rome under the name Laus lulia Corinthien- sium. The colonists, including freedmen as they did, were not well thought of, but by 7-3 B.C. Corinth was once more in charge of the biennial Isthmian games, as well as celebrating quadrennial Caesareia; and the colonists were to become thoroughly assimilated.24 Another colony was founded on the Gulf at Dyme at about the same time, reinforcing Pompey's settlement of ex-pirates there. But nearly three decades later a new colony at Patrae acquired territory across the water and incorporated villages close to it, so that Dyme was completely eclipsed. Patrae was to be the centre of the manufacture and export of flax.25
But Augustus' personal creation in Greece was an entirely new city, Nicopolis, which he established near the site of the battle of Actium through a synoecism of surrounding peoples: Ambracia, Amphilochian Argos and Alyzia became dependencies. It was an artificial entity in an undeveloped area, and must have uprooted some of the country populadon, but the festival it celebrated brought visitors to its two harbours, business and revenue; it began to grow rapidly, a precocious harbinger of the Greco—Roman culture of the second century.26
New and redeveloped cities could not usurp Athens' artisdc and intellectual primacy. That depended on her past, as current archaism in art, architecture and epigraphy showed. A mecca for students, tourists and devotees of religion, she also exported works of art and derived a
25 Strab. viii.7.5-8.5 (388c); ix.2.16-18 (406c); x.i.8-10 (447c); cf. Polyb. xxxv1.17.5- Wallace 1979 (e 886) 173-8, confirms; Dr S. Alcock draws attention to Bintliff and Snodgrass 1985 (e 816); see also Baladie 1980 (e 812) 51 jf. But Dr Alcock rightly warns against taking what may be a literary
Strab. viii.6.20 (578c); (381c); hellenization: [Dio Chrys.] xxxvii. 26.
Strab. viii.7.5 (387c).
24 Strab. vii.7.6-7 (325c); N. Purcell, 'The Nicopolitan synoecism and Roman urban policy',
notorious income, the more valuable now that her silver-mines were exhausted, from selling her citizenship: 'Ten sacks of charcoal imported and you too will be a citizen; if you bring a pig as well you're Triptolemus himself', wrote Automedon.27
Connexions with Athens, as well as with other Greek cities, were sought after by rulers within the Roman sphere of influence and by literary men. Antony had shown respect for Athens in spite of her support for Pompey and the Liberators. He and Octavia had been hailed as Theoi Euergetae and the aristocrats he had put in power in 38 B.C. were grateful for that and for his return of Aegina and other islands, with the revenue they brought.
Augustus' treatment of Athens was paternalistic. He showed his displeasure with her by residing at Aegina for part of a winter (22-21) and by freeing that island, and Eretria, from paying tribute to Athens. He also forbade the citizenship sales. The Athenians made up for the loss of revenue by granting foreigners the right to have statues erected in the city, but the statues were not always freshly carved for the individual honorand. For exceptional benefactions there were choicer honours: C. Iulius Nicanor of Hierapolis in Syria, a poet who restored the island of Salamis to Athens at his own expense, earned the titles of New Homer and New Themistocles. Embarrassing or invidious, they were later expunged.28
In spite of periods of estrangement, Athens benefited from Augustus' generosity.
Augustus was not insensitive to Athenian susceptibilities. He was
Dio liv.7.if, with G.W. Bowersock,
Dio Chrys. xxxi.i.6;
30 Shear 1981 (e 873) 361; Thompson 1987 (f 593) 4-9, for imperial political interpretation of the reconstruction of Ares, see Bowersock 1984 (c 40) 173.
initiated at Eleusis in 31 and about four years later the city is found beginning to issue a coinage that does not bear his head on the obverses. This 'autonomous' coinage continued until the reign of Gallienus; the privilege was enjoyed also by Corcyra, Delphi, Sparta and Corinth. In return Athens did not stint honours to Augustus and his family. A round Ionic temple on the Acropolis which may have been influenced by the temple of Vesta at Rome, though its order is modelled on the Classical Erechtheum, belongs to the decade immediately following his accession to sole power; Augustus is Theos on a dedication made at Delphi, a decree of the Council of Six Hundred resolved in 27—26 to celebrate his birthday (a day already associated with the restoration of freedom), and the ephebes held a festival called the Augustan Contest. The moving of the temple of Ares may be connected with the imperial cult, for in a.d. 2 Gaius Caesar, then in the East, was honoured under that патё.[784]
Eucles was a member of the oligarchy that emerged in Augustan Athens. He succeeded his father as supervisor of the construction of the Roman market, held the positions of
Discontent remained in Greece. In a.d. 6, according to Cassius Dio, it was prevalent in cities throughout the Roman world. At a date unknown, (Cassius) Petreius, son of a loyal Caesarian, was burned alive in Thessaly, and the district lost its freedom.[785] In the Peloponnese even Eurycles had to be exiled in about 2 B.C.: he certainly involved himself in eastern Mediterranean politics, visiting both Archelaus of Cappadocia and Herod of Judaea, perhaps also in imperial court intrigue, and it was claimed that he had disturbed the cities of Achaea.[786] At Athens the swivelling round of Athena's statue to face west and her spitting blood, which heralded a visit from Augustus (probably that of 21), were no good signs, and unrest is attested in a.d. 13, presumably on the part of the less well-off members of society; it was fatal to its leaders. Athens did not enjoy good repute under the Empire. When the whole province joined Macedonia two years later in complaining, not only about taxes, but about the cost of maintaining the proconsuls in their state, it must have been the upper classes who took the lead. The two episodes, which ended in the transfer of Achaea and Macedonia to the jurisdiction of the governor of Moesia, were connected, though it was probably not the unrest that induced Senate and emperor to make the transfer.[787] Economic problems affecting all classes were probably only midgated with the establishment of peace in 30 B.C. They may be illustrated from an inscription of a.d. 1—2, which shows Lycosura in Arcadia unable to attract competitors for its games in an Olympic year, and in debt to the provincial fiscus because of crop failure.[788]
As Roman armies advanced north and east in the Balkans, necessitating the creation of a new province, Moesia, Greece fell further behind the market constituted by legions and auxiliaries and became ever more a backwater. One of her most important exports, marble, which came from Euboea, Attica, Laconia and Paros, was in any case in the hands of the state; imperial marks begin in a.d. 17. Athens became more prosperous under Augustus, but her ceramics were giving way even at home to Arretine ware and her cheap lamps could hold only the domestic market.
That the provinces were able to appeal in concert shows that the leagues of the classical and hellenisdc periods, created to deal with problems and powers too great for individual cities, still had a role to play in the absence of a provincial
But it was the province-wide organization of western Asia Minor that scored the first and paradigm diplomatic success of the new age by establishing a firm relationship with the ruler when he was in the area in 29 в.с.38 Octavian on Samos received delegations from both Asia and Bithynia, the first representing an organization of long standing, the peoples and tribes in Asia and those individuals judged friends of the Roman People, or in short the
Octavian accepted the temples offered by these embassies on condition that Rome too received cult. Roman citizens in the provinces were to devote themselves to Rome and the Deified Iulius at Ephesus and Nicaea; the more modern Pergamum and Nicomedia were chosen for Octavian's temples. Partial acceptance of the honours showed the cities of Asia Minor that Octavian was well disposed, though not theirs outright. Prominent individuals benefited from the cult through the opportunities for self-advertisement that management offered them, and the city populations of Pergamum and Nicomedia and other large cities through the festivals laid on and the crowds that they attracted. Similar provincial
Homage to proconsuls of Asia did not long continue: the last known to have received it was C. Marcius Censorinus who died in office in a.d. 2. They were not even accorded the honorific titles of Saviour and Founder, which likewise became a prerogative of the
For his part Octavian's first concern in the years after his victory must have been the restoration of prosperity, and so taxability. Recovery was promoted by the resumption at Ephesus and Pergamum between 28 and 18 of the issuing of coins, the
51 Horn. 11.11.649. 38 Dio li.20.6-8. « Reynolds 1982 (в 270) 5; EJ2 )oo.
again until Hadrian's time. Octavian was also attentive to the plaints of cities which he knew to have suffered as a result of the Parthian invasion, and his ready aid after the earthquake of 27 was again available to Cyprus when it was striken in 15 B.C., after which Paphos took the
Imperial attentions were more easily secured if a community possessed such an advocate at court as Tralles did when it sought help after the earthquake of 27;[791] Chaeremon may have been brother-in-law to Polemon I and he was certainly a member of a notable pro-Roman, although also previously pro-Pompeian and pro-Antonian, family. The practice, valuable to both sides, of granting favoured individuals and families privileged access to the ruling authority, was to continue. More generally, it was to ancestral connexions that Ilium owed the rebuilding of its temple to Athena.44 Not surprisingly cities made every effort to bring themselves to the
Homage from individual cities also went along with the benefactions, acknowledging or encouraging them. Some cities combined it with reconstruction: Ephesus had its upper square modified to incorporate imperial temples and a
Although the cult was the creation of organized communities, notably of
Tlos called Augustus Benefactor and Saviour (or Founder) of the whole universe.48 Indeed, the foundation of a festival in the
In Asia Minor as in Greece Augustus encouraged the development of city life, more by way of innovation here than in restoration; even in the province of Asia it was lacking in remoter, inland districts. The synoecism of Sebaste in Phrygia, attested in a verse inscription, may be paralleled at Caesarea Trocetta in Lydia.50 This is not to be compared with Nicopolis. The
Augustan intervention in Asia and Bithynia by official settlement and colonization was not conspicuous; the colony of Alexandria Troas was exceptional. But there were independent immigrants. After the Sullan setdement the numbers grew again, and in Cicero's province of Cilicia a generation later they were already numerous enough to be subject to a levy. There was also substantial immigration into mainland Greece, notably in the Peloponnese where they acquired landed property on a large scale and formed a persistent element in their communities. Romans formed a relatively wealthy stratum in the cities in which they settled, but they do not seem to have held aloof from their neighbours: Roman citizens collaborated with natives in the restoration of Messene; L. Vaccius Labeo of Cyme, who endowed the gymnasium under Augustus,52 is only one of many such Roman benefactors. Intermarriage between Romans and local aristocrats was soon to produce candidates
52 Immigration: Wilson 1966 (a 106) 127-51; effect on Strabo: Baladie 1980 (e 812) 195; Messene:
Map 16. Asia Minor.
for the Senate and at a humbler level the elaborate and idiosyncratic funerary monuments of such a town as Aezani were to house the descendants of Italian immigrants alongside the bearers of Greek, Macedonian and Phrygian names.[792] When the death of Roman citizens at Cyzicus led to loss of freedom the victims were not necessarily immigrants: they could equally have been enfranchised natives.
Business and immigrant landowners, part of whose extensive properties were destined eventually to go to the substantial imperial holdings, are to be found further east in the peninsula, but there Augustus pursued a more active policy of urbanization, notably in the Galatian province and especially round the area in which Amyntas met his death and on important routes. Besides the six veteran colonies founded in 25 B.C., numismatic evidence reveals other colonies in the Galatian province founded as early as Augustus' reign: Germe in Galatia proper, Iconium on the border of Phrygia and Lycaonia, Ninica in Cilicia Tracheia, on the route south from Iconium via Lystra and Laranda over the Taurus to Seleucia on Calycadnus; at Ninica and Iconium the colonies seem to have been part of double communities of which the native components were to find advancement as Claudiconium and Claudiopolis.[793] Further, unofficial colonists thought to have been settled by Augustus on
iv. consolidation under the julio-claudians
The stable conditions created by Augustus required his successors to be maintenance engineers in the provinces, adjusting his scheme rather than making radical alterations, and his immediate successor Tiberius firmly professed close adherence to Augustan precedent. But the accession of a new emperor, even one well known in the East as Tiberius was (he enjoyed divine honours at Nysa by 1 B.C.) and for ten years the designated heir, a period in which he was being courted even by relatively unimportant cities such as Aezani, inevitably caused a stir. The new man could have new friends and favourites; relationships have to be developed or entered into. So in the Peloponnese, where the Claudii had hereditary influence, the League of Free Laconians in 15 passed a sacred law establishing ceremonies in honour of Augustus, Tiberius, Livia, Germanicus and Drusus, as well as for T. Quinctius Flamininus and the two local dynasts Eurycles, now posthumously rehabilitated, and his son Laco, who may have been particular partisans of Tiberius; Laco continued in favour for another nineteen years. At Paphos on Cyprus the people were quick to take an oath of loyalty to Tiberius and his blood line. From the beginning of the next reign there survives another oath taken at Assos in the Troad, in which play is made with Gaius' childhood visit to the city nearly twenty years previously. At Cyzicus Gaius accepted the local magistracy, the hipparchy, and was designated the 'New Sun'. These were prudent measures: Gaius had his own ideas about his position in the empire, different again from Tiberius'.[797]
Ironically, in view of his publicly proclaimed adherence to the Augustan blueprint, it was Tiberius who in the earliest years of his reign made significant changes in two of the regions with which we are concerned. The answer that Tiberius and the Senate returned to the request from Macedonia and Achaea for transfer to imperial rule was favourable but unflattering. Instead, economy was served: the two provinces were to have no governor of their own, but were attached to the province of Moesia. (Already in a.d. 6, when the proconsul died in office, his province had been divided between his quaestor and his legate.)[798] But the change brought into the open the fact that Macedonia and Achaea were backwaters removed from the scene of action nearer the Danube.
The unification was followed by the amalgamation of the two main leagues. The enlarged
The new arrangements lasted until 44, when Claudius returned Achaea to the jurisdiction of ex-praetors selected by lot.62 So it remained until Nero, claiming to be the only emperor who was a philhellene, conferred freedom on Greece on 28 November, probably 67 rather than 66, during his performing tour of the province.63 It was a reiteration (not the first) of Flamininus' declaration of a quarter of a millennium previously, but the Greeks appreciated the gesture of recognition and the abolition of taxes that went with it. Even in Plutarch's view, that of an upper-class intellectual in full sympathy with senatorial opinion, freeing those who were 'noblest and dearest to the gods' earned Nero reincarnation as a singing frog rather than as a viper.64
Nero's cultural philhellenism was genuine and strong. It too was appreciated. The tour he made (the four great festivals, Pythian, Olympic, Isthmian and Nemean, were rescheduled so that he might compete in all) was the first personal visit from a member of the imperial family since that of Germanicus and Agrippina, when Germanicus had a commission similar to those previously held by Agrippa, abortively by Tiberius, and by Gaius Caesar. The respect that Germanicus showed at Athens in 18, when he visited it after Nicopolis, was set off by the brutal assertion of Roman supremacy by his coadjutor Cn. Piso.65 Tiberius himself was a cultured philhellene and Athens' benefactor before his adoption, although Livia apparendy attracted more attention than the emperor. Surprisingly enough Claudius won more dedications than Nero, more than any emperor between Augustus and Hadrian. A whole
62 Suet.
65 Tac.
series honours him as Saviour and Benefactor: probably he paid for stairs leading to the Propylaea, not only adorning the Acropolis but providing work for quarrymen and craftsmen.66 Nero contributed a new
The reign of Tiberius, like the last decade of Augustus' Principate, had to be one of retrenchment in Italy and perhaps elsewhere. Areas self- sufficient and exporting would suffer less. Asia and Bithynia came into that category, as building activity during the reign suggests; Crete too. Parts of Achaea already in decline did not: at the end of the reign, Boeotia claimed not to be able to afford an envoy to congratulate Gaius on his accession.68 Some insight into the collection of taxes - and into the difficulties that some cities encountered in meeting their obligations - is given by inscriptions from Messene and Lycosura.69 And Achaea's capital, artistic and financial, was diminished when Nero's agents began to scour the provinces for works of art in a systematic effort quite different from the haphazard acquisitiveness of Verres or Antony. The centres of Greece and Asia known to have suffered were Athens, Delphi, Olympia, Thespiae and Pergamum. At Athens the imperial agent C. Carrinas Secundus was made eponymous
A recurrent, even chronic problem was shortage of grain, which had to be countered at any cost. Even in Asia Minor, where grain was a staple product, a severe winter could cause difficulties, especially in cities distant from the sea, where importing supplies would be particularly expensive. Aspendus in Pamphylia is not far from the sea, but vetch is said to have been on sale in place of grain there on one occasion under Tiberius. One of the titles accumulated by Agrippina on her travels with Germanicus was that of Divine Harvest-bringer, Aeolis, at Mytilene, like her daughter and namesake who took a place in the imperial pantheon on Cos as Demeter Harvest-bringer and was shown on city coinages with corn ears and poppies — similarly too on a panel from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias. The divinities would hardly allow their votaries to go hungry.71
Aspendus: Philostr.
Greece was more accessible by sea than the interior of Anatolia, but there were still questions of procurement and distribution, and of the cost of the operations. Athens had been importing corn since the time of Pisistratus; there was no imperial revenue to pay for it under the Principate. A special treasury for the reception of grain was created there in the reign of Augustus, significantly perhaps under the supervision of no less an official than a hoplite general. Under Claudius the
The other natural calamity to which both Greece and Asia Minor are subject is earthquakes. The Roman government did its best to help wherever they struck. One night in a.d. 17 twelve distinguished communities of the Hermus basin in Asia fell victim. Sardes suffered worst and was granted five years' remission of all taxes as well as a gift of 10 million sesterces from the emperor; Magnesia by Sipylus was held to have suffered next worst and was compensated accordingly, while the rest were relieved of tribute for five years and a commissioner was sent to inspect the damage and help restore it. Six years later it was Aegium, centre of the Achaean League, and Cibyra, an assize centre of Asia, that were devastated and granted three years' remission of tribute on the initiative of the emperor.[800]
This generosity, and his pitiless atdtude towards officials who enriched themselves at the expense of provincials - a proceeding that the people of Asia must have come to regard as almost as inevitable as natural calamities — won Tiberius popularity; on both fronts he was following the example of Augustus. The coming of the Principate did not destroy the hereditary connexions that families such as the Messallae, Galbae and Pisones had with the East and their natural claim to serve there, any more than it eliminated the expectations of some senators that they could reimburse themselves for the cost of attaining office in the course of their pro-magistracies and even make a profit. The wealth of Asia was a particular temptation, especially when the fortunes of Italian senators were in decline. Fierce competition for the province is attested in the twenties and thirties, made fiercer by Tiberius' proneness to prolonging even strictly annual terms of office: P. Petronius held Asia for about six years, c. 29—35; a C. Galba, excluded in 36, killed himself.[801]Envoys even from Achaea had complained about their governors even under Augustus, but the series of known prosecutions for misconduct in Asia begins with a particularly outrageous case, that of Valerius Messalla Volesus, who during his proconsulship of about 1011 had not only enriched himself but done so with open brutality, stalking amongst the corpses of 300 men he had executed and preening himself on a right royal deed. The case of Granius Marcellus, the proconsul of Bithynia prosecuted in a.d. 15, was unsensational, but Tiberius' handing over of his procurator in Asia, Lucilius Capito, for trial in the Senate in 2 3 made history and, like the relentless handling of C. Silanus on the precedent of Volesus the year before, won the emperor high opinions in Asia.[802]
These were the first attested prosecutions conducted at the instance of the
The
Political considerations were also important in the trials of senators charged with misconduct. Only the most strenuous efforts secured the conviction of Nero's man Cossutianus Capito in 5 7 for misconduct in Cilicia; the valuable prosecutor Eprius Marcellus, charged with
When Germanicus travelled the coasts of Greece and Asia Minor in 18, he worked to restore places exhausted by internal disputes and mismanagement on the part of their own magistrates.[809] Having paid to secure the positions they held, members of the ruling class in the cities sought to recoup their expenditure. This was a failing that Aristotle remarked in timocracies such as the Romans favoured, and the venality of Greeks was already commonplace for Polybius and Cicero.84 A Claudian proconsul of Asia, Paullus Fabius Persicus, issued a long and elaborate edict curtailing (he hoped) inefficiency, waste and dishonesty in the administration of the temple funds established by Vedius Pollio for the cult of Artemis at Ephesus.85 One trick was to lend young slaves to the temple, where their upkeep would be paid; another to anticipate temple revenue and speculate with it.
Paullus was a friend of Claudius and knew what was expected of a governor. Others became involved with local malefactors, giving them protecdon and an opportunity for blackmail. Those who did not cooperate could be threatened with the prospect of being passed over when it came to votes of thanks for their administration. Augustus had already in a.d. 12 forbidden such votes to be passed within six months of a governor's departure (perhaps in the wake of the Volesus Messalla case). The abuse came to light most blatantly in Neronian Crete, where the leader of the
In Crete it seems that the
As to the success of the provinces of western Asia Minor as a whole, the Romans can have felt no misgivings. They continued to encourage
" Tac.
" See Sanders 1982 (e 871) 132; encroachment:
communities who aspired to
But it was in eastern Asia Minor, in the third of the regions with which we are concerned, that Tiberius made his most important changes in the Augustan political map. Germanicus' mission to the East in 17-19 had two main positive purposes: to deal with the Parthians and to establish a new Roman client on the throne of Armenia Maior. But the visit came at a time of change for long-standing client states: the deaths of Antiochus III of Commagene, of Philopator in the kingdom of the Amanus, and, at Rome where the
Tiberius made a clean sweep of the client kingdoms. The 8 5,000km2 of Cappadocia, with its eleven eastern-style 'satrapies'
But Gaius' donations went against the trend. In 43 direct Roman rule spread to the south-west corner of Asia Minor when mountainous Lycia, with its thirty-six cities — the earlier number considerably advanced since the assessment of Strabo - was annexed, Rhodes also losing its freedom in the following year. Claudius' pretext was disorder in the cities and the killing of Roman citizens, but he allowed an appeal from Rhodes, backed by the young Nero, in 5 3,93 As far as Lycia's external independence went the change was a nominal one; cult had been offered since 188 B.C. to Roma Thea Epiphanes and to powerful Romans such as Agrippa; Tiberius' cult survived until the third century alongside the federal cult of the Augusti.94 But the federated cities now had to pay tribute and the first praetorian legate, Q. Veranius, doing for Claudius what his father had done for Germanicus in Cappadocia, seems to have met resistance.95 To loyal subjects Veranius was able to offer the reward of citizenship, and the new province settled down with Pamphylia, the district joined to it under the new arrangement, its upper class crystallizing into a nobility of Lyciarchs and (at least from Vespasian onwards) high priests, who often served as secretaries of the League, with
Dio Lix.8.2; lx.8.i (Antiochus). Braund (c 254) 42, on lx.8.2 (Polemo); Suet.
Dio Lx.17.}; 24.4; Tac.
Rome:
96 Suet.
It was under Nero that the main structural change in eastern Asia Minor came. Made in 5 4 for military purposes, it provided Cn. Domidus Corbulo with freedom of action against the Parthians and a wider recruiting ground amongst the warlike Gauls, and it became the model for Vespasian's permanent scheme. Cappadocia and Galada were united under the consular legate Corbulo, and his routine work in remoter areas was performed by a separate legate.97 The strategic importance of eastern Asia Minor was being realized; if its wealth was also increasing, that was a process that would be speeded up under the Flavians.
The client monarchs prepared for their own supersession by following the tradition of their kind and founding cities. M. Antonius Polemon of Olba may be the founder of Claudiopolis on the Calycadnus; Antiochus IV founded Germanicopolis, Andochia ad Cragum, Iotape and Neronias, later the city on the main road to Caesarea from the west that Archelaus made from the typical 'village-town' or 'fortlet' Gar- saoura, administrative centre of the
v. conclusion: first fruits
The century between Octavian's accession to sole power and the death of Nero was one of almost unbroken peace in the areas under discussion, a condition ideal for political and economic development for regions capable of it. Western Asia Minor was in the van, in part because of its proximity to the new Danubian provinces of Moesia and Pannonia, in part as encasing the routes that led from Ephesus and Byzantium through the Cilician Gates into Syria or by more northerly branches to the Euphrates crossing at Tomisa. From this last factor, proximity to main lines of communication, central and eastern Asia Minor also benefited, especially communides that lay on the highways, such as Ancyra, Iconium and Caesarea Mazaca.
From the Roman point of view increased prosperity meant an increase in the amount of tax that the regions would yield and, almost equally
" Asia:
important, their contribution to manpower at all levels. It is significant that in spite of the obstacles in the way of easterners (language difficulties, prejudice against new men) a beginning was made during this century in recruiting men to the imperial service which culminates, in the Neronian period, in the admission of a considerable number of easterners into the Senate.
Grants of citizenship were the prerequisite, and the rate of progress varied from city to city and province to province. From actual or, at a pinch, potential citizens, legionaries might be recruited, but even non- citizen areas could contribute soldiers to the auxiliary forces. For these the places of origin are significant: no units bear names that show them originally levied in Achaea, Bithynia, or Asia. Levying a troop of horse or auxiliary infantry from freshly provincialized territory would be removing potentially dangerous manpower from its home area, and some units at least (notably
Achaea equally fails to turn up any legionaries in this period, an indication of impoverishment: recruiting officers perhaps did not think it worth visidng. Asia and Bithynia have seven to show, eastern Asia Minor eight times as many (with the three Gallic capitals contribudng over half), and Roman colonies such as Troas, Antioch towards Pisidia, and Ninica seven. Potential fighting quality and a stake in the land were desiderata fulfilled above all by men from military colonies and apparently by the Gauls.[811]
At a higher social level the picture changes. Equestrian procurators had to satisfy a census requirement (400,000 sesterces) and high qualities of character were expected.101 These were conditions not different in kind from those applied to legionaries, but for equestrian posts patronage and recommendation played a vital part and men from out of the way places did not stand a good chance. Pompeius Macer of Mytilene, procurator of Asia and librarian at Rome already in the time of Augustus, came of a family that had been close to the Roman dynasts since the middle of the first century в.с. С. Iulius Spartiaticus, son of the disgraced Laco and grandson of Eurycles, became a procurator of Claudius and Agrippina; not surprisingly he claims to be 'first of the
Achaeans'. From Asia too came the later Julio-Claudian prefects of Egypt Cn. Vergilius Capito and Ti. Claudius Balbillus, and C. Stertinius Xenophon, military tribune and
The same criteria apply to senators as to knights, only the financial requirements and the barriers of prejudice were higher and more effective.[813] Q. Pompeius Macer, son of the procurator, is not surprisingly the first known; he rose to the praetorship in a.d. 15. But Italian descent (from veteran or civilian settler) is important, and that is why M. Calpurnius Rufus of Attalia, whose mother held the priesthood of Livia and Rome, is the next known entering under Tiberius and serving as legate in Lycia-Pamphylia, his province of origin. T. Iunius Montanus, who reached the suffect consulship in 81, the first easterner to rise so high, represents the military colony proper, that of Alexandria Troas. Rufus would soon be followed by M. Plancius Varus from neighbouring Perge, a Neronian entrant. L. Servenius Cornutus belongs to Acmonia, but has a comparable ancestry in the Italians there, although his mother was descended from client dynasts, making her a representative of a group that was to come into great prominence in the Flavian period. Cornutus was quaestor in Cyprus under Nero and early in Vespasian's reign also served in his own province as legate to the proconsul. Another man who must have entered the Senate under Nero is the unknown citizen of Miletus who boasted of being the first senator from his city and the fifth from Asia.[814] These men are harbingers of a swarm, versed as they were in the administration of cities and eager for metropolitan political life,105 familiar with Greek language and ways, and loyal subjects of Rome and the
P]ut. Df tranq. anim. 10 (Мог. 470c).
Plut.
CHAPTER
ALAN K. BOWMAN
I. THE ROMAN CONQUEST
'Aegyptum imperio populi Romani adieci.'2 Augustus' stark factual statement, published almost half a century after the event it records, spotlights the final act of the drama of Rome's absorption of the hellenistic kingdoms. In August of 30 B.C., some ten months after the Battle of Actium, Octavian had pursued Cleopatra and Mark Antony to Egypt; both had perished by their own hand in the city founded by Alexander the Great. The conqueror perhaps flirted with the notion of formally inaugurating his 'dominion' (
1 Recent general surveys of material relevant to the early Roman period may be found in Bowman 1976(8 367) and 1990 (e 901), Geraci 1983 (e 924) and Lewis 1983 (e 946) and Montevecchi 1988 (e 932). Still immensely valuable are Mitteis and Wilcken 1911—12 (в 379) and (especially for taxation) Wilcken 1899 (в 388). For a good selection of private and public documentary texts see the Loeb
The most frequently cited publications of papyri are included in the List of Abbreviations (p. 1006). Others will be found in E.G. Turner,
676
677
ROMAN CONQUEST
henceforth oriented towards the consuming nucleus of the empire, Rome itself.
The governmental system whose foundations were reshaped in the Augustan period was to last, in its essential features, for more than 300 years. During that period there were certainly important modifications of detail but it was not until the late third century that Egypt saw fundamental change. The effective division of the empire into East and West and the foundation of Constantinople were events which knitted Egypt more uniformly into the structure of the eastern empire and gave it again an important political role in what was in many ways a more natural context. Hence it is legitimate to suggest that a treatment of Egypt under Augustus and the Julio-Claudians might, with due attention to changes and developments between the accession of Vespasian and the death of Commodus, stand as valid for the 'high' imperial period. Its history in the difficult years of the third century can then form a suitable prelude to a discussion of the important changes under Diocletian and Constantine which shaped its role in the Byzantine Empire.
The transformation of a nominally independent kingdom into a Roman province may have been the act of a moment but Egypt had long been prepared for the coming of Rome. Her history in the dozen years before Actium shows a powerful and intelligent client monarch attempting to use the capacity of a Roman military dynast to aggrandize a friend and ally of the Senate and People of Rome. The story of the political struggle is told elsewhere.[815] As for the internal state of the country in the triumviral period, there are only scraps of evidence. The latest of the Ptolemaic royal decrees to have survived, issued in the names of Cleopatra and Caesarion in 42/41 B.C., offers protection to Alexandrians who owned land in the delta against depredations of Crown officials which will have been exacerbated by the need to purchase Roman goodwill.[816] The fabled wealth of the Ptolemies (Auletes' annual revenue was still 12,500 talents according to Cicero6) had been plundered to good purpose in recent years.
It is difficult to be sure that Cleopatra's reign as a whole was marked by declining prosperity. Some have postulated an upturn after the departure of Caesar and the recovery of Cyprus.7 In any event, Cleopatra found popularity with her Egyptian subjects. She spoke the Egyptian language, she personally attended the installation of the sacred Buchis bull at Hermonthis, she continued the tradition, albeit perhaps sparingly, of temple building and embellishment (construction is attested at
Map 17. Egypt.
Athribis, Coptos, Hermonthis and Tentyra).8 By 36/35 B.C. she had added a new element to the royal titulature, 'Philopatris'. Her Roman consort might receive a Greek vodve dedication and the appellation of 'god' (
Obviously, Cleopatra's contribution to Antony's war effort was of paramount importance; the Ptolemaic army and navy were still considerable; the latter, or what was left of it after Actium, went to provide the nucleus of the Alexandrian arm of the Roman imperial fleet. Signs of the Roman military presence are noticeable in 5 5 B.C. after the intrusion of the
Pollio).15 The first prefect was the poet Cornelius Gallus who had led Octavian's army into Egypt from the west in the war against Antony and Cleopatra. His first responsibility, to ensure internal security, was met by prompt reduction of rebellious towns in the region of Coptos in the Thebaid but he boasted, perhaps too vaingloriously, of that and of his feat in carrying Roman arms further south than they had hitherto gone.16 Within a couple of years he was removed from office, banned from entering the
For the first decade of Roman rule, we have more evidence for the preoccupation with military security than for the development of the civil administration. The history of Egypt in the decade after Actium well illustrates the major features of the Augustan frontier strategy. Cornelius Gallus' inauspicious foray to the south of the First Cataract was perhaps the first attempt to test the viability of further annexation of territory. In the Arabian expedition of his successor, Aelius Gallus, the security of the Indian trade routes will certainly have been an important consideration, but that need not have been the primary motivation for expansion. In effect, with the Nabataean kingdom to the east left independent until a.d. 106, the trading links maintained with India through the ports of the Red Sea coast and the developing road network of the eastern desert funcdoned perfectly satisfactorily.17 The expeditions of the next prefect, P. Petronius,18 to the south between 2 5 /4 and 22 в.с. brought a short-lived Roman occupation of the region beyond the Dodecaschoenus and a Roman garrison to Primis (Qasr Ibrim), a site which has yielded the earliest Latin literary manuscript, fragments of elegiacs, most probably by Cornelius Gallus.19 Augustus soon decided, however, to remit tribute, perhaps calculating that the cost of occupation was not justified, and within a few years the formal limit of the province had been set at Hierasykaminos, some 80km to the south of the First Cataract. But the impact of the Roman presence further south, in an area accessible to Rome and to Meroe, was still by no means negligible and served as a reminder of the latent interest and power of Rome. In the southernmost part of the province the most obvious signs of Roman dominion are the great temples, largely constructed in the Augustan period, at Dendur and at Kalabsha (Talmis) where there seem to be two disdnct temples of the Augustan period on a site which also shows signs of building in the late Ptolemaic period.20
Military sensitivity and the importance of the grain supply help to
15 Dio Lviii.19.6; Philo,
17 See below, pp. 732-6. 18 For the
" Anderson, Parsons and Nisbet 1979 (в 4).
20 Strab. xvii. 1.34(820-10); Porter and Moss 1951 (e958)vii 10-20, 27-33; de Meulenaere, CH 36 (1961) 98—105; for an exploratory expedition to East Africa in the Neronian period see Pliny,
explain the direct imperial appointment of the prefect and are perhaps sufficient to account for Tacitus' insistence that the
The office of prefect of Egypt was to develop, as might have been foreseen, into one of immense latent power, as Tiberius Iulius Alexander was to demonstrate in a.d. 69 with his support of Vespasian's bid for the imperial throne; Avidius Cassius, the son of a former prefect, was to claim the support of Egypt and its prefect in his unsuccessful attempt at usurpation in a.d. 17 5.[820] The authority of the prefecture was spelled out in a law, presumably enacted in or very soon after 30 B.C., which gave the incumbent's acts and decrees the same validity as those of any Roman magistrate.25 The list of prefects appointed by Augustus and the Julio- Claudian emperors shows some illustrious (and notorious) names: C. Turranius, Seius Strabo, father of Sejanus, Avillius Flaccus, Sutorius Macro. Prefects held office for three years, on average, and in the absence of any specialist Egyptian training relied on their general knowledge of the principles of military and civil administration and law, backed up by readily available local expertise, to cope with the diverse and intricate bureaucratic demands of the job.26 Promotion from Egypt to the praetorian prefecture is regularly attested in the period a.d. 70—235. Tiberius Iulius Alexander, nephew of Philo and member of a prominent Alexandrian Jewish family, is important as the earliest example of an official who held an equestrian post in Egypt (that of
Like any Roman provincial governor the prefect exercised control, subject only to the emperor's overriding power, over all aspects of the administration of his province. Innovatory regulations could be introduced either by the application of imperial pronouncements or
The functioning of the administration depended upon a complex bureaucratic structure which certainly owed a great deal to Ptolemaic precedents, although it should be firmly emphasized that the changes introduced by the Romans were at least as important as the continuities. In direct subordination to the prefect stood a variety of officials of equestrian rank: one in charge of the emperor's Special Account, the
For this view see Hanson 1982 (e 950).
Dio Lvn.10.5; Chalon 1964 (e 909) lines 3-10. и Thomas 1982 (e 975) и ch. 5.
specific and limited functions (relating most importantly to the liturgical system and the judicial administration); again, much of the evidence comes from the second century, by which time the office might have developed wider powers than it had earlier enjoyed. An important general feature of this innovation was that it constituted an injection of paid officials of high rank virtually all of whom, at least in the early years, will have been outsiders who might be expected to perform their duties with a greater degree of impartiality than natives. This is one feature which emphasizes the fundamental division between officials at this level and the native administrators occupying positions at the nome level or below.
It is difficult to provide a tidy description of the upper levels of the administrative structure by which the Roman government organized the affairs of Egypt, largely, no doubt, because the activities of officials at the procuratorial levels, even in the later period, were less apt to be compartmentalized than in modern government. Obviously the authority of the prefect was supreme within the province in all areas. The administrative activities of the head of the Special Account entailed judicial functions in matters affecting the account he administered; how independent his judicial role was depends on the strictness with which the matter of prefectural delegation is viewed. Equestrian military officers are found performing non-military functions — acting in judicial capacities and conducting admission (
A more detailed consideration of the administration of the emperor's Special Account, a Ptolemaic survival whose character was radically altered under Roman rule, provides a good example of the complexities and developments in the system. Under the Ptolemies this account had managed land which fell into Crown possession but under the Romans it seems to have supervised only ownerless property (
tation, manumission, the activities of priests, the rights of soldiers to own land and so on; its administrative functions are thus intimately bound up with legal powers. Whether it possessed the latter from the first or whether they are a gradual later accretion is difficult to see; but a fragment of the
Beneath this administrative superstructure, the traditional nome divisions, which numbered between forty and fifty in the Roman period, remained the basic territorial units for administrative purposes. In the second century natives drawn from the Greco-Egyptian populace were appointed to paid posts in these districts. They did not normally serve in their native nomes nor were they permitted to acquire unproductive or auctioned land in the nomes where they did serve. But in the first century there is evidence to suggest that they were recruited from Alexandrians with Roman citizenship and from the ranks of the magistrates in the nome-capitals (
Although there were also officials whose functions were exercised in regional divisions of the nome (toparchies), it is the officials of the towns and villages who form the keystone of administration at its most basic level. The role which the metropoleis developed as administrative centres for their nomes had always been inherent in the Ptolemaic system but the evidence suggests that it was much enhanced under the Romans. The villages in the nome tended to form their own hierarchical groupings but they were oriented towards the metropoleis as the main administrative centres of operations which directly served central government interests, principally record-keeping, taxation and the administration of justice. In this respect there is some analogy with the development of
Government supervision of these local authorities was particularly noticeable in the area of appointment to liturgical services, the nature and scale of which was to become so radically different from anything that had existed in the Ptolemaic period as to make it, in effect, another Roman innovation of the utmost importance. There is no doubt that the range and complexity of the liturgical system developed greatly in the course of the second century but its origins must certainly be put in the Julio-Claudian period.37 In due course distinctions became apparent between the various types of liturgies, all of which were dependent upon the property qualification
35 Despite Tac.
9°3)-
.11.37ff (a.d. 103—7); note the early evidence for an official called
more direct interest to the central government such as tax-collection or the dyke-corvee. In the absence of local councils it was natural that the nome officials, the
Only a handful of communities stood outside this system - the so- called 'Greek cities'; three had existed in the Ptolemaic period, Alexandria, Naucratis and Ptolemais and a fourth, Antinoopolis, was to be added in the reign of Hadrian. As far as internal administration was concerned these were distinguished by having a greater degree of autonomy and independence from government officials. They were the only communities which possessed councils (though Alexandria is a famous exception) and their magistracies and civic institutions (such as tribes, demes and some local courts and protected laws) were much closer to the traditional institutions of the Greek
In describing the details of the business handled by means of these bureaucratic structures, it is convenient to make a conventional division between the military, financial and judicial administration but it should be emphasized that there are in practice very few rigid lines of demarcation; the application of law and the administration of justice, in particular, pervades every area of bureaucratic activity in a way which modern notions of administration and jurisdiction tend to obfuscate.
The introduction of a standing army marked a sharp break from Ptolemaic practice. The monarchs had relied upon soldier-cleruchs (Greek immigrants at first, latterly native Egyptians as well), supple-
mented by the use of mercenaries.[822] In the reign of Augustus Egypt was garrisoned by a force of three Roman legions, nine auxiliary cohorts and three cavalry units (
The command structure in the Egyptian units differed from the norm only in one important respect. Since senatorial legionary legates were excluded, the legions were commanded by the prefect of the camp
After the first decade of Roman rule when attempts to expand the province were abandoned, the role of the army in ensuring external security was effectively confined to keeping an eye on the Dodecaschoe- nus and the borders with Meroe, not entirely a sinecure in this period (and even less so in the later empire); a papyrus of the later first century appears to describe an engagement between Roman troops and combined forces of Ethiopians and Trogodytes who inhabited areas of the Red Sea coast to the south of Berenice.42 Matters of internal security bulk larger in our evidence. Alexandria was always potentially volatile and trouble between Greeks and Jews in a.d. 66 necessitated action by the two legions and extra drafts of troops from Africa.43 The much more serious Jewish revolt of a.d. 115—17 was by no means confined to Alexandria - there was exceptionally fierce fighting in the
Such disturbances interrupted the routine duties of the army only infrequently. Of surpassing importance is the evidence for its centrality in the economic and social development of the province. Supervision of the exploitation of the mines and quarries of the eastern desert was particularly important, as was the construction and guarding of the roads which brought goods from the ports of the Red Sea coast to Coptos; a well-known inscription of the reign of Tiberius records the activities of a working party from the Egyptian legions, cohorts and
« Turner,
the price which the provincials paid for all this comes in the form of evidence for the burdens of billeting and requisidons which the military presence imposed on the civil population. Alleviation of these burdens was a preoccupation of Germanicus during his visit of a.d. 19 and an edict of the Claudian prefect Vergilius Capito inveighs against fraudulent requisitions and orders local officials to send accounts of such expenditures to an imperial freedman.48
Fundamental to an appraisal of the financial administration in Egypt is the nature of the monetary system and the organization of taxation. Whilst the Romans inherited from their Ptolemaic predecessors a province which was already extensively monetized and exploited through a wide variety of taxes and rents in cash and kind, fundamental changes were made under Augustus and the Julio-Claudians which determined the basic shape of the financial administration for the next three centuries.
For half a century after Actium the Alexandrian mint produced only bronze coinage, the notional value of the old tetradrachma being artificially supplemented to equate it to the new universal denarius standard. Minting of the silver tetradrachma was re-established by Tiberius in a.d. 19/20, though with a smaller percentage of silver than its Ptolemaic predecessor, and it remained the basic unit until a.d. 296 when the Alexandrian mint ceased to operate in isolation from the rest of the empire. The fixed equivalence of the tetradrachma to the denarius seems to have been established in the Julio-Claudian period, probably in the reign of Claudius, but the fact that it was more overvalued than the denarius had two important effects; first that the imperial government profited directly from this overvaluation and second that the Egyptian currency became 'closed',
« EJ2 320; H. Evelyn White, J.H. Oliver,
690
14Ь. EGYPT
phenomena in detail nor can we reconstruct the processes whereby the credits earned from overseas trade were internalized and contributed to payments of tribute made to Rome. There is some later evidence which implies that such operations were managed by Alexandrian financiers working under government contract.[825]
The extraordinary amount of evidence which the papyri provide for the details of the taxation system, in particular, means that Egypt is by far the best known of all provinces in this respect, even though there are many important features about which we are uninformed. The tribute which the Roman government drew from Egypt was extracted in the form of land-tax (
The great variety of taxes attested in the papyri can only be indicated in a summary form. Much of the revenue from the land was raised in grain, levied as tax on private property and as rent on imperially owned and public land; vineyards and garden-land were subject to cash assessments. A straight poll-tax was the basic personal imposition, imposed at different rates according to status and even varying fromplace to place and exempting Roman citizens, Alexandrians and women altogether. There were numerous small imposidons (
These general characteristics of the taxation system apply to the province as a whole but there is great variation in detail from place to place. Local and temporal variations in rates and methods of collection are bewildering but clearly attested. This makes it impossible to assess how great the burden of taxation was for individuals beyond the simple observation that the basic rates of tax on privately owned land during the Principate seem to have been quite low (little more than perhaps 10 per cent of yield). Assessments could, of course, be varied from year to year to take account of the level of the flood and consequent fertility or peculiar local conditions. Difficulties in collection are often apparent. During the reigns of Claudius and Nero substantial numbers of taxpayers from Philadelphia in the Fayum fled from their obligations. The edict of Tiberius Iulius Alexander of a.d. 68 presents a vivid picture of widespread abuses in the tax-system; impressment of people into tax- collection, the imposition of new and unauthorized levies and so on. Some have seen the edict as an attempt to cope with a general economic crisis in Egypt in the Neronian period but the evidence for universal difficulties is very slender. Abuses and complaints of the kind described in Alexander's edict are by no means confined to this era. The difficulties in tax-collection attested at Philadelphia are likely to be chronic and the situation was perhaps exacerbated during the forties by low fertility as a result of a run of unusual levels of inundation.[826]
The judicial competence of the prefect within the province was supreme, subject to the possibility of appeal to the emperor. The exercise of personal jurisdiction by the prefect was carried out by the introduction of an assize-circuit (
The exercise of 'judicial' functions by officials lower down the hierarchy is commonly described by modern scholars in terms of 'delegation' by the prefect. Thus, particular matters might be dealt with by a procurator, an
There remains the difficult issue of the precise status of this heterogeneous mass of institutions
III. ECONOMY AND SOCIETY
An attempt at a brief description of Egyptian economic and social institutions and practices under the early Roman Empire has to proceed from a somewhat conjectural base. The population of the province may have reached 7.5 million by the Flavian period, with Alexandria accounting for perhaps another half a million, though it has recently
и For differing views see Brunt 1975 (e 906) 132—6 and Modrzejewski 1970 (e 951) esp. 331-4- been argued that this esdmate is far too high.[831] The ability of the agricultural base to feed this population can only be reckoned by approximation. Thus,
Management of the agricultural base was the foundation of this wealth. A very significant feature of the Roman period is the great increase in private ownership of land, perhaps as much as 50 per cent in some areas, though proportions clearly varied greatly.[834] Private land, directly managed or farmed through lease and tenancy, stood cheek by jowl with public land, rented to public tenants
Productivity depended on the annual inundation and management of the irrigation system was therefore crucial. Private owners shouldered the responsibility for this on their own land, whilst the public dykes and canals were maintained by the introduction of the regular dyke-corvee as a compulsory service for the peasantry. As well as the staple cereals, a great variety of fodder crops, legumes, vines, olives and other garden produce was grown. Much labour came in the form of tenants and their families but there is substantial evidence for wage-labour, some of which was surely provided by these same tenants; only a small proportion of the required labour was supplied by the limited number of slaves employed on the land.[837] This suggests a picture which is rather different from the traditional notion of a peasant society supporting itself by subsistence farming and the evidence of the papyri makes it clear that even modest landholders, who might produce little or no overall surplus in a year would have to trade off surpluses in some crops or commodides to make good deficits in others. Exchange of goods and agricultural produce was thus universal and warns us against an oversimplified economic model which relegates trade and commerce to a purely 'secondary' role in comparison with 'primary' agricultural activity. Transportation and commercial services were essential to move goods from village to town, or village to village and the widespread use of coin, even in villages, suggests that barter was by no means a dominant feature in economic transactions.[838]
In fact, in Egypt the relationship between town and countryside was very close indeed and any distinction between the agricultural economy on the one hand and trade, industry and commerce on the other is likely to be very misleading. The ubiquitous taxes on trades and the variety of goods and services available not only in the metropoleis but also in the larger villages of the Fayum like Tebtunis, Karanis and Philadelphia attest to a great range of small-scale activity in trade and manufacture with the concomitant existence of transport, banking and commercial services. These facilitated both the movement of goods to market centres accessible to the people who earned their livelihood from the land, and the payment and delivery of taxes. At the same time, however, there are manufacturing enterprises like linen-weaving and pottery- making which are much more intimately linked to the agricultural economy and these are often found in villages or even on sizeable individual estates. It is worth emphasizing that an agricultural economy of the kind described could not have existed at all without these services. The evidence from the Roman period may be misleading but it does suggest an increase in this kind of economic activity, as also in trade over greater distances, especially in the luxury items of the eastern trade which entered Egypt via the ports of the Red Sea coast to be routed thence across the desert to Coptos and downriver to Alexandria.[839] With the relaxation of the rigid state control imposed by the Ptolemaic monarchs in the form of so-called monopolies, there was certainly greater scope for private enterprise.
By contrast, it might plausibly be maintained that there was a greater degree of social control in the Roman period. The tendency to classify the population according to status, privilege and obligation becomes much more clearly marked, as the
All the citizens of the 'Greek cities' enjoyed such status because of the very nature of their communities. Other Egyptians could obtain citizenship of Alexandria, which possessed an additional unique feature in being, for
There were, of course, other status categories apart from these. The groups of Jews in the towns of the
69 Pliny,
the large and important Jewish community of Alexandria was organized in a separate
The Roman presence made relatively little impact on the cultural and religious patterns in the
As for religion, the major distinction had always been that between Greek and Egypdan cult and this the Romans preserved. The native temples submitted to more stringent state control, losing economic power, but the innumerable Egyptian cults and the traditional caste-like character of the priestly and other temple offices survived well into the Christian period.[843] The Greek cults which proliferated under the Ptolemies also remained strong, especially in the villages of the Fayum, but they were, as is characteristic, much more closely linked to civic institutions than the Egyptian, their priests more analogous to local magistrates and drawn from the upper strata of the Greco-Egyptian populace. The difference is strikingly illustrated by the fact that civil administrators might participate in libations in a gymnasium or a
Roman cults and temples of Roman divinities, notably Jupiter Capitolinus, did eventually make some perceptible mark, but hardly at all before the third century; a veteran soldier is even found celebrating the Saturnalia in about a.d. 100,[845] but these novelties surely did little to disrupt existing patterns. Some adaptation was required in a more general way. The Roman prefect would make sacrifices to the Nile, as the Pharaohs had done, and avoid sailing on the river when it was rising. The emperor had to be accommodated, as Pharaoh, in the traditional institutions, whether on a temple relief or a stela recording the installation of a sacred bull (and the emperor Titus (a.d. 79-81), indeed, did attend such a ceremony in person).76 Above all, there was cult of the Roman emperor, visible at Alexandria in the great
iv. alexandria
The fact that official terminology marked out the great city of Alexandria as separate from the Egyptian
The main motives for this were doubtless political but emperors cannot have been unaware of Alexandria's immense economic importance throughout the early imperial period. Its role in the shipment of Rome's corn supply was only one aspect of this. Its central importance for the papyrus industry, the manufacture of glassware, mosaics and works of art and the transport of grain is badly documented but cannot be doubted and emphasizes its contribution to the profitable exploitation of indigenous resources. Goods of Alexandrian manufacture found their way to all parts of the Roman world as well as to areas beyond the southern frontier of Egypt. The perfume and jewellery industries and the spice trade point to its significance as the main entrepot of the Mediterranean littoral for the great volume of luxury goods imported from the East.
The cultural climate was to change somewhat by comparison with the Ptolemaic period for the days of open-handed royal patronage had long gone. But the Museum remained important, albeit swelled by an admixture of members distinguished for administrative rather than intellectual pursuits. The Royal Library and the 'daughter' library in the Serapeum survived too, the losses of books incurred in the Alexandrian War partly compensated by Antony's gift to Cleopatra of the collection of the royal library of Pergamum. In the Roman period the practitioners of literature were not to attain the same eminence as their predecessors of the Ptolemaic era. The literary pursuits were to yield pride of place to the philosophical for Alexandrian philosophy was greatly enriched by the influx of immigrants after the sack of Athens by Sulla. In the Julio- Claudian period the most distinguished philosopher was Philo, member of a prominent Jewish family and uncle of Tiberius Iulius Alexander; his works, along with those of the other Middle Platonists, point forward to the second century when the foundations of Christian theology and philosophy were to be laid in the interaction of Christian doctrine with the Platonic tradition, with gnosticism and with the legacy of Jewish thought.
At the same time, Alexandria retained her established pre-eminence in the traditional areas of scientific endeavour, among which the development and practice of medicine stands out. In the second century Galen of Pergamum studied there and Alexandria's reputation in this field was still paramount in Ammianus Marcellinus' day. The same is true of the applied scientific disciplines, particularly engineering. In the middle of the second century, the dominant figure was Claudius Ptolemaeus, whose writings reveal an astonishing range of expertise — in mathematics, astronomy, music, optics, geography and cartography. His
In the early imperial period, however, the peaceful arts were overshadowed by uglier events. At the root of the disturbances were the issues arising from the state of Alexandria's civic institutions, the privileges and aspirations of the large and important Jewish community and the relations between the Greeks and the Jews. Alexandria had almost certainly possessed a council (
In the mean time, there had been serious trouble between Jews and Greeks in the late 30s and early 40s, vividly described, no doubt with some partiality, by Philo. The Greeks were organized in guilds and cult associadons; attempts were made to put statues of the emperor in synagogues, Jewish houses were overrun and looted, vicdms were dragged out and burned, torn limb from limb in the market-place or scourged and executed in the theatre. Rival delegations went to Rome to plead their respective cases. Philo, who was himself a member of the Jewish embassy describes how his party pursued the deranged emperor Gaius from Rome to the Bay of Naples and waited for a hearing whilst the emperor enjoyed himself in his seaside villas.82 Reports of the opposing case take a much stranger form than the
81 CP
83 Musurillo 1954 (в 381). 84 Barnes 1989 (e 1087).
V. CONCLUSION
The Roman annexation of Egypt in 30 B.C. was an event of the greatest historical significance, marking as it did, the conclusion of the struggle for supremacy between Octavian and Antony and the elimination of the last of the powerful hellenistic kingdoms. Egypt's role as a province in Rome's empire was of immediate importance, largely because of the enormous wealth which it generated. This, together with the fact that it is uniquely well documented, has induced modern scholars to go too far in according it a special status and, in doing so, they have tended to emphasize the perseverance of the peculiar administrative and economic features of Ptolemaic Egypt, allowed by the characteristic
In fact, the opportunity to examine in some detail the process of creation of a Roman province provides a corrective to this view. The terminology of the Ptolemaic period survives in many areas, but there are fundamental changes of such importance that it is seriously misleading to posit a vague and general condnuity from Ptolemaic to Roman Egypt. The institutions and structures of central and local government were radically altered. The creation of a 'Greek' magisterial class in the nome-capitals introduced a type of local civic government previously unknown. With it came the introduction of a new and wide-ranging liturgical system. These features, in turn, rest upon the creation of a wholly different kind of propertied class from that of the Ptolemaic period, one which is based largely on the Roman introduction of genuine and widespread private ownership of land
These changes can all clearly be traced to the Augustan period. Emphasis on their importance need not blind us to the continuities - in the character of the agricultural economy, in religion, in Egyptian culture. A balanced account will give due emphasis both to the continuities and the changes. During the Augustan era the role of Egypt in the empire for the next three centuries was determined. That role was again to change radically only with the coming of Christianity and in response to the very different political and economic conditions of the late third century.
CHAPTER 14f SYRIA
DAVID KENNEDY
I. INTRODUCTION
Pompey's annexation in 64 в.с. of what remained of Seleucid Syria after the fratricidal struggles of the preceding century, introduced into the Semitic Near East a Roman rule which was to endure for seven centuries. Moreover, as a development and extension of a long period of hellenistic rule, it represented the greater part of almost a millennium of Greco- Roman political dominance and cultural influence. Throughout this long period, however, underlying the Greco-Roman veneer, local indigenous language and culture retained their vitality, to be released in the seventh century by the renewed political dominance of a Semitic people. The point is neatly illustrated by the re-appearance under Islam of many place-names, for centuries overlain by oflficial Greek or Roman ones, but which had apparendy remained in oral use amongst the native population.1
Yet Roman rule did make an impact in many ways which helped determine the distinctive character of this part of the Near East for several centuries. The creation of conditions of peace and political stability, the unification of the region, the reconciliation of its population to Roman rule and the subsequent participation and influence of many Syrians - most strikingly the Emesene ruling family (below, p. 731) - in and on the developing government and civilization of the Roman Empire, are all the work of the first three centuries.
ТЪе history of Syria in the two and half centuries after Pompey's setdement is dominated by three major themes. First, the establishment and development of a Roman province, and the influence and consequences of its role as the major military province of the East. Second, the character and role of the client states, their evolution, then disappearance. And third, the gradual emergence and flowering under the influence of the
1 Bcroea, once Harabu is again Halab; Epiphania, once Hamath is now Hama; and Philadelphia, once Rabbatamana is again Amman: cf. Jones 1971 (d 96) zji. Cf. Joseph.
703
essentially Semitic in character but with a Greco-Roman influence clear to some extent in each of its many facets.
None of this, however, occurred in a vacuum. Geography and previous historical development all played a part. Moreover, what may be said about any one of them is not just a matter of its relative importance in the Julio-Claudian or Flavian-Antonine period, but is constrained by the nature and distribution of the evidence.2
The geographical unit known in antiquity as Syria, was bounded on two sides by the Mediterranean and the Taurus Mountains; in the south and east there lay the Sinai and North Arabian and Syrian Deserts into whose fringes it merged; and finally, in the north east, though often limited politically by the bend of the Euphrates, north-western Mesopotamia as far as the river Khabur should be included. It is an immense area of some half million square kilometres (Map 18).
It is not possible to detect any fundamental changes in the appearance of the landscape or in the climate since Classical Antiquity. There have, however, been some notable alterations. Thus, deforestation - already far advanced in the pre-classical period - has been taken still further and erosion has destroyed once arable hill terraces; a wetter period in Late Antiquity washed soils away, creating in the lower reaches of water courses what is today called the Younger Fill, overlying ancient remains or making their current location hard to understand.3
The foremost literary source for the period treated in this volume is Josephus
For
For coins, Wrack 1931 (в 363) continues to be useful, as are the
Note also the publications of the American
Vita-Finzi 1969 (e 1068); Bintliff 1982 (e 989); Raikes 1985 (e. 1053).
The typical Mediterranean climate of the coastal belt - hot dry summers and mild wet winters, gives way to the harsher extremes of great heat and little rainfall in the deserts to the east and south. The land varies from the fertile plain of eastern Cilicia and the narrow coastal belt of the Levant, across the mountain ranges of the Amanus, Bargylus and Lebanon, which parallel the coast, to the broad belt of first pre-desert, then desert, which stretch beyond. In the west and north, rainfall, supplemented by snow-melt and rivers, is sufficient for dry farming. Some small rivers flow down from the coastal ranges but the major rivers of the region all rise beyond them. The Orontes flows through a broad ferdle valley with major cities along its course, before passing through to the coast between Amanus and Bargylus; the Leontes, far less attractive to urban development, also eventually flowed west into the Mediterranean. The Jordan, however, runs south through the Sea of Galilee, dropping below sea level before flowing into the Dead Sea, the rift valley continuing as the broad waterless trough of the Wadi Araba then the Gulf of Aqaba.
The whole broadening curve of land from the Sinai north-eastwards to the mountains of Armenia, is desert, largely devoid of any perennial water source. The major exception is the valley of the Euphrates which, together with its tributaries on the north, the Balikh and Khabur, offered a ribbon of rich well-watered land on either bank. A major problem, however, was that after flowing south parallel with the coast opposite Andoch, the river turned first east then south east, away from the Mediterranean, to flow eventually into the Persian Gulf, leaving a huge unwatered expanse of land, on both sides, but principally that stretching off to the south. There, with the exception of Palmyra, the few springs could offer only modest settlement attractions.
There are rich agricultural lands in northern Syria, in the Hauran, in Galilee and in the land immediately east of the Jordan. Even the pre- desert and parts of the desert can be farmed, though there the principal determinant is the availability of water. In practice that means a reliable minimum annual 200mm of rainfall; when traced on the map, this isohyet helps to explain a great deal about the shape and development of the directly administered Roman province which emerged, and the location of client states.[848] The line, of course, has never been stadc and farming did not necessarily everywhere stop at it nor even reach it; land in this 'border' area has gone in and out of use with periodic climadc fluctuations, the level of political security and population pressures, while, given suitable soil, rainfall could be and was 'harvested' in areas with far less than 200mm.5
Hill slopes, and poorly watered regions of steppe and desert provided attractive grazing for animals but these supported a less setded and thinner populadon. Settlement pattern was influenced too by the presence of natural resources other than soil and fresh water: thus the fisheries on the Mediterranean coast and Sea of Galilee, the dmber of the Lebanon, and the salt and bitumen of the Dead Sea.6 Trade too: Syria was sandwiched between the great centres of early civilization in Egypt and Anatolia-Mesopotamia; its own geography determined that the coast of the Levant, and routes across northern Mesopotamia, along the Euphrates, across the desert through such oases as Palmyra and Jauf, and up the eastern shore of the Red Sea, would all remain obvious lines of communicadon between Iran and the Mediterranean, Egypt and Anatolia.7
The populadon was overwhelmingly Semitic. Within this group, four major elements can be identified by the criteria of language and, in one case, religion. In the south west lay the Jews of Judaea and the semi- Judaized Arabs of Idumaea and Ituraea;8 other Jewish communities, some extensive, were to be found in every city of Syria (below, p. 708 and 724). North of Judaea lay the Phoenicians, notably in the great coastal trading cities from Arados to Tyre. The Arabs were located on the eastern fringes of the province, the outcome of over two millennia of migration from the Arabian Peninsula into not just Syria but across Mesopotamia and as far as the Taurus and Zagros mountains. Between and to some extent intermingled with the others, lay the earlier Aramaic population. People of Greek stock were the major intrusive element — many by now of mixed blood - and largely to be found in the cities, especially those of North Syria.
Linguistically, Aramaic was dominant - the 'Syrian language', employed even in Judaea where Hebrew was used only for liturgical purposes. The peoples of Edessa, Palmyra and Arabia Petraea all had written versions of their spoken languages, Aramaic dialects which seem to have been a proto-Arabic. Likewise the Safaitic and Thamudic graffiti of the nomadic tribes of central and southern Syria are probably a primitive Arabic. As elsewhere in the East, Greek was common - though far from universal - amongst the urban populations.
For more recent and better documented periods see Hŭtteroth and Abdulfattah 1977 (e ioi j); Lewis 1987 (e 1054).
Heichelheim 1938 (e ioiz); cf. the handbooks of the Naval Intelligence Division,
* Both groups had probably become mixed with the pre-existing Aramaic population: Schŭrer 1973 (e 1207) 1562; Dussaud 1955 (e 1007); 1636; in general, Millar 1987 (e 1039).
At no time do we know the size of the populadon. Locally we know that Apamea (and its territory) had 117,000 'dozens' (probably only males and females of tax-paying age) at the dme of Aemilius Secundus' census in a.d. 6;9 and Antioch, said by Strabo to be litde smaller than Alexandria or Seleucia on the Tigris, probably had a populadon, in city and country, of several hundred thousand.10 A rough guide to the size of some city populations may be drawn from Josephus' references to the size of their Jewish minorities, e.g. the 10,500 slaughtered in Damascus in a.d. 66.11 Precise figures are given for the military contribution of various kings (cf. below, p. 730 and 732), e.g. 5,000 Commagenians sent to join Cestius Gallus in a.d. 66.12 Likewise, we can estimate quite confidently the overall size of the Roman forces (40—5 0,000 in the Julio- Claudian period). From all of these one can roughly infer a probable population for Syria inclusive of the allied states in the first century a.d. of at least two or three million.13
ii. establishment and development of the province
The terms of Pompey's settlement of the East had created a
10 Strab. xvi.2.; (750c); the implications of various references to population at Antioch are discussed by Downey 1958 (e 1005).
" Joseph.
Joseph.
Census figures for the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon in the 1930s gave a total of almost 4 million inclusive of nomads: Naval Intelligence Handbook,
Antioch, Apameia, Seleucia and Laodicea: Strab. xvi.2.4 (749c); cf. xvi.2.8-10 (752-3C).
Canatha, Damascus, Dion, Gadara, Gerasa, Hippos, Pella, Philadelphia, Raphanaea and Scythopolis, are listed by the Elder Pliny
Principally Aradus, Tripolis, Byblus, Berytus, Sidon and Tyre: Strab. xvi.2.13-24 (754-8C).
Nabataean kingdom on the Red Sea to the Commagenian in the foothills of the central Taurus Mts. But because Rome failed to provide adequately for the security of eastern Anatolia, the Syrian governor also exercised some supervision over states there as distant as Iberia and Albania in the Caucasus.
Pompey's setdement brought a new regime but no lasting peace or stability during the succeeding generation. Within a decade, the disastrous campaign of Crassus (55-53 B.C.) had exposed the province to invasion by Parthia. The renewed civil wars which followed in 49 в.с. initiated a long period of insecurity, instability and exploitadon for the province. The great civil war battles were fought far to the west, but their ripples were felt. For Syria that meant the rebellion of the Pompeian Caecilius Bassus (47—44 в.с.)17 and the opportunism of various Arab phylarchs and Parthian mercenaries who had become involved;18 Cassius' struggle with Dolabeila for control of the province
The final turmoil came with Antony's gifts to Cleopatra: all of Phoenicia except Tyre and Sidon, the kingdom of Chalcis, and parts of the kingdoms of Herod and the Nabataeans. Later, by the 'Donations of Alexandria', these regions, as well as the overlordship of all of the client kings of Syria, were transferred to their son, Ptolemy Philadelphus.26
The victory of Octavian opened the way for restoring stability and at least creating the conditions which would allow a naturally wealthy region to regain its prosperity. Antony's gifts were of course nullified,
17 App.
" App.
App.
Dio xLv1n.26.1f; xlix.19.1-20.3; Joseph.
Jews: Dio XLix.22.3f; Joseph.
Dio xlvii.30.2-7; App.
Eus.
Dio xlviii.41.5. 26 Dio xlix.41; l. 1.5; Plut.
I
Ascalon/ tf } I
froG«ia ') (Я ( . J. _ Mae^fa'i/owfSf»
^hinocolura \ Mamptfs У/ /
\ioumaea ;'/ Щ
SCALE ! )
s' r
100 km —i
WmiĴ4
В
I : jjjg / V'V*: " '
гоо пил i*ohyet
1 - — iVW flRtl l«VI>fV(
( ' \ I
J j | Lend over 500 metre»
. i I
s
и
* ^
Desert *
Б
a / *
а M*E
Map 19. Syria and Arabia.
but there was no change in the fundamental arrangements of the previous generation which provided for a modest province under direct government and a network of alliances with petty rulers in the rest of Syria. However, within that basic formula much important reform and re-organization was required; that was to be largely the contribution of Augustus.
Relative to the preceding century, the Julio-Claudian period was one of general peace. After Herod's death in, probably, 4 B.C.,27 creation of the new province of Judaea removed a major segment of Syria from day to day supervision, though direct administration was soon extended to eastern Cilicia, Commagene and, intermittently, parts of Ituraea and the Hauran. Internally, although banditry seems to have been endemic in the Herodian or former Herodian realms at least, security and order had been enormously improved by the provision of a much enlarged and permanent army (below, p. 715). With the important exception of intervention in Judaea to calm passions or put down revolt, governors had little worry over internal insurrection. Even the campaign of Vitellius in 37 to punish the Nabataeans for their short 'war' with Herod Antipas, and Petronius' punitive expedition against the Jews, were halted by the deaths of Tiberius and Gaius respectively.
But the large army of Syria was a recognition too of the external threats - or opportunities - in the region. The expeditions of Aelius Gallus deep into the Arabian Peninsula in 26/5 в.с.,28 and the obscure
On the probable date of Herod's death see Schŭrer 1973 (e 1207)1 326ffn. 165.
Principally Strab. xvi-4.22f (78ocf); cf. RG v.26; Pliny,
Pliny,
Veil. Pat. 11. 10.1; Joseph.
introduction by Rome of claimants to the Arsacid throne. Despite the interventions in Armenia, the Parthian menace was controlled; there was no direct conflict with Parthian troops until the reign of Nero, and no threat to Syria's borders materialized until the time of Marcus Aurelius. The everyday management of relations with most of the nomad tribes was in the hands of various allied rulers (below, p. 715).
In 27 b.c. the status of Syria was enhanced and fixed. As the most vital and sensitive of the provinces assigned to Augustus in the East, it was endowed with the largest army. The legateship, invariably to be held henceforth by a person of consular standing, was the most powerful and prestigious in Rome's Asiatic provinces.
Syria's very importance demanded the careful selection as governor of men who were
There were other imperial appointees in the region. Quintus Servaeus was given charge of Commagene after its annexation in a.d. 18,32 and that may have been a common practice with many newly annexed territories. The administration of some discrete regions of the province, distant from Antioch, may likewise have been delegated. Thus, the prefecture of the Decapolis found in the time of Domitian, may have had its origins in the early Principate,33 and there is a suggestion that the
e.g. Joseph.
Tac. Ann. 11.J6.5.
bch 4(1880): jo6ff; the suggestion is made by Isaac 1981 (p 1016).
Teixidor 1984 (e 1066) 6jf.
Joseph.
The remoteness of Syria which could delay decision-making in Rome by months, combined with an unwillingness to allow too great an initiative to its governors, helps explain the employment and role in the East of members of the imperial house and close associates. Agrippa (and Augustus himself) in the early years of the Principate overhauled the arrangements with client states (below, p. 728f). Later, first Varus then Gaius Caesar were sent at a time of rising tension and internal upheavals following the deaths of Herod and the Nabataean Obodas, and Germanicus was instrumental in supervising the annexation of Cappadocia and Commagene, dealing with Arabia Petraea, the closer assimilation if not annexation of Palmyra,[849] and for diplomatic exchanges with Parthia. His diplomatic contact with Mesene at the head of the Persian Gulf must be associated with stimulation of trade with the Far East; it cannot be coincidence that the first attested Palmyrene caravans are of 19 and 24.[850]
With the exception of Corbulo's appointment to the governorship (a.d. 60-3), the actual ability and experience as administrators or soldiers of most governors, was not of course a criterion in their selection. Some, probably most, were corrupt and venal: we are told this explicitly of Sentius Saturninus and Varus, though neither these nor any others are known to have been prosecuted for misgovernment.[851] Whether the procurators were more experienced and able we cannot tell. The better evidence for the prefects and procurators who governed Judaea does not encourage optimism.[852]
From the pages of Josephus we get a detailed picture of these men at work. The administration of justice and keeping the peace were high on the agenda of all governors. Some at least of the assize-centres outside Antioch can be inferred: Berytus, Tyre, Damascus, Lydda and Jerusalem; and we may suppose too Apamea, Laodicea, Tripolis and Sidon. The complaints of the Jews against their procurator Cumanus,40 the intercession of Herod Agrippa I on behalf of the Jews of the city of Dora, persecuted by their Gentile neighbours,[853] and the boundary dispute between Damascus and Sidon,[854] all provide interesting glimpses of some of the preoccupations of the governor. Keeping the peace was, however, more than just a matter of arbitrating in such disputes. Turbulent cities like Antioch had to be policed,[855] religious festivals brought large numbers together in potentially unruly circumstances,[856] and banditry had to be controlled.
An aspect of the governor's activities which receives little attendon in the ancient literature is that of relations with the cides. The intervention in the affairs of Dora (above) and the order to its leading men to hand over the offenders to a military officer is instructive; more useful is the series of references in the Tax Law at Palmyra revealing intervention in the internal economic affairs of that city not just by Germanicus, but by the governors Corbulo and Mucianus.[857]
Both governor and imperial procurator were resident at Antioch. The city was no longer a royal capital, but henceforth, because of the status and wide jurisdiction of the governor, it was effectively capital of the Asiatic East; in the Greek East as a whole, second only to Alexandria in size. Appropriately, Tiberius was to emphasize the status of the city by his contribution of that quintessential symbol of Roman sovereignty, a statue of the she-wolf and twins atop the new East Gate.[858] The city housed the provincial bureaucracy and at least the governor's guards. For much of the year, however, the governor was absent on tour and some of the paraphernalia of government will have been established in successive provincial cities.
More than for any other province, it was a major function of the Syrian governors to deal with and watch over the activities of kings and princes. The meetings and correspondence Herod had with governors of Syria cannot have been unusual except perhaps in their frequency. Relations were not always easy for any governor ... or king. M. Titius was at odds with Archelaus of Cappadocia until reconciled by Herod,47 and Vibius Marsus earned the enmity of Herod Agrippa I for his interferences in that king's bolder activities.48 The heart of the problem was, as Tacitus observed in another context,49 that kings do not like to be treated like other men, and occasionally those in the East forgot the true nature of their position; conversely, a governor in office for only a few years at most needed to exercise considerable tact when dealing with men whose positions were 'permanent' and some of whom enjoyed very close relations with the emperor.
The governor disposed now of a large army. In place of the two legions of the late Republic and the wildly fluctuating numbers of the civil war period, Augustus allocated Syria four. We may roughly estimate the
The Roman forces performed two principal functions: the maintenance of internal security and the confrontation of potential external threat. The very presence of a powerful army in Syria would have had a deterrent effect and in practice the Parthians never renewed their invasions of Syria of 51/50 B.C. and of 40—38. The major external wars involving the army of Syria were those fought out far away in Armenia by the generals of Augustus (Tiberius in 20 b.c. and Gaius Caesar in a.d. 2: see above ch. 4) and Nero, but Syrian troops were involved too, internally, in the Homonadensian War of c. 5/3 B.C. and in the suppression of the Cietae in western Cilicia in a.d. 36 and 52.50 Internal security was a matter of policing the potentially turbulent city populations, suppressing banditry and controlling the nomads. The last of these does not appear as a problem for imperial governors after the interventions of the Arab sheikh Alchaudonius in the civil wars of the late Republic (see n. 18); most will now have been the direct responsibility of various allied kings and princes, as was certainly the case with the Herodian rulers in the Hauran at a later date.51 Most action against bandits would likewise have been the responsibility of petty rulers; certainly most of that known to us concerns Judaea. Nevertheless, imperial troops were also involved in what was probably a common enough task in any province. The governor Varro himself suppressed widespread banditry in the Trachonitis c. 23 b.c. after Damascus complained of their depredations,52 and later imperial troops were employed
50 Tac.
e.g. Varus in a.d. 6 (Joseph.
In 3 7 Vitellius was ordered by Tiberius to invade the N'abataean kingdom and send its king or his head to Rome. Tiberius' death gave him the pretext to halt the attack before it can have got much beyond the Jordan (Joseph.
The legions were all in the north; only the occasional intervention in Judaea brought one south of the river Eleutherus to be stationed in Jerusalem. At various times, legions are located at Cyrrhus and Rapha- neaea, and - we can infer or guess - Antioch, Apamea, Chalcis, Samosata and Zeugma as other bases for long or short periods.[859] The evidence is slight but the impression — derived partly from the evidence of their locations in the later first and in the second centuries — is of already in the Julio-Claudian period, a gradual movement of the legions eastwards to the Euphrates. The
Already in the late Republic, Rome had begun to recruit locally - not just the auxiliary Ituraean archers employed by Caesar and Antony, but even into the legions. With a limited pool of Roman citizens in the East as a whole, inevitably the practice continued under the Principate, relying on the hellenized population of the cities. Likewise the formation of locally recruited
The numbers and locations of the cities of hellenistic Syria are well known (above, p. 708). Much less can be said of their condition at the outset of Roman rule. The capital, Antioch, was of course already a major city by any contemporary standard, embellished over two and a half centuries by the building activities of successive kings and, under the last of these, even by a palace and circus donated by a Roman magistrate, Q. Marcius Rex in 67 в.с.59 Apamaea likewise had benefited from being the Seleucid military centre. In contrast to the irregular layout of the Phoenician and Jewish cities, these and the other hellenistic foundations had been laid out on a regular grid pattern which remained the basis of planning and development throughout the succeeding centuries. We may plausibly infer decline in the hellenistic cities during the final chaotic years of the Seleucid dynasty and the period of Armenian occupation (83-64 B.C.). The Roman civil wars and Parthian invasions took their toll: Apamaea, Laodicea, Arados, Tyre, Samosata and Jerusalem were all besieged at one time or another, and all cities suffered from the demands of successive dynasts seeking to fill their war chests. For the cities of Syria as for those of other provinces, Octavian's victory would have brought welcome relief.
The early Principate, especially the reign of Augustus, saw extensive urbanization in Syria, though little of it in the province itself. There were only three 'new' foundations, all of them veteran colonies, and all on the sites of existing urban settlements. Antony may have established a colony at Berytus,60 but if so Augustus, through the agency of Agrippa in 15/14 B.C. re-established and expanded it.61 Then, or soon after,62 colonists were established at Heliopolis-Baalbek in the Beqaa valley. A major route opened eastwards over the mountains and this solid block of veterans of V Macedonica and VIII Augusta would have exerted a pacifying influence over the central region of the difficult Ituraean territory. More to the point, as a major 'Roman' city, strategically and attractively sited, Berytus rapidly became a mustering point for troops,
Malalas, 225.7-11; cf. Humphrey 1986 (f 427) 4s6f.
The Antonian origin may be inferred from a Berytan coin, undated but issued under Commodus (
62 The date of foundation of Heliopolis remains unresolved. Extreme views see it as the work either of Augustus contemporary with Berytus or as dependent on the latter until given independent status by Septimius Severus (preferred most recently by Millar 1990 (e 1040) i8f). The recently proposed case (Rey-Coquais 1978 (e 1054) 5 2f) for independence coming rather under Claudius is attractive.
an assize-centre, and a resort for visitors and client princes. Ptolemais, the former Akko, probably founded between a.d. 51 and 54, but developed under Nero was also a veteran settlement,[862] located so as to stabilize the increasingly restless areas of northern Judaea in the late Julio-Claudian period.
The peaceful conditions which allowed the recovery of the cides, were augmented by active imperial interest in urban development. Antioch had attention lavished on it from the outset. After the palace and circus attributed to Q. Marcius Rex in 67 в.с. (above, p. 717), Caesar, twenty years later, donated a Caesareum and amphitheatre, built or rebuilt a Pantheon and a theatre, and constructed an aqueduct. Augustus, Agrippa, Herod and Tiberius were the great benefactors, adding a new quarter, baths, temples, a theatre and a great colonnaded street, and Gaius and Claudius were active in restoration after earthquakes. Between them these men transformed much of the city, making it a worthy metropolis of the province. In doing so, all of them were conforming to an established tradidon of aristocradc benefaction to cides; with Andoch, however, one
Outside Antioch we have no explicit evidence of direct imperial civic building even if one may suppose such involvement in the new colonies at least. From literature, however, we do know of major public works elsewhere in Syria. Exedras, porticoes, temples, an
The most extensive urbanization of the early Principate did not in fact take place in the province at all. The monarchs of the Herodian dynasty were all great founders of cities, several of which became major centres In due course, all of these were to become part of the provinces of Syria, Judaea or Arabia. Their importance for their founders, as for the Romans in turn, was in the creation of largely hellenized communities with a cultural, administrative and military role to play. Thus, Herod's highly hellenized city of Caesarea was not only firmly pro-Roman in the time of Jewish revolts (and rewarded with colonial status by Vespasian) but became the provincial capital of Judaea, a role which, together with the substantial military forces there, would have given it a more distinctly Greco-Roman character. Herod's cities thus began the process of replacing the old toparchies into which the four major regions of his kingdom had been divided for administrative purposes.68 The urbanization of the Ituraean lands, involved a mixture of procedures. In the north, much of the territory was allocated to the veteran colonies of Berytus and Heliopolis, the rest attributed to Arca/Caesarea ad Liba- num. In the south, territories were transferred to Herod and his descendants who introduced military colonies and cities in the western region,69 and were probably behind the process elsewhere which was to lead to the appearance in the second century of large villages with extensive administrative functions.
One of the most interesting developments of the period concerns Palmyra and is clearly associated with Germanicus' visit to Syria — perhaps even to the remote town itself. There is a complete silence in the literary and epigraphic sources about Palmyra between Antony's abortive raid in 41 в.с. and the beginning of Tiberius' reign, when suddenly we get a spate of information.70 Prior to this, the town - probably
67 Thus, at Caesarea in the construction of the great artificial harbour and of the temple of Roma and Augustus on the neighbouring high ground; in the palace of Herodium; and of course the great 'landscaped villa in the contemporary Italian manner' at Jericho (Ward-Perkins 1981 (f 613) 312). Other client states too may have been active in promoting urban development in the cities of the province; without the testimony of Josephus our impression of Herod the Great's work would be very different. Recent fieldwork at Samosata has revealed that the kings of Commagene employed
Discussion by Jones 1931 (e 1019) has not been superseded.
c. a.d. 11-17 we find the governor Silanus active defining the western border of its territory with either Apameia or Emesa (Schlumberger 1939 (e 1038)); the earliest Latin inscriptions — statue dedications to Tiberius, Drusus and Germanicus by the commander of one of the Syrian legions — appear in
The commonest structures in the cities at all times were the houses of their inhabitants. Very little is known of town houses at any time; they are almost entirely unknown for this period, though the evidence from Hama would suggest that the forms of earlier periods continued to be influential for years to come.[869] Josephus provides us with an illuminating observation which sheds light on the appearance of the cities and towns of southern Syria. In the course of Cestius Gallus' invasion of Galilee in a.d. 66, he destroyed the large village of Chabulon but reluctantly because of the beauty of its houses, 'built in the style of those of Tyre, Sidon and Berytus'.75 Earlier, Strabo had observed that the houses of Tyre (many of them on the 'island') were many stories high, higher even than those of Rome. On the other hand, the dye works at Tyre and some of its neighbours produced a distinctive and unpleasant smell.76
The governments of the cities were predominantly hellenistic in character, with a
The century of Roman peace which followed Actium saw, if not extensive urbanization in Syria, at least major urban development. The new colonies and the major Herodian foundations would have made a significant impact locally at least, Berytus, Ptolemais and Caesarea all rapidly developing as major cides. Elsewhere, by the end of the Julio- Claudian dynasty, many of the major cities of the province displayed the physical benefits of Roman benefactions whether direcdy from the emperor or through surrogates.
The basis of the Syrian economy was farming. Not just agriculture to produce the fundamental corn harvest, but the culdvation of olives, vines, dates and figs, and the rearing of animals for food, wool and hides (as well as the tools and ornaments which were made from bones). Within the largely unchanging limitations imposed by rainfall and soils (above, p. 705—8), altered circumstances could provide scope for increased activity in marginal areas and for a changed balance between different crops as well as between tillage and stock raising. Little of such change can be demonstrated, though much may be inferred.
Security and stable conditions provided a suitable environment for the development of farming. Moreover, 'new' cides and urban growth opened up new or extended markets for agricultural surplus, to which had to be added the tens of thousands of unproductive soldiers who had to be fed. The probable extension of agriculture which resulted would in itself, by encouraging the settlement of potentially productive land, have further stimulated the economy and enhanced stability.78
There were, of course, some traditional agricultural regions which continued to produce surpluses. The inhabitants of Sidon and Tyre, for example, were dependent on Galilee, and it may have been from this same region that much of the non-'Grecian' oil required by the Jewish communities of all of Syria, was exported.79 The movement of corn by land would at all times have been expensive except in very local terms. Herod, however, had imported huge amounts of corn from Egypt at the time of the famine in the 20s, supplying too, some of neighbouring Syria.80
New lands were opened up to agriculture. Thus Herod obliged the bandits of Trachonitis to turn to farming,81 and the growth of the Nabataean towns of the Negev must be associated with the development of the water-harvesting structures and 'farms' still visible in the region.82
78 The process can be documented for the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Well-armed soldiers in the towns and along roads, and at selected points in the semi-desert and desert, encouraged resettlement of abandoned land, turned semi-nomads into farmers, encouraged the growth of investment by the urban merchants and the Sultan, and provided not only new markets in towns and garrisons for food and hides, but even, during the Crimean War and the loss of Black Sea sources, a vigorous export market to Europe for Syrian grain (Lewis 1987 (e 1034)).
75 Joseph.
81 Joseph.
In the late Republic, the great caravan trade up the Euphrates had been virtually halted by the predatory activities of Arab phylarchs. Peace and the probable settlement of semi-nomads of the region along the river and towards Beroea re-opened the routes,83 and not only the growing populations in Syria itself, but access to a huge Mediterranean market stimulated activity. Aelius Gallus' expedition into south Arabia in 26/5 B.C. was certainly motivated by cupidity. Likewise, imperial interest in trade is probably behind the sudden concern for Palmyra (above, p. 714). On the other hand, the southern routes through Arabia Petraea, already in decline (below, p. 734), suffered a further blow as trade routes were polarized between those direct to Egypt and those from the head of the Persian Gulf.
Evidence from the Julio-Claudian period reveals a network of trading links within and beyond the province; more can be inferred. Thus timber from Lebanon for the sanctuary at Jerusalem,84 metals for both workshops and mints,85 Italian pottery appears on Syrian sites, following presumably the same routes as Italian wine and oil; Syrian glass is found as distant as south Russia,86 South Arabia and India, and Syrian wine was exported to India.87 The needs of the army too would have stimulated trade within and between provinces: metals, hides, clothing, building materials and, of course, huge quantities of food. Further stimulus would have come from the market created in Antioch by a bureaucracy, those around the army camps with their bodies of regularly paid soldiers and, of course, from the demands of the labour forces on the new building projects. The most striking economic activity in the period — the one, certainly, for which we have some useful evidence - is in public construction. Whatever the source of the finance, this provided long- term employment opportunities: in the case of a massive structure like the temple of Jupiter at Damascus, such construction work was still highly labour intensive; 18,000 were threatened by unemployment when the Temple was completed in Jerusalem.88
None of this should be exaggerated. There is little doubt that trade in food and other commodities increased and created a greater interdependence between communities in Syria and beyond. The underlying reality, however, is that most economic activity remained local and of a subsistence character, and the overwhelming majority of the population
Strab. xvi.i.
Joseph.
Copper from the mines of Cyprus and, perhaps, the Wadi Araba; cf. in general Muhly 1973 (e 1044). 86 Rostovtzeff 1957 (a 83) 69f.
87 Raschke 1978 (c 298) 90 jf, n. 999; Sidebotham 1986 (c 310) 13-47. Some at least of the silk appearing in Rome in the period may have come through Syria (but cf. Miller 1969 (e 1042) 1 i9f; '35-6)- 88 Joseph.
continued to live and work on the land.89 Nor need we doubt that for most small farmers, 'pre-harvest famine' remained a continuing feature of life unchanged - and unchangeable - by Roman rule.90
An important basis for this revived and developing economic life after 30 b.c., was the Augustan stabilization of the imperial coinage and the regularization of minting at Antioch. There were, however problems and setbacks. The population of the region would plainly not have suffered uniformly under a non-progressive tax regime. Indeed, in a.d. 17 Tacitus91 reports the financial exhaustion of the province from overtaxation; one of the reasons for the dispatch of Germanicus in that year. Just who was complaining - and how it was articulated - we are not told.
Natural disasters took their toll, though the extraordinary could expect imperial relief. A great famine and plague struck Judaea in the mid-2os b.c. and afflicted neighbouring regions. Another famine, portrayed by Luke as universal, is reported in
As part of the Mediterranean-wide Roman empire, the urban population of the great cities of northern Syria and the Levant became still more cosmopolitan both in racial mix and outlook than in the Seleucid period. Despite the considerable body of evidence for the very active involvement of Syrians in overseas trade, there is virtually none showing any interest by the aristocracy to enter imperial service. In contrast to Asia Minor, there is no certain senator before the Flavian period,93 and the two, possibly three, 'Syrians' who appear as equestrian officers in the Julio-Claudian period are all probably from the veteran colonies of Berytus and Heliopolis.94 Only a handful of the aristocracies of the cities appear prominently. Malalas reports on the wealthy Antiochene councillor, Sosibius, who accompanied Augustus to Rome in either 30 or 20 b.c., and left his wealth to the city for entertainments;95 and now we have the inscription reporting on the quondam tetrarch Dexandros, who remained at Apamea as the founder of one of the leading families, and served as first High Priest of the Imperial Cult for the province (below,
P- 727)-
An obstacle to assimilation of the city aristocracies of Syria outside the veteran colonies — as elsewhere in the Greek East - was of course the slowness with which Roman citizenship was extended in the province. The aristocracies of ancient and great cities such as Antioch, Apamea and Damascus would see little advantage in it for them. Significantly, it was from the descendants of now deposed allied rulers — who had often been granted Roman citizenship and had more direct contact with Rome and Romans — that many of the earliest Syrian senatorial families were drawn.
Roman citizenship
With native Semites appearing amongst the aristocracy of the cities, it seems certain that most of the remainder of the population, whatever their names, were likewise part or wholly Semitic. The Jewish community in most cities was especially noticeable; some such communities were substantial — that at Antioch had its own
The influx of people from outside Syria would have been principally through the army. While the numbers are potentially large, in practice many soldiers, even in the legions, will have been recruited locally (above, p. 716). Outside recruitment to the legions seems to have drawn on the neighbouring provinces rather than the West, and outsiders were rapidly assimilated, through contact and intermarriage, to the local communities. An unexpected element is the Parthian, Arsacid refugees and their retainers who were settled in Syria; and the Babylonian Jew Zamaris with his family and 500 archers who arrived с 9—6 в.с. to be initially settled at Daphne, is unlikely to have been unique if one may judge from the evidence of 'Parthian' regiments and mercenaries in the Roman army."
Evidence for romanization — as opposed to the greater scope for hellenization - is limited and largely superficial: Italian names (not least 'Agrippa'), some citizenship, mainly in pockets, the local cultural influence of the three veteran colonies and the influence of the imperial cult in cities and around the camps. The army was indeed the principal source of Romanization through the imposition of an influential Roman institution with established and thoroughly Roman practices in administration, language and religion. But the 40-50,000 soldiers were scattered and increasingly locally recruited even in the Julio-Claudian period. Those in cities, like the Thracians of the
Opportunities for refined entertainment and relaxation were extended beyond that handful of cities in the north which had theatres in the hellenistic period. Theatres remained less common than in Asia Minor, but Herod and his family were responsible for their construction and for the provision of baths and gymnasia in several cities in their own realms and in the Syrian province. The notion that the Greek East had no taste for the barbarism of the Roman wild beast and gladiatorial fights must now be jettisoned. Although the positive evidence is slight and amphitheatres are uncommon, literature attests to both practices — at the time of Herod's dedication of his new city of Caesarea in 10 B.C. and by Titus after the destruction of Jerusalem 80 years later. It is clear that theatres were used instead of purpose-built amphitheatres.102 Athletic and dramatic contests, often associated with religious festivals, were revived
" Applebaum 1989 (e 1075) ch. 4; Kennedy 1977 (e 1021).
Kraeling 1938 (e ioji) 4$6f nos. 199-201.
Cf. Braund 1984(0 254); Gracey 1981 (e ioio). When Josephus set about organizing an army in 67, he adopted Roman practices and ranks (
Robert 1940 (f 57) 259-66. At Antioch, gladiatorial games went back to Antiochus IV Epiphanes who had developed his taste for them while at Rome: Livy, xli.20. The amphitheatre discovered by aerial reconnaissance at Caesarea has received only a little attention but is presumably that of Herod (Holum
or established in various cities providing periodic attracdons and entertainment: the councillor Sosibius (above, p. 723) established a quinquennial festival at Antioch extending over thirty days,103 and Herod introduced them too into the cities of his realm, including Jerusalem.104
Religion played a large part in both politics and everyday life. Most detailed evidence belongs to a later period but the principal features for the current century are clear. Semitic religions had much in common with one another as indeed with those of their Mesopotamian neighbours with whom they had a shared cultural and political unity extending back to Persian times. A common feature was a Supreme God. By the Persian period the host of minor gods which had obscured the prominence of the supreme deity had moved into a more subordinate role. The 'Assemblies of Gods' which had characterized this earlier phase gave way to Angels, messengers of the Supreme God, who might have their own devotees. A consequence was a trend towards monotheism which facilitated the spread of Judaism and was to do so again for Christianity.
The character no less than the name of the Supreme God varied considerably between settled peoples and nomads, townsmen and farmers. The preoccupations of the citizens of Phoenician Tyre were far removed from those of the merchants of Palmyra or the nomads of Nabataea. Naturally, for most people, the fertility of the soil and the needs of agriculture were dominant; industry, trade, commerce or a nomadic life involved different priorities. Thus, Baalshamin, identified as a deity concerned with agriculture was popular around the Palmyrene oasis, and the Nabataean Supreme God, Dushara, perhaps equated with Mercury by the nomadic Nabataeans of the south, was assimilated to Dionysus amongst the farmers of the Hauran.
There is also a distinction to be made between the public religion of the towns and the popular religion of the masses. For the latter, their religion was probably very simple and their relationship with their god close: inscriptions often characterize traditional pagan gods as
Malalas,
Joseph.
impact outside the army camps and colonies. For the latter, the cult of Jupiter Optimus Maximus Heliopolitanus at Heliopolis-Baalbek, represents the most striking example. For the former, the official Roman cults which formed part of formal military festivals and worship were still vibrant in the early third century as the
The most significant Roman import was the introduction of the imperial cult in the time of Augustus (above, p. 724). Temples and priesthoods for Augustus, or Rome and Augustus, were established during his lifetime, as they were for his successors and for the
The prominence of religion in everyday life is clear enough from the numerous temples and shrines, the altars and
A handful of Syrians are prominent in the field of scholarship. The numbers of philosophers, rhetoricians and orators is small by comparison with, for example, Alexandrians. Nicolaus of Damascus, the minister and historian of Herod the Great, is to be ranked alongside Strabo, Timagenes and Dionysius amongst the outstanding Greek writers of the Augustan period. Other notable figures are Tiberius' tutor, the rhetorician Theodorus of Gadara, and his fellow-townsman, the epicurean philosopher Philodemus, teacher of Calpurnius Piso and Virgil; from Tarsus and Cilician Seleucia, respecdvely, came Nestor and Athenaeus, tutors of Marcellus.109 However, while these Syrians appeared in the imperial household, no Antiochene — in the absence of a precise role for Sosibius (above, p. 723) - is known to have held a position of prominence there in the way Alexandrians did, and neither the city nor the province held the attraction for eminent Roman hellenophiles which Greece, Asia Minor and Egypt did.[877]
III. CLIENT STATES
Pompey's settlement of Syria had involved the recognition of a number of men as rulers over much of the region. Although they subsequently appeared prominently in support of the vanquished in three successive rounds of Roman civil war, they were still numerous in 30 в.с. Indeed, numbers may have increased: Antony had swept away the many tyrants set up by Cassius[878] to rule over newly created principalities, but then established other such states himself.[879] However, it is only in the 20s в.с. that we get an indication of just how numerous these states were. Alongside the kingdoms - Commagene, Judaea and Arabia Petraea, there were numerous minor dynasts and tetrarchs: more than a score in Syria Coele, and several more in the south.[880]
The usefulness of a network of allied rulers in and around the periphery of a province was not in doubt.114 Rather, the task confrondng the new
The terms of Roman friendship, alliance and recognition for kings and princes — whether officially stated or not — varied considerably. There had always been limitations on the freedom of action of such rulers, but the defining of parameters was one of the achievements of Augustus' reign. The character of a ruler and the location and size of his kingdom all went to determine the extent of his freedom of action and behaviour. Inevitably it is from Josephus' account of Herod and his descendants that we learn most about the rulers of Syria, but from what may be gleaned both from the same author and other writers, it is clear that the same parameters of rights, obligations and behaviour applied. Equally inevitably, some rulers either did not recognize these or sought to break them.
Location of course was important. Commagene's capital, 260km from Antioch as the crow flies, would have given its ruler a measure of remoteness until the annexation of Cappadocia in a.d. 17 brought another province into existence in the north. The nearest Roman troops would have been about four days distant. Its dynasty felt akin to Parthia and just beyond their Euphrates border lay a dangerous example: Osrhoene, a powerful Parthian vassal, whose kings had been able to shake off Roman overlordship after the Battle of Carrhae. Rome was often uneasy about Commagene's reliability. It had colluded with the Parthian invasion of 40-38 в.с. which had led to Antony's abortive siege; strategic considerations almost certainly lay behind the decision in a.d. 17 to take direct control of the major crossings of the upper Euphrates by annexing Cappadocia and Commagene; and its final elimination in 72 was precisely on the grounds of alleged conspiracy with Parthia.[883]
Tarcondimotus' Cilician kingdom, though divided from the rest of Syria by the Amanus Mountains was hemmed in by the Taurus and the province of Cilicia and easily open to Roman influence and intervention. Emesa was close to the heart of the province.[884] Under Claudius, when the governor Vibius Marsus appeared at Tiberias and ordered the dispersal of Herod Agrippa I's guests including the kings of Comma- gene and Emesa, both complied rapidly, recognizing the nature of their position even if their host had believed Claudius' friendship and indebtedness had accorded him greater ladtude.
Arabia Petraea is rather different. Unlike Commagene, there was no powerful neighbour beyond; on the other hand, the remoteness of Petra — some 700km from Antioch, hedged in by mountain and desert — with consequent difficulties either of controlling or bringing the region under direct administration, conferred a certain amount of immunity from day- to-day interference. But there were limits and warnings. Aretas IV had acceded without prior approval in 9 b.C., and in a.d. 37 made war on his neighbour Herod Antipas. Augustus had considered deposing the dynasty but was too preoccupied to pursue a radical solution; Tiberius actually despatched an army into Nabataean territory but Vitellius seized the pretext of Tiberius' death to withdraw his forces from Nabataea. Luck had saved Aretas on both occasions but the lessons would not have been lost: in 4 в.с. Nabataean troops were sent to aid Varus in his Judaean expedition[885] and in a.d. i 8 Germanicus was feted by Aretas.[886]Moreover, with the growth of Nabataean possessions in the Hauran, the kingdom was now rather more vulnerable.
The funcdon of these client kings is largely a matter for conjecture from the totality of evidence for client rulers everywhere and in particular from the well-attested Herodian examples. The advantages to Rome of leaving the less urbanized and poorer parts of Syria under their traditional rulers, was obvious. Except in the cases of the Herods and the Nabataeans (below, p. 73 2) we are largely ignorant of the character of the individual royal armies. Both Commagene and Emesa contributed significant forces to Roman expeditionary armies: in 66 that was 5,000 and 4,000 troops respectively;121 in 67 it amounted to 3,000 men from each, both offering especially useful archers and cavalry.122 Moreover, the annexation of Commagene between a.d. 17 and 3 8 had resulted in the absorption of some at least of the former royal army into the Roman
The king-lists provide a bare indication of politics and government. Interruptions at Commagene from 17 to 3 8 and again under Gaius, did not, however, prevent the family remaining deeply involved in Roman politics. Antiochus IV was one of the 'tyrant-masters' of Gaius and with him in Gaul in 39. A generation later, his son, Antiochus Epiphanes, fought with the Othonians at the First Battle of Bedriacum before joining Titus at Jerusalem. Interestingly, when Antiochus III died in a.d. 17 and the kingdom was annexed, it appears that the masses supported the continued monarchy and it was the aristocracy which petitioned for annexation.[888] Presumably the aristocracy saw political advantage to themselves if removed from the shadow of a monarch; indeed after final annexation, the ruling family was catapulted into senatorial politics. The 'masses' were largely Semitic and it is interesting to see their support for a ruling family which, as we know from its nomenclature and the character of the art preserved in the best-known monument, the great tumulus at Nemrud Dagh, was Iranian with a Greek influence. The kingdom itself was reputed to be wealthy - the wealthiest of them all; Strabo refers to rich valleys and upland pastures; Antiochus I had offered to buy off Ventidius Bassus with 1,000 talents (24 million sesterces); and later, Gaius reimbursed to Antiochus IV the 100 million sesterces said to be the accumulated revenue to Rome from twenty years.[889]
Less can be said of Emesa. Only four monarchs span the period from restoration in 20 b.c. to annexation probably not long after a.d. 72. The family lived on as hereditary priests of the local Syrian deity (Baal). Emesa, like the other allied kingdoms, had become enmeshed in a network of family alliances through royal marriages.[890] None, however, were to be as successful as the marriage, more than a century after the ending of the kingdom, of lulia Domna to the future emperor Septimius Severus. The result was to be three Emesan empresses and their children ruling in Rome.
In contrast to Commagene and Emesa, we know a great deal about the government, character and development of the Nabataean kingdom. Arabia Petraea - the heart of the kingdom - is unpromising terrain for human settlement. Composed in large part of rock and desert, lacking any substantial perennial water course and dependent on seasonal rains, it is no surprise that in the late fourth century,[891] its Arab population was nomadic, albeit already engaged in a lucrative commerce. Three centuries later Strabo knew them as a settled people living in houses. By then too, their realm included the Hedjaz, the Negev Desert and the fertile Hauran. In the first centuries в.с. and a.d. they developed a politically powerful and culturally vigorous and innovative society.
Nabataean monarchs enjoyed long reigns: only five between c. 58/7 b.c. and a.d. 106. On the other hand, it appears from Strabo that effective power lay with an appointed minister
Security was provided by a standing army which was modelled to some extent on that of Rome. Thus, alongside the hellenistic chiliarch and hipparch one finds the centurion (
The sudden Nabataean appearance at Hegra, deep in the Hedjaz 500km south east of Petra, may have been inspired by Rome.136 The new territory may in fact have been that ruled by a kinsman of the Nabataean king at the time of Aelius Gallus' campaign. There, in a region of Lihyanite and later Thamudic settlement, appeared a series of some seventy-nine monumental rock-cut tombs similar in design and quality to those at Petra. Unlike the latter, many bear dated inscriptions, often naming civil and military officers, a few citing distant origins, and ranging in date from a.d. i to 75. All of this points to a major development there, perhaps a military colony, but so far nothing more of the town has been unearthed than an apparent 'residential area'.137 Now too we have evidence of settlement elsewhere in the region: ten similar tombs have come to light at al-Bad (Ptolemy's Madian) and another at al- Disa.138 More exciting still are the numerous other small Nabataean sites in the Hedjaz identified especially in the coastal region around Aynunah (probably Leuke Kome - see below, p. 734).139
There is similar evidence from the other two major acquisitions. The Negev underwent a phase of development in the early Principate. The evidence suggests growing settlements at Mampsis and along the line of the Petra-Gaza road which continued through into the Roman period. In the north, Zenodorus had sold Auranitis to the Nabataeans in 30 B.C. for a modest 50 talents. The scanty physical evidence so far suggests intensification of occupation about the middle of the first century a.d. At Bostra there is growing evidence to suggest a substantial Nabataean settlement there. The 'Nabataean' arch is now confirmed as first century a.d., probably second half, and it would seem that the main thoroughfare leading to it may have been a contemporary
Of existing settlements, Petra was also being developed: some of the tombs date to this period, the theatre is early first century, and the
What appears to be a foundation coin naming Hegra dates to between 9 в.с. and a.d. 18 (Meshorer 1975 (в 343) ;jf)and the earliest of the dated inscriptions there is for a.d. i, the same year in which the
Winnett and Reed 1970 (e 1070) i78ff.
Parr
Ingraham
"o Peters 1983 (e iojo) 273-7;cf. Miller 1983 (e 1041); Dentzer 1984(e998); 1986(£999)1.2,406; Sartre 1985 (e 1057) 57-62. See now the evidence for Umm el-Jemal: De Vries 1986 (e 1003) 229?.
141 Schmidt-Colinet 1980 (e 1059) 217-33; cf- Wright 1962 (e 1071); McKenzie 1990 (e 1038).
All of these developments suggest expanding economic activity and a more cosmopolitan outlook. Certainly, so much construction at Petra - over 5 oo monumental tombs - and in other centres will not only have provided employment for the architects, masons, plasterers and other artisans attested in inscriptions, but have stimulated urbanization. The construction techniques and design show evidence of Alexandrian influence and some at least of the many foreigners at Petra,142 may have been imported artisans and artists. The finished product, however, is both impressive and unique to the Nabataeans. Some of these foreigners will have been merchants selling as well as buying. The Nabataeans had already begun to produce their own highly distinctive fine painted pottery in the late Republic, but at several sites imported wares have turned up. The Nabataean potter's workshop at Avdat (first half of the first century a.d.), for example, seems to have sold alongside its own produce 'Herodian' lamps, Eastern and Italian
Financial support for such endeavours no longer rested so firmly on trade. By the beginning of the Christian era, much of the south Arabian trade had long been moved direct by sea to Egypt144 with serious consequences for Nabataean commercial well-being. Caravans did still operate through Arabia Petraea. Strabo145 refers to traders with loads of south Arabian aromatics travelling between Leuke Kome and Petra thence to Rhinocolura 'in such numbers of men and camels that they differ in no respect from an army', and in the time of Malichus II (a.d. 40-70),there are reports146 of many but modest sized ships coming loaded from Arabia to Leuke Kome which had a centurion supervising the collection of a 2 5 per cent tax, and from which a road led to Petra. Leuke Kome has now been identified with Aynunah.147 Nearby one finds a major roadstead at Khuraybah and a series of Nabataean and Roman sites in and around the springs and gardens of Aynunah itself, which has produced over one hundred rock-cut tombs and a major building with over 130 rooms, corridors, towers and courtyards.148 Such activity required protection and it is probably no coincidence that most of the attested Nabataean garrisons and camps are in the Hedjaz, Hisma and Negev.
Trade links in the north, possibly reflecting a development of the Wadi Sirhan route from Jauf to counter the decline in Arabian traffic and also to exploit the developing Palmyrene monopoly of trade from the Gulf, are suggested by the presence of a Nabataean ethnarch at
Strab. xvi.4.21 (779c).
Negev 1974 (e 1045) 25—42. There were Nabataean merchants at Puteoli
Strab. xvi.4.24 (781-20). Dihle 1965 (e 1004) 25 suggests the transfer had begun in the late hellenistic period. 145 xvi.4.25 (780-ic). 146
147 Kirwan 1981 (e 1028) 1984 (e 1029). 148 Ingraham
Damascus in the last years of Tiberius.149 To this may be added the significant physical evidence from Decapolis cities, notably Philadelphia and Gerasa, for Nabataean communities there too.150
There was some industry in the kingdom apart from the ceramic. Copper was extracted from the mines in the Wadi Araba and in the Sinai151 and those south of Petra, and asphalt had been exploited around the Dead Sea since the fourth century. Although no silver source is known in Arabia Petraea, both bronze and silver coinage appear throughout the two centuries before annexation,152 and at least one Roman extorted an indemnity in silver from the Nabataeans in the late Republic.153
The foundation of the Nabataean economy continued to be sheep-and camel-raising as it had been in the early fourth century.154 Now, however, they were much more involved in arable farming. Part of their realm offered good farming land, especially in the new lands of the Hauran; in the low rainfall of the Negev and Hedjaz the key lay in their skill in hydraulic engineering. No longer just the collection and storage in cisterns of water for their flocks, now too there was the beginning of 'water-harvesting'.155
The long reign of Aretas IV appears as a golden age of tranquillity and development in Arabia Petraea. Eighty per cent of known Nabataean coins belong to his reign.156 Nor were they struck to pay extra troops. Quite the reverse; after assisting Varus in 4 B.C. there was no warfare again for forty years: in part the removal of a royal neighbour from Judaea itself and the marriage of Aretas' daughter to Herod Antipas, but largely the peace demanded by Rome between neighbours and an end of the raiding which was a feature of Nabataean life until the early Principate.157
The population of Petra at least is characterized in Strabo as a harmonious one: formal litigation was exclusively between foreigners or by foreigners against Nabataeans.158 They appear as very materialistic, but with few slaves. Drinking parties were popular but drunkenness said to be limited; singing girls performed at their communal feasts. These last were probably religious. Temples included
2 Cor. 11.32; an official in charge of a Nabataean community is the more likely explanation rather than unlikely Nabataean rule.
Graf 1986 (e ioi i) 788-93; Gatier forthcoming (e 1009).
'Smith' is a common element in Sinaitic Nabataean names: Negev 1986 (e 1047) iof.
Meshorer 1975 (в 343) oo.
>53 Joseph.
154 Joseph
156 Meshorer 1975 (в 343)41. '5' Strab. xvi.4.21 (779c). 158 xvi.4.21 (779c).
159 The meal included olives, dates, fowl and mutton (Negev 1986 (e 1047) 92).
The Nabataean religion involved worship both at sacred high places and in temples (above, p. 726f). Their Supreme God, Dushara, 'the One of Shara', the escarpment south of Petra, is widely commemorated.[898]However, one of the earliest and grandest 'Nabataean' temples is that of Baalshamin at Seeia in the Hauran.[899] There, a huge isolated sanctuary, dedicated (probably by Herod the Great) between 33/2 and 2/1 b.c., was constructed.
iv. conclusion
On a July day in 69, Antioch witnessed an event which would have astonished its inhabitants of a century before. The governor of the province, Mucianus, made a speech to the populace in the theatre in justification of Vespasian's proclamation as emperor and sought their support for the civil war. Equally remarkable, he was able to gain the sympathy of the populace by suggesting that the local garrisons were to be transferred to Germany, and that they were to lose the troops they were used to and with whom there had been a great deal of intermarriage.[900]
Attitudes had changed and the reasons are not hard to find. Stable and more efficient government had been introduced and the hand of Rome was relatively light in its effect on local culture. Peace and security had been firmly established. Even the recent wars of Corbulo had had little direct effect on the province and there was no sympathy for the Jewish rebels. A few cities had been founded and urban development given a significant impetus. Trade had recovered and shrewd Syrian merchants could fully exploit their safe access to Mediterranean markets. The contrast with the last generadon of Seleucid rule and of the last days of the Republic was only too clear.
The shape of the province was not yet complete - that was to be the work of the Flavians and, finally, Trajan, in removing the last of the petty rulers. But the transition from the bitter, resentful, ravaged province of the 40s в.с. to the stable rapidly integrating province of the second century a.d. was well advanced.[901]
JUDAEA
martin goodman
i. the herods
The political history of Judaea in the period covered by this volume is particularly well attested through the preservation of the work of the Jewish historian Josephus, who wrote after a.d. 70 first a detailed account of the Judaean revolt against Rome from a.d. 66 to a.d. 73 or 74 and then an apologetic version for non-Jewish readers of Jewish history to the outbreak of that war.1
A priest from Jerusalem and a commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee during the war, Josephus was steeped in the traditions of his nation. He was an acute observer, but his evidence is tainted by the traumas of his own career. Captured by Roman forces in a.d. 67, he espoused the enemy cause with a wholeheartedness that won him the favour of the future emperor Vespasian and enabled him to spend the last part of his life, including his active years as a writer, in comfort, probably in Rome.
The bias in Josephus' narratives, particularly of the first century a.d., when Judaea fell under direct Roman rule, can be pardy checked from other sources. Inscriptions provide less useful evidence than elsewhere in the Roman East, for the Judaean ruling class never picked up the epigraphic habit except in the medium of coinage, but the contribution of archaeology is large and growing. The Gospels and Acts of the Apostles add further evidence although, since they are theological documents, their accuracy cannot be taken for granted. But Josephus' narrative is best checked through his own inconsistencies: his detailed account often reveals information that his more sweeping generalizations and general tendentious approach tend to obfuscate.2
The main sources for the reign of Herod are the parallel accounts in Joseph.
On approaches to Josephus, cf. Rajak 1983 (в 147) and works cited in Feldman 1986 (в 50). For the coins of Herod and his successors, cf. Meshorer 1982 (в 344). For recent excavations, see Avi- Yonah and Stern 1975-8 (e 1078); Avigad 1984 (e 1080).
737
Map 20. Judaea.
Herod to some extent presented himself as a Jewish monarch, and for some Romans his family were seen as representative of Jewry.3 But his rule over Judaea was inaugurated in 40 b.c. and preserved until
Herod's story begins with the career of his father Antipater, who had taken advantage since the sixties B.C. of internal dissensions within the Hasmonaean dynasty to promote himself, trading on the obscurity of his own Idumaean lineage, which made him appear no danger to his Hasmonaean patron, Hyrcanus II; the Idumaeans had only been forcibly converted to Judaism in the 120s b.c. and could still be insulted as only half-Jews by some Judaeans.4 At the same time he cultivated Roman officials in the East, for their influence had been decisive since 63 B.C. in the balance of power between the various Hasmonaean factions. In 44 b.c. Antipater's position thus relied on his friendship with Caesar, but by 43 b.c. he had rapidly won the confidence of Cassius and persuaded Hyrcanus to support the Liberators of Rome. His power was cut short only by his assassination in a court intrigue.
That it was Herod who inherited Antipater's position and not the latter's older son Phasael was due to Herod's demonstration of energy and competence in his father's lifetime. At the age of twenty-five in 48 b.c. he had already acted briefly as governor of Galilee on Caesar's behalf. When in 43 B.C. he proceeded to destroy his father's murderer and the latter's supporters with Cassius' approval, his role as Hyrcanus' chief adviser was certain.
Herod's further progression to the crown was brought about by the continuing chaos in the eastern Mediterranean before and after Philippi. The Liberators urgently needed funds and Herod dutifully raised considerable quantities, first in Galilee and later in Judaea and Syria. When some cities in Judaea refused to pay, he ruthlessly subjected them to slavery. Meanwhile his position in Hyrcanus' estimation was strengthened when he routed the king's nephew Antigonus.
Cassius' defeat at Philippi did not check Herod's rise: Antony, concerned not to lose a powerful friend of Rome, accepted the fiction that Hyrcanus and his side had supported the Liberators unwillingly and advanced Herod and Phasael to the position of tetrarchs; the precise relationship between the brothers and Hyrcanus, who was entided ethnarch, is unclear.
This promotion of Antipater's sons was greeted with rioting by the Jews but enforced with bloodshed, only to be rendered nominal in 41/40 b.c. by the Parthian invasion of Palestine and the installation in Judaea of Antigonus; he was to be king over the Gentile population and High
3 Cf. 'Herodis dies' at Pers. v. 180, as a description of the sabbath in the middle of the first century a.d. 4 j0sqjh.v4yxrv.40}.
Priest of the Jews, who welcomed his accession and the legiumacy which he advertised on his coins. Phasael was killed or forced to commit suicide. Hyrcanus was sent to Parthia and, by mutiladon of his ears, rendered incapable of holding the high priesthood. Herod in early 40 в.с. fled to Rome.
That flight, which implied that only in Rome did he have a hope for the future, proved opportune. The triumvirs, especially Antony, to whom the eastern provinces had been allotted, saw in Herod the surest way to return Judaea to Roman control. No adult male Hasmonaean was readily available for promotion as a puppet ruler. The installation of a new family as monarchs of a client state was new in Roman foreign policy; but Herod was known in Roman society, he was a competent soldier, his father had been Caesar's friend, as an associate of Hyrcanus he was assumed to understand Jewish society. Less tangible but no less important a factor was his luck: he was in Rome just after the treaty of Brundisium, the right place at the right dme.
Herod was granted the throne of Judaea and Samaria by the triumvirs with the support of the Senate in autumn 40 в.с. He celebrated, incongruously, with a sacrifice to Jupiter Capitolinus and set sail for Syria to take possession of his kingdom.
For three years all his efforts were without avail since he lacked sufficient forces. Only in 38 did Antony send two legions under Sosius for an attack on Jerusalem. Despite an attempt to win popular support by celebrating his delayed marriage with the Hasmonaean Mariamme, Herod was faced by the implacable opposition of his putadve subjects. The reducdon of Jerusalem, probably in July 37 B.C. after a siege of more than seven months, was Sosius' victory, for which he was not slow to claim credit and a triumph; Herod prevented the sack of his new capital only with difficulty. Antony, once again breaking with precedent, had Antigonus, who begged for mercy, executed.
Herod's loyalty to Antony was as great as his enthusiasm for Cassius had once been, and he proved his worth to his new patron during the Parthian campaign.5 Antony in turn protected Herod even when Cleopatra demanded Judaea for herself or her children; the triumvir allowed her to take in 36 в.с. only the territory of Jericho and the rich balsam groves of Engedi near the Dead Sea, which Herod then cleverly leased back, thereby retaining political control over his domain despite the financial cost. That cost was augmented by his forced agreement to guarantee the rent of territory that Cleopatra had taken from the Nabataean king Malchus.
This friendship with Antony made Herod's position precarious after Acdum, but a campaign in Nabataea in 32-31 B.C., undertaken at the
5 Joseph.
instigation of Cleopatra, prevented his presence on Antony's side in the batde itself, and in spring jo в.с. Octavian not only confirmed his rule but presented him with an enlarged kingdom which included both the territory taken by Cleopatra and the fertile coastal plain of Judaea. Herod was to reign without further serious threat until his death in c. 4 B.C., becoming so firm a friend of Augustus that his territory was enlarged first by the addition of Trachonitis, Batanaea and Auranitis in 24/23 в.с. and then by Ulatha and Panias in the north in 20 в.с.
The apparent peace of these years was only achieved by continuing repression of opposition to Herod's rule by his subjects. In 26 в.с. Costobar, the governor of Idumaea, who was justifiably suspected of treason, was put to death. Disaffection in the Trachonitis caused endemic banditry in these border lands but no political threat. The refusal of more than 6,000 Pharisees to take the oath of loyalty demanded from them in c. 8 B.C. caused Herod annoyance but was not dangerous. Only as Herod approached death did an uprising in Jerusalem gather momentum in objection to the erection of a golden eagle above the Temple; even then it was only on his demise that widespread revolt broke out.
More dangerous to Herod was the disaffection within his family which was a constant feature of his reign from the beginning. His marriage to Mariamme in 37 B.C. was intended to boost his own prestige, but as a Hasmonaean princess she carried the hopes of all Jews who resented the Idumaean intruder. Herod needed either to eradicate or to harness the power she represented. That he was in two minds can be shown from his treatment of her younger brother Aristobulus III, whom he installed, aged sixteen, as High Priest in c. 35 B.C., only to panic when he was acclaimed with too much enthusiasm by the pilgrim crowd in Jerusalem. Herod staged an 'accidental' drowning for Aristobulus in the swimming bath in his palace in Jericho. Similar ambivalence was shown towards his old patron Hyrcanus, whose release Herod contrived from Parthia in 36 B.C. only to have him executed in 30 в.с. for alleged conspiracy with the king of Nabataea.
Such treatment of her father and brother was not calculated to endear Herod to Mariamme. He suspected her, probably with some justification, of rebellious designs, particularly during his own absences from the country; concern at the political threat she represented was augmented by fierce sexual jealousy of possible marital infidelity with those to whom she was entrusted while he was away. In 29 в.с. she was put on trial and executed. Herod's personal sorrow was perhaps compensated by the diminution of open opposition to his rule for the next twenty years, but it is at least possible that the subtle calculations of the power- seeker had in this case been upset by the savage passions of the infatuated lover.
The bitter harvest of Mariamme's execution was reaped when her mother Alexandra attempted rebellion in 28 B.C. and was killed; the poison lingered also in Herod's relationship with her two elder sons, Aristobulus and Alexander, when they reached manhood. Herod had sent the young princes to Rome in 24/23 B.C. for an education in the house of a Pollio,6 and when they returned to Jerusalem in c. 16 в.с. he made it clear that he wished them to succeed him. But such plans proved disingenuous. Herod's own sister Salome and his brother Pheroras, who had been since 20 в.с. tetrarch of Peraea, were unwilling to see their Idumaean family eclipsed by their half-Hasmonaean nephews. They persuaded Herod to recall his eldest son Antipater, whose mother was the Idumaean Doris; Antipater was accordingly also marked out for preferment by being sent to Rome in 13 в.с.
If Herod hoped in this way to control the ambitions of Mariamme's sons and the jealousy of his other relations, he was disappointed. Antipater began a concentrated intrigue to prove the treachery of the young princes to their father. The charges may even have been true, for Mariamme's sons had little reason to like Herod and by virtue of their Hasmonaean ancestry could expect some popular support. But the truth hardly mattered. Herod accused his sons before Augustus in c. 13 B.C. They were acquitted then and given a future share in the kingdom with Antipater, but Alexander at least was suspected of continued plots, perhaps with Herod's brother Pheroras. After further accusations, in c. 7 B.C. the young men were tried before a partially Roman court at Berytus and condemned. Herod had them rapidly executed before disaffection spread. Their main accuser Antipater, after brief glory as heir apparent in Rome in 5 B.C., was in turn accused of conniving with Pheroras against Herod; Pheroras died of natural causes before execution, but Antipater was put to death a few days before his father expired in
Such turmoil within the dynasty left the line of succession hardly clear when Herod died. Herod had in a final will left his kingdom to Archelaus, the offspring of a Samaritan wife Malthace. Archelaus' younger full brother Antipas was left Galilee and Peraea, while Philip, son of a woman from Jerusalem called Cleopatra, was to rule the northeastern wild country of Gaulanitis, Trachonitis, Batanaea and Panias. These provisions overrode an earlier will which, for reasons now unclear, had left everything to Antipas, and in disappointment he went to Rome to persuade Augustus to uphold his father's earlier intention.
The fraternal struggle took place before Augustus'
the three dead sons had been preferred for that role, though all of them had received part of their educadon in Rome.
In Judaea, immediate unrest, reviving the cause of the religious enthusiasts put to death for taking down the eagle from the Temple (see above, p. 741), was partially defused first by Archelaus' promise to accede to demands for lower taxes and the removal of Herod's favourites from high positions and then by bloodshed, but more serious disturbances erupted when Archelaus had set off for Rome accompanied by his rivals and by a delegation of Jews who had been encouraged by the legate of Syria to request that Judaea be incorporated within his province and the troublesome Herods deposed.
The causes of these more serious agitadons in the absence of the Herodian princes were probably varied.[902] In Galilee a certain Judas, son of a bandit named Ezekias who had opposed Herod in the forties B.C. (above, p. 739), sought power; he was perhaps a remnant of a powerful Hasmonaean family, in which case his aim will have been independence from both Herodian and Roman control.[903] In Peraea a certain Simon, a former slave of Herod, proclaimed himself king. In the Judaean countryside a former shepherd called Athronges, with his four brothers, also sought royal power.
It is not likely that these two latter rebellions were serious political attacks on the Herodian dynasty. The humble origins of the rebel leaders may perhaps be significant in assessing their motivation. It is possible that Athronges, with his four brothers, deliberately evoked the spirit of the Maccabees. Both he and Simon may have claimed religious sanction for national rebellion, but there is no direct evidence for this in the scanty report in Josephus.[904]
Meanwhile in Jerusalem itself riots were sparked off by the behaviour of the procurator Sabinus, who had been sent into Judaea from-Syria by Augustus to control the country while the will was being debated: a pilgrim crowd during the feast of Pentecost attacked him for reasons not known, and Sabinus retaliated by taking 400 talents from the Temple, thereby exacerbating the hostility. Quite different in intention and political significance was the revolt in Idumaea by some of Herod's veteran soldiers, for this mutiny was led by some of Herod's own relatives; their names are not known, but the weakness of Archelaus' position was emphasized by such disaffection even in the heartland of his family's traditional support.[905]
Suppression of all these disturbances was carried out with efficient ruthlessness by Varus, the legate of Syria, with two legions. Herod's final will was upheld by Augustus: Archelaus was confirmed as ruler in Judaea but with the dtle of ethnarch rather than king and the cities of Gaza, Gadara and Hippos removed from his territory; Andpas received Galilee, and Philip was granted his domain east of the Galilean lake. Both these latter had only the title of tetrarch, but they both enjoyed independence from their brother's sway.
On his return from Rome Archelaus found his land pacified but his subjects deeply hostile; a legion was left in Jerusalem to prevent further violent outbreaks. Josephus' account of Archelaus' rule is very skimpy; it seems that the history written by Nicolaus of Damascus, Herod's court historian, on which Josephus relied for the narrative of Herod's own rule, now came to an end. At any rate, in a.d. 6 Archelaus was deposed by Augustus and banished to Vienne in southern Gaul, and Judaea was taken under direct Roman control.11
Archelaus' brothers fared somewhat better. Philip remained for most of his rule ensconced peacefully in his somewhat remote territory, administering it, according to Josephus, with conscientious moderadon until his undramatic death while still tetrarch in
The beneficiary of Andpas' misfortune was his nephew and Herodias' brother, Herod Agrippa I.12 Agrippa's career, which had fluctuated from extreme misfortune to the heights of power, was nearing its peak when, probably in a.d. 40, he added Antipas' ethnarchy in Galilee to the territory which he had already inherited from Philip in a.d. 3 7. Agrippa's success exemplifies the Herodian technique in the pursuit of political power. The son of Aristobulus, who was executed by Herod in c. 7 B.C., he grew up close to the imperial court in Rome, but without official position or private income he ran up enormous debts and returned at some time after a.d. 23 in despair to Palestine. Rescued briefly by his brother-in-law Antipas, he made his way eventually in spring a.d. 36 to Italy, where his charm enabled him to join the emperor on Capri and to win the friendship of Gaius. Imprisoned by Tiberius for referring too
" Sources for Archelaus' rule are Joseph. Д/ xvii.j 39-5 j;
12 For the career of Agrippa i, see Joseph.
openly to his wish to see Gaius succeed to the Principate, he was released with honour when that event came about in spring a.d. 37 and was granted by the new emperor both the territory once governed by Philip and the tetrarchy of Abila in the Lebanon, with the dtle of king.
Skill at court intrigue and the friendship of a Roman prince had thus elevated Agrippa, and the same factors were to enlarge him still further. While Gaius was alive Agrippa preferred to rule his subjects through depudes, and frequently returned to Rome where real power lay. It was a wise decision: in a dramatic episode described in detail by Josephus (see above, p. 230), Agrippa played a central role in the elevation of Claudius to the Principate in a.d. 41 after the assassination of Gaius, and Claudius showed his gratitude by granting him the entire kingdom once ruled by Herod.
Agrippa now went to Jerusalem to enjoy the benefits of his intrigue. Popular with the people partly because of his Hasmonaean links through his grandmother, he ruled in a style sufficiently magnificent to arouse a suspicion in the mind of Marsus, the legate of Syria, that, by convoking in Tiberias a meeting of five other petty kings allied to Rome, he might be plotting rebellion. The charge was implausible, for Agrippa would have gained nothing and lost much by independence, but his painful death 'eaten up by worms' put an end to speculation.[906]
No other member of the dynasty of Herod was to achieve such power in Judaea. Some of Herod's less prominent descendants were granted territories, but these were in obscure parts of the eastern empire and little connected with Judaea:[907] Agrippa's own children were still young on his death in a.d. 44.[908] Their later considerable influence on Judaean society was achieved more through their presdge among Jews derived from their father than from the grant of power by Rome. Thus Agrippa II, who was in Rome in a.d. 44, was given in a.d. 49 the kingdom of Chalcis in the Lebanon that his uncle Herod had enjoyed from a.d. 41 to 48, and then in a.d. 5 3, in exchange for Chalcis, a larger territory including both the tetrarchy once ruled by Philip and other land east of the Sea of Galilee. Furthermore, some time after a.d. 54, Nero added to this kingdom parts of Galilee itself near the lake and a small area in the northern Peraea. But his political importance rested less on these territories, which merely brought him revenue, than on his role in Jerusalem, where he was granted the right, previously held by his father and uncle, to control the administration of the Temple. Not that even this control was entirely secure, for despite strenuous efforts he was unable to prevent the priests building a wall in the late fifties a.d. to block the view from his palace into the interior of the Temple.16
Agrippa IPs sisters, who had no formal powers at all, wielded hardly less influence. Drusilla married the Roman governor of Judaea, Antonius (or Claudius) Felix. Berenice achieved notoriety as paramour of the future emperor Titus.
Throughout this long and complex history over more than a hundred years, Roman favour to Herod and his descendants was remarkably constant and public. Their power depended upon Rome, which guaranteed their fidelity, while on the whole they showed fair competence in the administration of areas which, though not of major consequence in the immediate context of the empire's defence, were not themselves easy to hold in subjection. Each Herodian ruler was judged by his efficiency; at any rate, when they were grossly incompetent at keeping the peace, they were easily enough deposed, as Archelaus and Andpas discovered.
Jewish support for the Herods was, not surprisingly, much less enthusiastic, particularly when their regime was contrasted unfavourably to the Hasmonaeans they had supplanted. The myth of the Hasmonaeans as national liberators remained potent even in the first century a.d.17 Herod and his successors could only survive through a complete break with this past. All the male members of the Hasmonaean dynasty were dead by 30 B.C.; the women were married to Herod's own close relatives. It is probable that the supporters and friends who had formed the courts of the last Hasmonaeans were ruthlessly eliminated: forty-five of Andgonus' associates were killed. It is unlikely to be chance that no family whose original prominence can be traced to before Herod can be discerned in the detailed prosopography of Judaea in the first century a.d.18
In their place Herod promoted his own men. His court was largely composed of Gentiles who could be guaranteed not to seek influence except through his patronage; thus, most of his closest advisers, his generals and the tutors of his children were not Jewish. Exempted from this rule were only two categories of Jews. His own family was trusted by Herod to a remarkable extent, as in the nomination of his brother Pheroras as tetrarch of Peraea in 20 b.c.; in his case, such trust proved misplaced (see above, p. 742). The second category comprised the occupants of those positions in Judaean society which by their nature could only be filled by Jews.
Most important of these was the high priesthood, which had since the Persian period marked out its holder as a secular as well as religious leader. When the attempt to install Aristobulus III foundered (see above,
16 Joseph.
18 Cf. the discussion in Stern 1976 (e 1218) 11.561-6)0.
p. 741), Herod filled the post with Jews from Babylonia and Alexandria whose unsullied priestly birth could not be disputed but whose influence in Judaea was probably negligible. Only the family of Boethus, an Alexandrian who held the office from c. 25—4 b.c. was permitted some secular advancement. The clothes of the High Priest, which had once enshrined oracular powers and still apparendy bestowed excepdonal presdge on the wearer, were kept in Herod's possession further to limit the pontiffs' power. Most dramatically of all, Herod inaugurated a custom derived from pagan cults of shortening the tenure of the office.
Thus was opposition effectively silenced. Herod's sister's husbands proved some danger: both Joseph, executed in 34 B.C., and Costobar, executed in c. 26 B.C., had been married to Salome, and their ambition was suspect because of this proximity to the royal house. Few other Idumaean friends were allowed to join the circle of power; of these, only Salome's third husband Alexas is known to have retained his family's influence. The power of the ancient theocracy was broken. Any change in institutions of government was probably less significant than this removal of key personnel and their replacement with Herod's own supporters.19
Such measures did not still the abiding hatred of Herod within the wider Judaean population. Many Jews had been killed or enslaved in 37 B.C. when Sosius seized Jerusalem on his behalf. Herod's origins, not just as an Idumaean but as the son of a non-Jewish mother who is not known to have converted, were held against him, especially since it is possible that for some Jews, in this period as later, Jewish citizenship was held to be passed down through the female line.20 His interference in the prestige of the high priesthood was resented, as was his insistence that his unwilling subjects should forswear themselves by taking an oath to him in 17 B.C. and probably again in c. 8 B.C.
It is also probable but not certain that the populace was heavily taxed to pay for Herod's grandiose expenditure and the huge reserves which he accumulated.21 Herod may have enjoyed a considerable income from hereditary estates in Idumaea, from confiscated land in Judaea, both royal and private, and from letting out grazing land to the Nabataeans. The right to collect taxes for Rome and to farm half the revenue of the Cyprus copper-mines will have added considerably to his revenues. His expenses will have been less if, as is probable but not certain, he did not pay tribute to Rome after Actium. It is thus possible that the tax burden
" Oil the administration under Herod, see Schalit 1969 (e 1206) 185-223.
There is much debate over the date when the inheritance of citizenship through the female rather than male line was generally accepted by Jews. See Cohen 1985 (e i 101).
On the weight of Herod's taxes, and the continuing debate about the imposition of
on Judaea was not excessive: emergency measures in famine conditions in 25, 20 and 14 B.C. have no implications for the weight of normal exactions. Perhaps his Jewish subjects objected to paying taxes of any kind to a king whose legitimacy they questioned. Later Jewish literature in antiquity depicted Herod as a monster.22
Herod had few weapons with which to ward off such hostility. Apart from attempting to smother disaffection at an early stage by the use of a secret police, his most blatant reaction was the building of fortresses within the country for his own protection. The massive construction of surviving parts of his palaces in Jerusalem, Masada and Herodium bears witness to the importance of such defences.23 It is probable that these fortresses, like the military colonies planted mostly on the eastern edges of his territory, were intended as much to control the subject population as to fend off external foes. In Jerusalem a highly trained mercenary force composed mainly of Gentiles and largely recruited from the Greek cities in and near Palestine kept the peace; the Jews included in their number were mostly Idumaeans and Babylonians, though it is not known whether the omission of Judaeans was through their reluctance or Herod's insistence.24
But Herod also took steps to woo his Jewish subjects. At least while in Jerusalem he adhered to the main tenets of Judaism. His decision not to advertise his own portrait on his coins was in deference to the biblical prohibition on graven images. His avoidance of pork was the subject of a famous joke ascribed to Augustus: 'I would rather be Herod's pig than his son.'25 Above all he spent lavishly on the embellishment of Jerusalem and its Temple, creating a monument to the glory of his people as well as himself. The building was tactfully left under the supervision of the priests — except for the eagle, whose erection over the Temple door at Herod's command provoked violent opposition (see above, p. 741).
The extent of Herod's commitment to such 'double book-keeping' — presenting himself as Jewish to Jews, Greek to Gentiles - should not be exaggerated; such an attitude was in fact more characteristic of his grandson Agrippa I than of Herod himself.26 Herod did not hesitate to use hellenistic titles on his coins or to welcome many Greek-educated Gentiles to his Judaean court. Nevertheless he undoubtedly tried hard to promote his Jewish credentials, even claiming rather ludicrously that he was really descended from a line of Babylonian Jews.27 He prevented the marriage of the Nabataean Syllaeus to his sister Salome when the former
b. Baba Batbra sb-4a; b. Taanitb 23a; Lev. Rab. 35:8; Num. Rab. 14:20.
On Jewish levies in Herod's army, see Schalit 1969 (e 1206) 167-83.
Macrob.
For analysis of Herod's rule in these terms, see Baumann 1983 (e 1091) 264.
Joseph.
refused to convert to Judaism, and he liked to present himself as the protector of all Jews under Roman rule, wherever they might live.
Such bids for popularity seem to have failed to change Herod's image at least in Judaea. Much of the credit for rebuilding the Temple was destroyed by the riots against the erecdon of the eagle above it. Josephus writes that at Herod's death the 'notables of the kingdom' had been shut up in the hippodrome in Jericho under threat of execudon; Herod is said to have planned their demise to coincide with his to prevent unseemly joy when he died.
Neither Archelaus nor Andpas achieved any more popularity than their father. Philip, who did not rule over many Jews and, unlike his brothers, did not use 'Herod' as a dynastic name, avoided evoking such resentment, but the first Herodian to be accepted by at least part of the Judaean populace as more or less a genuinely Jewish king was Agrippa I. It is significant that Agrippa managed this not least by avoiding in Judaea any public connexion with his grandfather, preferring to be known as Agrippa rather than Herod; in his favour was his Hasmonaean grandmother Mariamme. Both he and his son won some further support by their championing of the Jewish cause at Rome when disturbances broke out in Alexandria and Judaea under Roman governors,28 but neither ever won a really enthusiastic following in Jerusalem.
The Herods compensated for this uneasy relationship with their Jewish subjects by seeking support elsewhere. They preserved excellent relations with the gentile population of the Greek cities in and around Palestine, increasing their number by various foundations, of which the most important was the great port of Caesarea. Herod and his descendants gave huge gifts to numerous Syrian cities, partly just to emphasize the Hellenic culture of the Jewish dynasty. Herod made grand donations also to cities and shrines in mainland Greece and Asia Minor. In Judaea itself, however, the Greeks were kept under firm control as part of the Herodian realm.
More important for the Herods themselves was their self-conception as the most glorious of the petty dynasties which ruled the Near East in the early Empire in friendly alliance with Rome and under her watchful eye. Influence on this plane was encouraged by intermarriage between Herod's relatives and the families of other client kings from areas as far afield as Nabataea, Emesa, Cilicia, Cappadocia and Africa.29 Relations with these dynasties were only strained when proximity encouraged Herodian dreams of expansion; such dreams help to explain the
a For Agrippa I and II in Rome, cf. Joseph.
29 For these relations, sec Sullivan 1978 (e 1064).
occasional hostility shown towards the Nabataeans, particularly in the wars of 9 b.c. and a.d. 36.[909]
Good relations with the emperor were of overriding importance to all the Herods. Cities were named in the emperor's honour; Herod entitled himself on official inscriptions 'Friend of the Emperor' and 'Friend of the Romans'; in about 8 B.C. he added to the oath of allegiance the name of the emperor; in the non-Jewish cities he established the imperial cult with great enthusiasm soon after Actium; in Jerusalem he began the practice of a daily sacrifice in the Temple for the well-being of the emperor and, less in accordance with Jewish custom, quadrennial games in the emperor's honour. Both Herod and his successors paid frequent visits to the imperial court in Rome.
The Herods thus functioned as much on the international as on the purely Judaean stage, intriguing for power in Rome as in Jerusalem. In neither city were they entirely accepted. Their Judaism, strikingly superficial though it seemed to Jews, distinguished them from the Roman senators and emperors in whose company they were found: the prospect that Berenice might marry the future emperor Titus caused outrage among the latter's associates.[910] Not until the second century a.d., when all their territorial rights had disappeared along with the vestiges of their Judaism, did the descendants of Herod win full acceptance in Roman society.[911]
ii. roman administration[912]
Direct Roman rule over Judaea began in a.d. 6 on the deposition of Archelaus. There was probably no deeper cause than that announced in public: Augustus' personal dissatisfaction with the ethnarch's immoderate and brutal behaviour towards his subjects.[913] Other explanations, however, have been proposed and may be correct: Rome benefited financially by the transfer of royal property such as the Engedi balsam groves to the imperial fiscus; the tribute raised by Rome despite provincial hostility was not small; the Judaean hill country had been held by the Parthians Јrom 40 to 37 в.с. and was of some, albeit slight, strategic importance for the defence of the eastern Roman frontier; in general, Augustus seems to have assumed that the imposition of direct rule in the place of client kings was desirable when appropriate.
Whatever the cause, direct rule proved to be Rome's more or less permanent solution to the squabbles of Herod's descendants over Judaea. Apart from the brief period (a.d. 41-4) when Agrippa I reigned (see above, p. 745), the same kind of Roman administration remained in force until a.d. 66, when a great rebellion led first to the establishment of an independent Jewish state and then to the fall of that state in an orgy of violence.
The decline towards catastrophe was gradual and probably intermittent but the signs were evident from the beginning. Despite the unpopularity of the deposed Archelaus, the first months under a Roman governor already witnessed considerable unrest. The immediate cause of discontent was the imposition of a provincial census under the supervision of the governor of Syria, P. Sulpicius Quirinius. It is not clear whether the complaint was aimed at higher taxation or the notion of being registered or the unpalatability of so blatant a sign of foreign domination. The trouble was soon stilled, for the moment.
Despite this early evidence that the administration of Judaea would not be easy, neither Augustus nor his successors seem to have taken great pains in the selection of suitable governors. All those chosen were of equestrian or lesser ranks; the province was too small to insult a senator with its rule, especially since no legions were stationed there. The tide
Nothing is recorded of the origins of the governors before a.d. 41, and none is known to have progressed further in his career; a salutary reminder of the insignificance of Judaea in Roman terms and also, perhaps, of Josephus' ignorance of events which preceded his own recollection. Of the later procurators, the historian records more detail of only three, whose appointment he evidently considered exceptional. The emperor Claudius appointed in
55 Frova 1961 (в 132); cf. Weber 1971 (в 296).
was probably still a powerful figure in Rome when Josephus wrote, it is unlikely that the Jews were very enthusiastic at the prospect of rule by a public apostate.[914] Less well intentioned and probably more disastrous was the appointment in
The extent to which the unrest engendered by the census in a.d. 6 was continued in the years immediately following has been much debated. Tacitus records a complaint in a.d. 17 against the weight of Roman taxation but not the principle of its imposition; for the rest he asserts that 'under Tiberius all was quiet'.38 The disturbances surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus are thus passed over by the Roman senator without mention. Other disorders in the time of Pilate were also treated by the Roman authorities as of less significance than with hindsight they deserve: Josephus records how Pilate provoked a mass demonstration against his introduction of legionary standards into Jerusalem and later caused a storm of protest, quelled only with bloodshed, by sacrilegiously using money taken from the Temple to build an aqueduct for the city;[916]another incident, mentioned by Philo alone, when Pilate was compelled to withdraw from Jerusalem shields bearing the emperor's name, perhaps because the reference therein to the divine Augustus was seen as idolatrous, may be identical with the episode involving the standards.40 Tiberius, ensconced on Capri, ignored such trivialities. Pilate lost his office only after an even more appalling crime in which a crowd of Samaritans was slaughtered in an eager search for the treasure said to be hidden on their holy mountain of Gerizim.
These symptoms of unrest were entirely overshadowed for later historians by the sudden, unexpected and climactic events of a.d. 40.41 A complaint sent through the procurator of the city to the new emperor Gaius in late a.d. 39 by the Gentile inhabitants of Jamnia, to the effect that their Jewish neighbours had refused to allow them to set up altars for his worship, elicited the response that a statue with the emperor's effigy must be set up in the Temple in Jerusalem. The effect was pandemonium: of the two detailed surviving accounts, that of the contemporary Philo is preferable to Josephus', but the very fact that the story of these events was treated almost as a dramatic myth by those, like Josephus, who were children at the time is highly significant. Agrippa I in Rome tried to dissuade his old friend, in Judaea the populace refused to harvest (or, depending on the precise chronology, perhaps to sow) their crops; Publius Petronius, the governor of Syria, to whom the task of installing the statue had fallen, baulked at the consequences of so grave an assault on the Jewish cult and prevaricated. Josephus and Philo state that the people were prepared to die to prevent Gaius' sacrilege, and Tacitus adds that they were close to rebellion. According to Josephus, Gaius repented his intention, at least temporarily, after Agrippa's intervention; but Philo states more plausibly that only the emperor's death in a.d. 41 forestalled calamity — and brought a remarkable change in fortune with the advent of a glamorous Jewish king, Agrippa I, only for this renaissance to be in turn abruptly terminated by his demise (see above, p. 745).
The unhappy events of a.d. 44-66 need to be seen against this background of the arbitrary imposition and removal of persecution, the raising and dashing of hopes. A border conflict in a.d. 44 between the Jewish inhabitants of Peraea and the citizens of Philadelphia was easily crushed and agitation against the new procurator Cuspius Fadus (a.d. 44—c. 46) for failing to return the high priestly garments to the Jews was mostly confined to the ruling class, but the band urged by a messianic prophet named Theudas to retire into the desert was apparently reckoned more dangerous and suppressed by the execution of Theudas himself. A period of comparative peace under Tiberius Iulius Alexander (с. a.d. 46-8) was followed by riots in Jerusalem under Ventidius Cumanus (a.d. 48-c. 5 2) when one soldier displayed himself indecently near the Temple and another burnt a copy of the Jewish Law during retaliatory action against a Judaean village whose authorities had failed to apprehend some brigands who had stolen goods from an imperial slave. More serious intercommunal fighting was to lead to Cumanus' exile: when a Galilean pilgrim was attacked by Samaritans while he was on the way to Jerusalem, a mob which rushed north from the festival celebrations caused such bloodshed before the procurator could control the combatants that the legate of Syria sent all parties, including Cumanus, to Rome, where they were duly punished.
Felix
The followers of other visionaries suffered a similar fate under Porcius Festus
The Jews claimed Caesarea as their city because it had been founded by Herod; the Greeks, more plausibly given the prominence of pagan temples in the city from the start, claimed it as theirs. The intermittent dispute was decided by Nero in
The antagonism thus aroused towards the procurator led quite rapidly to the outbreak of rebellion in the early summer of a.d. 66. Some youths lampooned Florus' meanness; the governor marched to Jerusalem to demand their surrender; the authorities refused to surrender the guilty; Florus let his troops loose on the city as punishment, arraigning before his tribunal even the richest Jerusalemites — Josephus claims that some were
Despite the efforts of some of the Jerusalem ruling class it proved impossible to restore order under the procurator's aegis. Florus attempted a public demonstration of the Jews' submission by ordering them to greet two cohorts sent to Jerusalem as reinforcements, but the soldiers' arrogance caused so much offence that rioting and further bloodshed were the only outcome. The governor's withdrawal to Caesarea eased tension slighdy and both Agrippa II and Berenice tried hard to prevent further escalation of disaffection, but in vain: in May/ June a.d. 66 some young priests, led by the captain of the Temple Eleazar son of Ananias, proclaimed defiance of Rome by halting the sacrifices regularly offered up on behalf of the Roman emperor.
The theological justification for this action, that it was not right to accept offerings from a Gentile, was exceptionally tenuous since this had
Tac.
Joseph.
been the custom for centuries, and the ruling class of Jerusalem split on the issue, the caudous advocating the restoradon of the sacrifices perhaps more on prudendal than theological grounds. Fighting between the different facdons reached an intensity not known in the gang warfare of previous years, and within a few days the viciousness increased still further when brigands under a certain Menahem son of Judas attached themselves to Eleazar's faction: Eleazar's father and uncle, the leaders of the main faction trying to avoid war with Rome, were killed, and the troops which had been sent by Agrippa to help quell the disturbances were either brought onto the rebels' side or expelled from the city; a small contingent of Roman auxiliaries hoped similarly to escape with their lives but were treacherously murdered by Eleazar's followers.[917]
Now that rebellion was irrevocable Jews in many of the cities around Judaea rose against their Gentile neighbours, who in turn took advantage of Rome's blessing to plunder and kill the Jews. As in 4 b.c., a.d. 6 and a.d. 40 the task of restoring Roman control was entrusted to the legate of Syria, and in Antioch Cestius Gallus gradually collected a large force which included the Twelfth Legion (Fulminata), other legionaries, and troops provided by allied kings including Agrippa.
It took until September for this force to reach Ptolemais. Cestius with little opposition secured Galilee, presumably to protect his rear, and ravaged some villages and small towns in the Judaean coastal plain, perhaps in the hope that exemplary massacres would terrify the Jerusalem rebels into submission. Josephus gives no details about events in Jerusalem over the summer months, perhaps out of embarrassment at the participation in rebellion of his own class, whom he later wished to exculpate from responsibility for the revolt, but the Jews were clearly not unprepared by October, when they confronted Cestius as his forces emerged from the Bethhoron Pass and despoiled him of much baggage even before he reached Jerusalem.
Cestius was impressed and daunted by the strength of this opposition. He rapidly captured the northern suburbs but after a few days decided that the city could not be taken that year; his main concern was perhaps his lack of supplies and the problems of transporting reinforcements through hostile hill territory. At any rate, he retreated to the coast in incompetent disorder, losing many men and much equipment in the Bethoron defile.
Whether or not the Jewish rebels had organized themselves coherently before Cestius' attack, they did so now. Josephus himself was chosen as general of the rebel forces in Galilee, and Ananus son of Ananus, who had briefly held the high priesthood in a.d. 62, was appointed joint commander-in-chief. On the Roman side Nero entrusted the war in February a.d. 67 to Titus Flavius Vespasianus, with the rank of
By June a.d. 67 Vespasian was in Galilee where Josephus, lacking proper troops and weapons, was reduced to defending hill-top fortresses. According to Josephus' detailed report the Galileans seem to have been less enthusiastic for revolt than their reputation as the most warlike of men would suggest;45 Vespasian's aim may have been less to secure his flank than to instil terror in Jerusalem by the ruthless treatment of the rebels, but if so the determined defence of Gamala after mass executions in Tarichaeae proved that such tacucs might backfire.46
Josephus himself had been captured in Jotapata before the fall of Galilee after a siege of forty-seven days and, at any rate according to the story as told later, had rapidly won Vespasian's attention and leniency by prophesying his elevation to the Principate.47 The historian's place in command of Galilee was taken by his arch-rival John son of Levi of Gischala; but John too proved ineffective against siege and escaped to Jerusalem, where he joined Ananus and his associates in late summer a.d. 67.
Meanwhile in the capital city the populace was not happy at the incompetence of the leadership which had permitted the loss of Galilee, and dissatisfaction spread further when Vespasian began in spring a.d. 68 systematically to encircle the capital. Opposition to Ananus was fuelled particularly by the peasants who, deprived of their homes, flooded into the city, finding leaders among a group of well-born priests who described themselves as Zealots, by which name they seem to have claimed a special zeal for the Temple cult.48 These priests accused Ananus' faction of a lack of enthusiasm for the war. The charge of treachery was probably not justified since Cestius' failure had shown that the rebels' strength lay in the strong walls of Jerusalem, but it was rendered plausible by the fact that many of Ananus' associates, including by now Josephus, had joined the Roman side. At any rate the Zealots established themselves in opposition to Ananus' government, barricading themselves inside the Temple. When they were joined in spring a.d. 68 first by the opportunist John of Gischala and then by a force of Idumaeans, they proved sufficiently powerful to wrest control of the whole city from Ananus, who was soon put to death.
45 Joseph.
44 The siege of Gamala is described at Joseph.
Suet.
Cf. Joseph.
Josephus claims in his account of the war that from this moment the Judaean state declined rapidly into savage civil war.[918] His assertion has often been believed but perhaps unwisely, for he himself had by now joined the Roman side, and at the time of writing he wished to distance himself and his friends
The efflorescence of this independent Jewish state from spring a.d. 68 to a.d. 70 was facilitated very largely by factors external to Judaea. In June a.d. 68 Vespasian suddenly halted the subjugation of the countryside because Nero's death had ended his mandate as imperial legate for the war. The renewed campaign in May/June a.d. 69 had just recovered the territory subdued the previous year and completed the encirclement of Jerusalem when in July Vespasian was proclaimed emperor and Roman operations against the Jews again ceased.
With the enemy thus distracted the Judaean leaders indulged in internecine struggle for control of the state. During a.d. 68 some of those ousted from power by John and the Zealots left Jerusalem to join an increasingly powerful figure in the countryside, Simon son of Gioras. This Simon had led troops against the rearguard of Cestius Gallus in autumn a.d. 66 but had been ousted from all influence by the deep hostility of Ananus son of Ananus; only after Ananus' death in early a.d. 68 did he take further part in the war. By spring a.d. 69 he had occupied Hebron and was powerful enough to take Jerusalem with the help of the Idumaean forces who had become disenchanted with John and the Zealots. His regime retained control of all the city except the Temple until Roman forces finally arrived outside the walls.
Vespasian, now
The reasons for Titus' zeal in the prosecudon of the siege again lay outside Judaea: he and his father needed a rapid victory to serve as a propaganda base for the new Flavian dynasty. By May the outer (third) wall was in Roman hands. In June the Antonia fortress fell and siege was laid to the Temple; the daily sacrifices ceased and famine began. On 10 Ab (August) a.d. 70 the Temple was destroyed, probably, despite Josephus' denial, on Titus' express order.[921]
Pockets of resistance in the upper city were slowly mopped up during September. The Herodian fortresses held out longer; Masada, the last stronghold, fell only in a.d. 73 or 74 with the suicide of the defenders: the surviving ramp confirms Josephus' account of the efforts of the Romans to secure complete pacification.53 Judaea was put under a praetorian legate with a legion permanently stationed at Jerusalem. A veteran colony was established at Emmaus.
The Temple was not rebuilt and its treasures were carried in triumph to Rome, as the reliefs on the Arch of Titus record. Of the rebel leaders Simon was executed on the Capitol, and the others were either imprisoned or enslaved. No attempt was made to reconstitute Judaean society: the province's desoladon was deliberately stressed by Flavianic propaganda, especially on imperial coins.[922] Only the religion of the Jews survived, and that too underwent great adaptation as the significance of the Temple's destruction was gradually interpreted during the late first and second centuries a.d. and a new understanding forged of the relation of God to his people. (See САН xi2).
Such disasters and so much bloodshed must be accounted evidence of a failure in Roman provincial administration. The causes of such failure were undoubtedly complex; nor can Josephus, the main guide to the facts, be accounted of much use in the ascriptions of blame in which his prejudices are blatant. Nonetheless some causes specific to Judaea can profitably be pointed out.
Both Josephus and Tacitus accused the procurators of Judaea of incompetence and deliberate wickedness,55 and a charge of at least tactlessness in the handling of Jewish religious susceptibilities is hard to refute. On the other hand failure to comprehend the intricate regulations of Judaism was particularly venial in the light of the variety of religious attitudes and authorities in Judaea in this period (see below, p. 762).
On the Jewish side Josephus attempted to shift all blame onto rebels from the poorer classes, attempting to portray the rich as loyal subjects of Rome despite the involvement of many of them in the war. According to his account the nation was destabilized by bandits in the countryside and urban terrorists in Jerusalem, and the war was a direct result of their wicked acts.56
These terrorists, described as
Other factors are less stressed by Josephus. The riots and massacres in cities of mixed Jewish and gentile occupation near Palestine in a.d. 66 were symptomatic of an intermittent hatred whose origins probably went back to the Hasmonaean period. Most of the auxiliary forces used against the Jews were volunteers from these cities. Their antagonism was fuelled and reinforced by the cultural divide which hindered intermarriage and all except the most superficial social contact. Within Judaea the widening of class divisions, for which there is much evidence
56 Cf. Bilde 1979 (e 1094). 57 Joseph.
58 Joseph.
61 Some take
(see below, p. 769), embittered the poor, especially since biblical law through the (now disregarded) institution of the Jubilee prohibited the accumulation of landed wealth over generations;62 but although the rich in normal times sided with Rome and class hostility could thus be expressed by rebellion, in a.d. 66-70 many of the wealthy also joined in the revolt.
This transfer of allegiance by the ruling class was itself a cause as well as a consequence of the outbreak of war. The ruling class was expected to help the governor in the suppression of disorder in the province, and when they proved incapable of doing so, the procurators tended to treat them as if they were themselves implicated: in
The struggle within Jewish society continued inside the independent Jewish state of a.d. 66 to 70. With the raising of the stakes, the methods used by the factions became closer to outright warfare; their rivalries struck even the outside observer Tacitus.66 It is possible that these factions represented different ideologies, sects, classes or areas of origin, but since both John of Gischala and Simon son of Gioras included Jews of all classes and origin among their followers and Josephus' vituperative rhetoric about the disreputable origins of his opponents is hardly to be trusted, reconstructions of such parties by modern historians are necessarily speculative. It should be noted that the slogans on the coins issued by the different factions when in control of Jerusalem do not differ materially. It is possible that the struggle of the faction leaders was solely for power, while their supporters were mercenaries, often former bandits, culled from the dispossessed peasantry; in the opposition to Rome all the factions united in an appeal to the nationalist sentiments of the general population.
There is only little evidence for the common assertion that the prime causes both of the rebellion and of this civil strife were explicit religious
62 Lev. 25:9-10. " Joseph.
65 Joseph.
beliefs. Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius all mendon widespread belief in an oracle that a man from Judaea would become ruler of the world. Josephus states that the inidation by the rebel leader Judas the Galilean in a.d. 6 of the new ('Fourth') philosophy, according to which Jews should obey no ruler except God, was responsible for the war;67 but this may refer to divine displeasure at alleged unauthorized religious innovation as much as to the arousal of anti-Roman sentiment by this anarchist doctrine, and the explicit connexion made by Josephus between the Fourth Philosophy and the
Nonetheless it is striking that most disturbances which required forcible suppression were sparked off by religious issues and that many occurred at the pilgrim fesdvals where the religious atmosphere was highly charged. One reason may be the lack of a clear all-embracing orthodoxy in first-century Judaism (see below, p. 762): behaviour which to some Jews, including perhaps the governor's advisers, seemed permissible, was anathema to others. More pervasive was the general hostility to the Romans simply because they were Gentile: in a society where holiness was achieved through separadon from impurity and non- Jews were believed to be in a vague sense a source of pollution (see below, p. 765), the liberation of the land from foreign rule might well seem desirable. But it must be stressed that the legends on the coins issued by the rebels to put forward their public message bear no such overt religious meaning, although the objects illustrated were evidently designed to emphasize the centrality of the Temple worship; they proclaim the freedom of Jerusalem and Israel.69
iii. jewish religion and society
Much of the evidence for Judaean society derives from sources which are only dubiously reliable since they were written for theological rather
67 Joseph.
M Kadman i960 (в 528).
70 The main sources, apart from the gospels, the Acts of the Apostles and the rabbinic texts, are Joseph.
Most Jews did not belong to any sect or (in Josephus' terminology) philosophy, for worship was a matter not of belief but of practice. None the less a central core of dogmas most of which were common to all Jews can be defined. Prime among these is devotion to monotheism and to the Jewish law enshrined in the Pentateuch, the Torah. The exact requirements of the Torah were much discussed, to the extent that interpretation of the text became in itself an important mode of worship,
Christian Church along with but outside the canonical books of the Old Testament (translations in Charles 1913 (в 25); a much larger but not fully reliable collection in Charlesworth 1983-5 (в 26); a smaller selection in Sparks 1984 (e 1214)). Of the rabbinic texts, the Mishnah and Tosefta, both edited in the early to middle third century a.d., deserve more respect as evidence for Judaism in the first century a.d. than the Palestinian Talmud (compiled
71 On the excavations at Qumran, see de Vaux 1973 (e 1229); on En el-Ghuweir, see Bar-Adon 1977 (e 1085); on discoveries in Jerusalem, Avigad 1984 (e 1080).
divergence on the correct exegedc method constituting one of the defining characterisdcs of the various sects. The whole adult male community was required to meet at least once a week in synagogues to hear and learn about the Torah; this was the main and perhaps the sole function of synagogues in Palestine in this period, for the scarcity of clearly identified buildings from the first century a.d. or before suggests that, unlike in the diaspora (see below, p. 777), Judaean synagogues in this period were not yet treated as sacred places.[923] Understanding of the Torah was expedited by translation into the vernacular and by detailed interpretation of the implications as well as the plain meaning of the text.
Most Jews also acknowledged the paramount importance of the Temple in Jerusalem, where a highly professional hereditary priesthood administered the minutely organized sacrificial service with scrupulous ceremonial. Twenty-four groups of priests served in turn. Public and private offerings were made in a state of exceptional purity; the ordinary people meanwhile stood outside in the courtyard, while the Levites, a clearly defined caste of less prestigious Temple servants, sang psalms. The architecture of the sanctuary enhanced its function as the centre of purity: the grand colonnade built by Herod surrounded a great courtyard into which all were permitted to enter; that courtyard enclosed entirely a smaller court (the Court of the Women), through which it was necessary to pass to reach the Court of the Israelites; enclosed by the latter court lay the Court of the Priests, who alone could enter the sanctuary itself; beyond the reach of all except the High Priest on the Day of Atonement lay the Holy of Holies, the purest place of all. While the sacrifices continued divine approval would ensure rain, harvests and prosperity; their cessation in a.d. 70 was seen at the time as calamitous[924]and led to the development in coming centuries of more than one novel and distinctive Jewish theology (see САН xi2).
Of those few Jews known to have dissented from the high value placed by their fellows on worship in the Jerusalem Temple, the adherents of the Dead Sea sect are striking. Whatever the original reason for their treatment of the priests in Jerusalem as sinners whose sacrifices were invalid (see
The significance attributed to the Torah and the Temple and the strict observance of personal restrictions on the Sabbath and festivals were characteristics of Judaism inherited from Persian and early-hellenisdc times when the last books of the Hebrew bible were still being composed. Less pervasive but, perhaps because of their novelty, well attested in the sources are the new elements introduced in the last centuries в.с. and in the Roman period.
One such new development was the evolution of distinct theologies by the three major sects, the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes; all three have been discussed in detail in САН ix2. So far as is known, neither of the two latter groups underwent any great shift in ideology, membership or political significance during the period covered by the present volume; the identity of the Essenes with the sectarians who produced the Dead Sea scrolls, and of the latter with the inhabitants of the settlement at Qumran, is likely but not certain.
Much more evidence survives about the Pharisees in the first century a.d. The authors of the gospels, particularly that of Matthew, depicted the Pharisees as opponents of Jesus and subjected them to a fierce polemic. Josephus showed a particular interest in them, claiming to be of their number, as did St Paul.[925] The rabbis of the second century a.d. saw some of the Pharisees as their spiritual forbears: thus the family of Hillel, a Babylonian Jew who came to Jerusalem under Herod and founded a dynasty of teachers including Paul's instructor Gamaliel, are described by Josephus and the New Testament as Pharisees but by Judah the Patriarch, Hillel's long-distant descendant who compiled the Mishnah in
The different pictures of the Pharisees in these sources cannot be satisfactorily reconciled. The teachings specifically attributed by later rabbis to named authorities who taught before a.d. 70 concern to a large extent the intricate laws governing physical purity and the tithing of foodstuffs, and it has been argued that such matters constituted the prime or sole interests of first-century Pharisees; but it is also possible that such concerns were confined to a small group within the Pharisaic movement — the later rabbis described those individuals particularly zealous about such matters as
Most of the leading Torah scholars of this period mendoned in later rabbinic wridngs were probably Pharisees. According to the rabbis, two distinct schools ('Houses') emerged in the first century a.d., one constituted of the followers of Hillel, the other of Shammai; both these teachers lived in the time of Herod. Later tradition depicted the controversies between the Houses as fierce, but the issues mentioned as under dispute are mostly quite trivial and presuppose wide areas of agreement.
The extent of the wider influence of the Pharisees in the first century is also uncertain. The rabbis assumed that their forbears, like themselves, were the natural leaders of the nation, and Josephus, in describing the Pharisees of the Hasmonaean period, attributed to them great authority over the masses. But the Pharisees are not ascribed a prominent role as a group in Josephus' detailed narrative of the politics of Judaea in the first century a.d.; if they had acted as a political faction in the Hasmonaean state, it would appear that they had lost this role in the Herodian period or soon after. In any case, the number of Pharisees was probably never great - the only figure mentioned by an ancient writer is the 'more than 6,000' who, according to Josephus, refused to take an oath in support of Herod. Their influence in religious matters spread beyond their immediate circle, partly because in their interpretation of the Torah they often took account of popular customs.[926]
A more widespread development than the emergence of distinct philosophies was a concern by Jews for physical purity in a general sense. Both purity as a metaphor for holiness and pollution standing for sin are frequently found in the language of the Hebrew bible, but such usage gained added significance in the post-biblical period as a symbol of the separation of Jews from Gentiles. This tendency was expressed in an interest in what entered the body as sustenance and in bodily excretions, going well beyond the biblical definitions of the limited sources of uncleanness which debarred priests from the sanctuary. Not only were Jews renowned among outsiders for scrupulous observance of the dietary prohibitions listed in Leviticus but,[927] probably in late hellenistic times, they also adopted further taboos which lacked any obvious biblical base, including the avoidance of Gentile milk, bread, wine and olive oil. Later rabbinic tradition, aware of the anti-Gentile tendency in these customs, ascribed them, probably wrongly, to the eighteen anti- Roman decrees said to have been agreed by the Houses of Hillel and Shammai at the start of the Great Revolt.77 Finds of ritual baths in a number of early-Roman Palestinian sites suggest that total immersion was a widespread practice, at least among those believed most susceptible to pollution such as menstruating women.
The symbolism of purity was elaborated in the idiosyncratic theologies of the Dead Sea sect, for whom the consumption of meals in purity was a central rite, and of the
The avoidance of pollution occasionally led to asceticism which had its roots in the conduct of some of the biblical prophets. The austere surroundings of the Qumran sect were probably believed to be intrinsically desirable. The ascetic Bannus whom Josephus claims to have joined in the Judaean desert was admired for his avoidance of everything beyond necessities.78 John the Baptist won fame by refusing to use manufactured food or clothes; it is not clear whether his denial of comfort or achievement of purity was perceived as more praiseworthy. Nonetheless asceticism was not widespread in contrast to the early Christian church. For most Jews fasts were restricted to times of such emergencies as drought.79
There were at least three other significant theological innovations in the religion of first-century a.d. Judaean Jews, but neither the extent nor the depth of their influence can be determined with certainty. Some Jews began to believe in a life after death; some lived in confident expectation of the Messiah; some tried to adopt Greek philosophical explanations of the world while retaining loyalty to the Torah.
Belief in a life after death was certainly a novelty in the hellenistic period, for no Jewish text before the Book of Daniel (12:2), which was redacted to its final form in the second century B.C., unambiguously refers to such a notion. Since in the first century a.d. the issue was still fiercely debated by the Pharisees and Sadducees and extant texts are unclear when, how and with what accoutrements this after-life would take place, this hope was perhaps not an important element in religious consciousness. Mourning practices continued to assume the unalloyed grief of the deceased's relatives. The introduction of secondary burial in
Joseph.
stone ossuaries after the flesh had rotted is more likely to reflect a desire for purity than the after-life; the practice was confined in the Jerusalem area and parts of the Judaean countryside to the late first century B.C. and the first century a.d.80
The importance of messianic beliefs in first century a.d. Judaea may have been exaggerated by the Christian tradition through which most of the literary texts of the period survive but some Jews at least expected that a Messiah (however defined) would eventually appear, accompanied by a radical reorganization and judgment of the world.81 There was no agreement about the nature of the new world: the messianic age depicted in the Dead Sea scrolls differs markedly from that in other texts and no group developed any precise doctrine on the subject. It is impossible to know how many Jews would accept all of this composite picture which can be created only by amalgamation of a number of texts but it is likely that many would subscribe to at least part of it: a final ordeal and confusion would lead to Elijah, who would come as precursor to the Messiah; this latter would be assaulted by Gentile powers but, proving victorious, would renew Jerusalem, gathering the dispersed to enjoy the kingdom of glory in the holy land; in a new heaven and earth the dead would be resurrected to face the last judgment and assignation either to bliss or to damnation for eternity. The role of Israel was always seen as central but the new age was frequently taken to have universal application.
The precise nature of the Messiah himself was also a matter for speculation. The concept as expressed in the Hebrew bible involved a king of the line of David, but at Qumran a second Messiah of priestly stock was envisaged; the notion of a suffering Messiah was in this period uncommon and perhaps unknown outside the early Christian community. The practical consequence of such messianic beliefs was often political quietism since it might be felt impious to force the divine timetable; it is thus debated whether such doctrines were a major element in any of the disturbances preceding the revolt of a.d. 66.
The extent to which further changes in the theology of Judaean Jews were occasioned by adaptation of hellenistic religious ideas cannot be clearly determined since many intertestamental texts which now survive only in Greek cannot be certainly assigned either to Judaea or to the diaspora (see above, p. 762). Folk memories of the events preceding the Maccabean revolt (see
ю On ossuary burial see Hachlili and Killebrew 1983 (e 1132); Rahmani 1986 (e i 192). On the debate over life after death, cf. Acts 23:6-8.
" Discussions of messianism in Klausner 1956 (e i i j 8); Schiirer 1979 (e 1207) h 488-5)4; Neusner, Green and Frerichs 1987 (e 1185).
borrowing rare, but such Greek notions as the immortality of the soul divorced from the body were held for instance even by the Essenes.82
The agrarian economy of Judaea thus could not by itself support a city of the size and magnificence of Jerusalem, which Pliny the Elder described as 'by far the most illustrious of the cities of the Orient'.83 Nor could agricultural wealth alone have paid for the multifarious imports and impressive expenditure of the rich inhabitants of Jerusalem whose houses have been revealed by recent excavations. The Judaean economy was fuelled by a constant influx of wealth brought to the Temple both by Jews and by others from all over the Mediterranean and the Near East. This wealth percolated into society through the spending power of the priests, the provision of employment in the beautification of the sanctuary, and the influx of pilgrims who required service industries for their comfort. The splendour thus acquired by Jerusalem was all the more remarkable in contrast to the rustic poverty of its hinterland.
The evidence for such poverty is extensive. The prevalence of the debt burden which afflicted the poor is clear from the attempt by the rebels in a.d. 66 to persuade debtors to join them by burning the debt archives in Jerusalem;84 apart from the natural effect on small farmers of bad harvests, an important cause was probably investment by the rich of surplus wealth in loans when there was insufficient land to purchase: a legal innovation, the
Joseph.
Pliny,
85 Deut. 15:1-2. On the
bated by overpopulation, of which a main cause must have been the common unwillingness of Jews on religious grounds to practise contraception, abortion or infanticide. Surplus children were more likely to survive in Jewish society than other rural economies because Jewish concepts of charity required the rich to provide food and shelter up to a (very low) minimum standard to all who seemed to be in need.
Conflict between rich and poor took different forms in the town and in the countryside; since before a.d. 66 the rich were often identified with the Roman suzerain, class and political motives were sometimes mingled in the struggle. According to Josephus rural violence became endemic in the late fifties a.d.86 Bandits found refuge on the hill-tops and in artificial caves; many such caves have been discovered, though some may have been dug out of the limestone only during the Bar Kochba revolt in a.d. 132-5.87 Such places of concealment sufficed for the brigands to escape the attention of the small forces of the Roman governor; the awareness of their presence by the local peasant population may have been of less concern since their attitude seems sometimes to have been sympathetic or at least not hostile.88
In Jerusalem the poor formed an urban proletariat of a size rarely found in this period outside the city of Rome. They were attracted by hopes of charity or of employment either on such public works as the building of the Temple or on private projects for the richer families of the city. Their numbers and volatility are evident from the account by Josephus of the consternation of the city's leaders when, on the completion of the Temple in
Resentment at economic disparities was not apparently channelled into direct class warfare partly because social identification of individuals in terms of their property ownership, which was natural in Greek and Roman society, was less obvious among Jews, for whom the possession of wealth, though considered only in a few marginal religious groups such as the Essenes as positively undesirable, was rarely seen as in itself a criterion for status: the rich in Judaea, apart from the Herods, did not practise evergetism.90
Jewish society in fact lacked the clear social hierarchy which marked contemporary Rome; it is probably a mistake to treat the religious sects as important social groupings or to identify their interests with those of particular economic classes. There was probably general agreement
M Joseph.
Kloner 198 j (e 1159); Kloner and Tepper 1987 (e 1160).
On complicity of locals with brigands, see Joseph.
90 Class warfare is emphasized by Kreissig 1970 (e i 166). On the different criteria for status in Jewish compared to Greek or Roman society, see Goodman 1987 (e i 150) 109-33.
about the low social and religious status of Gentiles and slaves. There was consensus too among men about the posidon of women, who were generally excluded from positions of influence, although royal princesses were excepted from this rule and the introduction of the
High priority was given to genealogy, even though most Jews, apart from priests, were probably unable to trace their ancestry more than five generations. Men used their patronymics after their own name. Dynasties preserving family pre-eminence can be found among the Pharisees and the
Such claims were made only for the sake of prestige and not as a statement of social ties. Extended families based on shared ancestry do not seem to have played an important social role in Judaea in this period. Endogamy, which was still highly praised in the Book of Tobit, which was written probably in the third century B.C., is almost unknown in the first century a.d. outside the Herodian family. The characteristic tombs of the rich in this period, comprising central chambers surrounded by
Among the most highly regarded origins was that of priests. Only those whose fathers were priests could serve in the Temple and receive tithes from other Jews. Intermarriage with proselytes or divorcees was forbidden for fear of throwing doubt on the paternity of the offspring. In their zeal to protect the purity of their lineage the priests kept their own archives which stretched back far into the Hasmonaean period and perhaps beyond. Of exceptionally high status were those whose ancestors had as High Priests acted as the religious and (except under the
Hetods) secular leaders of the nadon; in the first century a.d. these families were known collecdvely as the High Priests.94
But even such status from birth could in this period be undercut or nullified by an alternative route to status through learning.The centrality of the Torah in Judaism led direcdy to the prestige and popular influence of the scholars who interpreted it. Such scholars, the 'scribes' of the gospels, might come from a range of social backgrounds and were never a hereditary caste like the priests. Nor were they a unified professional group, for methods of interpretation differed drastically from one scholar to another: for instance a scholar in the Pharisee tradition would take account of popular custom but a Sadducaic scholar would not (see САН ix2, 304-8).
Some Torah interpreters gained further authority from the accident of birth since some at least were priests, though not all priests were scholars; others perhaps increased their influence by ostentatious personal piety in the synagogue and streets.95 Less common were charismatic teachers who did not aim to interpret Torah. Their rarity gave particular power to such figures as Honi the Circle-Drawer, whose prayers could end droughts, and Hanina son of Dosa, whose cures were famed. Stories about both men survive much embroidered in late rabbinic texts; the picture painted there of Honi is confirmed by Josephus' stories of the same man, whom he names Onias.96
The career of Hanina son of Dosa seems to have been confined to Galilee, and the regionalism of many of these religious leaders, and indeed of local loyalties in general, militated further against national acceptance of any single man or group. In constitutional terms (in the eyes of both Jews and Romans) the national leader should have been the High Priest of the day, but his authority was weakened in this period first by the policy initiated by Herod of usually permitting each incumbent only a short term (see above, p. 747) and second by the selection of what was probably a quite new priestly family, that of Ananus, by the procurators after a.d. 6: Ananus and his five sons, who all held the post, dominated the high priesthood until a.d. 66.97
Lack of confidence in the High Priest prejudiced also the prestige of the council over which he presided, the Sanhedrin. Later rabbinic stories that the Sanhedrin was an appeal court composed entirely of Torah
M Ibis interpretation is doubted by Jeremias 1969 (e 1151) 175-81, but remains the most plausible explanation of the evidence, cf. Schŭrer 1979 (e 1207) 11 232-6.
95 Cf. Matt. 6:2, 5, 16; 23:5-7. For the claim that the priests as a group regulated religious behaviour, see Joseph.
" On the family of Ananus, cf. Stern 1976 (e 1218). The identification, proposed by Stern, of
scholars are probably not trustworthy: inventions of the late second century a.d. and after may have been retrojected to the period before a.d. 70; the evidence of Josephus and the New Testament, although itself not perfect, is to be preferred.98 The precise composition of the council is not certain, except that some members of the high-priestly families and both Pharisees and Sadducees could be included. It seems probable that the Sanhedrin sometimes acted also as the
The lack of clearly accepted authority in first-century Palestine, and the resulting social confusion, were exacerbated by Roman failure to recognize any of the competing local criteria for status. Roman insistence on wealth as the prime requisite for the governing class promoted to power men who sometimes lacked the local respect which might have enabled them to control popular disaffection.
This process is clearly seen in the art and architecture of first-century Judaea. The decoradon of houses excavated in Jerusalem uses Greek modfs even to the extent of plaster painted in imitation of marble columns, but both mosaics and murals are with few exceptions aniconic. Many tomb markers in the city's vicinity have Greco-Roman facades although the tomb layout is derived from near-eastern custom. Herod's stoa around the Temple did not interfere with the Semitic plan of the inner sanctuary. Theatres, amphitheatres and hippodromes were built by the Herods at Jerusalem and Jericho; there was (probably) a theatre alone at Sepphoris; Tiberias had a stadium and Tarichaeae a hippodrome; but the cultural activities in these places brought prestige to the dynasty only outside Judaea, for such activities were, according to Josephus, alien to Jewish custom.101
For a conservative approach towards the rabbinic evidence, postulating the existence of two Sanhedrins, see Mantel 1961 (e H7j);cf. the more sceptical remarks in Sanders 1985 (f 212) 312-17.
Joseph.
Joseph.
Joseph.
Less certain is the extent to which the Greek language was adopted by Judaean Jews; it was the normal tongue of at least the upper-class Gentiles of the cides in the vicinity of Palestine. Some Greek religious texts were found at Qumran, though the great majority are in Semidc tongues. The letters and legal documents of the early second century a.d. discovered in the Judaean Desert are apparently trilingual in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.102 It is probable that the rural poor knew less Greek than the urban rich and that no Judaean spoke good Greek — hence, perhaps, the tribune's surprise that St Paul spoke
A major hindrance to any deeper hellenization of Judaea was the Jewish educational curriculum in which, as Josephus boasted, the Torah took the place of Greek literature and rhetorical ability was not highly prized.104 Judaean literature itself was probably little affected by Greek literary genres, but both the Greek histories of Josephus and of Justus of Tiberias and the uncertain provenance of many extant Jewish Greek wridngs make this unsure; on the other hand, the common assumption that texts originally composed in a Semitic language were written in Palestine is also not entirely warranted since there was a large Jewish diaspora in Mesopotamia.
At any rate, it is striking that all surviving Hebrew and Aramaic texts are religious documents which show a passionate concern for ancestral customs and bible interpretation and only slight influence by Greek culture in, for instance, vocabulary. Semidc nadonal annals were no longer written after the fall of the Hasmonaean dynasty but, following biblical models, religious poetry, such as the
102 Benoit, Milik and De Vaux i960 (e 1093); Avigad
elaboration of codes of conduct such as are also found in later rabbinic Judaism was shared by other Jews in the first century a.d.105
Perhaps the most fundamental cultural change through Greek influence was in the area of law, where the Pharisees seem somedmes to have elevated popular custom to sacred status. The rabbinic texts of the early third century a.d. reveal the incorporation of many hellenistic legal customs into Jewish law and the Judaean Desert documents of the early second century (see above, n. 102) confirm that this was law in practice in property sales, leases, marriage and divorce. Of most social and economic significance were the laws governing tenancies of land and the enhanced rights of women protected by marriage contracts.
The great spread of the Jewish diaspora was largely a phenomenon of the late-hellenistic and Roman periods. There are good a priori reasons to suppose that such Jews living outside Palestine may have developed differently from their compatriots in Judaea in various ways.
Exceptional weight in the reconstruction of the* history of diaspora Jews is necessarily accorded to the voluminous writings of Philo of Alexandria. A pious Jew from one of the leading families in the city in the first century a.d., Philo was highly educated in Greek literature and Platonic philosophy. In his theological works he tried systematically to interpret the bible as an esoteric allegory of Greek moral philosophy; he claimed this exercise to be a necessary corollary to, rather than substitute for, the literal interpretation of scripture. His high social status and the peculiar political problems of Alexandrian Jews led him also to write historical works on the vicissitudes they suffered in his own day.
Caution is however necessary in extrapolating from Philo's evidence to the rest of the Jewish diaspora. Other Jewish Greek writers are known to have existed, but, of non-Christian Jewish authors, only Philo's theology was sufficiently congenial to the early Church to be extensively preserved; by the third century a.d. most of the rest of this literature was known to Clement of Alexandria and later patristic authors only in very fragmentary selective quotations from earlier, often
On these texts, see Schiirer 1986 (e 1207) ih.i, 177-469, 1987 (e 1207) 111.2, 746-808, with bibliographies of editions and secondary discussions. Translations of Qumran material in Vermes 1987 (e 1231), and of the other material in Charlesworth 1985-5 (в 26).
The main evidence for Jewish society in the diaspora in the hellenistic and Roman periods comes from the writings of Philo. Also important are Joseph. AJ, especially Book xi v; Acts of the Apostles; remarks by a variety of non-Jewish Greek and Latin authors (cf. the comprehensive collection by Stern 1974-84(3 168)); a good number of inscriptions set up by Jews cf. Frey 1952-75 (в 2 jo); papyri produced by or about Jews in Egypt (cf.
non-Jewish, compilations, particularly that by Alexander Polyhistor.107 It is therefore likely that Philo's theology was not typical of Greek- speaking Jews and it is certain that the politics of Alexandria were specific to that city. No less untypical of Greek Jews was that other prolific Jewish writer, St Paul. Generalizations about the diaspora can thus only be tentadvely proposed.
According to the often disparaging remarks of non-Jewish writers in antiquity, the religious practices of diaspora Jews were similar to those in Judaea: circumcision, the Sabbath and food taboos were all seen by these authors as sometimes amusing, sometimes obscene, but always characteristic of Jews. The theft by the proconsul of Asia Lucius Valerius Flaccus in 62-61 в.с. of a huge sum collected by Asia Minor Jews for the Jerusalem Temple108 demonstrates the respect for the sanctuary of those who contributed. Many diaspora Jews visited the holy city on pilgrimage at least occasionally, although the Temple's overwhelming religious importance in Judaea seems to have been diminished somewhat by distance: at Leontopolis, near Memphis in Egypt, indeed, the temple founded in the middle of the second century b.c. by the Oniads (see САНix2, 299) was only finally closed in a.d. 73, though it had apparently never attracted many adherents outside its immediate vicinity.
Most of the new religious trends found among Jews in Palestine in this period are also attested in the diaspora. The extension of purity taboos to Gentile olive oil was also practised at Antioch in Syria; messianic hopes are probably implicit in Philo; expectation of life after death at least for a disembodied soul is quite often expressed; the sect of the Therapeutae in Egypt made, like the Essenes, a virtue of asceticism. But besides this a more distinctive feature of the diaspora Jews at least of the Mediterranean coasdands was a more thoroughgoing hellenization in the expression of their religion than was normal in Palestine; Jews like St Paul naturally spoke and read good Greek.
10,7 Such texts are discussed in Schŭrer 1986 (e i 207) in.i, j 09-66, 617-700.
'» Cic.
Thus Greek genres were employed by a number of hellenistic Jewish writers. The Wisdom of Solomon is a protreptic or encomium. The Fourth Book of Maccabees is a diatribe. The philosophy of Aristobulus employs an eclecdc variety of Stoic and other Greek teachings.109 The extraordinary play about the Exodus written by a certain Ezekiel provides precious evidence for the composidon of tragedy in the hellenistic period. Significantly some forger now unknown tried to pass off pious Jewish verses under the guise of such archaic and classical Greek poets as Orpheus and Phocylides, probably with the intention of impressing his fellow Jews as much as Gentiles.
For probably most Jews in the hellenistic diaspora the Septuagint was the standard text of the bible. This translation, which had come about gradually in the third and second centuries в.с. in Alexandria, was nearly always used rather than the original Hebrew in surviving Jewish writings in Greek. For Philo the Septuagint bore divine authority. It was only in the second century a.d. that Aquila and Theodotion tried to revise it in line with the Hebrew, although the survival of Theodotionic readings in the New Testament and probably in the Greek scroll of the Minor Prophets found at Qumran suggests that Theodotion had available an earlier text from before a.d. 70 which represented either a predecessor's efforts at revising the Septuagint or a Greek version of the bible quite separate from the main Septuagint tradition.
Reliance on this Greek version of the sacred Torah had in itself some effect on theological development as Greek terms which corresponded to only one meaning of a Hebrew word were equated to the whole range of its meanings, creating thereby a range of 'septuagintalisms' which made Jewish religious Greek nearly incomprehensible to outsiders while simultaneously importing the extraneous overtones of the Greek word (e.g.
This power of language to stimulate new concepts may be illustrated by the presence of terminology reminiscent of the mysteries in some hellenistic Jewish writings including, though not prominendy, the Septuagint: it has been argued, mostly because of mystery terminology in the works of Philo and St Paul and (rather fancifully interpreted) the iconography of some late-Roman Jewish artefacts, that a Jewish mystery cult existed in the hellenistic diaspora.110 But there is no direct evidence for this, and it is striking that many of the contemporary traditions incorporated in the classic midrashic fashion in the interpretation of the Hebrew text by the Septuagint translators preserve teachings otherwise
,
1,0 Goodenough 1953-68 (e 1126).
known only in later Semitic midrashic compilations rather than comprising specifically hellenistic versions of the text.
Jewish communities were found in the countryside in Syria and Egypt but were largely an urban phenomenon. In foreign cities they were self- regulating either
The physical foci of these communities were the synagogues, of which each setdement would have at least one and the larger communities several scattered around the localities. Because the sanctity of the Temple site loomed less large outside Judaea these synagogues became more than just meeting-places: they were places of sanctity — Josephus even describes one as a lepov.113 Thus the first-century B.C. synagogue at Delos, identified by inscriptions to 'the most high god', was an impressive structure; nothing is known about the earliest Jewish buildings which underlie the extant fine third- and fourth-century synagogues at Dura Europus, Ostia and Sardis, but literary references to the magnificence of synagogues in the first century a.d. elsewhere in the diaspora are quite common.114 The primary function of such edifices was, as in Judaea, the stipulated reading of the Torah, but around this role accreted a regular liturgy which probably included the public recital of blessings and other prayers,115 and, at least by the fourth century a.d., the chanting of psalms.116
The need to live close to a synagogue was one cause of the tendency of Jews to cluster in particular quarters in each city, but this trait reflects also the general attitude that separation from the non-Jewish world was in itself desirable and pious; in confirmation of this attitude but not its motive, to the pagan Tacitus it appeared that Jews 'stayed apart in their meals and their beds' out of'a certain hatred of the human race'.117 Jews abstained from the meals which might have formed social bonds, provoking particular resentment by not participating in the public feasts which constituted an important element in civic paganism (see below, p. 845). Explicit evidence for intermarriage is scanty, but this may reflect not the rarity of such liaisons but a reluctance to advertise them. Such unions took place with Jewish approval only after the conversion of the Gentile partner and this was possibly a factor in the decision of some proselytes to become Jewish (see below, p. 851). In other cases the Jewish partner may have chosen to abandon Judaism, but it.is impossible to judge the frequency of such apostasy.
Hostility between the Jews and their neighbours was by no means constant, but the massacres perpetrated or threatened by each side in the Syrian cities in a.d. 66 must reflect sentiments which had originated before violence was precipitated by the events of that year in Judaea. It is likely that when antagonism flared up, it was provoked by local issues which can no longer be discovered. Thus at Alexandria in Egypt, the only place where the detailed history of Jewish-Gentile relations is recorded, many of the stresses which led to bloodshed were specific to the city.
The Jews of Alexandria, who had prospered exceptionally under the late Ptolemies through direct royal patronage, were relegated by Augustus to the status of the native Egyptians because of the
1,5 Hengel 1971 (e i i 54); Justin Martyr,
116 Fasola 1976 (e 1114). 117 Tac.
standing to, and independent of, the city administration)"8 are thoroughly documented not only by Philo, who was himself a leading figure on the Jewish side, but also by Josephus and by papyrus fragments of writings belonging to a curious genre known to modern scholars as the
Such local disputes only exceptionally brought diaspora Jews into conflict with the Roman government, which in general protected Jewish interests in line with the highly sympathetic declarations made in their favour - probably for immediate political advantage — by Iulius Caesar, Antony and Augustus.120 In the city of Rome itself, however, Jews were expelled by Tiberius and either ejected or forbidden to congregate by Claudius, in the former case as punishment for a fraud practised on a Roman matron, in the latter case because of rioting which had probably been confined within the Jewish community.121 The Jews of Rome were a large group mostly descended from prisoners brought to the capital as slaves by Pompey in 63 B.C. and Sosius in 37 в.с. Their numbers had expanded under Augustus when many of these immigrants won their freedom: thus synagogues were named after Augustus and Agrippa.122 But they remained confined to the poorest class among the plebs and became notorious as beggars. The expulsions reflect Tiberius' concern to uphold Augustus' propaganda of the restoration of old Roman cults — adherents of Isis were also driven out — while Claudius was perhaps only intent on the preservation of order in the crowded metropolis. At any rate Jews returned rapidly after each expulsion and probably few ever in fact went beyond the suburbs. By late antiquity the catacombs reveal a large Jewish population.
The diaspora communities apparently made no move to participate in the anti-Roman uprising of a.d. 66 to 70 except in the immediate vicinity of Palestine and briefly in Alexandria, but this loyalty to Rome was severely strained both by Titus' destruction of the Temple and by the imposition on
This 1аиег interpretation is argued in full by Kasher 198; (e i i 54).
1,9 Musurillo 19J4 (в }8i). The Philo treatises are
Joseph.
On banishments under Tiberius, see Tac.
•и CI] i2 nos. 284, 365.
rose in bloody revolt as much against their Greek neighbours as the Roman government. Totally crushed after two years, the Jewish communities of Egypt and Cyrene disappear from the historical record for centuries, while the death penalty was decreed for any Jew who set foot on Cyprus.123
But the world around these diaspora Jews was not always so antagonistic. The separateness of the Jews in itself proved attractive to some pagans, for Gentiles were enticed to become proselytes in the diaspora far more than in Judaea and there is little evidence that this resulted from deliberate Jewish missionary acdvity. Such conversion had dramatic consequences for the proselyte, who was cut off from family and friends by voluntary self-exclusion from their meals and worship. The number who took this step is variously esdmated at a huge or minimal figure; epigraphic evidence for proselytes of the first century a.d. is rare, and Josephus is informative only about the famous conversion of the royal family of Adiabene.124
Better testimony to amicable reladons between Jews and Gendles in some cities is the role of Gentiles who accreted to the synagogues in a great variety of ways without joining the Jewish community. Such people were perhaps attracted by the theology of Judaism or wished to placate the Jewish along with other powerful deities; this latter modve presumably lay behind the offerings made by many non-Jews to the Jerusalem Temple. Such 'god-fearers' (
iv. conclusion
The impression that Jewish history in this period was different in kind from that of other provincials is probably exaggerated by the religious orientation of much of the surviving evidence, but since that impression was shared by contemporary Gentiles and not least by Roman administrators it must be accounted a major factor in the peculiar and frequently unhappy fortunes of the Jews within the Roman empire. In the attempt
Dio. Lxviii.31.1-3; cf. Pucci 1981 (e i 190); Barnes 1989 (e 1087). See САН xi2.
Joseph. AJ xx. 17-96. On god-fearers and proselytes, see Schiirer 1986 (в 1207) 111.1,150-76; McKnight 1991 (e i i 74).
Acts 10:2, 22; 13:16, 26,43,5°; 16:14; 17:4, 17; i8:7;Joseph. A]xrv. 110. On the Aphrodisias inscription, see Reynolds and Tannenbaum 1987 (e 1198). On changing attitudes towards 'godfearers', see Cohen 1989 (e i 103); Goodman 1989 (d i 32).
of the Roman elite during the late Republic and early Empire to define the correct place of religion within the state, Judaism was generally excluded from the body of respectable cults and designated a
CHAPTER 15
ROME AND ITS DEVELOPMENT UNDER AUGUSTUS AND HIS SUCCESSORS1
NICHOLAS PURCELL
Augustus' own summary of the impact of his rule on the city of Rome was the boast, often quoted, almost proverbial 'urbem... marmoream se relinquere, quam latericiam accepisset', that the city he had taken charge of in brick he passed on in marble (Suet.
The enormous brick ruins of the monuments of Augustus' heirs which characterize the centre of Rome today make Augustus' words sound paradoxical to the modern visitor: they need some explanation and interpretation.
The 'brick' in question, to begin with, is not the kiln-fired, almost indestructible product of later Roman architecture: it is the traditional sundried mud brick of Italian domestic architecture, and also, probably, refers to the terracotta decorations which had so characterized the sacred architecture of Italy from the seventh century в.с. For Augustus was thinking primarily of the city as defined by its public architecture, and above all by its religious buildings. It was here that his own personal
I am grateful to the editors for their opinions on this piece. It takes for granted the account of the demography, composition and economic activities of the urban plebs which will be found in САН ix2, ch. 17 and is designed to introduce the much more problematic world of the urban populace in the middle Empire which is discussed in САН xi2.1 have naturally not attempted to cover every facet of the architectural and social history of Rome between 44 b.c. and a.d. 70.
Zanker 1988 (f 633) now has pride of place among studies of this subject, but there is a good deal of further work required.
782
initiatives had done most to effect a change, and it is important that his
Our knowledge of the fabric of the city in the last century and a half of the Republic is scanty: this is an ignorance which must be recognized before a limited picture can be evolved. It will not do to retroject too casually the better documented conditions of the middle Empire. An improved organizational structure, the revolution in architectural technology, changing social conditions combined with the perennial opportunities of the fires and floods to produce a very different urban atmosphere in the Flavian and subsequent periods. What can we say of the earlier city?
Rome's site provides all the raw materials for a city. Strabo, enthusing about the 'concurrence of advantages which surpasses all the beneficence of nature' (v.}-7 (234-5C)) makes a point of setting the supply of brick stone and wood beside the resources of local agriculture as the explanation of the city's survival. The Alban volcanoes are the real source of this endowment. Only a few kilometres down the Appian Way from the city gate lies the furthest-reaching lava flow, providing the indestructibly hard
3 Zanker 1988 (p 633) esp. chs. 3-4; Gros 1976 (p 397) 13-52.
784 15- rome and its development
habitations of Rome had a strong vertical component, created by the slopes of the hills and the winding defiles of the valleys between them. As archaeology begins to unravel the less monumental parts of the urban fabric, the organic growth of the tangled clusters of rooms out from the naked tufa (as well as into it in many cases) in layer after layer ascending from the winding streets of the valley bottoms, is being revealed in case after case.[932] Naturally the bulkiest, most elaborate of these structures are the ones of imperial fired brick like those which extend the Palatine towards the Forum and the Velabrum; but the principle is much older. These stacked cellular accretions, extending the hillside into the air, are what the Romans first called
An architecture appropriate to a 'hanging city' had emerged in west central Italy by the third century в.с. It is difficult to be sure where it was developed - Rome is not the only city-site with complex and varied relief to contend with, and some of our early examples are Campanian. The architecture comprised the use of strong concrete and squared stone, the arch and - at first on a limited scale - the barrel vault, to extend hillsides at will with platforms, terraces, ramps and stairways. The purpose was a monumental urbanism like that of the hellenistic East, seen at its acme in the acropolis of Pergamum; its finest example in Italy is the sanctuary of Fortuna Primigenia at Praeneste (Palestrina). At Rome this was the architecture of the great projects of the 'building censors' of the age after the Hannibalic War, and in the late Republic was deployed for the sculpdng of the Forum face of the Capitol by Lutatius Catulus, with the monumental public complex (the so-called Tabularium) which still survives; and for private enterprises like the suburban estates of the hills north of the city. Here it is important to stress one negative point: although Claudius and Nero, Trajan and Septimius Severus, continued the approach with the improved materials available to them, creating hills where there had been empty space, Augustus and his fellow builders largely ignored this traditional approach to urbanism for most of their ascendancy. Indeed it can be argued that through the laws on building, controlling the heights of the
In order to understand the preferences of the age we must return to the ideological background to Augustus' dealing with the city of Rome. Building had been a prominent part of the self-presentation of the Roman elite since time immemorial, and Augustus needed to excel at all the activities which conferred
' On this architectural tradition see Gros 1978 (f 398); Gros 1976 (p 397) ch. 2 for the weaknesses in Augustan design.
7 Caesar's plans: see esp. Suet. /*/. 44; Cic.
the audience: at close quarters, since the buildings were designed as the stage for the activities in which the elite encouraged them. Alexandria and Pergamum were the inspiration. The great theatre and
The party of Octavian had been compelled to adopt this type of benefaction during the politically complex years between Philippi and the restoration of the
The mood was religious. Sulla and Pompey had not omitted the temples of Rome from their building programmes; Cicero contributed to the reconstruction of the temple of Tellus. But the sophisticated religious policy of Caesar and chaos of the times combined to produce a competition among some of the
8 Gros i976(p 397) 235-42; Zanker 1976 (e
see the vows of Octavian himself, the temple to Divus Iulius voted in 42 b.c. and that of Mars Ultor, first conceived in that year also; the temple of Apollo Palatinus, dedicated in 28 b.c., as well as the more mundane reconstruction work on the temple of Jupiter Feretrius in 31 B.C., which began the great record of his temple maintenance that was to last the whole of his rule. The keynote of much of this building was eastern magnificence. Pedius' work seems to have been in the tradition of the great substructure architecture of the late Republic. Sosius' temple is a splendid display of Hellenism, from its own elegant floral marble-work to the re-used Greek pediment sculptures, now recently re-discovered, which graced its facade. Likewise Ahenobarbus displayed an enormous sculptural
The religious fervour is striking, and, as we shall see, left its mark on the character of the Augustan Principate. But not all the
' Gros 1976 (f 397) 107, the temple of Divus Iulius as 'une sorte de manifeste architectural'. Apollo Sosianus: La Rocca 1980-1 (f 459). Apollo Palatinus: Lefevre 1989 (f 466). On the Corinthian order, Wilson-Jones 1989 (f 622); Gros i976(f 397) 197-234. Zanker on building, 1988 (f 653) 42-31. Gallus fragment: Anderson, Parsons, and Nisbet 1979 (в 4).
10 Shipley 1931 (f 571) with Boethius 1934 (e 6); Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 145-57.
So even before Acdum the victorious party was in the ascendant, already beating the other
But the mood did not last, or Rome might have been transformed by a.d. 14 into the most remarkable instance of all that was most grandiose in hellenistic taste. It was after the buoyant mood of the early twenties, restored peace, sole power, family harmony, that the style of Augustan planning for the monuments of Rome changes. The 'Crisis in Party and State' of 23—19 may be the main explanation. Just as the most careful symbiosis of the
11 Buchner 1982 (f 306) the sundial; on the Pantheon, Coarelli 1983 (f 333).
of the complex of Apollo Palatinus with the sober mix of Athenian and old Roman in the temple of Mars Ultor, which formed the centre-piece of the greatest project of the later part of Augustus' rule, the Forum Augustum.[934]
Augustus continued to enjoy the best of both worlds. His own house on the Palatine could with justice be regarded as modest by the standards of the day, and it was not until the reign of Nero that a great purpose- built palace complex dominated the Palatine (the platform, like that of an enormous villa, whose substructions remain beneath the Farnese Gardens, and which supported the pavilions and peristyles of the complex misleadingly known today as Domus Tiberiana). But it was not wholly a private house; Augustus made it over to the People to satisfy ritual requirements when he became High Priest in 12 B.C., and these religious connotations helped produce an ambiguity as to where his living- quarters stopped and the public buildings began. A hearth-temple of Vesta was part of the monumental approach to his moderate abode which was inseparable from the splendour of the
Rome's periphery had undergone various evolutions with the changes in the nature and size of the population and the availability of wealth and food. One of the most striking was the tendency for the greatest men in the state to accumulate suburban property which they could convert into extraordinarily luxurious display-grounds for their wealth. The vocabulary was the same as we have seen in the buildings of the triumviral period — changing the face of nature, cultivating paradox. The proximity to seething Rome of evocations of the coast or countryside or wilderness was the most enjoyable feature, to emphasize which they called these estates 'kitchen gardens',
Now the tone of this private luxury was, as we have seen, very close to the monarchic assertiveness which Augustus at first practised. So it was dangerous in the hands of other
14 For
example Dio lvi.i.i); it also provided a chance to pose as a second founder, building a new city alongside the old, as Hadrian was later to do at Athens. For Strabo the effect of the very numerous buildings of Augustus and his circle in the Campus Martius was to produce a suburb more beautiful than the city (v.3.8 (235-6C)). The process, again reminiscent of Caesar, was to make over to the public formally a building created on private land by private contract, as Dio makes clear in discussing the works of Agrippa; the effect was to tone down the unpleasant associations of
Thus it was that the prevailing architecture of Augustan Rome is not the concrete and vault, arch and terrace native to Rome and Italy, but the less boastful and more relaxed sequences of squares, courts and colonnades which the forty years of Augustan rule extended across much of Rome. Thus it was also that the utilitarian note was struck, in buildings like the Market of Livia, another of the improvements to the Esquiline fringe of the city. The old provision market of Rome, the Macellum, had had strong associations with the commercial with luxurious profit- making freedmen and over-indulgent customers, and the replacement of part of its district with the new Forum Augustum may have been the occasion for the new building and its banishment to the fringes of the city. Roman pragmadc utilitarianism is such a cliche, however, that we forget to notice the significance that it has in the actions of the first
To attempt this, we need to move beyond the subject of large-scale
15 For Rome's
public building. Across the years of Augustus' Principate there are many other moments at which the affairs of the city as an enuty received deliberate attendon. Some such spirit may be discerned in the role played by Maecenas during Octavian's absence in the triumviral period and in the
This involved the management of military personnel. As Ulpian, writing in the third century on the duties of the city prefect, puts it
16 For the urban prefect, see Vitucci 1956 (e 136). Police duties, Nippel 1988 (a 71); Echols 1937-8 (d 187). Urban violence under the Principate: Moeller 1970 (c 376).
formalization of a common social pattern which was already in existence. Scores of thousands of Italians came to experience the life of Rome and convey its tendencies to their home towns through this machinery.17
Similar in its effects was the establishment of the city watch, the
The same spirit of the organization of manpower can also be seen in the regulation of the private
The first sign that Augustus would involve himself in the running of the city was his tackling the question of corn distribution and the
Purcell 1983 (f 49); 1991 for movement to Rome. Durry 1938 (d 185).
Reynolds 1926 (e 108); Rainbitd 1986 (e 104); Freis 1967 (d 190).
" Pearse 1976-7 (в 261); Royden 1988 (f 58). 20 Rickman 1980 (e 109) 60-6 and 179-85.
,21 Boatwright 1986 (e j). City gates: Platnet and Ashby 1929 (e 95) sw. 'Arcus Crispini et Lentuli', 'Arcus Dolabellae et Silani'; Nash 1968 (e 87) s.v. 'Arcus Dolabellae et Silani', 'Arcus Gallieni'.
These changes were not dramatic innovatory reforms based on policy. They were modified and evolved over the years. The delineation of the Tiber is a good example. A republican procedure, unused since 54 b.c., was deployed by the consuls in 8 B.C. and in 7 b.c. by Augustus himself; in a.d. 15 Tiberius changed the system again, with the appointment of a permanent board of
The wishes of the inhabitants of Rome were not without their political significance as Augustus knew from his experience of the triumviral period: it was amply confirmed. It may have been unwise for him to absent himself from the city so much in the years 27—24; certainly violence continued throughout the period, reaching a peak in 22, when the Senate was barricaded inside the Curia, and was not just a response to the natural disasters of famine, fire, pestilence and flood (see especially Dio liii.3 3.4—5; liv. 1.1—2). The affection and favour of the people gave one Egnatius Rufus the base from which to attempt an illegal transfer from being praetor to the consulship in 19 b.c. His benefaction had been a successful fire-fighting programme, and he was only suppressed with difficulty.23 Again in a.d. 6 the activities of P. Plautius Rufus, who built on the miseries of the people from famine and fire with a revolutionary pamphlet campaign, clearly constituted a serious political threat to the regime (Dio lv.27.1—3; Suet.
The tone of our principal sources for Augustus' activity, the
22 Le Gall 1953 (e 73). 23 Lacey 1985 (c 150); for famine, Garnsey 1988 (a 33) 218-22.
projects after the middle of the twenties в.с. Instead there is a sense of decency and good order and good government, of responsibility, tidiness and justice about the new arrangements, which is reminiscent of the prescriptions of Cicero about how a city should be managed, and indeed has a long literary tradition. There is a flavour of the administrative sections of the Aristotelian
It is most important to this argument not to separate the 'hardware' of aqueducts and river banks and fire prevention from the people who moved in and around it. The remodelling of the
Purcell 1986 (d 107), for the assumptions of ancient administration; also Nicolet 1988 (a 69) advocating a much more positive view of the possibilities of ancient bureaucracy. Note that the benefits could, in general, be taxable; revenue was raised from Rome under the Empire in significant quantities, Le Gall 1979 (d 142).
Rawson 1987 (f 5 6). By a noteworthy development, as the citizenship spread, the
whom Augustus was showing favour, while the
The populace was not entirely mute. From its expressive moments in the time of troubles a tradition of involvement in the doings of the elite continues through, and indeed does much to characterize, the whole Julio-Claudian period. Some have, however, argued powerfully to the contrary. 'The
Those who have wished to make the fall of the Republic the turning- point also of the history of the
Freedmen in Augustan Rome: Treggiari 1969 (f 68) 75-6; 244-5.
Nicolet 1980 (a 68) 552.
of the oligarchy and a real tradition of free expression, political engagement and actual practical influence. To this second tense dialogue the forms of personal power enshrined in the practice of the Principate were not alien; it made all the difference in the world to a junior patrician senator if the greatest men in the state had the position of Augustus or Vespasian rather than that of Cicero or Scipio Aemilianus; to the men and women of the Roman street the difference was much less palpable.[936]
The second ingredient in the traditional view of the final elimination of some democratic tradition is the constitutional moment at which the
To that extent, then, this is indeed the moment at which the Senate finally won the age-old 'struggle of the orders'. However, although the
The coming of the Principate enabled the personal attachments of the populace to become more stable and more deeply felt, richer as they were in raw material. So it is that, for example, the women of the
This process was closely linked with the steps which Augustus took to appropriate for himself the topography of the city, through the architectural initiatives which we have examined; and the chronology of the
In the sections that follow we shall explore in more detail the nature of the 'occasions' which received their significance from being included in the Fasti. How did they provide a setting for dialogue between the
There has been an unfortunate tendency to omit the observance of public religious rites when considering the activities of the first
which we are explicitly told involved the
The dialogue of public religion is the matrix which held together the highly disparate elements of Roman society; I cannot establish that this entails theological sincerity, but the dialogue very certainly mattered.
The religion of the city was quite literally urban: bridges, slopes, statues, fountains and especially crossroads had their appropriate rites. In 7 в.с. Augustus reconsidered the oppressive legislation which had controlled the activities of the local assemblies which practised these rites and celebrations - the 'uncountable associations cobbled together from all the filth and slavery of the city', as Cicero had called them
35 Examples: Zanker 1988 (f 635) chs. 6-8.
Isis and Pietas; to the Divine Fates: that it may go well, propitiously and prosperously for Imperator Caesar Augustus, for his [power] and that of the Senate and People of Rome, and for the Nations, at the propitious beginning of the consular year of Gaius Caesar and Lucius Paullus [a.d. 1] — Lucius Lucretius Zethus, Lucius' freedman, dedicated this Augustan Altar at the command of Jupiter. Victory of the People! Health in Seed-sowing!'[942] The Augustan religious changes were no sterile revivalism, but a part of the adaptability and creativity inherent in Roman religion.[943] On a more informal level the inscriptions of Rome show us how tutelary divinities were found for other new arrivals in the urban landscape as the imperial benefactions and building-projects progressed; the Bona Dea Veneris Cnidiae 'Good Goddess of the Venus of Cnidus', that statue being a well-known imported masterpiece, is a nice example. The Genius of the Corn Warehouses of Galba and the Venus of the Gardens of Sallust are further cases of how traditional responses were made to the new imperial complexes as much as to the tangled matrix of the unreformed city. 'You believe that there are gods to the places in the city - or even that the places themselves are gods', a critic of paganism was to say (Tert.
Similarly, the new institutions of the imperial house were inserted into the traditional repertoire of Roman religiosity. The creation of the
Augustus had been careful to involve the
The presence of the
iam se, quisquis is est, inops, beatus,
convivam ducis esse gloriatur.
whoever he is, poor but happy, his boast is that he has been the guest of our Leader.
(Stat.
The
The
These buildings, above all the theatres, were political buildings as they had always been in the Hellenic world. To have statues or dedications in the theatres was a rare sign of achievement (cf. Tac.
There is no need here to rehearse the very long list of examples of the responses of emperors to the people at the games. Three typical examples are: the attack on Pompey by Diphilus in July 59 b.c. when the crowd took up the line 'it is by our wretchedness that thou art Great'; the moment when the audience mocked Galba by singing over and over again the passage from the Atellan farce 'Onesimus has come in from the country'; and, most memorably of all, the pastiche with which Datus the actor joked about Nero's murders of Claudius and Agrippina.43 It would be wrong to take these as some form of resistance, as 'demonstrations' in the modern sense. Certainly the extent to which they were organized by the elite as deliberate disruptions must have been minimal - the difficulties would have been enormous, though we do hear of the managers of claques, like Percennius who fomented the Pannonian mutiny in a.d. 14. More importandy the absence of political programmes even among the elite will have made it more difficult to build up continuous agitation: high politics were too mutable. On a more general level some perennial preferences and distastes there were, which are examined below, both the 'political' and the more selfish. But it is not enough to regard the urban populace as 'primitive rebels' living 'in an odd relationship with its rulers, equally compounded of parasitism and riot'. It is noteworthy that the poor of the city do not seem to have developed a counter-culture of the sort found in the Islamic cities of the Middle Ages, rich in criminal confraternities. The activities of the
This is because the plebs was not parasitic; and its violence was not solely devoted to attaining selfish ends. The plebs was not wholly or even mostly dependent on state-managed largesse. Its economy was more vigorous than that. The benefits which the plebeians enjoyed were not charity to keep them alive, but a bonus to denote their status. Part of that status-symbolism was a degree of political licence, which stood beside the lavishness of the games and the grandeur of the buildings. The survival of that licence did credit to the
Within the phenomenon of this freedom of utterance various strands can be isolated. A consciousness of the tone of the political world of the elite is one: hostility to conspirators and traitors, and also to th
'They rushed to climb the Capitol without delay, and - belatedly - gave worship to the gods. Down they threw the statues of Poppaea; those of Octavia, borne shoulder-high, they decked with flowers and set up in Forum and temples'. The agitation was serious enough to provide Octavia's enemies with a believable case that her continued liberty and presence in Italy was a perpetual threat of civil war; at the same time, we are told, claiming that the rioting had been the work of'clients and slaves of Octavia arrogating to themselves the name of plebs'. There was indeed a real political component: the plebeians who shouted Nero's praises in 68 when he made his grand return to Rome from his Greek tour, demolishing the city wall to enter a city garlanded and full of lamps and incense (Dio LXii.20.4), in only months were joining in the round of hysterical sacrifice and merrymaking, dressed in caps of liberty like freed slaves, to commemorate his suicide
In the end much of this popular feeling proceeds from the complex self-presentation of the
The plebs could also show conspicuous favour to the powerful, but that is less surprising. In one memorable instance, their humorous sentimentality combined with their loyalty to the
Naturally enough, a strong streak of self-interest can be seen in the plebs' attitudes. Concern over prices and the availability of reasonably priced food — and drink — features prominently. It was the final blow for Nero's cause in 68 that a ship containing fine sand for a race-track docked from Alexandria at a moment when food was low and grain expected. But the riot over wine-prices which Augustus dismissed (Suet.
Cities, not city: it is important to remember that we are in fact not dealing with just the city of Rome. The social forms characteristic of the plebs in the first century в.с. had developed in a wide region which embraced both Rome and the wealthy and populous centres of Campania, and the milieu continued to exist for a very long time. Nero's display for Tiridates began at Puteoli, where Caligula's extravagant regal exhibition of a great procession along a temporary bridge across the sea had also been set. It was in Campania that Tiberius in a.d. 27 was overwhelmed by the 'assembling together of the inhabitants of the cities', so that he resolved to escape to Capri (Tac.
44 For the display of population see also Mithridates at Tac.
addressed in Rome; and the same is true of Ostia from the Julio-Claudian period on, and throughout of the old seats of Roman
Nevertheless, the effect of the institution of the Principate was to increase the privileges of the part of the population which was present in the vicinity of the city of Rome. The republican aristocracy had spread its interests widely; the emperors needed an imperial city to be the locadon and symbol of their power.[952] It is not without significance that some at least thought that they might not choose old Rome for the job, and that from the second century onwards, they came increasingly to take other places as their long- or short-term bases. By that dme the Creadon of the imperial city was complete, so that many of the effects of the two centuries which we have been discussing proved remarkably tenacious. The appearance of the city and the notion of its privileges were two particularly long-lasting consequences. But the distribution of the evidence makes it dangerous to assume that the social patterns of the period from Sulla to Claudius lasted beyond the Severan period. The examination of Rome in that period and its relations with Italy, when the
THE PLACE OF RELIGION: ROME IN THE EARLY EMPIRE
S. R. F. PRICE
Roman religion had always been closely linked with the city of Rome and its boundaries. The restructuring of a number of religious institutions in the Augustan period resulted in changes within Rome, and, beyond it, in the empire. The importance of the religion of place is illustrated by an episode from Livy's
Stress on the religious site of Rome was not an innovation of the Augustan age, but it did increase in this period and it formed the content within which the new political order was placed (see below, Section II). The Augustan restructuring of the earlier system was represented at the time as restoration: ancient cults had faded away, temples had fallen down, priesthoods were vacant. The 'restoration of the
1 Liebeschuetz 1967 (pi7j). 2 Warde Fowler 1911 (f 253); Latte i960 (f 170).
812
orthodoxy now seems very fragile. Religion in the late Republic is best seen as suffering from disruption, not decline, while preoccupation with revival ignores the extent of change in the system.3 But Augustan stress on restoration need not be treated as a cunning obfuscation. The age was fundamentally concerned to relate the present to the past.4
There were also rituals which focused more directly on the emperor himself, especially after his death. These are normally described as 'the imperial cult', and placed in a separate category from the 'restoration of religion'. But if the 'restoration' is to be seen as a restructuring around the person of the emperor, the rituals which alluded more specifically to him also belong in the context of restructuring (see below, Section III). Even the apotheosis of the dead emperor may be seen as rooted in 'tradition'.
The city of Rome also has to be located in the context of the empire (see below, Section IV). Roman cults were replicated outside Rome, in Italy and in the provinces in the army and colonies. Though the relations of the empire to Rome are normally seen in terms of'the imperial cult', it is again necessary to stress not direct worship of the emperor, but the range of other Roman cults.5
The social and physical context of the changes in Rome in the Augustan period merits discussion. Rome was an enormous city, with a population which may at times have approached 1 million people, and yet the principal holders of religious offices were members of the Senate, which numbered around 600 in all. Does this mean that we are dealing with an official religious system which held no meaning in the popular religion of the city? In fact, the opposition between 'official' and 'popular' religion is somewhat deceptive. Official and popular manifestations are simply different aspects, on different levels, of a continuum of religious institutions and practices. Upper-class leadership does not mean that the system lacked significance for the lower classes, and we shall see some signs of the penetration of the Augustan system among the poorer citizens. But the population of Rome did not consist wholly
On the Republic see Scheid 1985 (p 217); North, САН vii.22, ch. 12; Beard, САН ix2, ch. 19. On the Augustan period see Nock 1934 (p 192). Liebeschuetz 1979 (p 174) 5 5-100, Kienast 1982 (c ij6) 185-214.
In addition to Livy, Dion. Hal.
For such cults see Liebeschuetz, САН xi2.
of Roman citizens. Those of different ethnic groups, including some freedmen from the East, maintained cults from their places of origin. (See below, Section V.) However, it is very difficult to see how far the lower classes drew upon the Augustan religious system in constructing their own worlds.
i. myths and place
Roman mythology, according to the traditional view, never existed: only under the influence of Greece in the last centuries в.с. did the gods acquire some kind of mythology.6 A contrasting view holds that there was indeed a Roman mythology, which was in strict harmony with the mythology of the Vedic Indians, the Scandinavians or other Indo- European peoples, but that it was mainly swamped by the influx of Greek mythology in the middle Republic.7 The outcome of both views for the imperial period is the same: the current mythology was an alien import without much significance for Roman religion, and thus works on late republican or early imperial religion have little or nothing to say about mythology.8 The paradox is that the early books of Livy and Dionysius of Halicarnassus are full of mythological stories about early Rome, while Ovid's
The Roman mythology current in the early Empire was very different from that of other peoples, including, surprisingly, the Greeks. The myths did not form a cosmogony like that of Hesiod, and several major deities, including Jupiter and Mars, do not take part in any divine adventures. Indeed the Greek Dionysius of Halicarnassus commends Romulus, whom he holds responsible for the establishment of Roman religion, for following 'the best customs in use among the Greeks', while rejecting traditional Greek myths which contained calumnies about the gods.9 There had long been a debate in Greece about the propriety of certain myths, and Dionysius praises Romulus, and Roman religion of his own day, in the light of that debate. In the eyes of an educated Greek, Roman mythology was quite different from the traditional Greek stories
Wissowa 1911 (f 141) 9; Latte 1926 (f 169); H. J. Rose,
See briefly Dumezil 1970 (f 124) 47-39, and also Koch 1937 (f 162) (with review by R. Syme,
* Grant 1973 (f i 51) is the best introduction. See also Horsfall in Bremmer and Horsfall 1987 (f 105) ch. i. 9 Dion. Hal.
about their gods, contrary to the modern theories about the profound hellenizadon of Roman religion in the middle and late Republic.
Roman myths were in essence myths of place. They recounted the history of the area of Rome itself, a history that extended without interruptions or Dark Ages to the Augustan age and of which there were living tokens in the cults of Rome. Dionysius devotes the whole of his first book to the earliest populations of the area, especially the Arcadians, Greeks by origin, who were responsible for consecrating 'many precincts, altars and images of the gods and instituted purifications and sacrifices according to the custom of their own country, which continued to be performed in the same manner down to my day'.[953] The most striking of these was to Hercules, who passed through the area on one of his labours and killed a local bandit, Cacus. Evander, king of the Arcadians, wanted to offer divine honours to Hercules, knowing that he was destined for immortality. Hercules himself performed the initial rites and asked the Arcadians to perpetuate the honours by sacrificing at the spot each year with Greek rites. The altar at which Hercules sacrificed 'is called by the Romans the Greatest Altar (Ara Maxima). It stands near the place they call the Catde Market (Forum Boarium) and is held in great veneration by the inhabitants'.[954]
The ritual of this altar was the subject of learned debate. The Greek nature of the sacrifices was satisfactorily explained by the story of Evander and Hercules, but there was a further peculiarity: women were barred from the altar. Various explanations were offered. A Roman annalist of the second century B.C. seems to have explained the ban through a story that the mother of Evander and her women were late for sacrifice.[955] Varro offered a different account: the priestess of the Bona Dea (whose shrine lay near the Ara Maxima) refused to allow Hercules to drink from the goddess' spring, and in turn Hercules banned all women from his altar.[956] The myth and ritual of the Ara Maxima were the subject of lively interest on the part of antiquarians, historians and poets of the late Republic and early Empire. Their accounts exemplify the focus of Roman myths on a particular place, and the elaboration of that focus in the Augustan age.[957]
The majority of Roman myths refer to the founding and early years of
Rome. So, for example, a myth related to the festival of the Parilia, the founding of Rome and the creation of its sacred boundary. According to Ovid, there was an ancient rural festival designed to purify the sheep and cattle by calling on the goddess Pales, from whose name that of the festival was derived.[958] Ovid goes on to describe the festival, in two parts. First, the contemporary urban festival, in which he says he had often taken part. 'I personally have often brought in handfuls the ashes of the calf and the beanstalks, pure means of expiation. I personally have leaped over the flames ranged three in a row, and been sprinkled with water by the moist laurel bough.'[959] After this, Ovid moves on to the rural festival of purification of sheep and cattle. 'Shepherd, you purify your well-fed sheep at fall of twilight, first sprinkle the ground with water and sweep it with a broom' and so on.17 His account of the rural festival is much fuller than of the urban one, but he makes clear that the two do differ (there is no blood of a horse or ashes of a calf in the rural festival). In drawing this distinction Ovid is (allegedly) following the evidence of his own eyes, and also the work of Varro, who insisted on the distinction between the public and private festivals, that is the urban and the rural.18
Ovid goes on to discuss the origins and hence significance of the festival. The Parilia, like any Roman festival, permitted a multitude of competing explanations.19 Ovid was faced with no less than seven: (i) fire is a natural purifier; (ii) fire and water were used together because everything is composed out of opposing elements; (iii) fire and water contain the source of life, as in the symbolism of exile and marriage; (iv) the festival alludes to Phaethon and Deucalion's flood, an explanation Ovid doubts; (v) shepherds once accidentally ignited straw; (vi) Aeneas' piety allowed him to pass through flames unscathed; (vii) when Rome was founded, orders were given to transfer to new houses; the country folk set fire to the old houses and leaped with their cattle through the flames. Ovid favours the last interpretation, commenting that it happens 'even to the present day on the birthday of Rome'.
Ovid elucidates his favoured interpretation by recounting the story of Romulus and the foundation of Rome, a story to which we shall return in the context of Augustus. Romulus chose the time of the celebration of the Parilia to found the city of Rome. He marked out the lines of the wall of the new city with a furrow, praying to Jupiter, Mars and Vesta; Jupiter responded with a favourable augury. Romulus then instructed one Celer to kill anyone who crossed the walls or the furrow, but Remus, in ignorance of the ban, leaped across them and was struck down by
Celer. In this common version, the Parilia, the founding of Rome, the creadon of the
In making his choice of interpretation Ovid was in good company. Though modern scholars are generally happy to treat the Parilia as a genuine, primitive agricultural ritual which survived into imperial Rome,21 our only extant pre-Julian calendar marks against the entry Parilia 'Roma condita', and the association of the Parilia with the foundation of Rome only became more orthodox. When news of his decisive victory at Munda in 45 в.с. arrived in Rome at the time of the Parilia, the coincidence was exploited in favour of Caesar, the new Romulus: games were added to the Parilia, at which people wore crowns in Caesar's honour.[961] And the Romulan theme became dominant in a.d. 121 when Hadrian chose the date of the Parilia to found his new temple of Venus and Roma: the festival continued to have lively celebrations, but became known as the Romaea.[962]
The Parilia provide a perfect example of the way that competing interpretations of Roman festivals changed. The Parilia could be seen in all sorts of ways, as Ovid shows: in terms of natural science (fire as a natural purifier); philosophy (fire and water as opposing elements); Greek myths (Phaethon and Deucalion); accident (chance fire caused by shepherds); Roman myth (Aeneas and Troy). But the interpretation already offered by the pre-Julian calendar was the one Ovid favoured: that the festival was connected with the founding of Rome. For Ovid the ancient festival, at which Rome was founded, evokes the incorporation of the primitive golden age into the structures of imperial Rome.
The privileging of one, historicizing interpretation of the Parilia, which connects the festival and the site of Rome, is characteristic of the late Republic and early Empire. One might compare the contemporary accounts of Hercules and the Ara Maxima. Of course, since the early second century в.с. there had been 'histories' of Rome, which focused on the achievements of the Roman state, but, so far as we know, the preoccupation of Livy with the
The importance of Rome's
In the imperial period the
The boundary was also reinforced at time of crisis. Following dire portents, the
As in the republican period, the
Civil authority in the Republic had been defined and limited by the
Military authority, which was traditionally valid only outside the
Luc. 1.5 84-604. Prop, iv.4.75 describes a threat to the boundary (by Tarpeia) at the Parilia, 'the day the city first got its walls'.
Magdelain 1968 (f 180) j 7-67; Magdelain I977(p 181); Catalano i978(f 110) 422-j, 479-91.
Dio li.19.6. Cf. Suet.
triumphs emperors continued to follow the ancient rules. When Vespasian celebrated his victory over the Jews he spent the night before the triumph outside the
The scope of the emperor's
ii. the re-placing of roman religion
The Augustan period is conventionally viewed as one of restoration or renovation of traditional cults plus the addition of ruler cult. This dichotomy of restoration and innovation is quite false. The ancestral cults of Rome were not simply restored; they were restructured. Ruler cult in Rome was not a simple innovation; many aspects of it were deeply traditional. Thus the distinction between the two types of cults disappears. There were major changes in Rome in the Augustan period, which affected senatorial priesthoods and state temples; at the lower level, the ward cults; and the Secular Games. At the centre was Augustus, sometimes seen as the new Romulus, and round him the whole religion system was restructured.
The concern for the proper performance of religious rites is illustrated by a book entided 'Memorable Acts and Sayings', which devoted the first chapter to religion.37 The work, dedicated to Tiberius, notes examples of ancestral maintenance of religion even in the face of severe difficulties, of punishment meted out to those who ignored the claims of religion, and of the correct response to cases of superstidon. These paradigmatic anecdotes neatly encapsulate the importance placed in the imperial period on the maintenance and even reinforcement of Roman religious practice.
An index of the energy put in the early Empire into the organization of religion is the production of books on religious law. Traditionally, sacred law had been the special preserve of the various priestly colleges, but from the second century в.с. various priests published books on the subject, and in the second half of the first century B.C. others also, both juriconsults and antiquarians, wrote further works. Jurists continued to write such works in the early Empire. Antistius Labeo wrote 'On Pontifical Law' in at least fifteen books, Ateius Capito 'On Pontifical Law' in at least six books, 'On Law of Sacrifices' and 'On Augural Law'; Veranius 'On Auspices' and 'Pontifical Questions'.38 These treatises codified the basic framework of sacred law and made subsequent work unnecessary; after the early first century a.d. we hear of no further books on the subject, despite the fact that some leading jurists were also members of priestly colleges. The legal works of the Augustan and Tiberian periods are a neglected aspect of the religious and intellectual achievement of the age.
The need to pay particular attention to religion is stated by poets in the early 20s в.с. Horace, in an Ode composed before 28 в.с. associates the recent travails of Rome with religious neglect. This poem is sometimes used as evidence for the decline of religion in the late Republic, but it of course does not support that thesis.39 Horace is here reflecting and creating an Augustan perspective on the previous period. Just as Livy, writing on early Rome, explained her misfortunes at the hands of the Gauls by religious neglect, so Horace is seeking to account in traditional fashion for the turmoil and near disasters of the previous generation.40 The solution, in the eyes of both Horace and Virgil, lay in the hands of one man.41 Octavian, or to use his official Roman name, Imperator Caesar, held such a position of prominence that in 27 в.с. some proposed that his name should be changed to Romulus, as the new founder of Rome.42 But others thought that Romulus was too regal a name and one that carried the taint of fratricide, and an alternative proposal won the
M Schulz 1946 (f 690) 40-1, 80-1, 89-90, 138.
Hor.
Compare Virg.
Virg.
day. His official name henceforth was Imperator Caesar Augustus. Both names indicated that the bearer was uniquely favoured by the gods for the service of Rome. The story was told that when Octavian was campaigning for his first consulship in 43 в.с. six vultures appeared, and that when he was elected six more appeared; this auspicy indicated that like Romulus he would (re)found the city of Rome.[972] This theme was maintained in the choice of the name 'Augustus', a word which was used of all places consecrated by augurs. The name carried evocations of the founding of Rome, without using the name of an actual king of Rome, and of the peculiar favour of the gods for its bearer.[973]
Augustus also awarded honours to the first founder of Rome. In 16 в.с. he rebuilt the temple to Quirinus, who had become identified in the late Republic as the deified Romulus. A fragment of a later relief depicts the pediment of the temple.[974] In the centre stand Victory and Mercury, with Jupiter and Hercules on either side, and beside them Vesta, Mars and Venus. This fine gathering of Augustan deities is impressive enough, but the important point is that these gods are connected with Romulus and Remus. They are at either end of the pediment sitting as augurs, and in the top centre are the vultures seen at the founding of Rome.
The depiction of both Romulus and Remus reflects an Augustan emphasis on fraternal harmony. The myth of Romulus presented above (pp. 816-17) simply gave one, Augustan, version of the myth, but there were other, earlier versions of the story with very different emphases. Horace, for example, condemned the renewed bloodshed in the civil wars, in the late 40s or early 30s B.C.: 'A bitter fate pursues the Romans, and the crime of a brother's murder, ever since blameless Remus' blood was spilt upon the ground, to be a curse upon posterity'. By contrast with this version, Ovid makes Romulus say to Remus: 'There is no need for strife. Great faith is put in birds; let us try the birds', and, as we have seen, he blames the death of Remus on his ignorance of Romulus' prohibition and the action of Celer.[975] Romulus himself is guiltless, the travails of Rome are ascribed to the sin of Laomedon, and Augustus can thus be seen as the new founder of Rome.
Augustus subsequently undertook a major administrative reorganization of the city, which created local analogues to the reformed religious system of the state. In the earlier system, ascribed to Servius Tullius, there were four regions and shrines to the
The Augustan reorganization transformed the cults of the wards: from 7 b.c. onwards they were of the
The new cults involved building a shrine at the crossroads in each ward. The one excavated example is a small monument, 2.80 m by 2.38 m, with a flight of five steps running up to the shrine, which sheltered images of the
The Augustan reorganization of the ward cults placed the emperor within the life of the city of Rome. The shrines continued to be repaired (and used) through the third century and indeed still feature in the fourth-century catalogues of Roman monuments.[984] The cults were not a transient Augustan phenomenon. The running of the cults of a ward lay in the hands of the four annual magistrates, who were mainly ex-slaves, aided by four slave officials. They were responsible for the festivals, including the local games
The imperial focus on Rome continued in the sphere of priesthoods. Augustus, who held priesthoods only at Rome, gradually accumulated membership of all the major priestly colleges, becoming pontifex in 48 B.C., augur in 41—40 B.C.,
The first two of Augustus' offices, augur and pontifex, are worth consideration here: we shall return to the
Augustus had been pontifex since 48 B.C., but in 44 в.с. Lepidus was deviously appointed
The
The relationship of Augustus to Vesta was much closer than that of any republican
The creation of the shrine on the Palatine was an important stage in the formation of a peculiarly imperial residence. What had been just one of many residences of the republican nobility on the Palatine was transformed into a palace. 'Vesta has been received into the house of her kinsman; so have the senators rightly decreed. Apollo has part of the house; another part has been given up to Vesta; what remains is occupied by Augustus himself ... A single house holds three eternal gods.'[994]Rather than Augustus going to live in the public residence near the shrine of Vesta he shared a house with her and Apollo (below, p. 832). The
The new relationship with Vesta is one aspect of the transformation of the office of
Under the guidance of Augustus, who increased the privileges of some priesthoods, the senatorial priesthoods remained extremely prestigious. Augustus noted that he had rewarded 170 of his senatorial supporters in the civil war with priesthoods and Dio says that in 29 в.с. Augustus was allowed to choose priests even beyond the regular number.73 But despite Augustus' powers, the number of non-imperial members of the main four priestly colleges remained stable. As these priesthoods, unlike magistracies, were held for life, competidon was fierce. For the first two centuries of the Empire it was not possible for a senator to be a member of more than one of the four main colleges. Indeed only a quarter to a third of senators (and a half of all consuls) could become priests. Some senators saw membership of one of the priestly colleges as the pinnacle of their career, ranking higher than being praetor or consul.
There were however problems with the appointment to two of the priesthoods. The case of the
There had also been problems over the appointment of Vestal Virgins, which Augustus attempted to solve. He increased the privileges of the Vestals, including special seats in the theatre; later, distinguished imperial women sat among the Vestals in the theatre.77 Many senators were reluctant to put their daughters forward to be Vestal Virgins (Vestals served for thirty years and subsequent marriage was unusual), but Augustus swore that if any of his granddaughters had been of the appropriate age, he would have proposed them. Such official encourage-
Gell.
Tac.
Tac.
Suet.
ment proved to be successful. Under Tiberius two senators vied with each other to have their daughters chosen as Vestal Virgins and the office remained in high prestige through the third into the fourth century.78
The Vestals in fact accumulated new, imperial functions in addition to their traditional ones. In the Republic they had been present with the other priests at the grand funeral of Sulla and it was voted that with the priests
The Arval Brethren illustrate in more detail the extent and nature of changes in priesthoods in the imperial period. They held a shadowy position among the numerous priesthoods of the Republic, but their sanctuary is attested archaeologically from the third century в.с. Augustus became a member of the college and, perhaps in 29 b.C., placed the body on a new footing.81 Our only republican literary source on the Arvals explains that they perform rites to make the crops grow; their name
The revived college proudly inscribed a record of its ceremonies and membership. The extensive fragments that survive run from 21 в.с. to a.d. 304 and are the fullest extant record of any of the priesthoods of Rome.83 The membership of the college was of some distinction from its first Augustan appointments to the end of Nero's reign. Thereafter the members were generally drawn from the middle ranks of the Senate
" Tac.
Ara Pacis: Ryberg 1955 (f 209) 41, 43, j 1-2, 71-4; Dio Li.19.2; RG 11-12. Livia: Dio Lx.5.2.
Scheid 197j (f6i) 331-66; 1987 (f 2i8)Cf. Saulnier 1980 (f 215) and Wiedemann I986(f 237) for an Augustan reorganization of the
Varro,
Texts mainly in Henzen 1874(8 242) or
which could not expect consulships or major priesthoods.[1000] The records of the Arvals' ceremonies demonstrate clearly the extent to which the ancient (or allegedly ancient) cults of Rome were re-structured round the figure of the emperor.
The central, three-day fesdval of the Arval Brethren was in honour of Dea Dia, an obscure deity known only from these inscriptions. The festival was somewhat fluid, at least in the way it was recorded, but it never included imperial sacrifices. The emperor and his family were the focus of a range of quite separate sacrifices. There were annual vows and special vows for the emperor's safety, sacrifices to mark imperial birthdays, accessions, deaths or deifications, sacrifices because of the discovery of a conspiracy against the emperor or because he had returned safely to Rome. There was also in the sanctuary of Dea Dia a shrine to the emperors (a Caesareum) which contained imperial statues. But sacrifices for the emperor were never in the sanctuary of Dea Dia and almost never involved sacrifices to her. The vows were taken on the Capitol to the Capitoline triad, Jupiter, Juno and Minerva, and the other sacrifices were offered in various locations in Rome (mainly on the Capitol and at the temple of Divus Augustus) to the Capitoline triad and other deities, to the deified emperor and empress, to the
After a.d. 69, with the exception of one offering to the
The building or rebuilding of temples is another aspect of the restructuring of the religious system around the person of the emperor. Augustus was proud of his speed in repairing eighty-two temples in 28 B.C. and of building or repairing fourteen temples in Rome during his reign, but his account of the temples is interspersed with references to his work on other, secular buildings, such as the Senate-house, theatres, the water supply and a road.87 That is, Augustus presented his temple construction within the tradition of building works carried out by victorious generals and other senators. There was, however, a profound difference. While senators continued to erect some secular buildings during the reign of Augustus, after 3 3 в.с. only Augustus and members of his family built temples in Rome. Senators, now excluded from their traditional opportunity for display in the capital, increased their munificence to their native cities in Italy and elsewhere. This shouldering of responsibility for temples in Rome increased the importance of the emperor.88 Temple building placed the emperor in a unique relationship with the gods.
Almost all the nine state temples built in Rome between the death of Caesar and the accession of Vespasian refer directly or indirectly to the emperor. Two were dedicated to the officially deified ruler (Divus Julius; Divus Augustus). Three relate to official victories (Apollo; Neptune; Mars Ultor). Two stress imperial virtues (Concordia; Iustitia). One (Jupiter Tonans) was dedicated by Augustus in thanks for the fact that a thunderbolt just missed him. Only one (to Egyptian Isis) has no overt imperial associations, and may not be a real state temple. The reign of Augustus is the crucial period for the establishment of this imperial focus of temple building. Seven of the nine new temples date to his reign: in addition, some of the old temples rebuilt by Augustus gained new associations. Three temples built or rebuilt by Augustus may be taken as exemplary of the new system: Cybele, Apollo and Mars Ultor.
The temple of Cybele on the Palatine was a familiar peculiarity in the late Republic. The cult of the Mother of the Gods, introduced to Rome from Phrygia in 205 B.C., was noted for its barbaric exoticism. Even in Augustan Rome, at the festival of Cybele eunuchs preceded the goddess through the streets banging drums and clashing cymbals. But the goddess became in the Augustan period more Roman and more imperial. Her Phrygian homeland was now associated with the Trojan origins of Rome; according to Ovid, she almost followed Aeneas from neighbouring Troy to Italy but awaited a later date. Already in the
a All temples 'would have fallen into complete ruins, without the far-seeing care of our sacred leader, under whom shrines feel not the touch of age; and not content with doing favours to humankind he does them to the gods. О holy one, who builds and rebuilds the temples, I pray the powers above may take such care of you as you of them': Ov.
The goddess herself gained prominence as the annual washing of the image took place from the early Empire onwards not in the temple, but after a grand procession down the river Almo, where the goddess had first arrived in Rome. In the Republic, though the praetors had overall responsibility for the sacrifices and games, no Roman citizen could take part in the festival and the priests and priestesses were Phrygians, but in the imperial period the rule changed and Roman citizens could become priests and priestesses. It was even possible to honour Drusilla posthumously with a festival modelled on the festival of Cybele.[1003] The cult retained 'Phrygian' peculiarities - Cybele held precedence over the other gods, her children, and the offering to her of herbs, which the earth once grew without human labour, sacralizes the most primidve stage of human existence before the Greek Ceres introduced cereals[1004] - but they obliquely emphasized the antiquity and pre-eminence of Rome.[1005]
Adjacent to the temple of Cybele on the Palatine, Augustus also constructed a temple of Apollo, which with the temple of Vesta framed his own house. On the advice of
The location of the temple is very striking. As Apollo was a Greek god, his earlier temple was outside the
The third major Augustan temple, which was later described as the most beautiful building in the world, is the summadon of Augustan religious restructuring. The temple of Mars the Avenger formed the centrepiece of Augustus' new Forum, built next to the Forum of Caesar and dedicated in 2 B.C.97 This was the first temple to the god of war within the
The design of the Forum and temple ardculates the relationship between Augustus, the gods and Rome, without directly glorifying Augustus.100 Augustus was referred to overtly only by the dedicatory inscription on the architrave, and in the chariot which probably stood in the centre of the Forum, but the whole complex evoked him. The cult statues in the temple were of Mars, Venus and Caesar, referring both to Caesar's (and Augustus') descent from Venus, and to Augustus' piety in avenging Caesar. On the pediment were Mars, Venus and Fortune; Romulus as augur and victorious Roma flanked them, and on either side were representations of the Palatine, the setting of Romulus' augury, and the river Tiber. Augustus' own victories and restorations of Rome had here their mythical analogues. In the porticoes on either side of the temple stood balancing series of statues depicting Augustus' dual ancestry. On one side was Aeneas, the descendant of Venus, dutifully carrying his father from the flames of Troy (echoing Augustus' own filial
* Gage 1931 (f 142)99-101; 1933 (f 146), 342-33.
" Described in Ov.
" There was already within the
" Suet.
100 Zankern.d.
piety), and flanked by his descendants, the kings of Alba Longa and the Julii. Facing this series was a statue of Romulus, the son of Mars, victoriously bearing the armour of an enemy king whom he had slain in battle and round him other figures of Roman history, celebrated mainly for their military prowess. In all there were about 108 statues, each with a brief inscription itemizing their distinctions. To these famous predecessors and ancestors, stretching back to Aeneas, Romulus and through them to Venus and Mars, Augustus was the heir. The place of Rome, evoked by their achievements and by the representations of Palatine, Tiber and Roma herself, was now restructured around the figure of the emperor.
The restructuring connected with the temples of Apollo and Mars Ultor was not however because of animosity towards the existing cults. Both new temples did received functions previously part of the cult of Jupiter Optimus Maximus: the Sibylline Books were moved to the Palatine, and some military functions to the Forum Augustum. But Augustus himself rebuilt the Capitol and made lavish offerings to Jupiter. And the annual offering of vows on behalf of the emperor was always performed in the Capitol. The old system had now increased in complexity with the integration of the new temples into the life of Rome.
The celebration of the Secular Games in 17 в.с. neatly sums up the workings of religion under Augustus and the subsequent persistence and transformations of the Augustan system.[1009] These games are uniquely well documented in a variety of sources: the Sibylline oracle ordaining the procedures, the inscribed record of the games, the hymn of Horace sung at the festival, and other scattered sources. The main location for the games was in the north-west Campus Martius beside the Tiber at an altar known as the Tarentum (or Terentum), where the records of the games were later set up. A story circulated from at least the first century в.с. onwards that in archaic times one Valesius, hoping to save his children from plague, was told by the gods to sail down the Tiber to Tarentum, a Greek colony in the 'instep' of Italy, and give his children water from the altar of Dis Pater and Persephone. Putting in at night at the Campus Martius, he gave water to his thirsty children, who were miraculously cured. He had unwittingly drawn water at a place called Tarentum from the altar of Dis Pater and Persephone, and in thanks for the cure Valesius established three nights of sacrifices and games.102 The Secular Games of Augustus were thus tied to this mysterious place.
The Augustan celebrations, however, differed substantially from any republican predecessors. Augustus and his heir Agrippa played leading roles, though not without traditional justification. Augustus, long a member of the
The celebrations themselves were also transformed. The preliminary distribution of torches, sulphur and asphalt to the entire free population of Rome (line 65; cf. line 8) had not been part of earlier Secular Games, but as with the cult of the
At the second stage of celebrations there were major changes to the old practices. The nocturnal rites remained, but Dis Pater and Persephone were replaced by the Fates, the Goddesses of Childbirth and Mother Earth, and three day-time celebrations were added, to Jupiter, Juno, and Apollo and Diana. Instead of a focus on the gloomy gods of the Underworld, marking the passing of an era, the Augustan games marked the birth of a new age. The fertility of Mother Earth, one of the themes on the Ara Pacis, was guarded by the Fates and the Goddesses of Childbirth. A prominent role was also played by 110 mothers, one for each year of the
,(B Zosimus, ii.1-3 (and Val. Max. 11.4.5). Versnel 1982 (f 232) 217 28 discusses the relation of the story to the Valerii.
1(D The formula appears in Cato,
was one of the locations where the
The games are also worthy of comment.104 They too reveal different layers. During the three days of the festival proper there were two quite different sorts of games: 'at night games were held after the sacrifices on a stage without a theatre and without seats'. This continued into the following day, but there were in addition 'games in a wooden theatre which had been built in the Campus Martius by the Tiber'. The second type of games formed the seven days of games that closed the festival; these were held in three locations, the theatre in the Campus Martius; the Greek musical games in the Theatre of Pompey and Greek theatrical games in the theatre in the Campus Martius. The first type of games, without theatre and without seats, was avowedly primitive (and unpopular - it was not repeated in the seven days at the end of the festival). Varro, writing on the origin of theatrical performances in Rome, associated them with the introduction of the
The rituals and their organization were based on traditional sources. The 'ancient books', perhaps the records of the
The timing of the celebrations also received due authority. The only well-attested republican celebrations were in 249 and 146 B.C., with a cycle of 100 years.107 But, following the Sibylline oracle (and Varro), a cycle of no years was accepted as authentic and a sequence of earlier
104 Erkeli 1969 (p i jo). 105
•Об Dicls 1890 (f 120) ij-15; Gage 1953 (f 143) 177—8}; Momigliano 1941 (p 189) 165 and Momigliano 1966 (л 64) 625.
107 Censorinus,
republican games was established, beginning in 456 в.с. These were added after 17 B.C. to the official Calendar. This new history of the games, which ignored the two earlier authentic celebrations, authorized games in 16 b.c.; the puzzling choice of 17 b.c. is perhaps because of disagreement over the precise year of the foundation of Rome.108
The Augustan games formed the model for all subsequent celebrations. Claudius celebrated games in a.d. 47, receiving censure from modern scholars for his self-interested choice of date, but we tend to forget that a.d. 47 was 800 years from the foundation of Rome and a cycle of 100 years was perfecdy reasonable (indeed the Greek translation of Augustus'
A second cycle of games was also celebrated under the Empire.109 Taking its lead from Claudius' holding of Secular Games 800 years after the foundation of Rome, games were also held the following two centuries (a.d. 148 and 248). These were not counted in the official numbered sequence of Secular Games and, in the latter two cases, the ritual was quite different. The Tarentum seems to have been displaced in favour of rites in front of the temple of Venus and Rome, known as the Temple of the City, and the date was probably changed to 21 April, the birthday of Rome (above, p. 817). These anniversary celebrations, which developed from the Augustan framework, mark the emergence of a new consciousness of the importance of the city of Rome. While under the Republic such anniversaries of the foundation of Rome are unheard of, in the imperial period, the Secular Games, within which the emperor was inscribed, achieved a new importance.
iii. imperial rituals
The religious position of the emperor was thus central and pervasive but also diffuse. There was no one major ceremony such as a coronation or new year's festival at which the emperor was the leading actor, nor did any one religious ritual sum up the religious position of the emperor.110 Rather, a range of rituals incorporated the living emperor. From 30 в.с.
10* For earlier plans to celebrate games in zj B.C. see Virg.
110 For such ceremonies elsewhere see Cannadine and Price 1987 (p 109).
games were celebrated every five years by one of the colleges of priests or the consuls in fulfilment of vows for Augustus' health; and in 28 в.с. Augustus' name was inscribed in the hymn of the Salii by a decree of the Senate.111 His birthday was celebrated publicly, as we have seen in the case of the Arval Brethren (above, p. 830), and at banquets public and private libadons were made to Augustus.112 Images of Augustus and members of his family stood in household shrines, sometimes tended by 'worshippers of Augustus' organized on the model of private associations.113
Though there was no straightforward cult of the living Augustus in Rome, his
Ovid's
1,1 Dio li.19.7 with Weinstock 1971 (f 235) 217-19; RG 9.1; Salii: RG 10.1; Dio li.20.1. The same honour posthumously for members of the imperial family: EJ2 943.4—3 and AE 1984,308 lie; Tac.
Dio li.19.7; Petron.
Ov.
liberator of Rome from the kings (Macrob.
Emperors after death were seen in sharper focus.115 The official cult of Caesar offered the obvious model for Augustus and subsequent emperors. Though some honours were probably voted for Caesar in his lifetime their posthumous consolidation was decisive for subsequent practice. In 42 B.C. the Senate passed the official consecration of Caesar, including the building of a temple; in 40 b.c. Antony was inaugurated as the first
The transition of Augustus to the status long held by Caesar was smoothly managed. The expectation was expressed in his lifetime that he would ascend to his rightful place in heaven, and immediately after his death Augustus was made a
The practices of the Augustan age established the basic framework which prevailed for the rest of the imperial period. Emperors and members of their families were given divine honours only after their death and then only in recognition of the fact that they had, by their merits, actually become gods. This Augustan system marks a change from the tone of the triumviral period when Octavian was commonly
115 Price 1987 (fioo). 116
thought to have held a dinner party of the Twelve Gods, himself appearing as Apollo, and when he erected a statue of himself on the Palatine in the guise of Apollo. In addition, official coins from the mint of Rome of the early 20s B.C. showed Octavian as Apollo, Jupiter and Neptune, and the original plan for the Pantheon was that it should be named after Augustus and have his statue inside it.117
After 27 B.C., Augustus no longer employed such imagery and his successors generally upheld his norms. There were, of course, some changes within the system. The
The one major rejection of the Augustan norms in this period was by Gaius who, after a popular start to his reign, began to make claims to personal divinity. He is said to have sat between the statues of Castor and Pollux in their temple in the Forum, showing himself to be worshipped by those who entered; he wore the clothing or attributes of a wide range of deities, and established a temple to his own divinity.120 Such behaviour was completely unacceptable in Rome. For his biographer it demonstrated that Gaius was no longer emperor or even king, but monster, and memory of Gaius' reign (however exaggerated) survived as a warning to subsequent emperors not to destroy the Augustan norms. Thus Claudius, by temperament a conservative with antiquarian interests, reverted to the maintenance of ancestral Roman customs. According to his biographer, 'he corrected various abuses, revived some
1,7 Suet.
118 Tiberius: Dio LVii.8.3; LVin.2.8. Gaius: Suet.
120 Suet.
old customs or even established some new ones'. For example, he always offered a supplication when a bird of ill omen was seen on the Capitol, and in making treaties he recited the ancient formula of the fetial priests.[1010] Concern for the maintenance of the Augustan system recurs throughout the imperial period.
IV. ROME AND HER EMPIRE
The relations between Rome and her empire, to which we now turn briefly, reinforced the transformations visible in the religious system of Rome itself. These relations are normally analysed specifically as the spread of the imperial cult throughout the empire. That is, the worship of the Roman emperor is seen as the cement of empire. In fact, there was no such thing as 'the imperial cult', and in some important contexts imitation of the transformed system of Augustan Rome was of far greater significance than direct worship of the emperor.
Italy formed the core of the empire. All the freeborn population of the peninsula up to the Alps had been Roman citizens since the time of Caesar. Italy was not a province; it was not subject to Roman taxation, but remained in principle a collection of self-governing communities. But the authority of the religious institutions of Rome extended to Italy. The scope is neatly illustrated by an incident under Tiberius, when the equestrian order in Rome vowed a gift to the temple of Equestrian Fortune for the health of Livia, only to realize that there was no such shrine in Rome itself. But a temple was discovered at Antium, where the Senate decided that the gift could be placed, 'since all rituals, temples and images of the gods in Italian towns fall under Roman law and jurisdiction'. The case suits the tone of the imperial period. Expulsions of undesirables were normally from both Rome and Italy, and the Roman college of
The unique position of Italy is visible most clearly in the calendar. There survive, often in small fragments, forty-four calendars dating to the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius (and one from the early first century B.C.)[1012] Of thirty-eight calendars whose original location is known, twenty-five come from Rome itself, the others from towns in Italy, and only one from elsewhere, a colony in Sicily. The level of detail given in these calendars varies greatly, but all differ from earlier, Italian calendars and all are mutually compatible. They give no festivals peculiar to their own city, but only differing selections from the official festivals of the city of Rome. Towns in Italy, unlike those in the provinces, chose to adhere publicly to the official Roman religious calendar.
Even Italy, however, did not follow all the Roman rules. Some towns preserved their own religious institutions from pre-Roman days, even burying the dead within the town, which was impossible at Rome.[1013]The ancient towns nearest Rome, who had been Rome's 'Latin' allies in the republican period, shared some of Rome's most particular practices; they claimed indeed that Rome had adopted them from the Latins. Thus Alba Longa, Lavinium, Tibur and other Latin towns had one or more of the following:
Outside Italy replications of Roman practices were normal in the early Empire in two, related contexts: the army and colonies. The body of men which stood most clearly for Rome in the provinces was the legions, made up of Roman citizens, and with a religious life that was predominantly Roman. There was an official Roman calendar for both legions and auxiliaries that specified the year's religious festivals. The third- century archives of an auxiliary cohort, Twentieth Palmyrene, stationed on the Euphrates frontier included a copy of this calendar, which demonstrates how the restructured religious system of Augustan Rome was, in a modified form, repeated in the army.127 On purely internal grounds it seems certain that the document is a third-century version of a calendar first issued to the legions under Augustus and subsequently also to the auxiliary forces. The first type of celebrations are in honour of the gods of Rome: Mars Pater Victor, the Quinquatria, the Neptunalia,
Salus. The circus-games in Rome founded by Augustus at the dedication of the temple of Mars Ultor in 2 b.c. were marked in the calendar, as was the festival of Vesta, another deity patronized by Augustus. The birthday of Rome was added to the calendar under Hadrian (perhaps replacing an earlier celebration of the Parilia). Secondly, there were the celebrations in honour of the reigning emperor, his family and predecessors. We cannot reconstruct the original version of the calendar, but there is no reason to think that there would have been few such entries. The marking of transient Augustan events, which were certainly celebrated in Rome, may easily have been pruned to make way for events of more contemporary relevance. But the birthdays of all the deified emperors and the eight deified empresses whose cult was still officially observed in Rome at this time remained in the calendar. (In fact only fifteen birthdays appear on the extant part; the others will have been in the missing section(s).) Only those deified empresses whose cult was no longer celebrated in Rome certainly do not appear on the Dura calendar. In other words, there is probably a complete correspondence between those honoured in the army and those honoured by the Arval Brethren in Rome. There were also commemorations of the accessions of at least five previous emperors, going back to Trajan, and of two other events in the reign of Septimus Severus; the legitimacy of Severus Alexander was thus strengthened by these ties to the Antonine dynasty to which Septimius Severus had linked himself. There were celebrations on at least four occasions of events in the life of the current emperor, all of which would have been in place under Augustus: for example, his first consulship and his appointment as
The structure of the Dura calendar is thus identical in type to the religious system of Rome itself. There were the festivals in honour of the gods, some of which now had clear imperial associations, and there were the celebrations of emperors past and present. Not that there was any opposition between the two: on 3 January vows were taken for the safety of the emperor and the eternity of the empire with sacrifices to the Capitoline triad. This was the religious system officially enjoined on the army. Nock argued that there was no official desire to see the soldiers worshipping the gods listed in the calendar rather than any other gods,128 but this conclusion does not follow from the fact that officers and men also worshipped other gods. Rome chose to replicate its own religious system as the official basis of the Roman army.
Roman colonies were the other principal context in which the Roman religious system was replicated. This is hardly surprising as the colonists in the late Republic were landless citizens from Rome and in the early
m Nock !9)2(f 193) 223. MacMullen 1981 (f 179) 110-11 also denied that there was an official Roman religion of the army.
Empire were ex-soldiers who received land in return for their service. The regulations for the Caesarian colony at Urso in southern Spain provide our clearest evidence.[1016] The extant copy of the regulations consists largely of the original rules, but with some additions of the Augustan period, and it was inscribed in the later first century a.d. The peculiarly Roman nature of Urso thus continued to provide a framework for her identity a century and more after the foundation of the colony, and may have been of particular importance at a time when other Spanish towns received another, subsidiary Roman status. The foundation of the colony began with rites that echoed those of the foundation of Rome itself. The auspices were taken and the founder ploughed a furrow round the site, lifting the plough where the gates were to be. The act was commemorated by cities on coin issues a century and more later.[1017] The boundary of a colony, the equivalent of Rome's
The colony at Urso celebrated its major games in honour of the Capitoline triad (sect. 70-1). This is the earliest evidence for the cult of the triad outside Italy and strongly suggests that Urso had an actual Capitolium. The building of a Capitolium, modelled on that at Rome, was certainly carried out at the creation of some early imperial military colonies. Both Cologne and Xanten in Lower Germany have Capitolia dating after their elevation to the rank of colony; the former was built not long after Cologne became a colony in a.d. 50; the latter was built perhaps 70 years after Xanten became a colony under Trajan, but in this case the entire town was rebuilt and work proceeded slowly. The great temple of Baalbek was begun in the Augustan period at a time when the town received some Roman colonists. Some of the design is purely Roman and the expenses of construction (128 monoliths of Egypdan granite) strongly suggest imperial financing. But the cults were a blend of Roman and Syrian: Jupiter Opdmus Maximus Heliopolitanus, Venus and Mercury.[1020]
The priestly colleges, of
Communities and associations not made up of Roman citizens did not seek to replicate the Roman system, but responded to Rome in their own fashions. In the East, Greek towns maintained their traditional religious systems, worshipping their own selection of the Olympic pantheon, as Pausanias was to describe in the second century a.d. They also commonly chose to establish cults of the living Augustus, somedmes in the context of their ancestral cults. For example, in one Macedonian town a local citizen volunteered to be priest of Zeus, Roma and Augustus, and he displayed extraordinary munificence in the monthly sacrifices to Zeus and Augustus and in the feasts and games for the citizens.[1024] The text is a clear illustration of the integration of the worship of Augustus within local religious and social structures. In the Latin West too towns below colonial status sometimes established cults of the living Augustus, which did not correspond to practice in Rome but did express their position in the Roman hierarchy.138
The associations in both East and West which united these towns at the provincial level also established cults that referred to Rome. The pracdce began in the East when the Greeks of Asia and Bithynia-Pontus were given permission in 29 b.c. to establish cults of Roma and Augustus. Similarly the assembly of the province of Syria also acquired a priest of Augustus and games.139 The Greeks thus expressed, in an endrely acceptable manner, their subordination to Rome. In barbarian areas of the West, which had just been conquered (as the Romans hoped), the Romans felt it appropriate to encourage similar institutions. For example, in north-west Spain soon after the Augustan conquest a governor established three altars to Augustus which were probably to serve as centres for three peoples in the north-west area; or, the three provinces of Gaul conquered by Caesar were united in 12 b.c. in a single provincial assembly at Lugdunum at an altar of Rome and Augustus, dedicated by Drusus, Augustus' step-son.140 In the case of more 'civilized' western provinces, provincial cults were slow to appear, and followed strictly Roman models. In the two long-established Spanish provinces, after Augustus' official consecration in Rome, temples to the deified Augustus were built, with priests of the same name
The place of religion was the city of Rome. Myths recounted aspects of the Roman past and related to features of Roman topography; individual festivals and cults were founded at a particular time and particular place. For example, the Ara Maxima was established at the time when Hercules passed through the area and the festival of the Parilia was associated with Romulus and the creation of Rome. Emphasis on the places at which cults had to be celebrated went together with an emphasis on the importance of a boundary round the site of Rome. At the Parilia Romulus defined a line, the
The religion of place was adapted to accommodate the figure of the emperor, Augustus, seen as the second Romulus, and he expressed his religious position through the traditional priesthoods, through temple building, and through the celebration of the Secular Games. Though the individual elements had earlier parallels, their combination was novel and resulted in a new and remarkably coherent system centred on the emperor. The religion of place was now restructured round a person.
139 Dio li.20.6-7. Syria:
I<0 Spain: Tranoy 1981 (e 244) 327-9. Gaul: Livy,
But it is misleading to categorize this as 'the imperial cult'. The term arbitrarily separates honours to the emperor from the full range of his religious activities, and it assumes that there was a single institution of cult throughout the empire. Within Rome, honours to the emperor have to be seen in the light of his holding of religious office, while outside Rome it is wrong to look only for honours to the emperor. In the context of the army and colonies, real clones of Rome, the copying of other Roman religious practices was at least as important. And when, as in Greek towns, religious honours to the emperor were of considerable significance, they were not replications of Roman honours. Indeed the Roman system was not designed to be replicated (except in the army and colonies). Its principal features were specific to the site of Rome, and the growing emphasis on those features served to distinguish Rome from other towns and to express the peculiar position of Rome as the capital of the empire.
THE ORIGINS AND SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY»
G. W. CLARKE
i. origins and spread
Renewal and reform movements in Palestinian Judaism are well represented in the first-century generations preceding the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple a.d. 70; they flourished in a religious context which lacked sharply defined doctrines and practices, where there was no clearly accepted orthodoxy or authority. Not only was there a range of distinguishable sects (the most notable being, of course, the Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Essenes — but there were a number of others, most prominent among which was the 'Philosophy of Judas' with his politically active followers, the Sicarii and Zealots);2 there was, in addition, a bewildering array of individual ascetics, prophets and preachers who frequently drew in great crowds and commanded dedicated followings.3 What they often shared in common was a passion for the Torah and the Temple but what often distinguished them was their precise definition, in ritual practice, of purity and sacrifice. Messianic expectations were in the air - but they were by no means shared equally by all, nor was there even agreement on the nature of those messianic hopes.4 Ethical debate went hand-in-hand with debate over ritual and ceremony, diet and custom, oral law and written law, the interpretation of the Torah; it was all part of the same process of drawing the boundaries between purity and pollution, holiness and sin, in defining for Israel the will of God. Doctrinal debate there certainly was,
I have chosen a few generally non-controversial features of the ministry of Jesus: for these one is necessarily reliant upon the evidence of the synoptic gospels (composed in their present form near or generally after the destruction of the Temple, the chronological terminus of this study). But for the most part I have preferred to follow as far as possible the contemporary witness of Paul and his associates (supplemented, unavoidably, by the additional testimony of Acts). That way I hope to eschew as much as I can the anachronistic perceptions of the early Christian past (embedded in the Canon as it became later formed) as Christianity developed its own self-awareness and its own sense of separate identity and sought legitimation for those developments in its preferred accounts of its past.
Josephus
Some examples are to be found in Joseph.
848
especially centred on the after-life, immortality and resurrection, but the debates at least shared the same religious and cultural preoccupations.
Into such a religious context with its ferment of debate and diversity fit the movements of John the Baptist (urging a renewal of Israel in the wilderness and a new passage through the 'sea' of the Jordan), and of Jesus of Nazareth round about a.d. 30 (Christian sources being at pains, somewhat apologetically, to subordinate the former to the latter). Jesus' central activities of teaching in the synagogues, attending the Temple services, keeping the festivals - and disputing with other teachers (especially represented, at least in later tradition, as sharpening his views against those of the Pharisees) — these place him in the mainstream of contemporary religious occupations. And his central concerns fit comfortably into the continuing debate within the Judaism of the day, often characterized as they are with reformist tendencies: concerns for Temple purity and cleansing (Mark ii-.ijff, Matt. 21:1 if, Luke 19:45ff, John 2:i4ff), concerns for intentional purity in worship as well as in morals (e.g. Matt.
Compare the story recorded by Hegesippus
Examples of contact with Gentiles are Mark 7:25!? (cf. Matt. ij:22ff), Matt. 8:jff (cf. Luke 7: iff).
Was the scandalous prophecy of the destruction of the Temple intended as an indication of this coming End?
Map 2i. The eastern Mediterranean in the first century a.d. illustrating the origins and spread of Christianity.
kingdom? But what Jesus demanded of his chosen disciples was a renunciation of family and worldly goods, a single-minded dedication and a proselytizing zeal to spread the word (e.g. Mark io:28ff) which ensured that his movement did not remain confined just to sympathetic families and pious followers within Lower Galilee and Jerusalem even after his ignominious death
The Pentecostal scene in Jerusalem, as depicted in Acts 2:9ff, has Peter preaching to Jews who have gathered in Jerusalem from the Diaspora. There are 'Parthians, Medes, Elamites; inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judaea and Cappadocia, of Pontus and Asia, of Phrygia and Pamphylia, of Egypt and the parts of Libya around Cyrene; visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes,8 Cretans and Arabs ...'. This appears to be telling us in general terms that in the view of the writer the Christian message would be disseminated via these sojourners back to Rome and to the regions of the eastern Mediterranean beyond the Aegean (and to the islands of the Mediterranean) as well as along the north African littoral as far as Cyrenaica. After all, there were present at this scene 'devout Jews drawn from every nation under heaven' (2:5). But our information on the processes of this dissemination is fugitive and haphazard, leaving us with very little confidence in conceptualizing accurately the size and social configuration of the Christian communities formed down to the Flavian era. We can, of course, trace the work of one such emissary, viz. Paul, and whilst aware that his growing special sense of mission to the Gentiles will have dictated particular routes and contacts, particular missionary targets, we have basically to be content to take his missionary journeyings (their precise chronology and itineraries do not matter for this exercise) as roughly symptomatic of the types of community and area where Christian groups (in however minimal a gathering) became established in the first forty years after the death of Christ.
Indicative, however, of our general ignorance are Egypt and Cyrene, mentioned in Acts but lacking, in fact, any specific Pauline connexion.9 Legend (but legend only) was required in later time to provide an
8 The relative frequency of the appearance in the New Testament corpus of 'godfearers' (but more rarely 'proselytes') suggests awareness of the significance to the Christian movement of those non-Jewish sympathizers located more to the margins of Jewish communities. Among many discussions Schŭrer 1986 (e 1207) i6off, Reynolds and Tannenbaum 1987 (e 1198) esp. 48ff, Goodman 1989 (d 132) 42f.
' Later, the Muratorian Canon (purportedly of the middle of the second century) can register a palpably fictitious epistle of Paul to the Alexandrians (PL 3.191 f). There occurs incidentally in the Pauline following the learned Jew, Apollos of Alexandria (Acts 18:24), as well as the converted Jews from Cyrene (Acts 11:20) with whom Paul and Barnabas laboured at Antioch (Acts 11:22?, 13:1-3: their number presumably included the Lucius of Acts 13:1).
apostolic-period pedigree for 'the Alexandrian churches'.10 And despite geographical proximity to Jerusalem, despite second-century papyrolo- gical evidence for the remarkably early and remarkably penetrating spread of Christian literature between the Delta and Upper Egypt,11 and despite the inherent likelihood that the Christian message would have found some sympathetic hearers, however few, in the region (given the well-documented Jewish communities of Cyrenaica and Alexandria, displaying a fair degree of permeability with their hellenistic cultural context),12 despite all these factors we cannot go any further without blind conjecture. And we have to compound that conjecture with the surmise that such nascent Christian communities, still identified as Jewish, suffered virtual annihilation along with their parent communities in the later Jewish revolt under Trajan a.d. 115—17. And being without Pauline details also, we are similarly ignorant of Christian penetration into the land of the Arabs, let alone into the territory east of the Euphrates, among Medes and Parthians (despite the considerable Jewish Diaspora).13 Paul seems to claim to have sojourned for some 'three years' in 'Arabia' (elastic term) according to Gal. i:i7f, but this could well have been in one or other of the southern hellenizing cities of the Decapolis (and the failure of churches in the area to claim Pauline foundation suggests that the sojourn may not even have been primarily missionary in intent).14 Even so, we know the land was destined soon to become a richly Christianized area: already in the northernmost city of the Decapolis, Damascus, Christians were to be found in the Jewish community before the time of Paul's conversion (Acts 9'.2ff),15 that is to say, in the course of the thirties. This chance glimpse is a salutary reminder of our overall ignorance. Elsewhere in Syria proper (to which Damascus technically belonged)16 we are relatively well informed about the rich and flourishing, as well as confidendy independent, community established in the far north of the province, in the great urban complex of
10 Thus,
11 See Roberts 1979 (f 206).
Note especially (on Cyrenaica) Liideritz 1983 (в 250), cf. Applebaum 1979 (e 775), and (for Alexandria) the life and work of Philo (Schŭrer 1987 (e i 207) 111.2
The legends of Abgar and of Thaddaeus' mission (e.g. Eus.
Some notion of the size of the Jewish community can be derived from Josephus' figures for those claimed to have been slain in the Jewish revolt a generation later. BJ 11.561 (10,500), vn.368 (18,000).
In Paul's day (2 Cor. 2:32) Damascus had been under an ethnarch of the Nabataean king of Arabia, Aretas IV: by imperial concession?
Antioch (on the Orontes), thanks again to the Pauline connexion, for Paul seems to have spent some twelve years or so 'in the regions of Syria and Cilicia'according to Gal. 1:21, 2:1 (cf. Acts n:2jf, 13:1,15:35) — this should include most or all of the decade of the forties. Notoriously, Antioch is depicted by Paul (Gal. 2: iff) as well as by the author of Acts (1 i:2off) as the
By contrast, Palestine itself has more in the way of details recorded, not unnaturally given the nature of our evidence. But where we can, by means of incidental information, flesh out 'the churches in Judaea' (Gal. 1:22, cf. i Thes. 2:14, Acts 11:29 ('the brethren dwelling in Judaea'), we happen to find predominating the seaboard cities and ports (with their mobile and mixed populations, strongly under the influence of - if not dominated by - hellenistic culture) such as Sidon (Acts 27:3), Tyre (Acts 21:4), Ptolemais (Acts 21:7)- and Phoenicia in general (Acts 11:19,15:5) - Caesarea (Acts 10, 21:8) and Joppa (Acts 9:56, 9:42^ ю:2з).[1027] In Caesarea, in fact, the procurator's headquarters, we are presented with an emblematic cameo, the miraculous conversion of Cornelius (a god- fearer), a centurion of the
So far we have been pressing into service for the most part the testimony of the Acts of the Apostles, itself composed possibly several generations after these events and composed moreover with a disarming tendency to telescope events and with a sharply focused historicizing agenda. From now on Paul himself, along with his associates and disciples, become our almost exclusive guide together with that (deceptively and tendentiously coherent) narrative of Acts. That is to say that we rely on the Paul of the seven indubitably genuine letters — though some of these may already be themselves composite documents (1 Thess., 1 Cor., 2 Cor., Gal., Rom., Phil., Philem.). The post-Pauline or deutero- Pauline epistles (2 Thess., Eph., Col. including the Pastorals, 1 Tim., 2 Tim., Titus) provide, on the whole, merely general and corroborative testimony.22 And, notoriously, even of Paul's own missionary work we can glimpse but a partial view (though with some locations - such as Corinth - fortuitously visible to us under a disproportionately searching light). Thus even though Paul spent so long in the vicinity of his home city of Tarsus and its province of Cilicia - apparently some dozen years at least, Gal. 1:21, 2:1 - we are entirely without details of the centres of population he may have visited, of any success his mission may have had, let alone knowing with whom.23 All we can say is that the Cilician churches are linked closely with Syrian Antioch. They share in the Pauline attitude towards Gentile salvation, their congregations definitely include Gentile Christians (Acts 15:23, cf. 15:41). If we move on westwards around the coastline in Pamphylia we find preaching only at
Consult, for example, Evans 1970 (p 132) 264^
The Pastorals, for example, yield Corinth (2 Tim. 4:20), Troas (2 Tim. 4:: 3), Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:3,2 Tim. 1:18,2 Tim. 4:12), Miletus (2 Tim. 4:20) and Galatia (2 Tim. 4:10) - all otherwise attested. But they do record, additionally, Nicopolis (Titus 3:12), Dalmatia (2 Tim. 4:10) and Crete (Titus i:j): on these see below.
Three
Perge (Acts 14:25,cf. 13:13), but for Lycia or Isauria we know nothing. Inland, however, in the Roman province of Galada we reach Pauline country. In Lycaonia we encounter (in Acts) three cities. At Iconium (Acts 14:1—6, 21), a large number of converts are recorded among the Jews and Greeks as the result of a visit by Paul and Barnabas to the synagogue: the 'Greeks' are manifestly, in some sense, already 'god- fearers' (Acts 14:1). At the neighbouring town of Lystra (to the south west of Iconium) Paul and Barnabas are depicted amidst an initially adoring and enthusiastic native audience (Acts i4:8ff), with stalwart converts (Acts 14:20), and at Derbe (to the south east of Iconium) they are seen winning 'many converts' (Acts 14:21).24 It is worth noting that this missionary journey of Paul and Barnabas included the surrounding country
In Pisidia we have instanced Antioch only (Acts 13:14!?), where Paul is made to address (successfully) in the synagogue a mixed audience of Jews and Gentile godfearers (Acts 13:26, 43).25 Further northwards we have the journey 'through the Phrygian and Galatian country' towards Bithynia. No towns are specified and (though it is an insoluble conundrum) Paul's 'Galatians' may well refer to tribal communities and villages in this area26 (rather than to the hellenized cities included in the Roman province of Galatia to the south and west). We have to allow that Pauline converts were not confined to such cities - though (to our knowledge) he would appear to have been most effective within them. As for Phrygia, though Acts is unspecific, we can reasonably rely on the three churches of the Lycus valley mentioned in the Letter to the Colossians, viz. Colossae (Col. 1:2), Laodicea (Col. 2:1, 4.12—17, cf. Apoc. 3:14ff) and nearby Hierapolis (Col. 4:13, 16)- and there may have been other communities (Col. 2.1). At the time of writing Paul is depicted as never having visited the congregations (Col. 2:1) but the
Timothy is one named Christian, from Lystra (of mixed Jewish and Greek parentage), Acts 16:1—3 (2 Tim. 1:5 purports to record further family details): Gaius is another (Acts 20:4), from Derbe.
Paul had made straight for Pisidian Antioch (via Perge) from Cyprus. Did the converted proconsul of Cyprus, Sergius Paulus, provide Paul with entree into the colony (the family of Sergius Paulus having close links with that city)?
The addressees of the Letter to the Galatians were once Gentile pagans, now tempted to revert to pagan ways (Gal. 4:8—11) and under pressure to submit to circumcision and other observances of the Law (e.g. Gal.
churches are declared to have been founded (Col. 1:7-8) and supported (Col. 4=7ff) by his associates:[1029] the addressees appear inclined to some form of Jewish-hellenistic syncretism (Col. 2:8, 15ff).
But further northwards again, in Bithynia and Pontus, we must remain in ignorance of any establishment, Paul being (mysteriously) thwarted of reaching there (Acts. 16:7). But the later evidence of 1 Pet. i: i (addressed to the elect dwelling in 'Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia') as well as of Pliny, Ep. x.96.6 (Christian converts of over twenty years' standing in Pontus - that is, dating back to the eighties) is indication enough that evangelization cannot have been long thwarted.[1030] Likewise for Cappadocia, to the east of Galatia. We need to recall that Jews from Pontus and Cappadocia are represented as witnesses at the Pentecostal scene in Acts 2:9.
It is clear that down towards the Asia Minor seaboard Paul made the great cosmopolitan city of Ephesus, the province's metropolis, his headquarters for missionary work along the Aegean littoral, whether in person or through his now growing following of associates (as in the Lycus valley).[1031] We see him first at Ephesus on a brief visit (on his way back from Greece to Syria, in the early fifties) sounding out the vigorous and sizable Jewish population (Acts 18:i9f). By the time he returns by the overland route (i.e. via Galatia and Phrygia) in about the mid-fifties we are given to believe that the Alexandrian Jew Apollos has already made converts in the synagogue (Acts i8:24ff). But Acts is careful to establish that they have been imperfectly instructed, they are without the Holy Spirit — and they number but a dozen (Acts 19:1—7): it is Paul who is shown to bring the full Faith. Acts is also at pains to emphasize that the Pauline mission was aimed initially at the Ephesian Jews but after three months of Jewish resistance and hostility, Paul opened his message (in the lecture hall of Tyrannus) to a more general audience and eventually it was heard by 'all the inhabitants of the province of Asia, Jew and Greek alike' (Acts 19:10), to the discomfiture of both diehard Jews (the story of the seven sons of Sceva, Acts 19:1 jff) and diehard Greeks (the story of Demetrius and the silversmiths, Acts 19:23!!). Whilst Acts declares a missionary period of some two years, with evangelizing 'not only at Ephesus but also in practically the whole of the province of Asia' (Acts 19:26, cf. 19:10), we are not given details of other locations but we do learn, incidentally, of Christian communities at the ports of Miletus (Acts 20:15ff, cf. 2 Tim. 4:20) and of Troas (Acts 2o:5ff, 2 Cor. 2:12, cf. 2 Tim. 4:13). The focus remains for us Paul, and his work at Ephesus.
But the 'seven cities' of the
We now cross the Aegean to Macedonia and Achaea: it is a crossing and landfall which Acts makes into a significant and solemn moment (i6:6ff), perhaps to be dated to the end of the forties. Here six communities are known to us. At his initial major landfall in Macedonia, at Philippi on the Via Egnatia, Paul, accompanied by Silas (and presumably Timothy), encounters for the first time a population predominandy Latin in character (it was a Roman colony which had received two groups of veteran settlers) — and he encounters the sort of reception and resistance that is to be characteristically Roman ('they are advocating customs which it is not lawful for us, being Romans, to adopt and follow', Acts 16:21, cf. Phil. 2:2). Physical assault by the city magistrates (
The missionary itinerary has Paul then aim for the next Jewish community, in the provincial headquarters and the large trading city of Thessalonica. Again Acts is careful to record Paul's habit of attending the synagogue and to note that a few (only) of the local Jews are persuaded (was Jason, and his household, one such?, Acts 17:5), whereas a great number of the Greek godfearers as well as a good number of the leading (Gentile) women (Acts i7:4)33 are declared won over: indeed convert Jews go unaddressed in the Letters to the Thessalonians (note especially 1 Thess. 1:9, 2:i4ff envisaging a Gentile readership). And we are left in no doubt of the virulent hostility roused in the Jewish community generally (Acts 17:jff, cf. 1 Thess. 1:14!?, j:2f), a hostility which hounds Paul, Silas and Timothy even at Beroea (reached via Pella?), their next halting-place, known to us only from Acts (i7:ioff). And this, despite a warmer reception in the local synagogue of Beroea, with correspondingly, many Jewish converts as well as a considerable number of Greek women of high status and men34 (Acts 17:12). It is well to be mindful of the rich variations in contemporary Judaism and hence in receptivity to Christian missionaries.
Apart from these three centres we have no knowledge of other locations to which Paul might be referring when he mentions (in 1 Thess. 4:10) 'all the brethren in the whole of Macedonia'. For our one source (Acts again, 17:14^ has Paul travel on hastily to Athens in the province of Achaea35 where he is presented (as standard) speaking with Jews and godfearers (in the synagogue) and with passers-by (in the
32 On the use of
Presumably Sopatros son of Pyrrhus (Acts 20:4) was one of these.
i Thess. 3:1, 3:6 merely has Paul waiting in Athens for Timothy.
Damaris) representing the fledgling Athenian church (Acts 17:34) - though it would be many centuries before Athens was to become in any sense a major Christian centre.[1034]
And so on to Corinth for a mission that was to last a year and a half (Acts 18:11) and for what appears to be, on our information, Paul's most penetrating evangelization, with high-status converts, Jews (the
As for the Mediterranean islands, even Crete, mentioned at the Pentecostal scene, fails to score any mention save in the (later) Epistle to Titus. There Paul is claimed to have visited the island, leaving Titus temporarily behind 'to institute elders in each city' (1:5). At the very least we can say Crete is the type of island believed to have fallen within the Pauline missionary orbit, with urban Christian communities fully established and with converts amongst the Jewish population (1:10—14). Others of Paul's missionary entourage are expected to be calling by (3:13): Crete was a natural port of call on the sea-lanes for missionaries on the move just as was Cyprus (cf. Acts 27:4, 27:7-8). And at least for Cyprus we are on firmer ground in claiming an early missionary visit by Paul (in company with the Cypriot Barnabas, and John Mark) with the towns of Salamis and Paphos specified (Acts 13:5—6). The mission was aimed 'at the synagogues of the Jews'41 and included, accordingly and pointedly, the confutation of a charlatan but influential Jewish sorcerer (13:6ff); Barnabas and Mark make a return missionary journey in Acts 15:39. But even (apparently) prior to Paul's mission, Jewish converts, scattering from Jerusalem after Stephen's death, had brought the good news to receptive Jews on the island (Acts 11:19).42 But of the Aegean and Ionian islands generally, there is not a word, though Paul's voyaging brought him in passing contact with a number (e.g. Acts 20: i4f, 21: iff). And it is fortuitous that we learn of an enforced sojourn by Paul on Malta
For what it is worth Titus 5:12 represents Paul as planning to winter at Nicopolis on the coast of Epirus and 2 Tim. 4:10 can report that Titus has gone to Dalmatia, further up the coastline. We have to wait until the early third century for the next Christian reference to Nicopolis: Origen found there a unique version of the Old Testament — which might suggest a somewhat early Christian connexion? (Eus.
Note the convert Cypriot Jews who bring the message from Jerusalem to Gentiles at Antioch, Acts 11:20.
One such could be 'Mnason of Cyprus, a disciple from the early days' later found domiciled in Jerusalem (Acts 21:16). As so often with the testimony of Acts, the chronology of events is controversial.
(Acts 28:1-11)[1038] as well as an incidental landfall on Sicily (at Syracuse: Acts 28: i г).[1039] There, no Christians welcome Paul, unlike the reception accorded a little later at Puteoli (Acts 28:14) or earlier at Sidon (Acts 27:3): we should deduce that Christian communities were yet to be established. The impression to be gained is that whilst some regular ports - such as Troas (2 Cor. 2.i2f, cf. Acts 16:11, 2o:5ff), Cenchreae (Rom. 16:1-2) or Puteoli (Acts 28:14) - already had some Chrisdan presence, this was not by any means yet a regular feature. And for all we know such major port-cities in the western Mediterranean as Carthage, Tarraco and Massilia, not to mention the western provinces of north Africa, Spain (despite Paul's declared aspiration, to reach the western limits of the Roman world, Rom. 15124, 28),[1040] and Gaul, sdll lay entirely outside any evangelization. After all Spain is mendoned by Paul in a context of 'places where the very name of Christ has not been heard' (Rom. 15:20). And were there by chance merchant travellers to these ports who were Christians or any early Christian pioneers in these provinces the memory of them faded fast, and completely: it would not be without significance that the western Mediterranean generally lacked established Jewish communities at this date.
And finally, Italy and Rome. By the time of Paul's arrival (very late fifties a.d.?), there was already formed a congregation at the port of Puteoli on the Gulf of Naples, the major Italian harbour for traffic with the Orient (Acts 28:14).[1041] And of course Paul found in Rome itself a Christian community to welcome him (Acts 28:15): he had previous knowledge of or acquaintance with a number of its members (if we rely on Rom. 16:3ff) — and in his protreptic letter to the Roman brethren Paul had gone so far as to declare that the story of their faith was being told throughout all the world (Rom. 1:8). Acts is at pains to depict Paul making, once again, an initial effort — politely and patiently - to convince the Roman Jewish community (and it was a large one) but meeting with only mixed success (Acts 28:17ff). As we are given our final view of Paul teaching 'openly and unhindered' under house-custody awaiting trial, we are left with the deliberate impression that the two full years of waiting were spent largely with Gendle hearers (Acts 28:2jff). To a degree the letter to the Romans corroborates: it shows careful awareness of the mixed nature of the Roman congregadon with its firm message that there is no longer distinction to be made between Jew and Greek. As for the size of this community, whilst we cannot go beyond Tacitus'
Sporadic and fitful as our evidence manifestly is, adherents to this new religious movement had become, by the end of the sixties, as broadly spread in race and social class as they were scattered geographically. Being dispersed from Arabia in the East to Rome in the West, they spoke in a babel of tongues: Hebrew, Aramaic (and other Semitic languages), Greek, Latin (as at Philippi, Rome), local vernaculars (as in Galatia, Acts 14:11, and compare the Pentecostal scene of Acts z:<)ff). These reflected the range of country and nation of their origins, though Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek predominated (and our evidence is biased towards the latter). They dwelt not so much in country districts - villages and rural areas are not well represented (Palestine and Galatia providing the clearest examples, and rural penetration was to continue to be erratic, but not by any means unknown, over the succeeding centuries). The city, and the hellenized city at that, is where they characteristically dwelt, and the cities where we can see them — though they vary greatly in size and sophistication - for the most part (but not exclusively) lay on major routes of traffic and trade, or were reasonably accessible from them (as in the Lycus valley). And within those cities - to judge from the cases where we get status indicators — they appear to have formed congregations that might combine all but the highest levels of social stratification: that is not altogether surprising or radical when secular
Whilst converts might range from Pharisees, still zealous for the observance of the Law, in Jerusalem to Greeks, sophisticated in the Hellenic philosophic traditions, in Athens (as perhaps Dionysius the Areopagite), nevertheless throughout, it is the Jewish sympathizers, godfearing Gentiles located somewhat to the margins of Judaism, who to our perception of things play a pivotal role: they appear to be found - and in significant numbers to be ready to lend an open ear — wherever synagogues flourished in the Diaspora: we must allow for a fair degree of interpenetration between Judaism and Gentile society around the Mediterranean at this period whilst aware, as always, that there will be regional differences (and sympathy with Judaism may diminish systematically as we move westwards, progressing deeper into a more Roman environment). Consequently, demarcation disputes with Judaism are perceived as endemic in this formative period as the processes of self- definition for the Christian movement get under way, processes which roused — and were to continue to rouse - much dissension and dispute within the movement itself: the Pauline formula for Gentile converts, involving as it did 'ritual invisibility', was manifestly not the only one nor was it necessarily acceptable either to them or to other (and especially Jewish) followers.
Some sort of control over our estimate of the social spread of Christianity in the generation between the thirties and the sixties might be sought in the onomastics of the Pauline connexion, from an examination of the sixty-six named individuals in the genuinely Pauline
4' For a useful study, Theissen 1982 (f 229) 69ff. 50 See Hock 1980 (f 156).
documents (plus thirteen more for the Pauline following provided by Acts) or of the full register of some ninety-seven names if we include in the tally the pastorals as well (treating bynames as separate entries). Caveats are obviously demanded not only in the field of onomasdcs itself (which name is exclusively, characteristically, sometimes, never Jewish?) but also in using the Pauline mission as a typical sample (which one can well imagine it may not have been). It is, however, the best sample we have.
What emerges, on analysis, is a mixed population, with a noticeably high proportion of Latin names (in a ratio 1:2 for Latin: Greek names), with no more than a dozen manifesdy Semitic names altogether.[1043] The Latin proportion may be accounted for, in part, by the adoption of Roman names (especially
II. CHRISTIANS AND THE LAW
Christ
The trial and condemnation of Christ 'as a criminal' (as pointedly observed by Tacitus,
Sources
Sources are troublesome (here, as everywhere else). Acts is our major source for the early political relations between the Christian followers and the societies in which they lived. But Acts has amongst its underpinning themes the law-abiding nature of the Christian victims: the municipal and provincial administration, on the one hand, and, on the other, the Christian movement (growing as it is and spreading among the Gentiles, themselves of increasing dignity and status) need not live together in other than harmony, but (the document pointedly and persistendy argues) it is the Jews (the 'unconverted Jews') who by, their hostility have consistendy stirred up trouble with the authorities for Christians56 and have thereby forfeited their ancient claims to be the chosen race. Paul's personal spiritual history in Acts is patterned to reflect this progression, shifting from Jewish hostility to Christian conversion, and then, increasingly, dedicated to a mission away from the synagogues towards the Gentile world, leading, ultimately, as far as Rome. Paul's own retrospective views of his past life (both as persecutor and as persecuted) are notoriously unspecific and shifting in emphasis (Gal. i:i3f, 1:2}; i Cor. 15:8f; 2 Cor. ii:2jff; Phil. 3:6): nevertheless, it remains clear that the initial followers of Jesus (whether from Paul himself or the author of Acts) in their perception of things were 'persecuted' - and in most cases persecuted by Jews, at times via urban or Roman authorities. It is an attitude encapsulated in the words given to Paul at Miletus to the Ephesian elders: 'In city after city the Holy Spirit assures me that imprisonment and hardships await me' (Acts 20:23); significandy, as the climax to the Beatitudes in the Matthaean version (j:ioff) figures the blessedness of those who suffer insults and persecution for Christ's sake. It is quite another matter to determine how exaggerated or indeed accurate a construing of events all this may be. But it is the mentality of this society which is crucial for its future: persecutions needs must come just as they had beset the prophets of old. The Christian prototype was on its way to be set not as the conforming
96 Thus, in order, in the first dozen chapters (as a sample):
'the Chief Priests, the Controller of the Temple and the Sadducees' along with 'the Jewish rulers, elders and doctors of the law' (Peter and John, in Jerusalem, Acts 4:1—))
'the High Priest and all his supporters, the Sadducean party' ('the Apostles', in Jerusalem, Acts 5:17)
'members of the Synagogue called the Synagogue of Freedmen' stirring up 'the [Jewish] people, the ciders and the doctors of the law' (Stephen, in Jerusalem, Acts 6:96)
(4) (The pre-conversion) Saul, in Jerusalem, Acts 8:iff (men and women)
(ĵ) Saul, from the High Priest in Jerusalem to Damascus (via the synagogues of Damascus), Acts 9:if (men and women)
'The Jews' (the converted Saul, in Damascus, Acts 9:23)
Herod (pleasing the Jews) (James, the brother of John, and Peter, in Jerusalem, Acts ia:iff)
In all the many instances of'persecution' in the later chapters of Acts Jews fail to be implicated only in 16:2 off (Paul and Silas in Macedonian Philippi), in 17:18ff (Paul in Athens - but is this actually 'persecution'?) and in I9:2jff (Paul's companions Gaius and Aristarchus in Ephesus) - that is, in a Roman colony and in two of the great pagan cities of the eastern Mediterranean (with characteristic displays of pagan and self-interested prejudices).
householder but as the singular and suffering martyr, 2 Cor. n:2jff, providing the
Accordingly, the death of Stephen, as Christian protomartyr, is highlighted in Acts 6 as the quintessential experience awaiting these Christian followers: the prophetic and inspirited individual is depicted as the innocent vicdm of uncontrolled Jewish mob lynching, 6:j4ff (though it is possible that legal condemnadon by the Sanhedrin for violating the Temple precincts had been formally executed).[1048] It is a scene which the unconverted Saul is tellingly made to approve (Acts 8:1, cf. 26:9ff- is Gal. 1:17 irreconcilable?). Whereas the encounters of (the later converted) Paul with Roman provincial authorities are contrived to represent him as unfairly accused by conniving enemies of Chrisdanity, and accused of offences which are rightly judged by the Roman legal representatives as not punishable under the law — thus before Gallio, the proconsul of Achaea in 51/2 (Acts 18:12ff, cf. before Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of Cyprus, Acts 13:6ff) and before Felix and Festus, procurators of Judaea (Acts 24—6). Note the verdicts allegedly given after the - manifestly informal - hearing at Caesarea before Festus and Agrippa and his court: 'This man is doing nothing that deserves death or imprisonment'; 'This fellow could have been released had he not appealed to Caesar' (Acts 26:3if).
However apologedc and pardal these accounts may be, two points still emerge clearly — individual Chrisdans, for whatever circumstances, did keep falling foul of the law but no Roman law, nevertheless, specifically oudawed Chrisdanity as such. The dealings of the Roman emperors themselves with Christians confirm this judgement.
No certitude is possible that the incident recorded by Suetonius
Tacitus, an experienced and senior senator (consul a.d. 97), had been proconsular governor of the province of Asia early on in the second decade of the second century: there Christians were doubdess becoming a perceptible fact of life if not yet greatly numerous. He is our original source
As the Tacitean narrative runs, expiatory rites hallowed by traditional religion had failed to scotch the prevailing rumour of Nero's personal responsibility for starting the disastrous fire. So Nero provided Christians as scapegoats ('subdidit reos': the wording implies they were not, in Tacitus' view, in fact responsible for the fire); they were followers of a new-fangled superstition 'hated for their crimes' (typical, therefore, of the modern influx of depravity into the capital). Those who confessed
и Oros. vii.6.1 j f in fact reads
were arrested - the tense in Tacitus' wording ('qui fatebantur') implies they were confessing to being Christians - and they in turn revealed the names of others: a huge multitude was thus convicted 'not so much on the charge of arson as for their hatred of humankind'. Nothing is revealed by Tacitus of the actual processes of their legal conviction (did Nero delegate authority and if so, to whom?) but he does disclose a belief that whilst the charge of arson was false they undoubtedly deserved punishment anyway. In his view Christians are tainted with crime. But he manages nevertheless to create a haunting memory of their deaths, contrived (as he puts it) 'not for the public good but to glut one man's cruelty', a holocaust lit to indulge Nero's histrionic obsessions: 'Mockery of various kinds was added to their deaths: covered with the skins of wild beasts they were torn to pieces by dogs, they were nailed to crosses or were doomed to the flames: when daylight failed their burning served to illuminate the night. Nero had made available his gardens for the spectacle and provided a Circus show, dressed as a charioteer mingling with the crowd or driving on a chariot.' There is no good reason to disbelieve this account but there is room to suspect that Tacitus may have enhanced the numbers (
There appears to be nothing except historical convenience to connect the deaths of Peter and Paul with these events of a.d. 64. Our last secure
See the analysis of Barnes 1968 (f 8j) and for examples of the connexion in the popular mind between dissident minority groups and the threat of urban incendiarism, Livy xxxix.14.10 (Bacchanalians in Rome), Sail.
For the case see, for example, Frend 1965 (f 139) i64f: Poppaea undoubtedly shared in the fashionable fascination with Jewish rituals and customs (e.g. Joseph. BJ vn.43 (Greeks in Antioch)
glimpse of Paul is that provided by the conclusion of Acts (28:16, 30) where he is depicted (in about a.d. 62) as being under house detendon in Rome awaiting trial. The chances are high (but by no means absolute), given the delays of two full years already, that the trial was in the end aborted and that Paul secured some casual release.61 Certainly the tone of the narrative in Acts and its whole tendency suggests (or at the very least is contrived to suggest) that at the time of writing the death of Paul at the hands of Roman authorities has not yet taken place — though admittedly Paul is made to foretell the permanence of his departure from Miletus and Ephesus (Acts 20:2 5, 3 8, at Miletus) along with forebodings of death (Acts 21:10-14, at Caesarea). And as for Peter, notoriously his Roman whereabouts are even more difficult to establish with any security.62 On the other hand there can be no doubt about the reality of the
It would not be too long after these incidents that (inspired) Christians - if we are to believe a persistent story (and we need not) - took refuge from Jerusalem immediately before its siege and eventual destruction and fled to the safety of (Jordanian) Pella of the Decapolis. On this version of events providential protection did save Palestinian Christians from becoming victims in the devastation that was to befall Palestinian Jewry.66
iii. conclusion
Actual deaths may have been relatively few before a.d. 70.67 But their heroic circumstances ensured that the lives of these charismatic indivi-
For valuable discussion, Sherwin-White 1963 (d 109) 1 i8f.
On these, both the Pauline
See Eus.
For example 1 Clement 5 -4f (late in the first century; Peter and Paul), cf. John 21:18f (Peter). Neither mentions the place of death.
For what it is worth Eus.
The story (which suspiciously ensures an apostolic pedigree for the church of Pella) has disturbingly irreconcilable variants: Eus.
Despite impressions Stephen and James, the brother of John, are the only two to die in Acts (7:60,12:if) along with the unsubstantiated Jerusalem victims whom Saul 'persecuted to the death' (if we are to place literal credence in the speech given him in Acts 22:4).
duals were to become the enduring models of behaviour and the focus of theological attention: characteristically these were outspoken missionaries, the zealous apostles, the staunch disciples and their descendants, often, as society and tradition expected of them, rootless men and professed celibates, or men who had sacrificed country and kin to their religious cause — and perceived, besides, as being direct descendants of one persistent lineage in Jewish tradition enshrined in the Book of Maccabees. Before their glittering examples the solid and dutiful householders of the secondary epistles ascribed to Paul, living out stable and orderly lives of domesticated Christianity, with loving wives, obedient progeny and submissive slaves, failed to capture the theological and spiritual imagination. Despite opponents, and despite the passage of the years, the spirit of the Pauline theology of imminent
SOCIAL STATUS AND SOCIAL LEGISLATION1
susan treggiari
The epoch of the destruction of the last great hellenistic monarchy which could challenge Rome in the Mediterranean world and of the addition of a
I. LEGAL DISTINCTIONS
Gaius, writing his textbook on Roman law in the second century a.d., launches into the law of persons with a pithy classification of the human race, as far as it was relevant to Roman law: 'the primary distinction in the law of persons is this, that all men are either free or slaves. Next, free men are either
To the mind of a Roman lawyer, legal status is the essential distinction. Although his first two sentences could be taken to refer to the whole human race, the third makes it clear that he is thinking of the community of Roman citizens and of slaves and
I am indebted to David Cherry, Colin Wells, members of Stanford seminars, and the editors for discussion and comments, and to James Rives for efficient verification of references.
A Spanish inscription of 87 B.C. provides a striking early instance. See Richardson 1983 (в 271); Birks, Rodger and Richardson 1984 (d 247).
873
Our focus, like that of our Roman sources, will be on that small proportion of inhabitants of the empire who, in 28 B.C., were free and Roman citizens, at most 5-6 million men, women and children, of whom not many more than 4 million lived in Italy.4 But the masses of non- citizens of many disparate cities and tribes, who heavily outnumbered Roman cidzens in the provinces, and the slaves, who made up a substantial proportion of the populadon in Rome and other cities and on the estates and cattle pastures of Italy, must not be forgotten. They sharpened Romans' perception of their own position of privilege. There is continuity between the humbly born traders who, as Cicero said (11
Though the citizen's rights appear most strikingly when he is accused of a crime, they were usually important to his life because they dictated his capacity to act in private law. Roman civil law superimposed further regulations on the conventions generally accepted by mankind, the
Buckland 1963 (f 646) i42f; Gardner 1986 (f 33) 14.
Brunt 1971 (a 9) 12. 5 Watson 1987 (f 703) ch. 6.
precaution of checking whether the other party was a slave or a non- citizen
ii. social distinctions
Gradations of prestige,
In the towns, the decurions formed an order just as the Senate did at Rome: local town councils included men who might also enjoy the status
Sherwin-White 1982 (a 88), especially 28.
Pliny,
of Roman
Other men who served the state were registered and distinguishable. Civil servants,
' Demougin 198) (e 34); Wiseman 1971 (d 81) 86ff; on qualifications, Crook 1967 (p 21) 6;ff.
10 See Wiseman 1971 (d 81) 89-94; Garnsey 1970 (p 33) 242-5.
" Cicero regarded the tax-contractors as an
13 Dobson 1970 (d 181) and 1974 (d 182); Breeze 1975 (d 167). On recruitment of the poor as common soldiers, Campbell 1984 (d 173) 8ff.
But Roman class structure cannot be described solely by
Setting himself up, in a sermon on true riches, as a senator of Stoic continence whose fortune would generally be considered modest, but who could adjust his expenditure to allow some surplus, Cicero mentions HS 100,000 as an income which would more than cover expenses, where an extravagant man would find 600,000 inadequate.[1052]But he regarded 80,000 as an adequate allowance for young Marcus when he was only a student in Athens — and in the first year travelling expenses brought the figure up to 100,000
The good man of course avoided disgraceful sources of enrichment (despoiling provinces, ejecting neighbours, going shares with unscrupulous freedmen and so on, Cic.
Lentulus had allegedly earlier scarcely supported the position of a
For means of enrichment see Finley 1976 (a 27); D'Arms 1981 (p 22) ch. 5 and, for a later period, Duncan-Jones 1982 (л 24) ch. t on Pliny.
Sen.
Tac.
Dio uv.26.3-4,
Hopkins 1983 (a 46) 7jf; Talbert 1984 (d 77) 47fT.
Hor.
might rival the wealthiest senators. Virgil is said to have acquired nearly HS io million from friends
Less than the equestrian census might make a family wealthy by the standards of a small community. The capital required of some municipal councillors is known to have been HS 100,000. Retired centurions or freedmen traders or even efficient farmers might attain solid wealth.[1055]But ordinary artisans, shopkeepers and peasants were immeasurably removed from equestrian wealth. The pay of a private soldier, HS 900 annually, out of which he paid for food and equipment, was attractive and must have represented security compared with what an able-bodied man could have earned as a labourer, seasonally employed and with no compensation for injury. Cicero had argued in the 70s в.с. that an ordinary labourer would earn no more than HS 3 daily (
'Though you strut in the pride of wealth, Fortune does not change your birth' (Hor.
Absence of real or fictitious distinctions of birth was not an insuperable barrier to advancement. (If fictitious, they were normally invented after a man had succeeded.) The Senate had necessarily always been recruited from below, and although new men who rose to the consulship were rare, men of equestrian family steadily reached lower magistracies and their sons or grandsons might do better. New men,
As the equestrian order was the seedbed of the Senate (Livy, XLii.61.5), closely linked to it by blood, intermarriage, friendship and similar interests and education, so lower strata of the propertied classes supplied recruits to the equestrian order. A man of modest means,
These various stratifications, themselves untidy, from senators and
The troubles of the late Republic and triumviral period ruined many and promoted some. Territorial expansion and the civil wars of Caesar and the Pompeians increased the need for commanders and administrators; reliable and successful soldiers claimed rewards from the victor; despite casualdes, the number of senators was inflated under Caesar. The wars which followed gave men of all classes further opportunities to rise. For example, Caesar's friendship secured the consulship of Cornelius Balbus of Gades (40 B.C.). The freedman's son Q. Horadus Flaccus would probably not have held an equestrian command if Brutus had not badly needed officers. Calvisius Sabinus (probably of Spoleto) was promoted by Caesar and rewarded by Octavian for attempting to defend the dictator against his assassins. He was consul in 39 and did Octavian good service in the navy and as governor of Spain during the war of Acdum. A son and grandson follow him to the consulship. C. Carrinas (cos. suff. 43) is comparable. Young men of hitherto obscure Italian families came up with Octavian, for instance Salvidienus Rufus (who should have been consul in 39). M. Vipsanius Agrippa, who dropped the gentile name which revealed his un-Roman background, outshone them all. The piping days of peace gave fewer opportunities to soldiers, but reliability and efficiency might still win promotion through imperial favour and the eloquent new man might still rise through forensic oratory.[1061]
iii. social problems at the beginning of the principate
The two themes of Romans who reflected on the twenty years after the murder of Caesar were social disruption and moral decay. The agony of the civil wars of the 80s and the shameful proscriptions of Sulla had been burned into the memory of Cicero's generation (Cic.
C. Sallustius Crispus (?86—35), a new man from Sabine territory who reached the praetorship under Caesar (46), between 44 and 3 5 produced a series of works on the decline of the Republic, diagnosing its ills as avarice, luxury and selfish ambition. Since 146 B.C.,
Cornelius Nepos, from Cisalpina, friend of Cicero, Atticus and Catullus 99 — c. 24 b.c.), made no sermons on civil war, but his assessment of Atticus' life defends the virtue of the able and rich
be the son of a gladiator. But Tiberius defended him by saying that 'he seemed to be his own father' (Tac.
Varro's fragmentary early Satires include
Sail.
Nep.
anger: the parallel with Antony and Octavian is clear. Virtue and wisdom are personified by Ulysses, who tried to get his companions safely home and who resisted the harlot who tried to enslave him. Horace and his friends (he admits) follow bad leaders mindlessly, suppressing their anxieties and postponing the moral effort which is needed to save them.[1062]
Sallust, Nepos and Horace were all conscious of the violent reversals of fortune which their age had witnessed. The fates of Pompey, Caesar and Antony were potent. Lesser men rose or fell. Octavian's admiral L. Tarius Rufus was said to have sprung from the lowest level of society (Pliny,
Cicero had advised Caesar, when he controlled the state, to stabilize the Republic and so avoid further dissension (
The triumvirs, charged, like Sulla, with rebuilding, concerned themselves with the excision of their enemies from the body polidc and other urgent measures. Once the emergency was advertised as over in 28,39 Octavian had to take up the work of reconstruction. Before, Horace had prayed for the cessation of civil war, now he turns to a Sallustian diagnosis of problems to be solved. As Augustus, the ruler must aspire to be a father of cities
Dionysius took the traditional philosophical view that the state depended on households, so the lawgiver should start by regulating marriages and sexual conduct. Romulus was an effective lawgiver. Instead of passing specific laws which allowed a husband to sue for adultery or desertion or a wife for ill-usage, desertion or recovery of dowry, he secured the good behaviour of wives by making marriage indissoluble and safeguarding their rights.[1066] It was traditional that founders or constitution-makers regulated social behaviour. The Sicilian Diodorus (writing c. 60-30 B.C., died not earlier than 21) had recently given fresh currency to the legend that Zaleucus had enacted a law at Locri that a woman was not to leave the city at night, unless she was going to commit adultery, or to wear gold or purple unless she was a courtesan (xn.21.1). Charondas at Thurii was held to have legislated against adultery and remarriage for men (Stob.
The restoration of temples in г8[1067] seems to have been accompanied by an effort to shore up sexual
Contemporary analysis of social problems focused on morality. Since a poor man or a slave might be thought to have deserved his lot because of bad character, we should not expect Romans to see poverty and slavery as social problems which required cure. But moderns, starting from their own presuppositions, diagnose slavery and the comparative stagnation of the Roman economy as the main causes of the top-heavy social system. The emperors palliated the insecurity of the poor of the city. They also propped up members of the senatorial class who were unable to maintain the economic base which public service and high position required. They sent aid in response to disasters. There was some 'humanitarian' legislation on the treatment of slaves, but this was dictated by concern for morality and the security of the free population rather than for the slaves: the result might be Claudius' decree that sick slaves abandoned by their owners were free, or the Silanian
iv. the social legislation of augustus and the julio-claudians
The decade after 23 B.C. saw concentrated legislation in various areas. Augustus himself claimed that his laws re-introduced old standards and set an example to posterity. Like Horace, he harks back to a mythical past. Tiberius was in closer accord with the tradition of the republican aristocracy when he deprecated interference in private morality.[1073]
Augustus could not enforce his reforms without at least some measure of consensus: this he presumably achieved by 18, when the Senate and People approved the Julian law on the marriage of the orders.49 The Julian law on adultery is convincingly dated to the same year. Some curbs on luxury had been introduced by sumptuary legisladon regulating public banquets in 22, maximum expenditure on dinner parties, and perhaps other extravagances which may have included the building mania attacked by Horace.50
Opposition to the marriage law was not stifled when it was passed: Augustus apparently had to make various modifications (Suet.
The motive for the law seems to have been that Augustus perceived men as reluctant to marry: he read to the Senate the old speech of Metellus which contained the hackneyed
hi. 25-8, especially 28.6 on Lex Julia et Papia; Suet.
Cf. Brunt 1971 (a 9) 11 ĵff on the Augustan census.
Dio suggests that there was a known shortage of 'well-born' (which seems in this context to mean freeborn) women: 'Since males far outnumbered females among the freeborn, he encouraged anyone who wanted to marry even freedwomen, except the senators, and he ordered that their reproduction should be legitimate' (Liv.16.2). Moderns now generally agree that marriage between freeborn and freed had not (as Dio implies) been forbidden before: if he is muddled on this point it does not inspire faith in his views on the sex ratio.52 Dio may be arguing back from the law to the situation.53 But if contemporaries perceived a shortage of women, their best evidence would have been the census, in which fatherless unmarried women may have been under-reported (as women are in modern non-industrial populations). A real imbalance between the sexes might be caused by abandonment or malnutrition of girl babies. If Augustus saw this as a problem, we might expect measures against abandonment (which would constitute no greater invasion of privacy than did his adultery law). But he impartially encouraged the rearing of children of either sex. Nothing confirms Dio's alleged cause for the endorsement of hypergamy for freedwomen, nor did the text of the law speak only of freedwomen but of freedmen as well (D 23.2.44
The law forbade intermarriage of senators, their sons, sons' sons and grandsons, their daughters, sons' daughters and sons' sons' daughters with freed persons, actors and actors' children. This is the first indication that the
The law was long and complicated. It invalidated provisions against marriage imposed by third parties. It laid down a series of penalties for the unmarried (
Watson 1967 (f 700) 3 }ff. For the interpretation of'well-born' see Brunt 1971 (a 9) 558.
Rawson 1986 (f 34) 49 n. 51.
The prescribed ages for marriages were from twenty (or perhaps less, since this age is directly attested for parenthood:
days:
The law paid particular attention to the wealthier classes and freed persons. The reason was probably practical. Although he continued the grain-dole to adult male citizens in Rome, Augustus was in no position to finance family allowances for poor citizens (there was occasional largesse to fathers: Suet,
Augustus' laws responded to a complex situation and shifting political possibilities. It is a mistake to ask what his one motive was in inspiring the legislation of 18 в.с. and a.d. 9. The need to encourage nuptiality and reproductivity in order to supply Rome with soldiers and administrators appears to have been most prominent in the minds of Augustus and his advisers. The laws would also serve to encourage the upper classes to breed sons to succeed them in their dignities and property: it reinforced the executive measures which Augustus took to recruit qualified men to the service of the state and to encourage continuity, loyalty and
The Julian law on adultery and extramarital sexual intercourse is intimately connected with the marriage law.59 It covered adultery by married women and all kinds of fornication (
Public sanctions against seduction of boys already existed. Adulterous wives had until now been dealt with by husbands or families, divorced and sometimes penalized by loss of one-sixth of their dowries or by relegation
In describing the purpose and impact of the law, both ancient and modern writers tend to concentrate on the provisions about adultery, which was of interest to jurists because it caused divorce and loss of dowry. But the law may initially have been motivated not only by the
There are traces of killings in second and third century rescripts: £>48.3.33
conviction that women were evading a commitment to chastity implicit in the marriage bond and that their adultery threatened the stability of the family and the production of legitimate children, but also by a conservative backlash against the
Realities of sexual conduct are comparatively inaccessible even through questionnaire and autobiography, harder to reach by way of political oratory or erotic verse. Latin literature had recently turned to exploration of emotional life; in law by about 100 B.C., marriages in which the husband had legal control of the wife had become uncommon; women had more independence in the bestowal of themselves and their property; wives, like husbands, could divorce unilaterally and without necessarily suffering severe economic consequences, scandal or complete separation from children. Men connected this social and legal emancipation with a sexual revolution. The evidence which reaches us is tendentious and it is impossible to measure the incidence of adultery and fornication in the society of Caelius and Clodia or of Ovid and Iulia. Augustus, who suffered not only the usual accusations of homosexuality but also circumstantial criticisms of adulteries with women of standing, and who had certainly married the divorced Livia with indelicate haste (Suet.
The severe penalties ordained by the adultery law inflicted suffering on everyone concerned. A husband confronted with undeniable evidence stood at least to lose his wife (whom he might regret) and also most of her dowry. Although relegation was not always permanent and some social life must have developed on the islands, the lives of condemned women in particular were ruined. The system was (as for the marriage law) operated by private prosecutors, who, if successful, were rewarded by a percentage of the confiscated property. This opened the door to persecution of the wealthier members of society, while it was
Suetonius lists the law on electoral bribery between marriage and adultery
hardly worth an outsider's while to pursue humbler adulterers. It also meant that a husband, to protect his wife, might divorce and prosecute her and hope that she would be acquitted (D 48.5.3). The law made some gestures towards preserving the stability of marriages: for instance, if a husband kept his wife a prosecutor would have to sue him first, for conniving (D 48.5.12.10, 48.5.27), and if a divorced woman remarried without having received notice of prosecution, the prosecutor was to sue her alleged lover first (D 48.5.18.6, 48.5.12.11), but its overall effect was to destabilize. Adultery cases could be brought by
The laws were praised by Horace, in the
The marriage law of 18 в.с. does not seem to have impelled Horace to marry; the consuls who proposed the second law were
63 Hopkins 1983 (a 46) chs. 2, 3, especially
the latter.[1077] There was no need for the upper classes to change their habits in marrying off their daughters. The most eligible girls probably continued to marry before eighteen. One child probably sufficed for entitlement to inheritances; a bigger family secured seniority in a political career.
The effect of the adultery law is hard to assess. Its deterrent effect might be demonstrated by the comparative rarity of known trials. Or did the upper class close ranks and discourage delation? Augustus himself invoked it in 2 b.c. and a.d. 8 and sharpened the penalties (Tac.
Ambivalent traditions guarded the citizen body. Constant appeal was made to the ancestral virtues of Romans and Latins. But the extension of citizen rights to non-citizens was deep-rooted. The extension was grounded in practical needs, but justified by the moral qualities of the recipient - industry, loyalty, courage, eloquence. Men who would adopt the ancient customs of Romans deserved to be recruited. As the Senate was theoretically open to the good and rich, so the citizenship was to be open to the best men of allied states and to slaves and other non-citizens who deserved well (Cic.
Manumission by will took effect on the owner's death, by census only at Rome and sporadically (and this method became obsolete under Augustus), by the rod only when a magistrate was available (but in the provinces as at Rome)
Three laws regulated manumission, the Lex Fufia Caninia of 2 B.C., the Lex Aelia Senda of a.d. 4 and a Lex Iunia of uncertain date, which is associated with the Aelio-Sentian law and seems to precede it. It fits well with Augustus' social engineering (particularly with an urge to keep legal status tidy) and may tentatively be assigned to 17 B.C., the period of
Augustus' major efforts in this area.[1085] The Lex Iunia recognized informally freed slaves and gave them freedom and a half-citizenship, as 'Junian Latins', like that of Latin colonists of an earlier age. The law specified that the owner must want the slave to be free and that he must be worthy of freedom in the opinion of the magistrate whose duty it would be to protect him; there were various details about the rights of owners.[1086] The law proved useful and adaptable: further rulings were gradually added.[1087]
Another area was regulated by the Fufio-Caninian law, which limited the numbers an owner could free by will. This method was popular because it displayed generosity at the expense of heirs. Augustus introduced a sliding scale: testators might free both slaves if they only had two, half the total if they had two to ten, a third if ten to thirty, a fourth if thirty to 100, one fifth if 100-500, and never more than 100. But they might always free as many as they would have been allowed if they had been in the category below (so an owner of thirty-two might free ten, rather than eight). This law applied only to will: an owner could still free as many as he liked in his lifetime.[1088] Augustus had now regulated the two methods of manumission which had previously needed no specific ratification by public authority.
The Lex Aelia Sentia was a comprehensive law on manumission and the resulting rights of patrons and
Ancient sources thought Augustus aimed at checking the flow of servile and foreign blood into the citizen body.[1099] Though the Fufio- Caninian law may have reduced the number of manumissions, the rest of his legislation blocked only criminal ex-slaves and made access to citizenship easier for others. He aimed to regulate, not to stop the talented and energetic. Pollution by foreigners remained a favourite theme of writers. But by the time of Nero it could be argued that most senators and
Later emperors also intervened. The Visellian law regulated the promotion of freedmen, pursuing those who sought offices reserved for the freeborn, unless they obtained the gold ring by application to the emperor
v. the impact of the principate on society
Mixed 'marriages' (legally
ffl On 'civil servants' see above all Weaver 1971 (d 22). For this explanation of the SC Claudianum, i6zff. Cf. Weaver in Rawson 1986 (f 34) t4j-69- Talbert 1984 (d 77) 44! lists the sources. The rule may also aim at acquisition of new slaves in general and avoidance of loss of patronal rights. 89 Gai.
90 For Pallas, see Oost 1958 (с 383). For Felix, Weaver 1972 (d 22) 279. His name is proudly evoked by his daughter in commemorating his great-grandson, a boy of senatorial family (
civil servants have rightly been seen as a 'symptom of the interpenet- ration of classes in Roman Imperial society'.[1100]
Great freedmen consorted with senators and members of the imperial family (Pallas was an ally of Agrippina and accused of being her lover). Another of Antonia's ex-slaves, Antonia Caenis, was influential not only as a confidential secretary but as the mistress and later concubine of a future emperor, Vespasian. Claudia Acte in a similar role exercised influence and acquired wealth through Nero. Freedmen, barred normally from a public career, and freedwomen, barred, among other things, from marriage with
Imperial
Senatorial sources, alert to detect that an emperor was swayed by non- senators and people excluded from a constitutional position, would attack wives, mothers and mistresses as well as ex-slaves. Women of the imperial family were like freedmen in dependence and influence. Antonia, Octavia's younger daughter by Antony, for instance, seems to have endeared herself particularly to Augustus and Livia. She was kept in reserve as a bride for Livia's son Drusus (they married when he was twenty-two and she twenty), allowed to remain a widow on his death (she had the requisite three children, but might normally have been expected to remarry, since she was only twenty-seven) and held an important position as the sister-in-law of Tiberius, the mother of Germanicus (Tiberius' adopted son), the grandmother of Gaius and his ill-fated brothers. She was a noted deployer of patronage, in the manner of noble matrons, which had been expanded by Livia. Good fortune in marriage alliances and motherhood and discreet conduct maintained and enhanced the position of Livia94 and Antonia; the fortunes of others fluctuated. But the Principate gave the emperor's kinswomen opportunities richer than those enjoyed by republican ladies. Dynastic planning by Augustus and his closest advisers brought noble families successively into the imperial network, which was scarcely expanded by transient marriages of later
94 See, e.g. Tic.
related to Augustus was at once recognized by Romans and provincials. Augustus' house was princely; the ladies might in the East be honoured with the attributes of suitable goddesses, in the West have towns named after them. Group portraits of the family set up by loyal towns may include women and children.[1103]
The independence and individuality of women (despite the restrictions of the marriage legislation and their deployment as brides) is signalled by nomenclature. Few aristocrats in the Republic used a second name for women. Practice becomes more flexible from Augustus on, starting with the top. Livia Drusilla
The existence of a 'court', with various nuclei (the circle of lulia was distinguishable on sight from that of Livia: Macrob.
The Flavii represent the gradual rise of an Italian family. T. Flavius Petro, a
A policy of enfranchizing suitable provincials and of promodng promising men from one level to another in the hierarchy of service is deduced from the emperor's reported acdons and from the epigraphic records of individual careers. Comparatively few junior candidates can have been personally known to the emperor. Some were recommended to him by his advisers or their patrons. The system secured the controlled promotion of others, for instance the auxiliary troops who on discharge became ciuzens. By the end of the Julio-Claudian period the citizen body was much expanded and both
The imperial peace and Augustan reorganization meant that Roman citizens were spread over the old and newly annexed provinces as never before.[1109] Veterans and some civilians were sent to colonies; peasants displaced in the reallocations of Italian land in the civil war period emigrated to provinces; provincials, particularly the upper classes, were gradually enfranchized. The army provided continual geographical mobility for citizens and a route to citizenship for non-citizens. By the end of our period Italians were not joining up in such numbers as they had under Augustus: in part this may be an indicadon of the prosperity of Italy (so that their economic prospects in civilian life were now better). Augustus had done much to promote the standard of living of urban Italians, though nothing directly to solve the social problems caused by the agrarian economy.
The Roman plebs, losing political power, gained in material advantages, which ranged from a fire brigade to attractive places of public resort. The
The Roman world was opened up both physically and mentally. The Principate brought improved roads, made safer from brigands, sea-lanes at risk from weather rather than pirates. But more important was mental attitude. A new mood of optimistic imperialism encouraged Italians to
enjoy that share in the empire which two generations earlier had been denied them and annexed new cidzens to the service of Rome. Provincials recognized that they belonged to an empire ruled from Rome (Luke 2:1). As it was natural for a clever young man from Sulmo to make a career in Rome, whether he decided to be a senator or a poet, so humbler Italians marched out to all the frontiers, to war down the proud and exploit, bully, love or learn from the local people. If we look at the experience of the citizen of non-Italian descent, we see that by the time of Nero, Paul knows people he can write to not only in cities of the Greek East, but in Rome and the household of Caesar. It is hard to imagine that his opposite number in republican Rome would have had a similar mental map.
In upper-class life, Vespasian marks a sharper social break than Augustus. A change of taste, personified by the Sabine grandson of a Pompeian centurion, accomplished the switch in
Society changed between 44 в.с. and a.d. 69. Some developments, such as the improved right of succession given to women, seem to have happened because views of the family continued to move further away from patriarchy and emphasis on agnatic relationships. Augustus merely hastened this trend. Others, such as greater social mobility up or down, were caused or increased by the major upheaval of the civil wars. Where before there had been a number of
Emperors affected society by legislation and the deliberate institution of certain pracuces, by individual acts of patronage (
CHAPTER 19 LITERATURE AND SOCIETY
GAVIN TOWNEND
i. definition of the period
While the age of Golden Latin is accepted as straddling the late republican and Augustan periods, the division between these two is particularly arbitrary, with no satisfactory date to set as the boundary — neither the death of Cicero in 43 B.C. nor the victory of Octavian in 31. Sallust survived into the 30s, but is properly classified as republican on the basis both of subject-matter and of atdtudes; Nepos, soil alive several years after Acdum, likewise looks back to the last period of the Republic and shows no real affinity to the new age; Marcus Varro produced a great part of his work during Cicero's lifetime and his
Yet from the start imagination had its limitations. The emulation of Greek models so desired by Cicero was to lead inexorably to the summing-up by Quintilian towards the close of the following century,
905
with parallel lists of writers in Greek and in Latin, carefully arranged according to their genres and set before the reader as models for
Only the genre of satire has no formal Greek model and no Greek name - indeed no secure Latin name either, until the tradition started by Ennius'
The exclusion of satire from the canon of regular genres is marked by its admission into Ladn of Greek words and phrases, a licence shared by those two minor genres never fully recognized by the Greeks although invented by them, the episde (whether in prose or in verse) and biography. The true Greek genres are accepted by the Ladn writers without real question, and there are only minor attempts to cross the boundaries between them and to form such hybrids as Hamlet's 'tragical-comical-historical-pastoral', which sdll show the dominance of the classical categories. It is rare for a major writer to go as far as Virgil does in borrowing formal elements from tragedy to relate the story of Dido, and from Callimachean epyllion to describe Evander's recepdon of Aeneas on the Paladne. Once Cicero, Virgil and Horace were securely established as paragons in their different fields, their influence was paramount; and even in the Silver Age, starting with the death of Augustus and running on well after the disappearance of his descendants, reactions against the masters, such as those of Seneca and Lucan never escaped from dependence on the genre.
ii. patronage and its obligations
The social position of literature at Rome, never as fully integrated into the life of the city as it had been at Athens during the fifth and fourth centuries, changed markedly after Actium, when oratory lost its preeminence with its divorce from a genuine political function. Already at the end of the second century B.C. the function of drama, whether tragic or comic, seems to have been greatly diminished, as the population became too big and too cosmopolitan to provide the common cultural background necessary for a mass audience.[1112] Drama survived, so far as it did, simply because of the major reputation of tragedy and comedy among classical genres, and revivals may have depended for their appeal largely on the spectacle.[1113] There is virtually no evidence that the contemporary tragedies written by Q. Cicero, Caesar or Asinius Pollio ever reached the stage or were even intended to.
Instead, literature becomes more and more the property of an elite, as Horace repeatedly emphasizes.[1114] Writers had never expected direct financial returns from the sale of their works, so long as there was no possible system of copyright or royalties; and men like Terence, of provincial origin and low rank, had attached themselves to prominent figures in society, without any apparent loss of creative independence. Even Lucilius, financially secure and proud of being his own man, took pleasure also in being a close associate of Scipio Aemilianus, and did not object to devoting two or three of his satires to attacking his patron's political enemies, while confident of freedom from reprisals. Of the major writers of the last generation of the Republic, Cicero, Varro and Catallus had no need of literary patronage; the posidon of Lucretius and his possible dependence on C. Memmius remains mysterious.6
During the years from Philippi to Actium, political protection was perhaps more important; and the writer is traditionally pictured as dispossessed of his property and as welcoming the patronage of a great man for financial security at least. This tendency is perhaps accentuated by the fact that the great majority of writers, both in the Augustan period and throughout the following century, came from outside Rome, from the towns of Italy proper (Horace, Tibullus, Propertius, Ovid), from the old province of Cisalpine Gaul (several of the earlier neoteric poets, Cornelius Nepos, Virgil, Livy, and in due course the two Plinies), from southern Gaul (Cornelius Gallus and perhaps Tacitus a century later), or from Spain (the two Senecas, Lucan, Columella, Quintilian, Martial). But most of these men of letters appear to have enjoyed comfortable means and independent position, and to have fully assimilated into upper-class Roman society, with traditional Roman ideas and standards.
Not dissimilar was the position of Greeks, now rivalling Italians in the equestrian civil service, as the authors of extensive prose works in their own language. None of these comes from old Greece: Dionysius of Halicarnassus combines orthodox and respectable literary cridcism with antiquarian history, evidently to present Rome to the Greek-speaking world, in Rome and in the provinces; Nicolaus of Damascus stands sufficiently close to Augustus to exploit the emperor's own apologia in the composidon of his highly favourable biography, and then attaches himself to Herod the Great as a spokesman for the king and his people; Diodorus from Sicily writes voluminous if uninspired history, as does Strabo from Pontus, now known only from his geographical work. These men hardly need to be counted as 'Augustan writers', however important their work may have been in making the new era acceptable to the hellenistic world and cementing the unity of Greek and Roman after the rift in the 30s. Some dme later, Philo of Alexandria, well known for his activities as a spokesman for the Jews under Caligula and Claudius, but mainly concerned with arguing the connexion between Greek and Jewish philosophy, belongs almost exclusively to his own hellenistic- Jewish society; but the Greek epigrammadst Lucillius, largely interested in music and drama, must have some claim as part of the literary scene of an emperor as philhellene as Nero. But, outside the field of diplomadc activity, where Greek oratory found a new and increasing role in the
6 Cf. Wiseman 1974 (в 197л) 26-39.
mouths of envoys from provincial communities, the dependence of any of these men on the support, financial or otherwise, of Roman patrons is impossible to determine.
The picture is much clearer for the most prominent of the Augustan poets. Horace, son of a freedman and starting badly by fighdng for the losing side at Philippi, became an accepted member of Maecenas' well- defined circle and was able in due course to give up his post as
It is hardly now believed that Maecenas (and still less Messalla, as patron of Tibullus and others) actually prompted the composition of particular works for quasi-political reasons, apart from such
7 Syme 1959 (в 177); Walsh 1974 (в 191л) j-6. 8 Suet.
Horace assumes complete lack of interest. Again in the
The
When the next work came to be written, Virgil may have been aware that Augustus (as he now was) wanted a nadonal epic to indicate the position of the
The failure of Horace to realize what might have been expected of the laureate, who could produce the
This leads to a question which is especially pressing in connexion with the opening decades of the Principate: the tendency of poets to propound a set of values totally at variance with the major programme of moral reform whereby Augustus was hoping to bring Rome back to the greatness of earlier centuries. Respectable private and public behaviour, the marriage of Roman men to Roman women, the production of true Roman children to fight Rome's wars and carry on the traditions of 700 years - these are the most obvious of the ideas on which the Julian legislation and Augustus' own injunctions sought to base the new society of citizens. Of the poets who might be expected to promote these ideas, Virgil never married, and seems to have had homosexual inclinations, if any. Horace likewise remained celibate, although he gives the impression that he followed the Epicurean practice of sexual indulgence with women and boys indiscriminately to work off natural needs when they arose, as first Lucretius and then the satiric spokesman of
For the three elegists, things are no better. Tibullus and Propertius, as
12 VI.868-86, with Otis 1963 (в 133л) 303-4.
poets, are romantically inclined bachelors, Tibullus expressing affection for boys no less than for girls; as men, they may have had wives and children. The anonymous life of Tibullus is too fragmentary to establish his marital status, unless by negative inference, although Pliny's friend Passennus Paulus (
and that the emperor's wishes have no validity in the context of love. Ovid is even worse. He married three times and, like Augustus, produced one daughter, the only attested child of any major republican or Augustan poet; but his poetry reveals a still more irresponsible rejection of the Augustan ideal. In the
the clearest example known to us of a decisive punishment visited by Augustus on an offensive writer, and one never revoked by his successor.
In his attempts to secure his recall from exile, Ovid indulged to some extent in the sort of flattery which becomes more and more noticeable as the Julio-Claudian age advances. In Tiberius' reign, Velleius Paterculus, while evidently paying due credit to the emperor's earlier successes as a military leader, clearly expresses himself in stronger terms than the truth required.13 Poets in the following reigns were guilty of increasing servility, often revealing a tendency to build up the achievements, or at least the promise, of a new emperor by blackening the name of his predecessor. There is some evidence that the same is true of some of the lost historians of the Julio-Claudians, such as Servilius Nonianus and Cluvius Rufus, if not of the more solid annalists, Aufidius Bassus and the
13 E.g. 11.94.1-5,124.1-5; but see Woodman 1977 (в 202) 54-5; Goodyear in Kenney and Clausen 1982 (в 95) 639—40.
elder Pliny.14 Certainly Seneca's
Flattery must necessarily have occupied a great amount of the oratory which was delivered during the period, if Pliny's surviving
This ideal, harking back to the heroic names of the younger Cato, of Brutus and Cassius, appears to have provided a continuous focus for discontent among senators throughout the first century. We lack Tacitus' account of the debate which followed the murder of Caligula, when the abolition of the Principate was allegedly debated for the first and last time; but hostility to tyranny, if not to autocracy, plays an active
14 G. B. Townend
part in the literature of the period. The actual expression of this hostility in the political field is regarded by Tacitus as fruitless and exhibitionist
Thanks to the loss of all of Livy's later books, we can form little idea of his treatment of the rise of Augustus to supremacy; but nothing suggests that he expressed hostility to the new settlement. Velleius Paterculus, to be discussed below, is too deeply devoted to Tiberius to reveal any reservations, and Curtius Rufus, writing his history of Alexander the Great apparently under Claudius, steers well clear of all but the most conventional reference to the contemporary world. Of the other main writers who recorded the reigns of the various Julio-Claudians within a few years of their deaths, Aufidius Bassus, Cluvius Rufus, Fabius Rusticus and the elder Pliny, we can infer little except that they provided a steady annalistic record of events and a great deal of highly hostile anecdotage to be used by Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio. There is no trace of any sort of republican sentiment, except in Cremutius Cordus, of whom we know at least that his remarks about the republican heroes, Brutus and Cassius, offended Tiberius enough to lead to prosecution and the ineffectual destruction of his works, which survived to gain a reputation for freedom of expression, and the surprising approval of Caligula (Tac.
In practice, the 'Stoic opposition', while confined to a small group of interrelated families, appears to have been sentimental and ineffectual, with Stoic language often playing no more significant a part than much of the traditional Christian language does in the literature of recent centuries in Britain. But Stoicism is still prominent in Latin literature of the Silver Age which follows Augustus. The Stoic concepts which feature in Manilius' astronomical poem are a feeble attempt to match the glowing Epicureanism of Lucretius, without any sort of credibility or cogency. More importance can be attached to expressions of hostility to Nero, as
15 The word 'Stoic', like the ancient literary terms 'lyric', 'tragic' and 'satiric', must be recognized as possessing a very precise sense in antiquity, deriving from the philosophical school of Zeno (335265 b.c.) in the Stoa Poikile (painted portico) in Athens, with its rigid doctrines of absolute virtue and duty, of acceptance of divine destiny combined with involvement in public life. In particular, the Roman Stoics expressed opposition to tyranny and admired Caesar's opponents, Cato and M. Brutus.
Seneca was driven to his death in a.d. 65 for his supposed complicity in the 'Pisonian conspiracy', if not its leadership. This plot certainly aimed at the assassination of the emperor (in the best tradition of the Athenian and republican tyrannicides) and at his replacement either by the unimpressive aristocrat Piso or by the elderly and ailing Seneca himself. So little was achieved that its true details cannot be discovered, if the conspirators indeed shared any common aim beyond that of murder.16 To judge from Seneca's literary utterances, tyranny was abominable enough to warrant such an action, although he never actually recommends it. The link between philosophical theory and effective political action remains tenuous.
More certainly prominent in the same conspiracy was Lucan, described by his biographer as virtually the standard-bearer of the affair. His motive appears to have been that Stoic opposition to tyranny which features with increasing force in the books of his
16 Griffin 1984 (c 352), esp. 166-70.
It is difficult to know how much consistency we should look for in such a poet, or whether he was capable of any degree of subtlety. To judge by the evidence of Tacitus
III. RHETORIC AND ESCAPISM
In a world where political comment was perilous and profitless and speech-making had no real political function, the development of rhetoric was at once natural and paradoxical. Cicero had not only provided a model for oratory; he had produced a series of treatises which could be the basis of training in all the necessary techniques. The establishment of rhetorical schools for young men of means is more or less contemporary with the rise of the Augustan age, as professionals took over where Cicero had left off in his coaching of aspirant politicians. Much of our knowledge of this training is contained in the
Certainly it shows its influence in most of the surviving literature from the very beginning of the Augustan period. Not a little of Virgil's power can be seen to depend on his absorption of the Ciceronian rules for producing effective arguments, although the technique is never allowed to take precedence. Ovid's
The vitality and originality which characterizes the literature of the Augustan age declines sharply during the succeeding reigns. In prose, Valerius Maximus, as much a devotee of the rhetorical schools as the elder Seneca himself, produces a series of books containing
For the younger Seneca, trained in the manner illustrated by his father's works, the exposition of his chosen subject, philosophy, as a guide to life, a purpose of some weight and significance, continually tended to be dominated by the need to express the same doctrine again and again in striking and memorable phrases. The
The nine tragedies which have come down to us under Seneca's name share enough of the characteristics of his prose works to make the slightly uncertain attribution of most, at least, virtually certain. Derived obliquely from Greek tragedies, mostly extant works by Euripides or Aeschylus, they have been totally adapted to the taste of the day, in which stage performance was a minor consideration, if indeed contemplated at all. Stoic doctrines, with the usual love of paradox, colour the speeches of kings, queens, commoners and choruses alike; and the dramatic flow is almost entirely sacrificed to the succession of telling
" Cf. H. Benario, "The
are much the same as those of the prose works, only made more remote from the reader by transference to the unreal heroic world of Greek mythology.
The same combination of rhetoric and philosophy shows itself inevitably in Seneca's nephew, Lucan; although for him philosophy is not a major preoccupation, but simply a source for ideas and commonplaces, together with the accepted link of Stoicism with the republicanism which colours the narrative of the
At least one can find in Lucan enough independence from tradition to grant him a degree of self-confidence hardly to be matched elsewhere in the derivative literature of the period. Our other surviving Silver Latin epics, by Silius Italicus, Valerius Flaccus and Statius, date from the Flavian dynasty; but they continue the general tendencies of the Julio- Claudian writers virtually unchanged, with the same desire for effect, which had begun as early as the major elegists, together with the same sensationalism and bloodthirstiness. All look back rather than forward, with Virgil always at hand as a model: the contemporary world or the future has no part in their scheme. It seems most unlikely that Statius'
There may have been other important poets in the period from Tiberius to Nero, but even their names are lost. We do possess a number of minor poems, some falsely attributed to the young Virgil, perhaps to replace the master's lost juvenilia. These are commonly dated after the death of Augustus, but are essentially continuations of the practices of the great Augustans. None contains a hint of genuine creative potential. More interesting is the group of more or less court poems from the reign and perhaps from the circle, of Nero: pastorals from Calpurnius Siculus and from an anonymous poet preserved in a manuscript at Einsiedeln, quite competent but uninspired pastiches of Virgil's
The reaction against these poetical fashions, especially epic as written by Nero himself, is found in Petronius, rather too intimate a member of the imperial clique for his esoteric criticisms of Lucan and others to be fully comprehensible to us[1118] (neither as parody nor as models for improvement do they really make sense). And in Persius, whose charges of vapidity, affectation and effeminacy show at least that he has not got Lucan in mind, there is a strong protest against those who have nothing to say and use fanciful and contorted language to say it (1.32—5,
One method of finding material for poetry without touching too directly on the perilous issues of the day, a method already practised by Catullus and followed by the Augustans and on into the Silver Age, was the Alexandrine device of exploiting Greek mythology to provide either examples or actual subjects for poetry. Virgil's use of the Trojan War and the adventures of the Trojan Aeneas to provide an aetiology for Rome and for the Augustan settlement is on a different level (or series of levels) from any other borrowing we are aware of. The use of lesser myths, some of extreme obscurity, by Horace, Tibullus and Propertius to illuminate erotic and other topics in contemporary life, whether seriously or ironically, enriches their poetry immensely, without necessarily adding to the impact.19 Ovid, after playing with Greek stories similarly in his early love-poetry, turns to myth as a subject in its own right for the
Major Greek myth serves a much more solemn purpose in Seneca's tragedies, a field in which Roman subjects had hardly ever proved effective; although, as already remarked, some fairly close follower of Seneca was before long to devise in the
IV. THE JUSTIFICATION OF LITERATURE
Various reasons were advanced during the period for writing and for reading different sorts of books. For Quintilian, writing on the training of the young orator, almost all literature could contribute to the mastery of rhetorical techniques, even Catullus and Lucretius. He has no place for works which do not belong to the recognized genres, such as Phaedrus' fables or Petronius' picaresque novel.
19 E.g. Hor.
Again, as Homer was often regarded by the Greeks as a repository of knowledge on all manner of practical matters, so a whole range of Latin works existed primarily as sources of information. Here Vitruvius
With the agricultural writers, however, Varro's practical application seems largely to be sacrificed to literary considerations, Columella's rather less so; but when Columella completes his treatise with a book in hexameter verse, he is deliberately placing himself beside Virgil's
The moral purpose of literature, taken over from the Greeks and emphasized in numerous apologias for the time spent on composition, is especially prominent in historiography, where there is a claim that reading about the past will enlighten and improve the quality of life, private and public, in the future; Cicero adds that this interest was not confined to the elite
The overt declarations of poets and prose-writers alike seldom reveal their true objectives. Horace's division between the
There is a curious conflict concerning the writer's originality: poets continually claim to be the first to strike out a particular line, but this means for the most part a new line in Latin.20 Explicitly or implicitly, there is always the assumption of accepted conventions within which a new work must develop, and the concept of
20 Williams 1968 (a 105) 2)5-267, with (e.g.) Virg.
whose influence we should recognize if their works had not been wholly or mainly lost.[1119]
Most contentious and debatable here is the role of Cornelius Gallus as in some sense the founder of the whole Augustan movement. The discovery in 1978 of a papyrus containing two tetrasdchs and fragments of other lines, clearly belonging to Gallus, has done little to clarify the nature of his poetry and the limits of his influence on his successors.22 His influence on the young Virgil especially cannot be doubted, but the precise part he plays in the sixth and tenth
An important issue here is the recognition that an intimate knowledge of the poetry of Gallus, and perhaps of other lost poets such as Cinna and Valerius Cato, could be taken for granted by the Augustan poets; and the alert reader would pick up many references and echoes which escape us today. This does not mean that Gallus was regarded as a completely satisfactory modĉl for aetiological or erotic verse — certainly the surviving fragments contain usages which were totally rejected by the next generation. The concept of the master as model seems only to be fully developed after the climax of the Augustan age, when Virgil's preeminence is so universally recognized that epic poets feel obliged to follow him more or less closely, unless they take a positive step, as Lucan did, in abandoning all of Virgil's heroic machinery and writing a fundamentally different sort of historical epic. Horace's mastery in lyric poetry, on the other hand, appears virtually to have prevented later poets from attempting to operate within the genre at all; while Statius' two essays in Alcaic and Sapphic in the fourth book of
The importance of earlier writers as sources for ideas and allusions of various sorts was expressly acknowledged in antiquity, as is shown by Macrobius' lists in
There seems to be no comment in ancient criticism on the major Virgilian symbols which play a prominent and continuous part in certain books of the
V. THE ACCESSIBILITY OF LITERATURE
The impact of major literature on the great public is hard to assess. The considerable production of tragedies seems never to have reached the theatres, the output of Asinius Pollio and Ovid evidently having little more success than Augustus' abortive
The most significant type of public performance becomes the
24 Kenney in Kenney and Clausen 1982 (в 95) 12.
audience (Suet.
But apart from the fact that reading, like writing, was almost always carried out aloud, the general status of reading appears to have borne a considerable similarity to that of our own day, with bookstalls selling copies for personal enjoyment and most works available in the great public libraries, which begin almost exactly with the Augustan age and expanded rapidly in the following two centuries.[1124] We still hardly know the extent of these collections, nor how far the different libraries duplicated each other. It would appear that readers would normally consult books inside the libraries, as in the British Library or the Bodleian. It may have been exceptional, and a matter of privilege, for Marcus Aurelius in the second century to report to Fronto that he has taken certain volumes of Cato out of the library of Apollo on the Palatine and advise him to bribe the librarian of the Tiberian collection to let him have copies from there.
Some works were evidently produced in fairly large numbers, with individuals having copies made by their own slaves from a borrowed text; others probably never merited marketing to any effective extent. Survival down to the Renaissance is little indication of the availability of works in antiquity: the fact that Velleius has come down to us largely complete cannot be proof of wide circulation. On the other hand, there is reason to suppose that Juvenal made so little impact in his own day that he survived only because of a surprising popularity in the fourth century, attested by Ammianus (28.4.14), when there was a sudden demand for improved texts, enriched with scholia and commenticious biographies of the author.29 Gellius provides some interesting stories, not always plausible, of discovering rare texts in unlikely places (e.g. ix.4.1, xvin.9.5); yet Quintilian can recommend for the student's reading a very wide range of authors as undistinguished as Rabirius and Albinovanus Pedo (e.g. x. 1.90), who must at least have been available in one or more of the public libraries. It is a bolder assertion that the libraries in Rome also contained copies of all the obscure works cited only by Dionysius of
Halicarnassus or the elder Pliny. It may well be that these libraries were such easy victims of deliberate arson in later times of trouble that their collections would provide relatively few archetypes for transmission, and that the chances were better for books in private houses. Yet from Pompeii and Herculaneum together we have recovered only one library, consisting of Epicurean treatises otherwise lost, and not a single book from any other house. The element of hazard in the survival of books was so great that, apart from the evidence of wide circuladon, largely dependent on use in the schools, of a few major writers like Virgil, Horace and Cicero, no safe conclusion can be drawn about the number of copies ever made. The total loss of Varius' poems or the histories of Cremutius Cordus (officially destroyed but preserved for subsequent distribution) and of the elder Pliny may indicate either a lack of quality or an excess of quantity, which made copying impracticable and allowed most of Livy to survive only in epitomes; but Pliny's
The evidence for the familiarity of the great writers outside the educated elite is very small, almost limited to the few tags written on the walls of Pompeii, which do not extend far beyond
Where the modern world suggests fiction as the obvious type of literature to attract a wide public, we hear of little but 'the Milesian tale', suitably bawdy indeed and made available in Ladn by Sisenna in the first half of the second century B.C. The Milesian tradition is certainly traceable in episodes of Petronius'
30 A. K. Bowman and J. D. Thomas, in
to have arisen from nothing,31 although, as mentioned above, it fits awkwardly into the genre of Menippean satire and is totally ignored by Quintilian, who would have been hard pressed to recommend it for the training of the young orator, even if he had ever come across a copy of it. Although the low language and the low subject-matter might well appeal to a popular readership, a great deal of literary cridcism and similar matter seems to be aimed only at a very limited circle; and the same is true of the other Menippean satire to survive, the
We do possess one writer, from the reign of Tiberius, who stands altogether apart from the fashion and attracted no attention from literary critics, although he may have been considerably more popular and widely read than many more imposing poets. Phaedrus was an imperial freedman, who was at one time involved in trouble with Sejanus. He versified a large number of supposedly Aesopian fables, adding some of his own, including a few on distinctively Roman contemporary topics. He is no master, but writes engagingly and unpretentiously, arousing the question as to how unusual his writing was in an age of great sophistication, and how far he was writing for a distinct level of reader. With his simple language and metre and his improving morals, he appears to be aiming at the younger pupils of th
What is most striking in the Roman world is the lack of any basic text which was read by any who could read and listened to regularly by all, as the English bible was for at least 300 years, providing a common focus of language and knowledge. To a certain extent Homer had filled this place in some Greek cities at least in the classical period and probably later; although his language was far removed from colloquial Greek even in the fifth century b.c. and his very bulk made him difficult to assimilate. Virgil could make some claims to have become the bible of Rome, almost as soon as the
31 P. Parsons, in
CHAPTER 20 ROMAN ART, 43 B.C. TO A.D. 69
MARIO TORELLI
i. the general characteristics of augustan classicism
In the history of ancient art few changes are so dramatically apparent as that which unfolded, gradually yet unmistakably, during the first two decades of the reign of Augustus. This change came about under the banner of a Classicism inspired by the great Attic examples of the fifth and fourth centuries в.с. The origins of this Classicism were, however, remote. In the architectural and art-historical context of late republican 'Asiatic luxury' (
In the age of Caesar, official architecture, sculpture and painting were still deeply imbued with a baroque and Hellenistic dramatic force, but they also recalled the distant experiences of the artistic culture common to the Etruscan and Italic world (the
F. Coarelli, DArcb г (1968) joiff; id. DArcb 4-5 (1970-1) 24iff: id. St. Miscell. 15 (1970) 85ff; id. in Zanker 1976 (e 141) 2 iff; id. in L'art decoratif a Rome (Rome, 1981) 2296".
Zanker 1988 (f 633); Simon 1987 (f 577);
930
linear countenances of the 'Arringatore' (The Orator, c. 100 в.с.)[1125] and of Caesar (с. 50 в.с.)4 on the one hand, with the soft, shaded features of the so-called Postumius Albinus (convincingly identified as Cato the Censor, c. 150 B.C.) and of Pompey (c. 60 в.с.) on the other.[1126] The two formal approaches continued to co-exist in the second half of the first century B.C., but the 'Italic' modes tended increasingly to denote municipality or provincial patronage, and they spread eventually to the lowest social and cultural levels of so-called 'plebeian art'. We shall return to this later.
In the official art of the court and the great aristocracy of Rome, the moment of transition from this ambiguous coexistence of 'Italic' with late Hellenistic forms to the decisive selection of Classicism may be situated in a brief period of political and cultural setdement, that is, in the decade which followed the constitudonal change of the year 27 в.с. Shortly before that date, characterisdc late republican tendencies are sdll clearly in play. Portrait sculpture continues to produce masterpieces with a flavour of Hellenistic dynasticism, such as the 'Actium'-type portrait of Octavian[1127] or the 'Gabii'-type of Agrippa.[1128] Decorative painting continues to develop the long established themes of the Second Style, with its characteristic 'open walls' and wide scenic perspectives,[1129]while public and private architecture operate within the framework of models developed between the end of the second and the middle of the first century в.с.[1130] The last decade of the first century was, however, already dominated by the Classicizing language of the Augustan regime.10 The 'Prima Porta'-type portrait of Augustus embodies the propaganda message of the new convictions of the Principate.[1131] In painting, plain, undisturbed tapestries, across which run slender cande- labras and minute friezes in the Third Style, support reproductions of the great Classical Greek panel paintings;[1132] while architecture and architectural ornamentation in marble and stucco echo - in the context of consolidated building types - the Attic, or at least Classical, models of the fifth and fourth centuries в.с.13 By now imperial Roman Classicism is completely formed and functioning.
As we have seen, the new style was not in fact entirely new: behind it lay over 15 о years of history. A work like the pediment in Via San Gregorio[1133] sufficiently conveys with its decidedly classicizing character the andquity of neoclassical experience in the city, under the sdmulus of the strong classicizing element in the late Hellenism of Pergamum and Athens. What was new was the pervasive, all-embracing aspect of Classical forms, which freed buildings and their decoration, official sculptures, and urban planning from all that unrestrained baroque freedom (
Consistently with the assumptions of the Augustan programme for restoration, all these non-Classicizing forms were assigned to the representation of idylls and escapes, trifles (
The ban on baroque language was accompanied by censure of any element that did not conform to the central plan of moral restoration. Once the military triumphs of the
This profound 'renewal', then, had its programmatic foundations in the ideology of the state. That was carefully fashioned by the great intellectuals within the circle of the
The instrument for the remarkable diffusion of this programme was above all a favoured group of sculptors in marble and bronze of the neo- Attic school. These men had already become established in Italy during the late Republic, working in Rome or Campania in a number of workshops, and controlled either directly or indirectly by such Roman aristocrats as Junius Damasippus, the Cossutii, or the notorious Gaius Verres. First among these workshops in both organization and quality was that directed by Pasiteles, who was head of a school which was well known for at least three generations.[1134] There were, moreover, a large number of lesser, anonymous stone-cutters as well as legions of fresco- painters, also anonymous, to whom the whole of Italy, from the
Thus the vein of formal inspiration began in a transplantation of neo- Attic craftsmen into a Roman environment which dates back to the middle of the second century B.C., with the activity of the school of
Timarchides, and it must have been re-invigorated under Augustus, thanks to the
ii. the creation of the augustan model
The death of Julius Caesar put a sudden end to the grandiose projects of urban transformation cherished by the dictator.18 It would fall to Octavian Augustus to resume, especially after Actium, the plans of his adoptive father, whose purpose it had been to imprint the Julian name
Typical of this is the choice of model for his own mausoleum, possibly begun in 27 B.C., which recalls that of the tomb of Alexander;19 while both the public and the private activities of his appointed successor, Agrippa, between the Campus Martius and the right bank of the Tiber, carried out in the years from 33 to 19 B.C., were certainly inspired by great Ptolemaic models. This can especially be seen if we consider the close link between Agrippa's urban villa across the Tiber (
Workshops were formed in the age of Domitian to respond to the demands of his colossal building programme, a phenomenon still little investigated (and responsible for the improbable Domitianic chronologies sometimes attributed to such works as the great Trajanic frieze). See the preliminary remarks of M. Torelli, in
On these projects and Caesarian town planning in general: Gros and Torelli 1988 (a 41) 117ff and i67ff; H. v. Hesberg, in
" H. von Hesberg, in
20 F. Coarelli,
a half later in his villa at Tivoli, with its evocative coupling of baths and Canopus; but it recalls above all the model of urban organization offered by Alexandria and repeated by the Augustan plan of
In his other
We may safely assert that, even if some works were completed a little later, in the course of the penultimate decade of the century the most complex and daring initiatives in architecture and urban planning of the Augustan period came to an end. Nevertheless, even where he did not erect new buildings or where the ideological interweaving of past and present was more subtle, Augustus imposed through his programme a new coherence on buildings which already existed, restoring a few — in his
Although beset with continuous crises over the succession, the years of the consolidation of power were consistently devoted to these exercises in sophisticated urban 'inlay', which in fact destroyed or radically transformed earlier meanings as surely as his settlement of the constitution. But these years were also devoted to the reorganization of the administrative structure and functioning of the city, one similar to and as necessary as that enforced by Agrippa in his
25 Coarelli 1985 (e 19) n 21 iff; with Gros 1976 (f 397).
the boundary between city and country through the systemadc restoration of all the city gates (between a.d. 2 and 10), thus reaffirming the powerful symbolic value of both wall and gates which was to find a very special echo in the architecture and town planning of the Augustan cities of Italy and Gaul. In the years 8 and 7 B.C., the banks of the Tiber were set in order, the night watch (the
In his
24 F. Coarelli, in
correspondingly deep diversity, which leads to the longing for, and the privadsadon of, the models derived from that particular variant of Hellenism.
On the other hand, the programme of restoradon required that the convicdons of 'western' and 'national' values be defended, consolidated and reasserted within the framework of a pervasive
The dominant models are, as in all art forms, those of high Classicism, with a special and understandable predilection for the prototypes of Periclean Athens. The caryatids of the Attic neoclassicist Diogenes are not preserved for us, although we may suspect a Classicizing sculpture, caryatids of the Cherchell-Tralles or Venice-Mantua type.27 But very clearly intended to evoke religious and revivalist memories are the copies of the
As to private architecture, innovations had already appeared in the culture of the late Republic, and the Augustan age added litde to what had already been developed, other than its own neo-classical taste in decoration. Large mosaic pavements in black and white, walls painted in
21 Documentation in E. Schmidt,
the Third Style, plain
Naturally all this exists in delicate balance with the classicizing tradition, even in sculpture in the round. The programme of sculptural decoration of the Villa of the Papyri at Herculaneum30 may have been due (as appears more likely) to a great intellectual of the Caesarian age such as L. Ateius Praetextatus, working for the patrician Claudii Pulchri, or (as some prefer) it may have been created a little later for the Calpurnii Pisones. Either way, it draws from a vast range of sculptural traditions in order to realize an articulated representation of the ideology and the ethical models of the leaders of society in the years of the civil wars. The classicizing formulae, which reach their peak in the ideal coupling of the Doryphorus/Achilles of Polyclitus with the Amazon/Penthesilea of Phidias, pass from the prototypes of the high fifth century в.с. through the late-classical — Lysippus' Hermes in Repose comes to mind — to end with the Hellenistic, found in garden sculpture. The choice of the prototype to be copied, developed and re-echoed is directly linked to the
a There is no standard work on Augustan domestic architecture and the relationship between it and painted, marble and stucco decoration. See in the meantime D'Arms 1970 (e jo); P. Zanker,
Eisner 1986 (f 357); von Hesberg and Zanker 1987 (f 418).
M. R. Wojcik,
type of message which was intended: loftier and richer in ethical or political content, for sculptures copied from the Classical; lighter, more idyllic and epigrammatic, for works drawn from the Hellenistic repertory. Naturally in the public part of the house forms and messages are of a higher, Classicizing tone, while in the private area devoted to leisure the prevailing models are Hellenistic or at least escapist. The boundaries between these two levels are obviously very fluid, especially in houses, a fact which encouraged the mixing of genres and idioms in sculpture as well as in the other figurative arts.
The leading patrons called on the expertise of the neo-Attic masters, whom they bound to themselves as freedmen clients, as the above- mentioned case of the Cossutii shows. Already extensive under the late Republic, production expanded even further in order to furnish the town houses, country villas and suburban estates of the Roman aristocracy and the
Because of their talent for copying, these craftsmen had to contend with a series of operations of 'assembly' and 'disassembly' of their own creations. Particularly significant is the operation undergone by the 'Cavaspina', an epigrammatic sculpture which was certainly well known and is late Hellenistic in conception, as can be seen in the copy in London: all the same, in the bronze copy at Rome its head echoes the severe style.[1138] The technical ability to reproduce sculpture relatively easily, when joined with a widespread 'culture of artistic canons' (modelled on that of literary canons), forged the opportunity for a whole series of formal tropes: archaistic heads on Classicizing torsoes, or Hellenistic draperies on naked limbs in a Classical manner, are to be read as stylistic metaphors and transpositions meant to express
However, the neo-Attic workshops had an even greater task than that of copying for public and private furnishings: this was to work out a sculpture in the round and in relief to exalt the
Neither the
That is: augural and pontifical statues, head covered and with curved staff and sacrificial bowl; triumphal statues, with cuirass, embroidered toga, and spear; cuirassed statues; consular statues, with toga and scrolls; equestrian statues, with tunic and military cloak; and statues of magistrates sitting in chairs of office. For these concepts: M. Torelli, in A. M. Vaccaro and A. M. Sommella (eds.),
As is shown beyond doubt in the series of statues granted to L. Volusius Saturninus (cos. 5 b.c.) in connexion with the
See most recently S. Adamo Muscettola,
« M. Torelli,
43 M. Hofter, in
portrait and the parallel evoludon of private portraiture in the second half of the first century в.с. take us over the same route. Portraits of the La Alcudia-type and the Acdum-type, such as that of Agrippa, still follow the tradition of dynastic portraiture which flourished in the inflamed atmosphere of the Second Triumvirate. Echoes of this style are also to be found in private portraiture, even of women, as is shown by the extraordinary gallery of busts from the tomb of the Licinii.
The creation of the Prima Porta-type, which is dated by coins to the period when Octavian proclaimed himself Augustus (27 B.C.), but which ought perhaps to be associated with his triple triumph of 29, is the first consciously and decisively neoclassical step in portrait sculpture. Its success is witnessed by the number of copies, by its use over the whole span of Augustus' reign and beyond, and by its close connexion with the Augustan programme, stripped as it was of any glamorous dramatization of dynastic power, and lit from within by the aura of the
Neo-Attic workmen were also engaged in the creation of the most important monument of Augustan sculpture, the Altar of Peace, Ara Pacis, which has come down to us in an exceptional state of preservation.45 Voted (
45 Torelli 1982 (p 596) 276; S. Settis, in
The placing of the monument, beside the Via Flaminia but open to the Campus Martius, is significant. In this case the northern boundaries of the city are imaginary (as is the 'realistic' depiction of the
Evocation of the past extends also to the shape of the monument, which is a traditional U-shaped altar set at the centre of a small enclosure. With its imitation of pillar posts at the four corners and of wooden panelling within, this enclosure is intended to reproduce a
The upper parts of these exterior reliefs present friezes with human figures. On the long sides facing north and south these depict a procession. This cannot be a procession of 13 b.c., since that never took place, nor one of 9, which if it did occur would not have seen among its participants Agrippa, who is shown on the frieze but who had died in 12. It is rather a theoretical, idealized depiction of an imperial
Iconographical echoes among panels on the same side serve to confirm common meanings within the diversity of subjects. Aeneas and Mars, founders respectively of the
The style is rich in meanings, all of them playing within the purely traditional framework of augural law, of priestly ritual, of the
Painting, however, is even more revealing of the profound changes that occurred in the middle years of the Augustan Principate. The origins of the extremely baroque Second Style can be fixed chronologically at the turn of the second to the first century B.C., and ideologically in the yearning for the impressive spaces and the luxury of decor of late Hellenistic royal palaces. The years of Caesar's brief and brilliant career saw the highest level of
« P. H. von Blanckenhagen,
48 B. Andreae, in
4'' A. De Franciscis,
assigned to the period between 70 and 50 B.C., linked as it is to the baroque in all the other figurative arts between Sulla and Caesar.[1141]Decorative painting under the Second Triumvirate and in the early years of the reign of Augustus shows the obvious signs of a crisis in this baroque. Augustus' house on the Palatine,[1142] decorated after he acquired the property from the orator Hortensius in 36, is a precious document of that crisis and, more generally, of figurative art in the decade before Octavian assumed the title of Augustus. One of the two libraries of the
The trend lamented by Vitruvius made giant strides in a relatively brief time. The House of the Farnesina (which was probably Agrippa's urban villa)[1143] at this point features slender architectural forms and paintings imagined as centrally suspended on walls which are still Second Style, in contrast with the Black Room in full Third Style; whereas the so-called House of Livia, an extension of Augustus' House on the Palatine, with its less realistic architecture, large paintings, monochrome friezes and candelabras, belongs about halfway between the House of Augustus and the Farnesina, that is to say, in 50-2 5 B.C.53 In this particular period, marked by the conquest of Egypt and the Actian triumph, we find the triumphal entry into painting of egyptomania, which informs both the dying Second and the nascent Third Styles. Besides the well-known contemporary Isiac Hall belonging to a private house on the Paladne, the very recent restoradon of the decoration of bedroom no. 15, the so-called 'studiolo', on the upper, private floor of the House of Augustus, a room decorated a little later than the one on the lower floor (с. 30-25), shows how rapidly the passion for these particular chinoiseries of Egyptian forms and decorations spread, mostly in the non-public parts of houses, and how a taste for both the floral and the filiform expanded, on which the transition to the Third Style was really based.
As we have already seen, the Third Style in theory took shape around the year 30 B.C. The reasons for its appearance and the paths it followed were completely independent of the conquest of Egypt and the consequent Alexandrianism, although these are often wrongly invoked to explain the beginnings of the Third Style.54 However, the resistance shown in the passage cited from Vitruvius must have lasted at least fifteen years, for it is only around the year 15 в.с. that we find the first examples of the Third Style on a large scale, as in the pyramid of Gaius Cestius, built before 12 B.C., and the Auditorium of Maecenas, which certainly predated his death in 8 в.с.55 In spite of its non-mimetic and therefore unrealistic and fundamentally anti-classical nature, the new style paradoxically responded perfectly to the expressive demands of Augustan neoclassicism; as such it is no accident that it was revived as the official decorative style for the First Napoleonic Empire. This style also helped to achieve a beneficial sumptuary effect, through the complete suppression of
Editio princeps: Rizzo 1957 (f 547).
For problems of chronology, see most recently W. Ehrhardt,
Pyramid of C. Cestius: P. S. Bartoli,
among buildings is transformed into costly little objects painted within boards
The ancient relationship between a decoradve style and the
Official culture having been monopolized by the
56 Von Blanckenhagen and Alexander 1962 (f 287).
such Alexandrian ardsts as Dioscurides and his son Hyllos.57 Extremely sophisticated silverware, from the exceptionally beautiful pieces from Hildesheim to the Hoby cups signed with the significant name of Cheirisophos ('Skilled-of-hand'), bear the imprint of great Hellenistic relief-work.58 In the cups from Boscoreale it also grappled successfully with themes of official 'historical' representations,59 and contributed no less than cameos and gems to establishing the official standards of good taste. From this there derived objects with a much larger circulation using less valuable materials. Glass and glass paste adopted forms and themes originally found in cameos, in gems, and in plate of precious stone and rock crystal, in order to create either such exceptional pieces as the famous Portland Vase60 or vessels for daily use in transparent and coloured glass.61 Toreutic works had even wider repercussions. On the one hand they inspired decoration, both vegetal and non-vegetal, for ceremonial bronzes (tripods, braziers, table vessels),62 while on the other their style came to be engraved on the humblest terracotta, on the 'Campana' plaques used to decorate public and private porticoes and sometimes even temples (which abound in themes beloved of Augustan neoclassicism), and above all on the well-known and very widespread
These luxury goods are understandably linked very closely with the higher expressions of the figurative arts, specifically with bronze and marble sculpture in the round, and thanks to them a single cultural fabric developed which cut across virtually all the social classes capable of expressing artistic culture. From the aristocracy to the middle classes of the Italian towns, they could display their understanding of, and their ability to adapt to, both the formal and the ethical models prescribed by the
57 On gem-cutting, see the excellent synthesis by C. Maderna-Lauter, in
F. Baratte, he trtsor ttorflvrerie romaine de Boscoreale (Paris, 1986).
E. Simon,
On this there is no modern, up-to-date synthesis. See the collection of C. Isings,
There is no standard work. See meanwhile E. Pernice, JOAI i i (1908) 2i2ff; M. Bieber, Die antiken Skutpturen und Bronqen des koniglicben Museum Fredericianum in Kassel (Marburg, 1915); R. Thouvenot, Catalogue des figurines et objets de bronze du Musee Arcbiologique de Madrid 1 (Paris, 1927); C. Boube Picot, Let bronzes antiques de Maroc (Rabat, 1971); J. Petit, Bronzes antiques de la collection Dutuit (Paris, 1980).
On all these kinds of materials, see A. Giardina, A. Schiavone (eds.),
pottery. The
iii. from tiberius to nero: the crisis of the model
Basically the reign of Tiberius was a pedestrian repetition of the pattern laid down by the Principate of Augustus. Tiberius' amply documented lack of enthusiasm for public works lies at the root of the extremely modest innovations of the period in town planning and architecture. The only important work in relief in the city of Rome was the temple of the Divine Augustus, called the
In fact a significant number of the portraits of the first imperial dynasty of Rome are Tiberian in date, and it is in the age of Tiberius that we even find new portrait-types of
The last years of Tiberius and the ephemeral reign of Caligula show the first skirmishes of a structural crisis in the formal and ideological model established by Augustus, although output continued to develop with explicit or implicit citations of Augustan works; with Claudius and Nero the crisis was finally revealed. In town-planning and architecture,68 the innovations which bore the richest implications for the future were those brought about by the definitive centralization in the hands of the
But it was in his Golden House that Nero wished to show off all of the advances which had been won in the period of late-republican
68 On all Julio-Claudian architecture and town-planning in Rome, see P. Gros, in Gros and Torelli 1988 (л 41) 179ff (with earlier bibliography).
and then frozen in the age of Augustus and Tiberius, and thus to make them live again in the light of a century of experience in building and technology. First we may compare the plan of the
The taste for a residence laid out in relation to a lake is entirely Hellenistic and Alexandrian — in particular, Caligula's idea of the ships on the Lake of Nemi is very Alexandrian, derived from the well-known
The baroque and dramatic form was the idiom of this revived
M Torelli 1982 (f 196) 7off.
accepted. Comparison with Tiberian monuments, such as the so-called Altar of the Vicomagistri,[1147] and with Augustan, such as the figured frieze on the temple of Apollo Sosianus,[1148] shows the gradual abandonment by the Julio-Claudian figurative arts of the model created by Augustus. For the 'staccato' composition and the 'stiacciato' relief of the Augustan monument, we find substituted two finely distinguished planes of representation, with the precise appearance of 'natural perspective' in the full-bodied first plane of representation of the Tiberian altar, and with the rich chiaroscuro of the Claudian relief.
In decorative painting Tiberian Classicism carries on the Augustan heritage, especially in the obliteration of all use of the old Second Style, in order to achieve an air of
The Fourth Style, which revives and mixes themes, elements and languages of the Second and Third Styles, is a 'pictorial asianism', in every way worthy to illustrate the verses of Seneca and Lucan, the coherent formulation of a taste which longed to surpass and to subsume the golden classicism of Augustus.
The nature of this phenomenon of the transformation of taste should be sought not so much in a regular, abstract swing between neoclassical and neobaroque periods in the figurative arts of Rome, although that dialectic did indeed exist, and not only in the Julio-Claudian age. It is rather to be found above all in the deep crisis within the historical bloc of
In truth, this very conception of co-optation, which was inherent in the social structure by
Therefore, the two greatest historians of Roman art in our century, G. Rodenwaldt and R. Bianchi Bandinelli, spoke rightly of the essentially bipolar nature of art at Rome. To the eternal formal bipolarity between Classicism and the baroque, within which was played out the Augustan experience of official, programmatic art and its crisis in the age of Claudius and Nero, there corresponds the no less eternal bipolarity of mentalities and idioms between 'art of the centre of power' and 'plebeian art'.
EARLY CLASSICAL PRIVATE LAW
bruce w. frier
With the establishment of the Augustan Principate, Roman private law enters its 'classical' period.1 During the largely tranquil centuries that followed, Rome's jurists articulated and developed a body of law that is beyond doubt the most conspicuous and influential Roman contribution to Western civilization.2 This chapter does not describe the system of Roman law itself,3 but instead concentrates on the jurists and the Roman judicial system during the Julio-Claudian and Flavian eras.
i. the jurists and the principate
Classical Roman law is based upon a distinctive procedural system, called formulary procedure.4 Formulary procedure, like most other well- developed procedural systems, distinguishes between justiciability (
At Rome, almost all suits between citizens were raised initially in the court of the urban praetor, an annually elected magistrate. The Praetor's Edict listed those causes of action that he was willing to accept during his term of office, as well as the general procedure to be followed in his court; already by the late Republic, the contents of the Edict varied little from year to year. If, in a given case, the plaintiff stated an acceptable cause of action, the praetor assigned a judge
On defining classical law, see Wieacker 1961 (f 704) 161-86.
See esp. Koschaker 1966 (f 664).
5 On substantive law, see esp. Kaser 1971-5 (f 662) 1—ri; on procedure, Kaser 1966 (f 661). The best general account in English is Buckland 1966 (f 646).
4 It is described at length in Kaser 1966 (f 661) 107-538; see also Pugliese 1963 (f 680). The following account is necessarily inexact because of its brevity. The only surviving ancient description is Gai.
959
multiple judges, to hear the case; the
In order to instruct the
The
The principal participants in the Roman judicial system (praetor,
The establishment of the Augustan Principate did not at first lead, as might have been expected, to a diminution of juristic independence and influence. On the contrary, the jurists, who in the late Republic derived chiefly from the Italian and equestrian stock that formed the core of Augustus' new oligarchy,[1156] found themselves well positioned to interpret the aspirations of the new regime within the limited but important domain of private law. Likewise, emperors seem to have perceived the value in preserving private law's independence, as a symbol of legitimacy and continuity; accordingly, direct imperial intervention in the Roman judicial system was initially cautious and sporadic, at least as a rule. Only very slowly, over centuries, did the government move to control and centralize the administration of justice, and thus to give the Roman judicial system a more regularized form, one more familiar to modern eyes. This evolution hinged on two major changes: the gradual replacement of the formulary system with 'extraordinary cognition' under the control of imperial officials; and the rise of imperial rescripts as a major source of law eventually supplementing or replacing jurists' law. However, neither change was complete until after the end of the classical period of Roman jurisprudence, in the middle of the third century a.d.
During the classical period, Roman jurisprudence was more or less identical with the thought and writings of the great jurists of the city of Rome. Except for Gaius'
procedural reforms that actually consolidated the formulary system and strengthened the jurists' authority within it.
Probably in 17 B.C. Augustus proposed and carried a general statute reforming private procedure (
The
Perhaps at about the same date Augustus began granting to certain jurists the right to issue formal opinions on law (
Augustus apparently granted the
Augustus' thoughtful procedural reforms set the stage for classical Roman jurisprudence - which is, in essence, a protracted intellectual discussion of legal norms and principles conducted within a small circle of skilled professionals. The
Yet almost at once the process began whereby the carefully balanced Augustan procedural system would be first eroded and then supplanted, although not before the Roman jurists had introduced changes which were permanendy to affect Western understanding of what law is.
iii. labeo
Servius Sulpicius Rufus, the great republican jurist, died in 43 в.с., while on a diplomatic mission for the Senate.19 He left behind him a large and thriving juristic community, which dominated Roman private law undl well into Augustus' reign; yet it lacked a leader comparable to Servius in influence and power of mind. During the triumviral period (43-31 B.C.), Servius' numerous students concentrated on compiling and editing their teacher's writings and
Except for Alfenus, the early Augustan jurists were characterized by political caution or even quietism; they left almost no mark on the momentous events of their times. For his part, Augustus did not seek to bind them more closely to the new regime; the story that he offered a
" See esp. Gc.
2.2, is the only surviving history of the juristic movement; on its form and purpose, seeNorr 1976 (f 672). The work dates to
Pomponius,
Pomponius,
Pomponius,
Cascellius, a pupil of Q. Mucius, was quaestor by 73, but advanced no further; cf. Pomponius,
6.i. Fragments: Lenel 1889 (в 109) i 107—8 (thirteen citations, usually through Labeo).
Pomponius,
Our impression of early Augustan jurisprudence derives mainly from the writings of M. Antistius Labeo, who was probably active as a jurist by about 30 в.с. A student of Trebatius, Labeo none the less closely attended the other senior jurists of his time, and he often reports on their agreement or disagreement concerning various technical questions.27 Labeo clearly regards Trebatius and Ofilius, and to a lesser extent Cascellius, as constituting the juristic mainstream, while Tubero is more commonly aberrant in his views; but Labeo presents a general picture of consolidation and regulated contentiousness, with little in the way of major methodological or substantive innovation. However, by about 20 B.C. the generation of republican survivors was yielding before a new and more vigorous generation. According to literary and juristic sources, much of Augustus' reign was marked by the dominance and rivalry of two jurists: Labeo and C. Ateius Capito.28
Their rivalry was personal and political. Unlike their elders, both Labeo and Capito were politically active, but they diverged sharply in their attitude to the new regime. Capito, the grandson of a Sullan centurion and son of an obscure senator of praetorian rank, was widely considered a sycophantic courtier who prostituted his talent and knowledge in the service of his imperial masters.29 Labeo, by contrast, was the son of a jurist who had conspired in Caesar's assassination and committed suicide after Philippi; Labeo himself soon acquired a reputation for his prickly insistence on constitutional details, often to the government's momentary discomfiture. After Labeo's death, Capito wrote of his rival that he had been driven by his excessive, foolhardy
Pomponius,
Cf. Paul,
Pomponius,
On the rivalry: Tac.
Capito's ancestors: Tac.
passion for
Jurists saw the rivalry quite differently. As Pomponius states, Capito clung narrowly to received views on law; but Labeo, more self-confident and daring, 'undertook numerous innovations' on the basis of his mastery of other branches of learning.32 This judgment, which may seem innocuous enough, has a dramatic consequence in the juristic tradition: Capito is all but ignored by later jurists, whereas Labeo is cited more often than any jurist before the high classical period, his voluminous writings are frequently annotated or edited by later jurists, and his opinion is usually treated with great respect even when it fails to carry the day.33 In short, Labeo is a commanding figure, the first indisputably 'classical' jurist.
To be sure, it is unclear what Pomponius means in saying that Labeo 'undertook numerous innovations'. The juristic tradition survives so fragmentarily that legal historians find it difficult to determine whether Labeo's position on a given question represents genuine innovation with respect to his predecessors. In any case, what modern scholars have chiefly discerned in Labeo's fragments are the traces of a defter and more conscious methodological approach to law, which Labeo may well have pioneered.34 A description of this method is not easy since it must be based on evidence haphazardly preserved, but the following is thought to be more or less accurate.
First, Labeo stresses the importance of solving legal problems, if possible, through direct interpretation of fixed texts — either general norms such as can be found in statutes or edictal provisions, or self-
Labeo's ancestors: Kunkel 1967 (f 666a) 32-4,114. His independence: Tac. Алл. 111.73; Suet. Aug. 54; Dio liv. 15.7—8. Capito on Labeo: Gell.
Tac.
Pomponius,
On Labeo's fragments, see n. 27. Labeo's
Pomponius,
imposed norms contained in private documents like contracts or wills. Further, Labeo assumes that the wording of such a text is intended to express its author's intent fully, that the author's intent can be presumed radonal, and that the author seeks primarily to communicate this intent (rather than, say, to express himself); therefore Labeo is usually reluctant to advance beyond the ordinary, 'objective' meaning of the words used in the text, even if the result is arguably harsh.[1164] Two examples from contract law may illustrate this method of reasoning. If a contract clause clearly disadvantages one party, Labeo none the less enforces the clause if this interpretation corresponds with the apparent or 'objective' content of their agreement
Second, if no text is available and law must be created, Labeo often relies on his belief that legal rules and institutions should be rationally purposive in their relation to society. This belief leads him to search for supervening principles that can be used to resolve doubtful cases. For example, if a minor child is old enough to understand his actions, should he be held liable for his wrongful damage to property
Third, Labeo's decisions are often apparently influenced by an underlying belief that, in principle, no person should draw unjustified enrichment, even innocently, at another's expense, and that procedural law should if possible be construed to prevent this from occurring. Thus, for instance, if I lose a borrowed object and then pay the lender its value, and the lender later recovers the object, Labeo rules that I may sue the lender on the contract in order to recover (as the lender wishes) either the object or the payment for it. Labeo seemingly arrives at this decision through simple construction of procedural law, avoiding the fiction that the lender and I had ever 'tacitly' agreed on this outcome.[1167] Likewise, Labeo rules that a plaintiff should have an action on fraud (
Labeo's various approaches to law are obviously not always compatible with one another, but he maintains an impressively productive tension between them. His influence with later jurists may thus result less from his specific substantive innovations than from the principled rigour of his decisions. In any case, his dominance of the Augustan era is so complete that his contemporaries are thrown into all but total obscurity. Fabius Mela, for example, was an able and penetrating jurist, to judge from surviving citations of his commentary on the Edict. It was Mela, for example, who concocted the famous hypothetical case of the slave whose throat was cut when an athlete's carelessly thrown ball struck the hand of a razor-wielding barber; this hypothetical case brilliantly illustrates several contrasting features of the law governing wrongful damage to property, including proximate cause and contributory negligence.[1170] But Mela remains a shadowy figure within the juristic tradition; he may or may not have possessed the
iv. proculians and sabinians
Labeo's dominant position among the jurists ended only with his death, probably late in Augustus' reign.[1171] No jurist could take his place, and in fact the reign of Tiberius (14-37) saw the more or less formal split of Rome's major jurists into two rival 'schools': the Proculians and the Sabinians or Cassians. This division would endure well into the second century; but its nature and the reasons for it remain controversial.[1172] It is even unclear what our sources mean by 'school' (
The emperor Tiberius, himself keenly interested in all branches of learning, extended political patronage to both schools; and whatever their earlier qualms, jurists now no longer declined the opportunity to obtain the consulate.[1175] The Proculians owe their name to the brilliant jurist Proculus, who has been plausibly identified with Cn. Acerronius Proculus (cos. ord. 37).[1176] However, Proculus did not derive from a socially prominent family, and during most of the Julio-Claudian era the Proculian school was also nominally led by two members of a far more influential family: first by M. Cocceius Nerva (cos. suff. 21/2), Tiberius' close friend who committed suicide in 3 3, and then by his homonymous son (cos. suff. 40), the emperor Nerva's father, who together with Proculus presided over the school from 3 3 until late in Nero's reign.[1177]
Proculus, clearly a more brilliant jurist than either of the Nervae, appears to have relied on their prestige in order to secure a hearing for his views.
The history of the other school is similar but more complex. Masurius Sabinus, its first leader, was not by birth a member of Rome's status elite; indeed, at first he allegedly supported himself through honoraria from his students. At the advanced age of fifty Sabinus finally entered the equestrian order, doubtless through the patronage of Tiberius who also granted him the
Since the Renaissance, legal historians have sought to isolate the underlying legal basis of the numerous doctrinal disputes between the two schools. A half-century ago it was widely argued that their differences resulted in large part just from the separate operation of the two schools; divergent solutions to various legal problems were formulated in each school and then transmitted from teacher to student, without a consistent pattern of larger dogmatic disagreement.[1181] There is doubdess a measure of truth in this view. However, more recent scholars have re-emphasized a methodological line dividing the Proculians from the Sabinians.[1182] According to Pomponius, the origin of the school disputes was the earlier rivalry between Labeo and Capito; the two schools simply increased their differences, with the Proculians imitating Labeo and the Sabinians Capito.[1183] And in fact the Proculians do frequendy rely on an approach to law that somewhat resembles Labeo's principled rationality; by contrast, the Sabinians often adopt a freer, more heterodox position, though whether they are following Capito in this respect is unclear.
Thus the Proculians, like Labeo, normally prefer close objective interpretations of fixed texts, while the Sabinians allow interpretation based on the author's presumed 'subjective' intent. For example, if a debtor promises by stipulation to make a payment within a fixed interval of time, Sabinus holds that the creditor can claim payment on the first day of the period, while Proculus and his school rule that the claim is not legally effective until the entire period elapses.[1184] Similarly, if someone promises by stipulation to pay money to both the promisee and a third party, both schools recognize that, owing to absence of privity, the third party acquires no enforceable right through the contract; but whereas the Sabinians hold that the entire payment is owed to the promissee, the Proculians rule that only half of it is owed to him and the rest of the promise is unenforceable.[1185] The same differences recur in interpreting the Edict; for example, if the parties reach a settlement before the
Likewise, the Proculians tend to uphold Labeo's rational conceptual- ism, while the Sabinians take a looser approach to law. Probably the most famous example of this difference concerns the law of sale (
By contrast, the Sabinians use analogy in a looser, more equitable fashion that arguably better captures the spirit of Labeo's style; their position on barter as a form of sale is a good example. Sabinus' expansive attitudes are at their most aggressive in the area of delict; for instance, he grants the direct Aquilian action for wrongful damage even when the plaintiff's property was not physically harmed (e.g. the defendant struck coins out of the plaintiff's hand and they fell down a sewer), and he also extends the action on theft even to the unauthorized sale of land.64 Neither view was received by later jurists.
By and large, the Proculians emerge as the 'better lawyers', the Sabinians as the more flexible ones. Two central strains of Roman jurisprudence, formalism and equity, are momentarily divided from one another. However, in a number of respects it is misleading to lay too great a weight on these school controversies. First, even though the record of their controversies is incomplete, the school disputes seem to have centred mainly on technical details and do not necessarily imply a radically different stance on the nature and purposes of Roman private law. Second, the Proculians and Sabinians may not have represented all jurists then practising; the obscure jurist Atilicinus was clearly a Proculian, but other Julio-Claudian jurists may well have operated independently.65 Third, by no means all of the attested controversies can be easily explained through a simple dichotomy in legal method; the theoretical basis of many disputes is extremely obscure. Fourth, the schools were in any case unable to enforce a narrow dogmatism on their members; the view of one school is not uncommonly adopted by one or more members of the other.66
Finally, the school debates must also be understood within the context of the Roman judicial system, in which a
Gai.
See, respectively, Ulpian,
Fragments of Atilicinus: Lenel 1889 (в 109) 171-4 (twenty-four citations, often with Proculus or Nerva
Liebs 1976 (f 668) 210-11. Individual school jurists may also take extreme or eccentric positions; e.g. the view of Nerva
Gai.
whether or not they arose through school debate, will have tended in practice to increase the flexibility of law, at any rate until one or another opinion prevailed and became 'the law we use'
The founders of the two schools had already achieved eminence under Tiberius; they continued to dominate Roman jurisprudence during the reigns of Caligula (37—41), Claudius (41—54), and Nero (54—68). Relations with these emperors did not always run smoothly. The demented Caligula reportedly threatened to revoke all previous grants of the
v. legal writing and education
Almost without exception, the attested writings of first-century jurists are directed primarily toward other jurists; these writings thus have an austere format that elevates technical discussion of rules and 'cases' above the didactic exposition of broad principles.[1191] Two major types of juristic literature are attested. The first is the extended commentary on a set text: above all, the Urban Praetor's Edict (by Labeo, Mela, Sabinus and probably Plautius as well), but also the Twelve Tables (Labeo) and the edicts of the peregrine praetor (Labeo) and of the curule aediles (Caelius Sabinus). Such commentaries assemble and interpret all law pertinent to each provision of the object text. The second type is 'problem-oriented', assembling decisions on a wide range of legal questions; these writings may take the form of collected
In addition to these basic types, some jurists devote monographs to particular areas of law; attested examples are Sabinus on theft and the younger Nerva on usucapion. Jurists also frequendy develop law by critically annotating the works of earlier jurists, especially those of Labeo and Sabinus.
This literature is not designed to be readily accessible to non-jurists, since it all presumes considerable prior knowledge of the institutions and principles of Roman private law. Yet literary sources show that demand was also growing among laymen for elementary handbooks.[1192] Although there is no evidence that the more prominent first-century jurists offered instruction to beginners,[1193] the need for a handbook was provisionally met by Sabinus' three books on the
vi. imperial intervention
Although classical private law is chiefly a juristic creation, the Roman state did not surrender its power to create new legal norms through statute
especially in matters concerning status or succession; the controversial social character of such laws may have made it desirable to obtain at least the formality of a popular vote.
However, legislation through the cumbersome popular assemblies soon became obsolete as new forms of law-making emerged to express a centralized government. These new forms had administrative origin and character; but they gradually created, alongside the
Already in the Republic the Senate had often issued advisory directives to be executed by magistrates; but in the early Empire the decrees of the Senate (
The emperor, himself a magistrate, also gradually came to enunciate general legal norms through a variety of administrative channels, including proclamations (
Cf. Kaser 1971 (f 662) 1199, 208-9; Schiller 1978 (f 689) j 3 5-7. The terms appear in a technical sense only from
See Schiller 1978 (f 689) 4j6-62, with bibliography. Most known
Directives to magistrates are found in
See Schiller 1978 (f 689) 480-j 06.
E.g., Ulpian,
975
Just.
century the emperor's legislative power may not yet have been recognized
The
Procedure before judges who had been delegated by the emperor differed markedly from the formulary system. Unlike the urban praetor, these judges took a much more active role in summoning the defendant, conducting the trial, determining the case and enforcing the verdict.[1200]Unlike formulary procedure, which presumed a model in which adversary proceedings led to the binding arbitration of disputes, extraordinary cognition more resembled the inquisitorial procedure commonly associated with modern Continental law.
Extraordinary cognition implies the power of the emperor to hear and decide lawsuits, either personally or through delegates; Augustus and his successors used this power extensively, although its constitutional basis is once again elusive.[1201] In turn, delegation implies at least the possibility of appeal
Extraordinary cognition is a considerable advance in procedural rationality over formulary procedure; the ancient arbitrational system gradually gave way before a system with more modern characteristics - a striking instance of how legal modes of thought came gradually to pervade the Roman judicial system. Nevertheless, although the elements of this new system were in place by the first century a.d., formulary procedure remained the dominant form of civil procedure for Roman citizens throughout the empire (except in Egypt). Its continued preeminence is reflected in the numerous procedural documents buried by the ashes of Mount Vesuvius in a.d. 79,[1204] as well as in the writings of first-century jurists who virtually ignore extraordinary cognition.
Another early imperial reform was also to be of lasting significance. By the Lex Cincia of 204 b.C., judicial advocates had been forbidden to accept honoraria for their services; Augustus reaffirmed this law, although it was already being widely flouted. In a.d. 47, however, Claudius had carried a
vii. the flavian jurists
Probably even before Nero's overthrow in 68, the two juristic schools had changed leadership. The new heads, both closely associated with Vespasian, enjoyed little prestige within the later juristic tradition. Caelius Sabinus (cos. suff. 69), who headed the Sabinians, is all but ignored by later jurists.[1207] His Proculian counterpart, Pegasus (cos. suff. 76?), fares only somewhat better; despite his reputadon among contemporaries for vast learning, he is known to history mainly from Juvenal's biting description of his complacent behaviour while serving as Domitian's urban prefect.[1208] Little is known about Pegasus, but he is perhaps the brother of a considerably more important jurist, Plautius, who may conceivably be D. Plotius Grypus (cos. ord. 88); Plautius' writings, also in the Proculian tradition, were frequently annotated and excerpted by later jurists.[1209] By contrast, the elder Juventius Celsus, who succeeded Pegasus in the Proculian school, is an exceedingly dim figure.[1210] The Flavian jurists in general maintained the standard school distinctions, with little major innovation in substance or method.[1211]
The Flavian period was thus a disappointing one from the jurists' standpoint; talent was lacking, or the times were not right. However, by the end of Domitian's reign jurisprudence attracted several new personalities of major importance: Javolenus Priscus (cos. suff. 87), the successor of Caelius Sabinus among the Sabinians; Titius Aristo, who probably remained outside the Senate; and Neratius Priscus (cos. suff. 97) and the younger Celsus (pr. 106/107,cos- П 129), who jointly headed the Proculians after the death of the latter's father. The advent of these brilliant jurists marks the beginning of Roman private law's 'high classical' period, the apex of the juristic movement at Rome.[1212]
APPENDICES
I. CONSULAR DATING FORMULAE IN REPUBLICAN ITALY
Consular dating formulae
Dates on wine amphorae are readily intelligible:
C/L i2 2929, Falernian, 160 b.c. (A. Tchernia,
1986, 60-3, should not have rejected the testimony of Cic.
absence of the term Falernian from the fragment Polyb. xxxiv. 11.1 is
manifestly without significance if one reads it in its context in Athenaeus)
Dates on roof-tiles, as on
The so-called
Anchial(us) Strti L. s. specta < ui > t num( )
979
mense Febr(uario)
M. TuI(Iio) C. Ant(onio) co(n)s(ulibus)
But one may suspect that the labels were in general for perishables such as corn.
The inscriptions of the Capuan
The remaining relevant inscriptions are:
M. Cristofani, in
C. Cenucio Clousino prai( )
It is unclear whether the text is to be regarded as in the nominative or in the ablative; whether the last word is to be restored as 'prai(fectus)/prai(fecto)' or *prai(tor)/prai(tore)'; and whether in the latter case we have a praetor or the archaic term for a consul. But it is clear that the person is the consul of 276 and 270 b.c.; that his presence as authority or eponym is to be related to the status of Caere as a community with
A. Morandi,
territory of Cliternia of Aequi, building '[ C.] Claudio M. Perp[erna
co(n)s(ulibus) ], 92 в.с.
The Fasti Antiates may have begun to be inscribed before the Social War; if this is so, we have a phenomenon similar to the diffusion of consular dating formulae.
Where status is secure, it is always that of a community with citizenship, without or with the vote; this suggests that Falerii Novi possessed citizenship, not the Latin right,
others all being by this date communities with citizenship, with or without the vote. The combination of the likely status and anthroponymy should make it possible to locate
II. SURVIVAL OF GREEK LANGUAGE AND INSTITUTIONS
Funerary inscriptions, which may be of persons, often slaves or freedmen, of extraneous origin, are mostly excluded.
See in general F. Ghinatti,
Varro,
F. de Martino, PP 7 (1952) 333-43, 'Le istituzioni di Napoli greco-romana'; F. Sartori,
E. Miranda, in
M. J. Osborne,
E. Miranda, E
C. Ferone,
zione napoletana della fratria degli Artemisi' (
E. Miranda,
napoletane' (
E. Miranda,
E. Miranda,
Dicaearchia (Puteoli): Cic.
Velia:
Cic.
Sartori,
Miranda,
J.-P. Morel, in E 77, 21—39, at 25 n- M> IIoTrXios еттоцае.
Rhegium:
Strab. vi.i.2 (253c). Sartori,
Locri:
Costabile,
Cicero, 11
M. Calvet, P. Roesch,
L. Gasperini,
E. Lippolis,
L. Gasperini,
Canusium:
Hor.
Note also:
L. Moretti, R
III. INSCRIPTIONS IN LANGUAGES OTHER THAN LATIN AFTER THE SOCIAL WAR
ETRUSCAN
An oracle allegedly given to Romulus, reported by C. Fonteius Capito, claimed that Tyche would desert Rome when she had forgotten her
J. R. Wood,
W. V. Harris,
Bilinguals are discussed at Harris,
[ ]AGI[ ]
[ TIN] AFFN1N ARSE V[ERSE ]
I do not know what to make of a fragmentary and unintelligible inscription, partly in Etruscan, partly in Latin, engraved on a brick before firing, from a first- to second-century a.d. dump in Pisa, M. Cristofani,
Harris,
G. Maetzke,
Caere:
M. Martelli,
Clusium:
Perusia:
T. Rasmussen,
Saena:
E. Mangani,
Volaterrae:
There is an enormous bibliography on the urns of Volaterrae, which may be pursued through A. Maggiani,
OSCAN
It is more than doubtful whether the plays and mimes of Strab. v. 3. 6 (233c); or the
P. Poccetti,
A belief in the use of Oscan after the Social War has usually been supported by the painted inscriptions from Pompeii (Vetter, nos. 23-35; for a proper archaeological account it is necessary to go back to Conway), on the grounds that one should not posit too long an interval before a.d. 79; but the so-called
For a group of Oscan graffiti on pottery from Pompeii, second to middle of the first centuries B.C., see C. Reusser,
M. L. Porzio Gernia,
Capua:
The curse tablet, Vetter, no. 6, may belong after the Social War; it abandons final M on three out of twenty-six occasions, M. L. Porzio Gernia,
The curse tablet, Vetter, no. 7, is conventionally placed between Sulla and Caesar; it is a strange mixture of Oscan and Latin.
MESSAPIC
C. de Simone, in H. Krahe,
IV. ITALIAN CALENDARS Ov.
quod si forte vacas, peregrinos inspice fastos: mensis in his etiam nomine Martis erit. tertius Albanis, quintus fuit ille Faliscis, sextus apud populos, Hernica terra, tuos. inter Aricinos Albanaque tcmpora constat factaque Telegoni moenia celsa manu. quintum Laurentes, bis quintum Aequiculus acer,
a tribus hunc primum turba Curensis habet; et tibi cum proavis, miles Paeligne, Sabinis convenit: huic genti quartus utrique deus.
So if you happen to have time, look at foreign calendars: in these too there will be a month with the паше of Mars; it was the third month for the people of Alba, the fifth for the Falisci, the sixth for the Hernici; the people of Aricia and Alba have a calendar in common, just as they have high walls built by the hand of Telegonus; the Laurentes have Mars fifth, the fierce Aequi tenth, the people of Cures fourth; and the warriors of the Paeligni are in agreement with their Sabine ancestors, for Mars comes fourth in both cases.
Censorinus, D.N. zz.6:
apud Albanos Martius est sex et triginta, Maius viginti et duum, Sextilis duodeviginti, September sedecim; Tusculanorum Quintilis dies habet XXXVI, October XXXII, idem October apud Aricinos XXXVIIII.
March has thirty-six days among the people of Alba, May twenty-two, Sextilis eighteen, September sixteen, Quintilis of the people of Tusculum has thirty-six days, October thirty-two, yet October among the people of Aricia has thirty-nine.
Macrob. Sat. i.i 5.18:
ut autem omnes Idus Iovi, ita omnes Kalendas Iunoni tributas et Varronis et pontificalis adfirmat auctoritas. quod etiam Laurentes patriis religionibus servant, qui et cognomen deae ex caerimoniis addiderunt, Kalendarem Iunonem vocantes...
The authority both of Varro and of the
(Censorinus and Macrobius are clearly in error in supposing that the customs in question survived to their own day.) Varro,
Quinquatrus... ut ab Tusculanis post diem sextum Idus similiter vocatur Sexatrus et post diem septimum Septimatrus, sic hie quod erat post diem quintum Idus Quinquatrus.
Quinquatrus... Just as the sixth day after the Ides is called Sexatrus by the Tusculani on the same principle and the seventh day Septimatrus, so here Quinquatrus (was used) because it was the fifth day after the Ides.
Festus 304-6 l:
Quinquatrus... forma autem vocabuli eius exemplo multorum populorum Italicorum enuntiata est, quod post diem quintum Iduum est is dies festus, ut apud Tusculanos Triatrus et Sexatrus et Septematrus et Faliscos Decimatrus.
Quinquatrus... But the form of that word is adopted on the model of many Italic peoples, because it is a feast day the fifth day after the Ides, just as Triatrus and Sexatrus and Septematrus exist among the people of Tusculum and Decimatrus among the Falisci.
See in particular C. Ampolo,
V. VOTIVE DEPOSITS
There is a general overall account by M. Fenelli,
See
Volceii (San Mauro) - 200 down to 7 5—5 о b.c. (there is no reason to blame the revolt of Spartacus; the site was converted to secular purposes in the first century a.d.).
See M. Torelli, e 130, 105 n. 49 for:
Veii (Porta Caere) - down to 50—40 B.C.
Gabii - down to 50-40 в.с. (see now M. A. Aubet,
See A. La Regina, in P. Zanker (ed.) (e 141), 219—54, 'II Sannio', at 237, for:
Schiavi d' Abruzzo - third century в.с. down to a miserable end some time after the Social War.
S
Capracotta - down to the middle of the first century a.d.
See
San Giovanni in Galdo.
The sanctuary of Mefitis in the Valle d'Ansanto is very imperfectly known; part of the votive deposit was discovered in circumstances which are for all practical purposes undocumented and was meticulously published by A. Bottini
VI. EPICHORIC FUNERARY PRACTICES
M. W. Frederiksen (n. 63), identified a group of Campanian funerary stelae with one or more full-length figures in an
Campano); an example from Isola di Sora (EE viii 609) has probably been transported there in modern times.
M. Eckert,
H. Solin, in
P. Pensabene,
S. Diebner,
square inscribed blocks with hole for ashes, covered with egg-shaped lids inscribed OSSA, from former Volscian territory, late Republic to early Empire.
G. D'Henry, in
lids in the shape of money chests from Corfinium on the one hand and Amiternum and Foruli on the other hand.
For Etruria in general, see W. V. Harris, 177-80; G. Maetzke; T. Rasmussen; L. Cenciaioli; E. Mangani; A. Maggiani; M. Pandolfini; M. Nielsen, all cited in Appendix III; for Volsinii = Orvieto, see A. Andrĉn,
grave stelae
La situazione attuale delle ricerche e problemi aperti', at 448-9, for stepped tombs drawing on earlier models and falling between the second century b.c. and Augustus.
VII. DIFFUSION OF ALIEN GRAVE STELAE G. Ciampoltrini,
S. Diebner,
intrusion of urban decorative motifs in Umbria and Sabina under Augustus and Julio-Claudians.
I. Valdiserri Paoletti,
monuments mosdy of freedmen diffused from centre from late Republic to Augustus.
F. van Wonterghem,
L. Todisco,
'sculture del genere ebbero ampia diffusione nell'architettura dell' Italia romanizzata, con cronologia che s fa oscillare tra perlomeno la meta del I secolo a.C. ed il II d.C.'
van Wonterghem,
distribution map of round mausolea modelled on those of Rome (including that of C. Utianius C.f. at Polla,
P. Pensabene,
Chiesa, in
a phenomenon surely to be explained in terms of diffusion from Rome to the Po valley rather than joint derivation from a 'tradizione italica'; see in general G. A. Mansuelli,
989
(I find it extraordinarily hard to accept the view of V. Kockel, cited in Appendix VI, that the late first-century B.C. herms from Adria, illustrated in G. Fogolari and В. M. Scarfi,
I. DESCENDANTS OF AUGUSTUS AND LIVIA
Octavian (AUGUSTUS) . (1) Scribonia
I
Nero Caesar Drusus Caesar (d. 31) (d. 33)
Iulia a (1) Agrippa
Gaius Caesar Lucius Caesar Agrippa Postumus iulia = L Aemilius Pauitus Elder Agrippina = Germanicus (d.a.q4) (d.A.a2) (da.ai4) i (cos.a.o.1) i
Aemilia lepkla = M. Iunius SUanus J (cos. 19)
M. Silanus D. Silanus L. Silanus Iunia Lepida в С. Cassius Sevems Iunia Catvlna s L. Vitellius (cos. 46) (d. 64) (d. 48) (cos. 31) (cos. 48)
Gaius hunger Agrippina = Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus Drusilla = (1) L. Cassius Longinus (cos. 30) Iulia LMIIa = M. Vinidus (d. 46)
Livia Ocellina
i
(adopts) j
Ser. Sulpicius GALBA
s distantly related to
CALIGULA , (cos. 32) = (2) M. Aemilius Lepidus (d. 41)
: (2) Uvia
TIBERIUS = (1) Vlpsanla = (2) Iulia Nero Claudius Drusus a Younger Antonia I (cos. 9 ac.) I
Germanicus CLAUDIUS Uvilla
Iulia = Rubellius Blandus Tiberius Gemellus I (cos. 18) (d. 37)
Rubellius Pfautus (d.62)
II. DESCENDANTS OF AUGUSTUS* SISTER OCTAVIA AND MARK ANTONY
Octavia - M. Antonius
Elder Antonia = L Domitius Ahenobarbus ('39 ВС) I (cos. 16 ВС)
Younger Antonia = Nero Claudius Drusus ("36 ас.) (cos. 9 B.C.)
Domitia • Sallustius Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus - Younger Agrippina Domitia Lepida * (IIM. Valerius Messalla Barbatus
Pasaienus (cos. 32) Crispus (cos. 27,44)
■ (2) Faustus Sulla (cos. 31)
»(3) C. Appius lunius Silanus (cos. 28)
NERO
Messallina - CLAUDIUS
Faustus Sulla Felix (cos. 52)
Tiberius CLAUDIUS Nero = (1) Urgulanilla —
= (2)AeliaPaetina
Germanicus = Elder Agrippina
Livilla - Drusus
= (3) Messallina
(two children)
Octavia-I1)L. Silanus (d. 48) - (2) NERO
Nero Drusus CAUGULA Younger Agrippina Drusilla lulia Livilla
lulia ■ Rubelliua Blandus
Antonia = (1) Cn. Pompeius Magnus Tiberius Gemellus * (2) Faustus Sulla Felix (d, 37)
RubelliusPlautui Id. 62)
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
Rome and Italy
The Provinces
Literature, Art and Architecture
Assassination of Iulius Caesar (i; March).
Battle of Mutina, deaths of consuls Hirtius and Pansa. Octavian becomes consul (19 August). Lex Titia establishes the triumvirate (»7 November).
42 Deification of Iulius Caesar.
40 Surrender of Perusia to Octavian by L. Antonius (early spring). Octavian marries Scribonia (summer). Pact of Brundisium (September). Herod granted the throne of Judaea (autumn). 39 Pact of Misenum (spring)
Cicero's
Murder of Cicero. Birth of Ovid.
45 Death of D. Brutus in Gaul.
42 Sex. Pompeius controls Sicily. Naval battle 42 Restoration of the temple of Saturn,
with Salvidienus Rufus. Illyrian triumph of P. Vatinius (51 July). Battles of Philippi (first early in October, second on 25 October), followed by suicides of Brutus and Cassius.
41 Antony in Asia. Herod and his brother 41 Virgil,
Antony meets Cleopatra at Tarsus in winter and proceeds to Alexandria.
40 Parthian invasion of Syria led by Pacorus and Q. Labienus. Death of King Deiotarus of Galatia. Death of Calenus in Gaul (summer).
59 Ventidius defeats the Parthians. Agrippa campaigns in Gaul. Antony and Octavia at Athens (winter).
38 Renewal of triumviral powers for five years from i January. Marriage of Octavian and Livia (17 January). Triumph of Ventidius (27 November).
37 Pact of Tarentum (summer).
36 Removal of Lepidus from triumvirate. Octavian granted
34 Sosius'triumphoverJudaea(3 September).
33 Octavian's second consulship. Powers of the triumvirate lapse at the end of the year.
3 2 Divorce of Octavia by Antony. Publication of Antony's will by Octavian. Personal oath of loyalty sworn to Octavian inthetownsof Italy and the West.
31 Octavian's third consulship.
30 Octavian offered tribunician
29 Closing of the doors of the temple of Janus (11 January). Octavian's triple triumph (13-13 August).
38 Second victory of Ventidius over Parthians and death of Pacorus. Antony captures Samosata. Sex. Pompeius' success against Octavian off Cumae and in Straits of Messina.
37 Capture of Jerusalem by Sosius and formal inauguration of the reign of Herod (July). Appointment of client kings: Archelaus in Cappadocia, Amyntas in Galatia, Polemo in Pontus. Marriage of Antony and Cleopatra at Antioch.
36 After initial reverse (August), Octavian defeats Sex. Pompeius at Battle of Naulo- chus (3 September). Antony's Parthian offensive, failure at siege of Phraata and retreat through Armenia.
3 5 Death of Sex. Pompeius in Asia.
35-33 Octavian's campaigns in the Balkans.
34 Antony's invasion of Armenia and capture of Artavasdes. Triumph at Alexandria, followed by the 'Donations'.
3 3 Death of Bocchus of Mauretania. Antony remains in Armenia.
31 Battle of Actium (2 September). 30 Capture of Alexandria by Octavian and suicide of Antony (1 August). Suicide of Cleopatra (10 August). 29-28 M. Licinius Crassus pacifies Thrace and defeats Bastarnae.
38 Publication of Virgil,
37-36 Varro,
36 Reconstruction of the Regia.
3; Death of Sallust.
34-3 3 Agrippa restores aqueducts and adds a fifth (Aqua lulia).
3 3 Agrippa as aedile revives
32 Restoration of Pompey's Theatre.
30 Publication of Horace,
29 Dedication of the temple of Divus Iulius and the Curia lulia (18 August) and the altar of Victory (28 August). Arch in the Forum
i8 Octavian and Agrippa share the consular
27 Octavian appears before the Senate (13 and 16 January). He is given the name of Augustus, the oak wreath, the grant of a
28 Inscription of Cornelius Gallus commemorates defeat of revolt in the Egyptian Thebaid and penetration of Roman arms beyond the First Cataract.
27-24 Augustus in Gaul and Spain.
to commemorate the victory at Actium. Restoration of temples of Apollo and Hercules Musarum. Completion of Virgil,
28 First celebration of the Actian Games (September). Dedication of the temple of Apollo on the Palatine (9 October). Mausoleum of Augustus begun. Composition of Vitruvius"
27 Death of Varro. Agrippa's construction of the Pantheon.
2 j Marriage of Iulia and Marcellus. Closing of the doors of the temple of Janus. Augustus falls ill.
23 Illness of Augustus. He resigns the consulship and on i July receives
22 Trial of Marcus Primus and conspiracy of Caepio and Murena. Augustus refuses dictatorship and consulship for life but accepts
21 Marriage of Agrippa and Iulia.
26 Dismissal and suicide of Cornelius Gallus (or in 27).
26—23 Campaign of Aelius Gallus to Arabia Felix.
2) Juba II made king of Mauretania. Campaigns of M. Terentius Varro in the Val d'Aosta. Death of Amyntas and annexation of Galatia.
23-22 Campaigns of P. Petronius in Ethiopia (or 24-22).
23-21 Agrippa sent out to the East with
22-19 Augustus in Greece and Asia.
25 Ovid begins writing the
26 Propertius,
23 Maecenas falls out of favour in the imperial court.
22 Temple of Jupiter Tonans on Capitol (1 September).
19 Augustus given a lifetime grant of the right to carry the consular
18 Renewal of the grant of the
17 Augustus adopts his grandsons, Gaius and Lucius, the children of Agrippa and lulia. Celebration of the
13 Tiberius consul. Death of Lepidus the triumvir. Agrippa's
12 Augustus becomes
20 Agrippa deals with trouble in Gaul. Recovery of Roman standards from Parthia. Tiberius crowns Tigranes as king of Armenia.
19 Agrippa completes the pacification of Spain. Campaign of L. Cornelius Balbus against the Garamantes in Africa.
17-16 Campaigns of P. Silius Nerva in north Italy and the Alps. Defeat of M. Lollius in Gaul.
16-13 Augustus in Gaul, Agrippa in the East.
15 Tiberius and Drusus invade Bavaria and reach the Danube. Agrippa visits Jerusalem.
14 Agrippa appoints Polemo king of Bosporus.
13 Agrippa campaigns in Pannonia.
12-9 Tiberius campaigns in the Balkans, Drusus in Germany. Rising in Thrace put down by L. Calpurnius Piso (c. 11-9).
12 Dedication of the Altar of the Tres Galliae at Lugdunum (? or 10 B.C., see p.98). Inauguration of Caesarea by Herod.
20 Dedication of temple of Mars Ultor on the Capitol (12 May). (? Or 19) Publication of Horace,
19 Deaths of Virgil (21 September) and Tibullus. Construction of the Aqua Virgo. Arch of Augustus in the Forum to commemorate the recovery of the Parthian standards. Dedication of Altar of Fortuna Redux (15 December).
17 Composition of Horace,
13 Dedication of the Theatre of Marcellus (or, less probably, 11 в.с.). Inauguration of the Ara Pacis Augustae (4 July).
12 Publication of Horace,
11 Tiberius made to divorce Vipsania and
marry Iulia. 9 Death of Drusus the Elder (14 September).
8 Census held.
7 Tiberius' triumph over the Sugambri. Establishment of the fourteen
6 Tiberius granted
; Augustus holds the consulship. C. Caesar assumes the
2 Augustus holds the consulship again and is given the title of
9 Drusus reaches the Elbe but dies after an accident. Altar to Rome and Augustus established at Ara Ubiorum (probably in 9).
8 Tiberius campaigns against the Sugambri.
Death of Polemo of Pontus. 7 Recall of Tiberius.
6 ? Death of Tigranes II of Armenia.
;/3 ?War of Sulpicius Quirinius against the Homonadenses.
4 Death of Herod. His kingdom divided between his sons Philip, Herod Antipas and Archelaus.
2 Death of Parthian king Phraates IV, succeeded by Phraates V (or Phraataces).
9 Publication of first edition of Ovid,
8 Deaths of Maecenas and Horace.
2 Dedication of the
C. Caesar sent to the East with
a.d.
1-4 Composition of Ovid,
2 Return of Tiberius from Rhodes.
Agreement between C. Caesar and Phraataces. Ariobarzanes installed as king of Armenia. L. Caesar dies at Massilia. End of Marmaric War in Cyrene (?).
B.C.
4 Another
Establishment of the
Agrippa Postumus banished to Planasia.
lulia the Younger banished.
12 Tiberius' Illyrian triumph (25 October).
i j Tiberius given a further grant of
14
ij Tiberius becomes
16 Conviction for treason (
B.C.
Death of C. Caesar. Tiberius invades Germany as far as the river Weser.
Tiberius reaches the Elbe.
Outbreak of revolt in Pannonia and Illyricum. Banishment of Archelaus, son of Herod; Judaea turned into a province (census of Quirinius). Revolt in Isauria.
9 End of the Pannonian revolt. Defeat of P. Quinctilius Varus and loss of three legions in the Teutoburg Forest.
12 Germanicus takes command in Gaul and Germany.
14 Army revolts in Pannonia and on the Rhine, dealt with by Drusus and Germanicus respectively (autumn).
i j-16 Germanicus' campaigns in Germany, from which he is recalled by Tiberius.
6 Rebuilding of the temple of Castor and Pollux by Tiberius.
8 Banishment of Ovid.
i о Restoration and dedication of the temple of Concordia by Tiberius.
Consulship of Tiberius and Germanicus. Twin sons born to the younger Drusus, of whom only Tiberius Gemellus survives. Trial and suicide of Cn. Calpurnius Piso. Triumph of Drusus (28 May). Consulship of Tiberius and Drusus. Tiberius retires temporarily to Campania. Grant of
Sejanus' request to marry Livilla (Livia Iulia), widow of Drusus, is refused. Tiberius leaves Rome for Capreae.
Death of Iulia the Elder. Marriage of Agrippina the Younger to Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus.
Death of Livia. Banishment of Agrippina and of Nero, son of Germanicus and Agrippina.
Suicide of Nero.
Consulship of Tiberius and Sejanus. Denunciation and death of Sejanus (18 October). Appointment of Sutorius Macro as praetorian prefect. Gaius Caligula assumes
■ 7 Death of Archelaus of Cappadocia. Triumph of Germanicus (26 May).
18 19/20
18-
»5
26
28
»9
Death of Agrippina (18 October). Death of Drusus. Suicide of Asinius Gallus. Quaes- torship of Gaius.
■7
Outbreak of war against Tacfarinas in Numidia. Germanicus sent to the East with
21 Revolt of Florus and Sacrovir in Gaul.
24 Defeat and death of Tacfarinas.
26 (?) Pontius Pilate becomes
30 Publication of Velleius Paterculus' history.
34 Death of Artaxias of Armenia.
Judaea. 28 Revolt of the Frisii.
jj (?) Death of Philip, son of Herod; his tetrarchy is taken under direct rule.
Death of Livy. Death of Ovid (?). Dedication of temple of Janus (18 October) and Fors Fortuna.
Death of Tiberius at Misenum (16 March). Gaius Caligula acclaimed
37
}8
Death and deification of Drusilla (10 June, 2j September). Gaius marries Lollia Paulina.
39
Gaius divorces Lollia Paulina and marries Milonia Caesonia. Leaves Rome (September). Gaudius marries Messallina. Gaius returns to Rome (31 August).
40
41
Murder of Gaius (24 January). Proclamation of Claudius (23 January). Birth of Britannicus.
Claudius proclaimed
4*
44
Pontius Pilate removed from his post for maladministration by L. Vitellius, governor of Syria.
Herod Agrippa I given Philip's kingdom.
Trouble between the Jewish and Greek communities in Alexandria.
Herod Antipas deposed. Gaius visits the Rhineland (October). Conspiracy and execution of Gaetulicus.
Herod Antipas' ethnarchy given to Herod Agrippa I. Gaius in Gaul (winter). Preparations for an invasion of Britain. Outbreak of rebellion in Mauretania. Gaius orders his statue to be placed in the Temple at Jerusalem.
40-4 Conquest of Mauretania and organization of provinces of Tingitana and Caesariensis.
Claudius' letter to the Alexandrians.
Conspiracy and death of Scribonianus.
Invasion of Britain. Lycia-Pamphylia made a province.
Death of Herod Agrippa I.
37 Dedication of the temple of Divus Augus-
41 Beginning of the construction of a new harbour at Ostia and of the draining of the Fucine Lake. Seneca sent into exile.
Ovation of Aulus Plautius for conquest of Britain.
47-8 Censorship of Claudius and L. Vitellius. Celebration of
'Marriage' and execution of Messallina and C. Silius.
Marriage of Claudius and Agrippina the Younger (t January). Extension of the
jo Claudius adopts Nero (2; February). Agrippina becomes Augusta.
51 Burrus becomes praetorian prefect. Nero given the title of
5 5 Nero marries Octavia.
54 Death of Claudius (1 j October), accession of Nero.
5; Death of Britannicus.
56 Nero given the title of
5 8 Rejection of proposal that Nero should be
Murder of Agrippina. Institution of
Institution of the
Annexation of Thrace.
Corbulo in the Rhineland.
49 Agrippa II given the kingdom of Chalcis.
51 Ostorius Scapula defeats Caratacus. Death of Gotarzes of Parthia, succeeded by Vonones and then Vologaeses.
5 3 Parthians take control of Armenia and Tiri- dates is appointed to the throne.
5 5 Corbulo appointed to an eastern command against Parthia and Armenia.
Corbulo attacks Tiridates and captures Artaxata.
Capture of Tigranocerta by Corbulo.
Completion of the subjugation of Armenia and appointment to the throne of Tigranes, great-grandson of Herod and of Archelaus of Cappadocia. Corbulo appointed governor of Syria. Revolt of Boudica and the Iceni.
51-2 Dedication of the Triumphal Arch of Claudius, forming part of the Aqua Virgo.
54 Publication of Seneca,
61 Nero divorces Octavia and marries Pop- paea Sabina. Execution of Octavia (9 June). Death of Burrus, retirement of Seneca. Introduction of
Birth and death of daughter of Nero and Poppaea, deified as Gaudia Augusta.
Outbreak of fire in Rome (18/19 July). Victimization of the Christians. Reform of the currency.
6j
66 Deaths of Thrasea Paetus and Barea Sora- nus. Conspiracy of Vinicianus. Nero marries Statilia Messallina. Tiridates crowned king of Armenia in Rome.
Nero returns to Italy and while in Naples receives news of the revolt of Vindex. Death of Nero (9 or possibly 11 June). Proclamation of Galba as
Otho proclaimed
в.с. в.с.
Tigranes invades Adiabene. Vologaeses threatens Syria.
Caesennius Paetus sent to Cappadocia. Sur- 62 Construction of the Thermae Neronianae renders to Vologaeses at Rhandeia. (or possibly 64).
64-j Incorporation of kingdom of Pontus into 64 Destruction of the
Galatia. 64-8 Building of the
the Circus Maximus and reconstruction of Rome.
65 Deaths of Seneca and Lucan.
Nero proclaims the freedom of Greece (? or 66 Death of Petronius. 67, see p.664). Conspiracy and deaths of the
Scribonii brothers. Corbulo instructed to commit suicide. Outbreak of revolt in Judaea.
Vespasian appointed as legate in command of the war in Judaea (February).
Vespasian reduces Samaria and Idumaea and prepares to attack Jerusalem. Revolt of Vindex in Gaul. Galba acclaimed by his troops in Spain (2 or 3 April). Battle of Vesontio and suicide of Vindex (late spring). Revolt of Clodius Macer in Africa.
German legions in revolt against Galba. Vitellius proclaimed emperor by the German legions. Revolt of Civilis and the Batavians. Vespasian proclaimed emperor at Alexandria (1 July) and then by the army in Syria and Judaea.
Second battle of Cremona (24/2; Octol Antonius Primus enters Rome, murde Vitellius (20 or 21 December) 70 Mucianus arrives in Rome (January). ' pasian confirmed by the Senate as
70
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABBREVIATIONS
S. Riccobono,
F. F. Abbott, A. C. Johnson,
AJ
1985
1006
BAR
H. Temporini, W. Haase (eds.),
York, 1972- ■
1961
British Archaeological Reports
London, 1910
1828-77
1936-75
Berlin, 1863-
Jerusalem, 1957—64
London,1952
Berlin and Leiden, 1923 -
1841—70
2nd edn. Florence 1940-3
D. M. Pippidi, I. I. Russu,
Sofia, 1956-66
2nd edn. 2 vols. Florence, 1957-63
1892-1916
Berlin, 1900
Belgrade, 1976-
M. Guarducci,
1969
G. Fabre, M. Mayer, I. Roda,
J. M. Reynolds, J. B. Ward-Perkins,
W. Dittenberger,
H. Malcovati,
P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, D. G. Hogarth,
1897-8; 2nd edn, 193 j—
C. Edgar, A. E. R. Boak, J. G. Winter et al., Papyri in the University of Michigan Collection. Ann Arbor, 1931- The Oxyrhynchus Papyri. London, 1898-
A. S. Hunt, J. de M. Johnson, V. Martin, С. H. Roberts, E. G. Turner,
N. Lewis, Y. Yadin, J. C. Greenfield,
Baltimore, 1969
(Philological Monographs of the American Philological Association, no. 26, Cleveland, 1971) R
A. GENERAL STUDIES
Abaecherli Boyce, A. 'The origin of ornamenta triumphalia',
Balsdon, J. P. V. D.
Beard, M. and Crawford, M. H.
Beloch, К. H. Die Bevolkerung dergriecbisch-rdmischen Welt. Leipzig, 1886
Beranger, J. Recherches sur Г aspect idiologique du principat. Basel, 1953
Blagg, T. and Millet, M. (eds.)
Bradford, J. S.
Braund, D. C. Augustus to Nero: a Sourcebook on Roman History ji B.C.-a.d. 68. London and Sydney, 1985
Brunt, P. A. Italian Manpower 22/ в.с.-л.о. 14. Oxford, 1971
Brunt, P. A. Review of Syme, R.
Brunt, P. A. The Fall of the Roman Republic and Related Essays. Oxford, 1988
Brunt, P. A.
Cairns,F. Generic Composition in Greek and Roman Poetry. Edinburgh, 1972
Charles-Picard, G.
Chaumont, M. 'L'Armenie entre Rome et l'lran. 1. De l'avenement d'Auguste a l'avenement de Diocletien',
Chisholm, K. and Ferguson, J.
Clark, C. G. and Haswell, M. R.
Corradi, G.
Debevoise, N. C.
Deroux, C. (ed.)
Dilke, O. A. W.
Dudley, D. R.
Dudley, D. R. (ed.)
Duncan-Jones, R. The Economy of the Roman Empire. Quantitative Studies. Cambridge 1974, 2nd edn 1982
Dyson, S. L. 'Native revolts in the Roman Empire',
Esser, A. Casar und die juliscb-claudischen Kaiser im biologisch-'drt%tlichen Blickfeld(Janus Suppl. 1). Leiden, 1958
Finley, M. I. (ed.)
Finley, M. I.
Fraser, P. M. and Matthews, E. (eds.)
Friedlaender, L.
Gabba, E. 'The historians and Augustus', in с 176 61-88
Gapp, K. S. 'Famine in the Roman world from the founding of Rome to the time of Trajan'. Diss., Princeton, 1934
3 5. Garzetti, A.
hellenistiques',
Gianfrotta, P.-A. and Pomey, P.
Gilbert, R. Die Be^iehungen ^wischen Princeps und stadtromischer Plebs im friiheti Principal. Bochum, 1976
Giovannini, A.
Greene, K. The Archaeology of the Roman Economy. London, 1986
Gros, P. and Torelli, M. Storia dell'urbanistica. IImondo romano. Bari, 1988
Hackett, J. Warfare in the Ancient World. London, 1989
Hammond, M.
Hatzfeld, J. Les trafiquants italiens dans Forient hellinique. Paris, 1919
Hopkins, K. Conquerors and Slaves. Sociological Studies in Roman History 1. Cambridge, 1978
Hopkins, K. Death and Renewal. Sociological Studies in Roman History 11. Cambridge, 1983
Jones, A. H. M. Studies in Roman Government and Law. Oxford, i960
Jones, A. H. M. The Roman Economy, Studies in Ancient Economic and Administrative History (ed. P. A. Brunt). Oxford, 1974
Juster, J.
Kahler, H.
Kahler, H.
Kloft, H. 'Aspekte der Prinzipatsideologie im friihen Prinzipat',
Kroll, W.
5 4A.
Kunkel, W.
Lloyd, G. E. R.
Luttwak, E. The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire. Baltimore, 1976
Martino, F. de. Storia delta costitu^ione romana iv,i. Naples, 1974
Millar, F. The Emperor in the Roman World (jt b.c.-a.d. jjy). London, Ю77
Millar, F. 'The Mediterranean and the Roman revolution: politics, war and the economy', P & P 102 (1984) 3—24
Millar, F. The Roman Empire and its Neighbours. 2nd edn. London, 1981
Misurare la terra. Centuria\ione e coloninelmondo romano. L'organi^a^ione del territorio in epoca romana. Modena, 1983
Momigliano, A.D. Alien Wisdom: the Limits of Helleni^ation. Cambridge, >975
Momigliano, A. D. Ter%o contribute alia storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico (Storia e Letteratura 108/9). Rome, 1966
Mommsen, T. R
Nicolet, C. Le metier de citoyen dans la Rome ripublicaine. Paris, 1976; transl. as A 68
Nicolet, C.
Nicolet, C. The World of the Citizen in Republican Rome. London, 1980
Nicolet, C. L'inventaire du monde. Geographic et politique aux origines de I'Empire romain. Paris, 1988; transl. as a 70
Nicolet, C. Space, Geography and Politics in the Early Roman Empire. Ann Arbor, 1991
Nippel, W. Aufruhr md'Poli^ei' in der romischen Republik. Stuttgart, 1988
Ogilvie, R. M.
Peters, F. E.
73B. 'Politics and art in Augustan literature',
Premerstein, A. von Vom Werden und Wesen des Principats (ABAW 15). Munich, 1937
Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites. Princeton, 1975
Purcell, N. 'Maps, lists, money, order and power',
Quinn, K. 'Poet and audience',
Rawson, E. D. Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic. London, 1985
Reinhold, M.
Rich, J. W. Declaring War in the Roman Republic in the Period of Transmarine Expansion (Coll. Latomus 149). Brussels, 1976
Ridley, R. T. 'Pompey's command in the 50s: how cumulative?',
Rostovtzeff, M. I.
Rowell, H. T.
Sherk, R. K.
Sherwin-White, A. N.
Sherwin-White, A. N. 'The Lex Repetundarum and the political ideas of Gaius Gracchus',
Sherwin-White, A. N.
Ste Croix, G. E. M. de The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World. London, 1981
Stier, H. E. 'Augustusfriede und romische Klassik',
Sullivan, J. P. Literature and Politics in the Age of Nero. Ithaca, NY, 1985
Syme, R. The Roman Revolution. Oxford, 1939
Syme, R.
Syme, R. The Augustan Aristocracy. Oxford, 1986
95A.
L'Urbs. Espace urbain et histoire (Ier siecle av. J.-C.-IIIe Steele ap. J.-C.) Collection de l'ecole franjaise de Rome 98). Rome, 1987
Versnel, H.
Veyne, P. Le pain et le cirque. Paris, 1976
Villes et campagnes de I'Empire romain, Actes du colloque tPAix-en-Provence 1980. Aix, 1982
Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'The emperor and his virtues',
Wells, С. M.
Wickert, L. 'Neue Forschungen zum romischen Prinzipat',
Williams, G. W. Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry. Oxford, 1968
Williams, G. W.
Williams, G. W. Figures and Thought in Roman Poetry. New Haven, 1980
Wilson, A. J. N. Emigration from Italy in the Republican Age of Rome. Manchester-New York, 1966
Wirszubski, C. Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome during the Late Republic and Early Principate. Cambridge, 1950
Wiseman, T. P. (ed.)
Wiseman, T. P. Roman Studies Literary and Historical. Liverpool, 1987
Yavetz, Z.
B. SOURCES
i. works on ancient authors
Albrecht, M. von 'Properz als augusteischer Dichter',
Ambrose, J. W. 'Horace on foreign policy. Odes 4.4', C] 69 (1973/4) 26-33
Anderson, R. D., Parsons, P. J. and Nisbet, R. G. M. 'Elegiacs by Gallus from Qasr Ibrim',
Andre J. La vie et Pauvre cf A sin ius Pollion. Paris, 1949
Anna, G. d\ 'Cornelio Gallo, Virgilio e Properzio',
Armstrong, D. 'Horatiusequeset scriba: Satires 1.6 and 2.7',
Badian, E. 'Nobiles amici: art and literature in an aristocratic society',
Baldwin, B.
Ball, R. J. 'The politics of Tibullus: Augustus, Messalla, and Macer',
Balsdon, J. P. V. D. 'Dionysius on Romulus: a political pamphlet?',
Beaujeu, J. 'Le frere de Quirinus (a propos de Virgile, Eneide 1 292 et de Properce iv 1, 9)',
Bellemore, J. Nicolaus of Damascus, Life of Augustus. Bristol, 1984
Bilde, P. Flavius Josephus between Jerusalem and Rome. His Life, his Works, and their Importance. Sheffield, 1988
Bowersock, G. W. 'Historical problems in late Republican and Augustan classicism',
Bowersock, G. W. 'The addressee of the eighth eclogue. A response',
Brink, С. O.
Broshi, M. 'The credibility of Josephus',
Brunt, P. A. 'Marcus Aurelius in his Meditations',
Bultmann, R. The History of the Synoptic Tradition. 2nd edn. London, 1972
Burck, E. 'Die Rolle des Dichters und der Gesellschaft in der augusteischen Dichtung', A <& A 21 (1975) 12-35
Cairns, F. 'Propertius on Augustus' marriage law (11, 7)',
Cairns, F. 'Propertius and the battle of Actium (4.6)', in в 204, 129-68
Carter, J. M. (ed.)
Charles, R. H. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. 2 vols. Oxford, 1913
Charlesworth, J. H.
Chilver, G. E. F.
Christ, K. 'Tacitus und der Prinzipat',
Claassen, J. M. 'Error and the imperial household; an angry god and the exiled poet's fate',
Coffey, M.
Cohen, S. J. D. Josephus in Galilee and Rome: his Vita and Development as a Historian. Leiden, 1979
32. Curran, L. C. 'Transformation and anti-Augustanism in Ovid's "Metamorphoses"',
3 3. Daly, L.J. 'Livy's Veritas and the spolia opima. Politics and the heroics of A. Cornelius Cossus',
Deininger, J. 'Livius und der Prinzipat', in A54A, 265-72
Desch, W. 'Horazens Beziehung zu Maecenas',
Dobesch, G. 'Nikolaos von Damaskus und die Selbstbiographie des Augustus',
Du Quesnay, I. M. le M. 'Virgil's first eclogue',
3 8. Duckworth, H. T. F.
Duret, L. 'Dans l'ombre des plus grands: I. Poetes et prosateurs mal connus de l'epoque augusteenne',
Eisenhut, W. 'Deus Caesar. Augustus in den Gedichten des Properz', in a 107A, 98-108
Elia, S. d'. 'L'esilio di Ovidio e alcuni aspetti della storia Augustea',
Fadinger, V. Die Begriindung des Prin^ipats. Quellenkritische und staatsrechtliche Untersuchungen Cassius Dio und der Parallelŭberlieferung. Berlin, 1969
Fairweather, J. 'Ovid's autobiographical poem,
Fantham, R. E. 'Ovid, Germanicus, and the composition of the Fasti',
Farron, S. 'Aen. VI 826-35 (the vision of Julius Caesar and Pompey) as an attack on Augustan propaganda',
Farron, S. 'The Aeneas-Dido episode as an attack on Aeneas' mission and Rome',
Farron, S. 'Aeneas' revenge for Pallas as a criticism of Aeneas',
Feldman, L. H. josephus and Modern Scholarship, 1937-1980. Berlin, 1984
Feldman, L. H. 'Flavius Josephus revisited: the man, his writings, and his significance',
Feldman, L. H. Josephus: a Supplementary Bibliography. New York, 1986
Fitton-Brown, A. D. 'The unreality of Ovid's Tomitan exile',
Fornaro, P. Flavio Giuseppe, Tacito et I'lmpero. Turin, 1980
Fraenkel, E.
5 4. Gabba, E. 'Progetti di riforme economiche e fiscali in uno storico dell'eta dei Severi',
Gabba, E. Appiani Bellorum Civilium Liber Quint us. Florence, 1970
Gabba, E. 'La "Storia di Roma arcaica" di Dionigi d'Alicarnasso',
Gabba, E. 'Political and cultural aspects of the classical revival in the Augustan age',
Galinsky, G. К. 'Some aspects of Ovid's golden age',
Gascou, J.
Getty, R. J. 'Romulus, Roma, and Augustus in the sixth book of the
Ginsburg, J. Tradition and Theme in the Annals of Tacitus. Salem, NH, 1981
Goodyear, F. R. D.
Goold, G. P. 'The cause of Ovid's exile',
Gosling, A. 'Tibullus 2.5 and Augustan propaganda',
Gow, A. S. F. and Page, D.
Grant, R. M. Eusebius as Church Historian. Oxford, 1980
Green, P. 'Carmen et error. Профаак and atria in the matter of Ovid's exile',
Griffin, J. 'Augustan poetry and the life of luxury',
Griffin, J. 'Propertius and Antony',
Griffin, J. 'The fourth Georgic, Virgil and Rome',
Griffin, M. Seneca. A Philosopher in Politics. Oxford, 1976
Grimal, P. 'Poesie et "propagande" au temps d'Auguste', CHM 8 (1964) 54-75
Grimal, P. 'Jupiter, Anchise et Vulcain: trois revelations sur le destin de Rome', in Diggle, J., Hall, J. B. and Jocelyn, H. D. (eds.)
Hahn, H. 'Untersuchungen zur Autobiographic des Kaisers Augustus'. Diss., Leipzig, 1957
Hahn, H. 'Neue Untersuchungen zur Autobiographie des Kaisers Augustus',
Hanslik, R. 'Die Augustusvita Suetons',
Harrison, S. J. 'Augustus, the poets, and the
Harvey, F. D. '"Cognati Caesaris": Ovid
Hellegouarc'h, J. 'Les buts de l'ceuvre historique de Velleius Paterculus',
Hemer, C. J. The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in their Local Setting. Sheffield, 1986
Hemer, C. J. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. Tubingen, 1989
Hermes, J. C. 'Cornelius Gallus und Vergil. Das Problem der Umarbeitung des vierten Georgica-Buches'. Diss., Miinster, 1977
Herter, H. 'Das Concilium Deorum im 1. Metamorphosenbuch Ovids', in a 107a, 109-24
Heubner, H.
84л. Highet, G.
Holleman, A. W. J. 'Ovid and polities',
Hollis, A. S.
Horsfall, N. 'Maecenas, Horace and the Georgics once more',
Horsfall, N. Cornelius Nepos. A Selection, Including the Lives of Cato and Atticus. Oxford, 1989
Horsfall, N. 'Virgil and Marcellus' education',
Hurst, A. 'Un critique grec dans la Rome d'Auguste: Denys d'Halicarnasse',
Janssen, O. 'De verbanning van Ovidius: waarheid of fictie?',
Jeffreys, E., Jeffreys, M. and Scott, R.
Johnson, W. R. 'The emotions of patriotism: Propertius, 4.6',
Jones, C. P.
Kenney, E. J. and Clausen, W. (eds.) The Cambridge History of Classical Literature, 11: Latin Literature. Cambridge, 1982
Koester, H.
Koester, H. Ancient Christian Gospels: their History and Development. London, 1990
Koestermann, E.
Korfmacher, W. C. 'Vergil, spokesman for the Augustan reforms',
Kragerrud, S. 'Perusia and the Aeneid',
Kŭhnert, F. 'Augusteische Dichtung und Dichtung der augusteischen Zeit', in а 54л, 118—29
La Penna, A. Ora%io e Pideologia del Principato. Turin, 1963
Lambrecht, U. Herrscberbildund Principalsidee in Suetons Kaiserbiographien. Untersuchungen \ur Caesar- und %ur Augustusvita. Bonn, 1984
Lana, I. Velleio Patercolo 0 dellapropaganda. Turin, 1952
Lasserre, F. 'Strabon devant l'empire romain',
Leach, E. W. 'Seneca's
Lefevre, E. 'Horaz und Maecenas',
Lefevre, E. 'Die
Lenel, O.
Lenel, O.
Lŭdemann, G. Early Christianity According to the Traditions in Acts: a Commentary. Minneapolis, 1989
Lundstrom, S.
Lyne, R. О. A. M. 'Virgil and the politics of war',
Mack, В. L. Л Myth of Innocence: Mark and Christian Origins. Philadelphia, 1988
McKechnie, P. 'Cassius Dio's speech of Agrippa. A realistic alternative to imperial government?',
McKeown, J. C.
Malcovati, E. (ed.) Imperatoris Caesaris Augusti operum fragmenta. 5 th edn. Turin, 1969
Malcovati, E. 'Augusto fonte di Svetonio',
Malherbe, A. J.
Manuwald, B.
Mehl, A. 'Bemerkungen zu Dios und Tacitus' Arbeitsweise und zur Quellenlage im "Totengericht" iiber Augustus',
Mehl, H. Tacitus iiber Kaiser Claudius. Munich, 1974
Mendelson, A.
Mensching, E. 'Livius, Cossus und Augustus', MH 24 (1967) 12—32
Merkelbach, R. 'Augustus und Romulus (Erklarung von Horaz,
Mette, H. J. 'Livius und Augustus',
Millar, F.
Moehring, H. R. 'Joseph ben Matthia and Flavius Josephus: the Jewish prophet and Roman historian',
Nagle, B. R. The Poetics of Exile. Program and Polemic in the Tristia and Epistulae ex Ponto of Ovid (Coll. Latomus 170). Brussels, 1980
Nikiprowetzky, V.
Nisbet, R. G. M. 'Horace's
Nisbet, R. G. M. and Hubbard, M.
Norberg, D. 'La divinite d'Auguste dans la poesie d'Horace',
Ogilvie, R. M.
Paladini, M. L. 'A proposito della tradizione poetica sulla battaglia di Azio',
Paratore, E. 'Letteratura pagana nella Gallia romana',
Pelling, С. B. R.
Petersman, G. 'Cornelius Gallus und der Papyrus von Qa$r Ibrim',
Phillips, C. R. 'Rethinking Augustan poetry',
Poma, G. 'Provvedimenti augustei su debiti e schiavi nell'interpret- azione di Orosio',
Poschl, V.
Poschl, V. 'Virgil und Augustus',
Putnam, M. C. J. 'The Virgilian achievement',
Quinn, K. 'The poet and his audience in the Augustan age',
Rahn, H. 'Zum Carmen saeculare des Horaz',
Rajak, T. Josephus: the Historian and his Society. London, 1983
Reckford, K. J. 'Horace and Maecenas',
Reinhold, M. 'The unhero Aeneas', C<& M 27 (1966) 195-207
Reinhold, M.
Ritter, H. W. 'Cluvius Rufus bei Josephus?',
Roddaz, J. M. 'De Cesar a Auguste: l'image de la monarchic chez un historien du siecle des Sĉvĉres. Reflexions sur l'ceuvre de Dion Cassius, a propos d'ouvrages rĉcents',
Rostagni, A. (ed.) Svetonio 'depoetis' e biografi minori. Turin, 1956
Rudd, W. J. N. 'Ovid and the Augustus myth', in
Rudd, W. J. N. 'The idea of empire in the Aeneid',
Sailer, R. P. 'Anecdotes as evidence for Roman imperial history',
Sanders, E. P. and Davies, M.
Scardigli, B. and Delbianco, P.
Schafer, P. 'New Testament and hekhalot literature',
Schalit, A. Namenworterbuch Flavius Josephus. Leiden, 1968
Schultze, C. 'Dionysius of Halicarnassos and his audience', in Moxon, I. S., Smart, J. D. and Woodman, A. J. (eds.)
Schwartz, D. R. 'Josephus and Nicolaus on the Pharisees',
157-71
Scott-Kilvert, I. (transl.). Cassius Dio. The Roman History: the Reign of Augustus. Harmondsworth, 1987
Stahl, H. P. Propertius: 'Love' and'War'. Individual and State under Augustus. Berkeley-Los Angeles, 1985
Stambaugh, J. E. and Balch, D. L.
Starr, C. G. 'Horace and Augustus',
Steidle, W. 'Beobachtungen zum Geschichtswerk des Cassius Dio',
Stern, M. Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. } vols. Jerusalem,
1974-84
Stone, M. E. (ed.) Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period. Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus (Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, Sect. II). Assen, 1984
Strack, H. L. and Stemberger, G.
Stroh, W. 'Trostende Musen: zur literarhistorischen Stellung und Bedeutung von Ovids Exilgedichten',
Strzelecki, W. C. Atei Capitonis Fragmenta. Leipzig, 1967
Sullivan, J. 'The politics of elegy',
Sumner, G. V. 'The truth about Velleius Paterculus: Prolegomena',
Swan, P. M. 'Cassius Dio on Augustus: a poverty of annalistic sources?',
Syme, R.
Syme, R. 'Livy and Augustus',
Syme, R. Ten Studies in Tacitus. Oxford, 1970
Syme, R. History in Ovid. Oxford, 1978
Syme, R. 'Janus and Parthia in Horace', in Diggle, J., Hall, J. B. and Jocelyn, H. D. (eds.)
Tarrant, R. J. 'The addressee ofVirgil's eighth eclogue',
Thollard, P. 'La notion de civilisation dans les livres in et 1 v de Strabon',
Thorley, J. 'The nativity-census. What does Luke actually say?'.
Toher, M. 'The date of Nicolaus'
Torelli, M. 'Contributi al Supplemento del
Traill, D. A. 'Horace C. 1 3. A political ode?',
Voit, L. 'Horaz-Merkur-Augustus (zu Horaz, C. 11 17,1 10,1 2)',
Wacholder, B. Z.
Wagenvoort, H. 'The crime of fratricide (Horace
Wallace-Hadrill, A. Suetonius: the Scholar and his Caesars. London, 1985
Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'Time for Augustus: Ovid, Augustus, and the
191A. Walsh, P. G.
Watson, L.'
Wellesley, K. Cornelius Tacitus: the Histories, Book 111. Sydney, 1972
Wickert, L. 'Horaz und Augustus',
Wiedemann, T. 'The political background to Ovid's
Williams, G. 'Horace Odes 1 12 and the succession to Augustus',
Williams, G. Technique and Ideas in the Aeneid. New Haven-London, 1983 197A. Wiseman, T. P. Cinna the Poet and other Roman Essays. Leicester, 1974
Wiseman, T. P. 'Calpurnius Siculus and the Claudian civil war',
Wiseman, T. P. 'Cybele, Virgil and Augustus', in в 204, 117-28
Wistrand, E. Horace's Ninth Epode and its Historical background. Goteborg, 1958
Witke, C. Horace's Roman Odes. A Critical Examination (Mnemosyne Suppl. 77). Leiden, 1983
Woodman, A. J. Velleius Paterculus: the Tiberian Narrative. Cambridge, 1977
Woodman, A. J. Velleius Paterculus: the Caesarian and Augustan Narrative. Cambridge, 1983
Woodman, A. J. and West, D. (eds.)
2. epigraphy
Arangio-Ruiz, V. 'Testi e Documenti VI, L'iscrizione leidense di Augusto',
Atkinson, К. M. T.'
Badian, E. 'Notes on some documents from Aphrodisias concerning Octavian',
Balland, A. 'Q. Veranius cos. ord. 49 et sa famille',
Bivona, L. Iscri^ioni latine lapidarie del Museo di Palermo. Palermo, 1970
Bogaers, J. E. 'King Cogidubnus: another reading of
Bove, L. Documentiprocessualidalle tabulae Pompeianae di Murecine. Naples, >979
Bove, L. Documenti di opera\ioni finan^iarie dall'archivio dei Sulpici. Naples, 1984
Brunt, P. A. 'C. Fabricius Tuscus and an Augustan dilectus',
Brunt, P. A. and Moore, J. M. (eds.) Res Gestae divi Augusti: the Achievements of the Divine Augustus. Oxford, 1967
Carter, J. M. 'A new fragment of Octavian's inscription at Nicopolis',
Cavallaro, M. A. 'Economia e religio nei ludi secolari augustei. Per una nuova interpretazione di
Coli, U. 'Nuove osservazioni e congetture sulla Tabula Hebana',
Collingwood, R. G. and Wright, R. P.
Crook, J. A. 'An Augustan inscription in the Rijksmuseum at Leyden,
D'Agata, A. R. M.
D'Ors, A. Epigrafiajurtdica de la Espana romana. Madrid, 1953
Degrassi, A. 'Frammenti di elogi e di una dedica a Romolo del Foro d'Augusto',
Degrassi, A. (ed.)
Degrassi, A. 'II sepolcro dei Salvii a Ferento e le sue iscrizioni',
Degrassi, A. 'Epigraphica II',
Ehrenberg, V. and Jones, A. H. M.
Engelmann, H. and Knibbe, D. 'Das Monumentum Ephesenum. Ein Vorbericht',
Engelmann, H. and Knibbe, D. 'Das Zollgesetz der Provinz Asia',
Frey, J. B.
Frisch, P. 'Zu den Elogien des Augustusforums',
Frova, A. 'L'iscrizione di Pontio Pilato a Cesarea', RJL95 (1961)419—34
Gage, J. (ed.)
Gonzalez, J. 'Tabula Siarensis, Fortunales Siarenses et Municipia Civium Romanorum',
Gonzalez, J. 'The Lex Irnitana: a new copy of the Flavian municipal law',
Gordon, A. E. 'Notes on the Res Gestae of Augustus',
Griffin, M. T. 'The Lyons tablet and Tacitean hindsight',
Guarducci, M. 'Ancora una volta sul frammento dell
Habicht, C. 'New evidence on the province of Asia',
Hall, A. 'New light on the capture of Isaura Vetus',
Hartmann, E. 'Die Gallus-Inschrift auf dem Vatikanischen Obelisken',
Henzen, W. Acta fratrum Arvalium quae supersunt. Berlin, 1874
Hoffmann, W. 'Der Widerstreit von Tradition und Gegenwart im Tatenbericht des Augustus',
Kroemer, D. 'Textkritisches zu Augustus und Tiberius (Res gestae c.34- Tac. Ann. 6,30,3)',
Kunkel, W. 'Uber die Leidener Augustus-Inschrift aus Куше',
Laffi, U. 'Le iscrizioni relative all'introduzione nel 9 a.C. del nuovo calendario della Provincia d'Asia',
Lauffer, S. 'Annos undeuiginti natus',
Lesuisse, L. 'La clause transitoire de la lex de imperio Vespasiani', R
Levi, M. A. 'La composizione delle Res gestae diui Augusti', R
Lŭderitz, G. (ed.) Corpus jiidischer Zeugnisse aus der Cyrenaica. Wiesbaden, 1983
McCrum, M. and Woodhead, A. G. Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors a.d. 68—96. Cambridge, 1961
Manni Piraino, M. T. Iscrizioni greche lapidarie del museo di Palermo. Palermo, 1973
Millar, F. 'Imperial ideology in the Tabula Siarensis', in Gonzalez, J. and Arce, J. (eds.)
Michelsen, E. 'The palaeographical interference as reflected in the Latin inscriptions of Clusium and Perusia', in Bruun, P.
Mitchell, S. 'Requisitioned transport in the Roman empire: a new inscription from Pisidia',
Moretti, L. 'Frammenti vecchi e nuovi del Commentario dei Ludi secolari',
Mourgues, J.-L. 'The so-called letter of Domitian at the end of the Lex Irnitana',
Oliver, J. H. 'The main problem of the Augustan inscription from Cyme',
Oliver, J. H. 'Octavian's inscription at Nicopolis',
Paci, G. 'Possibili tracce di statuti municipali in alcune iscrizioni d'ltalia concernenti un particulare tipo di munificenza privata', in
Pearse, J. L. D. 'Three
Pekary, T. 'Statuae meae ... argenteae steterunt in urbe xxx circiter, quas ipse sustuli. Interpretationen zu Res gestae diui Augusti 24', in a 5 5 a, 96-108
Pighi, J. B.
Pleket, H. W. The Greek Inscriptions in the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden at Lejden. Leiden, 1958
Ramage, E. S. The Nature and Purpose of Augustus■' 'Res Gestae'. (Historia Ein^elschrift 54). Wiesbaden, 1987
Ramage, E. S. 'The date of Augustus' Res Gestae',
Rehm, A. in Kawerau, G. and Rehm, A. (eds.)
Rengen, W. van 'L'epigraphie grecque et latine de Syrie. Bilan d'un quart de siecle de recherches epigraphiques',
Rey-Coquais, J.-P. 'Inscriptions grecques d'Apamee',
Reynolds, J.
Richardson, J. S. 'The Tabula Contrebiensis. Roman law in Spain in the early first century b.c.',
Ritter, H. W. 'Uberlegungen zur Inschrift des Augustusbogens auf dem Forum Romanum',
Robert, J. and L.
Robert, L. Etudes epigraphiques etphilologiques. Paris, 1938
Robert, L. Hellenica, recueil eFepigraphie, de numismatique et Robert, L. 'Discussion of a place-name in the Leiden inscription', Roueche, C. 'Acclamations in the later Roman Empire: new evidence from Aphrodisias', Salvaterra, C. 'Forum Iulium nell'iscrizione di C. Cornelius Gallus sull'obelisco Vaticano', Schachermeyr, F. and Merkelbach, R. divi Augusti', Seyfarth, W. 'Potitus rerum omnium. Ein Beitrag zur Deutung der R Sherk, R. K. Roman Documents from the Greek East: Senatus Consulta and Epistulae to the Age of Augustus. Baltimore, 1969 Sherk, R. K. Smallwood, .E. M. Documents Illustrating the Principates of Gaius, Claudius and Nero. Cambridge, 1967; Bristol, 1984 Solin, H. 'Ricerche epigrafiche in Ciociaria', Sotgiu, G. lscri%ioni latine della Sardegna 1. Padua, 1961 Stiehl, R. Die Datierungder Kapitolinischen Fasten. Tubingen, 1957 Syme, R. 'Sejanus on the Aventine', Taylor, L. R. 'The date of the Capitoline Fasti', Taylor, L. R. 'New indications of Augustan editing in the Capitoline Fasti', Torelli, M. Vassileiou, H. 'Drusus imperator appellatus in Germania (Erganzung des Drususelogiums auf dem Forum Augusti)', Visscher, F. de Volkmann, H. 'Bemerkungen zu den Res gestae diui Augusti', (1954) 81-6 Volkmann, H. 'Zur Gallus-Inschrift auf dem Vatikanischen Obelisken', Weber, E. 'Zur Inschrift des Pontius Pilatus', Wigtil, D. N. 'The ideology of the Greek Res Gestae', Wigtil, D. N. 'The translator of the Greek Res Gestae of Augustus', Wuilleumier, P. Inscriptionslatinesdes Trois Gaules. Gallia. Suppl. 17 (1984) Yavetz, Z. 'The Res Gestae and Augustus' image', in с 176, 1-36 Zecchini, G. 'La Tabula Siarensis e la "Dissimulatio" di Tiberio', 3. numismatics Alfoldi, M. R. Die Fundmun^en der Romischen Zeit in Deutschland iv.3/1. Berlin, 1970 Allen, D. 'The Belgic dynasties of Britain and their coins', Allen, D. 'A study of the Dobunnic coinage', in Clifford, E. M. (ed.) Allen, D. 'The origins of coinage in Britain: a reappraisal', in Frere, S. S. (ed.) Aulock, H. von Miin^en unci Stddte Lykaoniens (MDAI (I) 16). Tubingen, 1976 Aulock, H. von Aulock, H. von. Bay, A. 'The letters SC on Augustan aes coinage', Belloni, G. G. 'Monete romane (repubblica e impero) in quanto opera d'artigianato e arte. Osservazioni e impostazione di problemi', Burnett, A. 'Sicily', in в 312, 165-81 Burnett, A., Amandry, M. and Ripolles, P. P. Roman Provincial Coinage. 1: From the Death of Caesar to the Death of Vitellius (44 B.C.-a.d. 69). London—Paris, 1992 Burnett, A. M. 'The authority to coin in the late Republic and early Empire', JVC 17 (1977) 37-63 Buttrey, Т. V. 'Studies in the coinage of Marc Antony'. Diss., Princeton, 1953 Buttrey, Т. V. 'Roman coinage of the Cyrenaica, first century в.с. to first century a.d.', in Brooke, C. N. L. (ed.) 315 A. Buttrey, Т. V. 'Crete and Cyrene', in A. M. Burnett and M. H. Crawford (eds.), 3 i6a. Chapman, A. E. 'Some first century в.с. bronze coins of Cnossos', Collis, J. R. 'Functional and theoretical interpretations of British coinage', Crawford, M. H. Crawford, M. H. Crawford, M. H. Coinage and Money under the Roman Republic: Italy and the Mediterranean Economy. London, 1985 Ercolani Cocchi, E. Metodi di ricerca numismatica e problemi della prima monetavjone imperiale, 1: Augusto (Studi di storia antica 2). Bologna, 1978 Grant, M. From Imperium to Auctoritas: a Historical Study of Aes Coinage in the Roman Empire 49 b.c.-a.d. 14. Cambridge, 1946; repr. 1969 Grant, M. 'A step toward world-coinage, 19 B.C.', in P. R. Coleman- Norton (ed.) Grant, M. The Six Main Aes Coinages of Augustus. Controversial Studies. Edinburgh, 1953 Howgego, C. J. Greek Imperial Countermarks. Studies in the Provincial Coinage of the Roman Empire. Roy. Num. Soc. Special Publ. 17. London, 1985 Imhoof-Blumer, F. Jucker, A. 'Apollo Palatinus und Apollo Actius auf augusteischen Mŭnzen', MH 39 (1982) 82—100 Kadman, L. The Coins of the Jewish War of 66—7) c.e. Tel Aviv, i960 Kadman, L. Kent, J. P. C. Kindler, A. Kraay, С. M. Kraft, K. 'Zur Datierung der romischen Mŭnzmeisterpragung unter Augustus', Kraft, K. 'S(enatus) C(onsulto)', Kraft, K. Kunisz, A. Recherches sur le monnayage et la circulation monetaire sous le rigne dAuguste. Warsaw, 1976 Levick, В. M. 'Mercy and moderation on the coinage of Tiberius', in Levick, В. M. (ed.) Levick, В. M. 'Propaganda and the imperial coinage', Liegle, J. 'Die Munzpragung Oktavians nach dem Sieg von Actium und die augusteische Kunst', Masada I: The Yigael Yadin Excavations ipij-ipif. Final Reports. The Coins of Masada, edited by Y. Meshorer. Jerusalem, 1989 Mattingly, H. and Carson, R. A. G. Mattingly, H., Sydenham, E. A., Webb, P. H. Meshorer, Y. Meshorer, Y. Mirnik, I. Newby, J. D. A Numismatic Commentary on the Res Gestae of Augustus. London, 1938 Panvini Rosati, F. 'Le emissioni in ого e argento dei "tresviri monetales" di Augusto', Rodewald, C. Scheer, R. 'Vindex libertatis', Seyrig. H. 'Le monnayage de Ptolemais en Phĉnice', RN n.s. 4 (1962) 25-50 Shear, J. P. 'Athenian Imperial coinage', Smith, H. R. W. 'Problems historical and numismatic in the reign of Augustus', Spijkerman, A. The Coins of the Decapolis and Provincia Arabia. Jerusalem, 1978 Sutherland, С. H. V. Sutherland, С. H. V. Sutherland, С. H. V. The Emperor and the Coinage. Julio-Claudian Studies. London, 1976 Sutherland, С. H. V. Sutherland, С. H. V. Sutherland, С. H. V. and Kraay, С. M. Catalogue of the Coins of the Roman Empire in the Ashmolean Museum 1. Oxford, 1975 Sydenham, E. A. The Coinage of the Roman Republic. London, 1952 Walker, D. R. The Metrology of the Roman Silver Coinage 1 From Augustus to Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'Image and authority in the coinage of Augustus', Wruck, W. Die syrische Provin\ialpragung von Augustus bis Traian. Stuttgart, 1931 Zehnacker, H. Tensions et contradictions dans Fempire au 1" siecle: les temoignages numismatiques (Entretiens Hardt 33) 321-57. Vandoeuvres- Geneva, 1987 4. papyrology Badian, E. 'Notes on the Laudatio of Agrippa', Balconi, C. 'Documenti greci e latini d'Egitto di eta augustea', Bowman, A. K.'Papyri and Roman imperial history, 1960-1975',/RĴ66 (1976) 153-74 Fink, R. O., Hoey, A. S. and Snyder, W. F. 'The Gray, E. W. 'The imperium of M. Agrippa, a note on P. Colon, inv. No. 4701', Gronewald, M. 'Ein neues Fragment der Laudatio Funebris des Augustus auf Agrippa', Haslam, M. W. 'Augustus' funeral oration for Agrippa', Koenen, L. 'Die laudatio funebris des Augustus fur Agrippa auf einem neuen Papyrus (P. Colon, inv. Nr. 4701)', Lewis, N. 'P. Oxy. 2820. Whose preparations?', Lewis, N. 'P. Oxy. 2820: Gallus ... Vous dites Gallus?' CE 123/124 (1987) 219-22 Lewis, N., Yadin, Y. and Greenfield, J. C. (eds.) The Documents from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters: Greek Papyri (including Aramaic and Nabatean Signatures and Subscriptions). Jerusalem, 1989 Luppe, W. 'P. Oxy. 2820. Ein Bericht iiber die politische Tatigkeit des Cornelius Gallus?', Masada I: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963-196}. Final Reports. The Aramaic and Hebrew Ostraca and Jar Inscriptions, edited by Y. Yadin and J. Naveh. Jerusalem, 1989 Masada II: The Yigael Yadin Excavations /963-196}. Final Reports. The Latin and Greek Documents, edited by H. M. Cotton and J. Geiger. Jerusalem, 1989 Mitteis, L. and Wilcken, U. Montevecchi, O. Musurillo, H. The Acts of the Pagan Martyrs: Acta Alexandrinorum. Oxford, 1954 Musurillo, H. (ed.) Reinhold, M. 'Marcus Agrippa's son-in-law, P. Quinctilius Varus', Sherk, R. K. 'The last two lines of the Laudatio Funebris for Agrippa', Skeat, Т. C. 'The Augustan era in Egypt. A note on P. Oxy. xii 1453', Tcherikover, V. A., Fuks, A., Stern, M. Treu, M. 'Nach Kleopatras Tod (P. Oxy. 2820)', Wilcken, U. Griechische Ostraka aus Agypten und Nubien. 2 vols. Leipzig- Berlin, 1899 C. POLITICAL HISTORY i. the triumviral period and the reign of augustus Adcock, F. E. 'The interpretation of Adcock, F. E. 'A note on Res gestae diui Augusti 34, 3', JRS 42 (1952) 10-12 Aigner, H. Die Soldaten als Machtfaktor in der ausgehenden Republik. Innsbruck, 1974 Alfoldy, G. 'Die Ablehnung der Diktatur durch Augustus', Andre, J. M. Мёсёпе. Essai de biographic spirituelle. Paris, 1967 Andre, J. M. Le siecle d'Auguste. Paris, 1974 Andre, J. M. 'Мёсёпе ĉcrivain', Anello, P. 'La fine del secondo triumvirato', ФМа? Arangio-Ruiz, V. 'La legislazione', in с 12л, 101—46 Astin, A. E. 'Augustus and Atkinson, К. M. T. 'The governors of the province Asia in the reign of Augustus', Atkinson, К. M. T. 'Constitutional and legal aspects of the trials of Marcus Primus and Varro Murena', Badian, E. 'The quaestorship of Tiberius Nero', Badian, E. '"Crisis theories" and the beginning of the principate', in a 107A, 18—41 Badot, P. 'A propos de la conspiration de M. Egnatius Rufus', Barnes, T. D. 'The date of Herod's death', Barnes, T. D. 'Julia's child', Bastomsky, S. J. 'Proculeius and Augustus. A note on a friendship turned sour', Bauman, R. A. 'Tiberius and Murena', Bauman, R. A. 'Tribunician sacrosanctity in 44, 36 and 3 5 B.C.', Benario, H. W. 'Augustus Princeps', Bengtson, J. Zum Partherfeld^ug des Antonius, SB AW I (1974) 1-48 Bengtson, H. Beranger, J. 'A propos d'un imperium infinitum: histoire et stylistique', Beranger, J. 'La democratic sous l'empire romain: les operations electorates de la Tabula Hebana et la "destinatio"', Beranger, J. 'L'accession d'Auguste et l'ideologie du "priuatus'", Beranger, J. 'Diagnostic du principat: l'empereur romain, chef de parti', REL 37 (1959) 151-70 ( = с 27A, 259-80) Beranger, J. 'Imperium, expression et conception du pouvoir imperial', Bicknell, P. J. 'Caesar, Antony, Cleopatra, and Cyprus', Birch, R. A. 'The correspondence of Augustus. Some notes on Suetonius, Birch, R. A. 'The settlement of 26 June a.d. 4 and its aftermath', Bleicken, J. Boatwright, M. T. 'The Pomerial extension of Augustus', Bosworth, A. B. 'Asinius Pollio and Augustus', Bosworth, A. B. 'Augustus and August: some pitfalls of historical fiction', Botermann, H. Die Soldaten und die romische Politik in der Zeit von Caesars Tod bis ^ur Begrŭndung des Zweiten Triumvirats (Zetemata 46). Munich, 1968 Boucher, J. P. Caius Cornelius Gallus. Paris, 1966 Bowersock, G. W. 'Augustus on Aegina', Bowersock, G. W. Augustus and the Greek World. Oxford, 1965 Bowersock, G. W. 'Augustus and the East: the succession', in с 176, 169-88 Braunert, H. 'Zum Eingangssatz der (1974) 545-58 ( = c 44. 238-54) Braunert, H. 'Die Gesellschaft des romischen Reiches im Urteil des Augustus', in а 55л, 9-54 ( = c 44, 255-93) Braunert, H. 'Omnium prouinciarum populi Romani ... fines auxi: ein Entwurf, Chiron 7 (1977) 207-17 ( = c 44, 294-304) Braunert, H. Politik, Recht und Gesellschaft in der griechiscb-romiscben Antike, Gesammeite Aufsat^c und Reden. Stuttgart, 1980 Bretone, M. 'II "diritto antico" nella polemica antiaugustea', j Bringmann, K. ' Brunt, P. A. 'The lex Valeria Cornelia', Brunt, P. A. '"Augustus" e la "respublica"' in а 82A, 256-44 (in English) Buchheim, H. Die Orientpolitik des Triumvirn M. Antonius. Heidelberg, i960 Carcopino, J. Passion et politique che% les Ce'sars. Paris, 1958 Carter, J. M. The Battle of Actium. The Rise and Triumph of Augustus Caesar. New York, 1970 5 2. Cartledge, P. 'The second thoughts of Augustus on the res publica in 28/ 7 b.c.', Castritius, H. 54. Ceau§escu. G. 'Augustus, der "Hellenisator" der Welt (Kommentar zu Philo, Legatio ad Gaium, 145-147)', 5 5. Ceaujescu, P. 'Das programmatische Edikt des Augustus (Suet. Cerami, P. 'Ideologic, terminologie e realta costituzionale', in а 82A, 66-73 Chamoux, F. 'Gaius Caesar', Champlin, E. 'The testament of Augustus', Charbonnel, N. 'A propos de l'inscripdon de К у me et des pouvoirs d'Auguste au lendemain du reglement de 27 av. п. e.', Charlesworth, M. P. 'Some fragments of the propaganda of Mark Antony', Chilver, G. E. F. 'Augustus and the Roman constitution 1939-50', Christ, K. 'Zur Beurteilung der Politik des Augustus', Consigliere, L. 'Slogans' monetarie e poesia augustea. Genoa, 1978 Corbett, J. H. 'The succession policy of Augustus', Corte, F. della. 'La breve praefectura urbis di Messalla Corvino', ФМа$ Xapiv (Miscellanea in onore di Eugenio Manni) 11 Rome, 1980. 667-77 Crook, J. A. 'Some remarks on the Augustan constitution', Crook, J. A. 'A legal point about Mark Antony's will', Csillag, P. 'Das Eherecht des augusteischen Zeitalters', Cuff, P. J. 'The settlement of 23 в.с. A note', Daly, L. J. 'Varro Murena, cos. 23 B.C., [magistratu motu]s est', Daly, L. J. 'The report of Varro Murena's death (Dio 54.3.5). Its mistranslation and his assassination', Daly, L. J. 'Augustus and the murder of Varro Murena (cos. 23 b.c.)', Daly, L. J. and Reiter, W. L. 'The Gallus-affair and Augustus' De Coninck, L. Degrassi, A. 'I nomi dell'imperatore Augusto: il "praenomen imperatoris"', Deininger, J. 'Von der Republik zur Monarchic: die Ursprunge der Herrschertitulatur des Prinzipats', Detweiler, R. 'Historical perspectives on the death of Agrippa Postumus', Dominguez-Sanchez, B. Dorey, T. A. 'Adultery and propaganda in the early Roman empire', Earl, D. Eck, W. 'Augustus' administrative Reformen: Pragmatismus oder systematisches Planen?', Erkell, H. Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna. Lateinische Wortstudien. Gothenburg, 1952 Espinosa Ruiz, U. Debate Agrippa-Mecenas en Dion Cassio. Madrid, 1982 Fabre, G. and Roddaz, J. M. 'Recherches sur la familia de M. Agrippa', Ferrabino, A. 'L'imperatore Cesare Augusto', in с 12A, 1—59 Ferrill, A. 'Prosopography and the last years of Augustus', Ferrill, A. 'Augustus and his daughter: a modern myth', in A 20, и 3 3 2—46 Flach, D. 'Destinatio und nominatioim friihen Prinzipat', Francisci, P. de 'La costituzione Augustea', in с 12л, 61-100 Frei-Stolba, R. Untersuchungen %u den Wahlen in der romischen Kaiser^eit. Zurich, 1967 Gabba, E. 'The Perusine War and Triumviral Italy', Gabba, E. 'Sesto Pompeo a Naulocho', Gardthausen, V. Geiger, J. 'An overlooked item of the war of propaganda between Octavian and Antony', Girardet, К. M. 'Der Rechtsstatus Oktavians im Jahre 32 V. Chr.', ('99°) 3"~5° Girardet, К. M. 'Die Entmachung des Konsulates im tFbergang von der Republik zur Monarchie', Giua, M. A. 'Augusto nel libro 56 della storia romana di Cassio Dione', Grant, M. 'The Augustan "constitution"', Grant, M. Gray, E. W. 'The crisis in Rome at the beginning of 32 в.с.', Grenade, P. Essai sur les origines duprincipat. Paris, 1961 Griffin, J. 'Propertius and Antony', Griffiths, J. G. 'The death of Cleopatra VII', Grimal, P. 'Le promenade d'Evandre et Enee', Grimal, P. 'Enee a Rome et le triomphe d'Octave', Hadas, M. Hallett, J. P. 'Perusinae glandes and the changing image of Augustus', A]AH 2 (1977) 151-71 no. Hammond, M. hi. Hammond, M. 'Hellenistic influences on the structure of the Augustan principate', Hammond, M. 'The sincerity of Augustus', Hanell, K. 'Kaiser Augustus', Hanslik, R. 'Horaz und Varro Murena', Hanslik, R. 'M. Vipsanius Agrippa', RE ix, 1 (1961) 1226-75 Hanson, A. E. 'Juliopolis, Nicopolis, and the Roman camp', Herrmann, P. Heuss, A. 'Zeitgeschichte als Ideologic. Komposition und Gedankenfuhrung der Res gestae diui Augusti', in a 5 5 a, 55-95 Hohl, E. 'Augustus', Hornblower, S. 'Another suggestion about 'Varrones Egnatios Iullos' (Tac. Ann. i 10)', Horsfall, N. 'Labeo and Capito', Huzar, E. G. Instinsky, H. U. 'Consensus uniuersorum', Instinsky, H. U. 'Augustus und die Adoption des Tiberius', Jameson, S. '22 or 23?', Jameson, S. 'Augustus and Agrippa Postumus', Jeffreys, R. 'The date of Messalla's death', Johnson, J. R. 'The authenticity and validity of Antony's will', 494-503 Jones, A. H.M. 'The imperium of Augustus', Jones, A. H. M. 'The censorial powers of Augustus', in a 47, 19-26 Jones, A. H. M. Judge, E. 'Res publica restituta. A modern illusion?', in Keddie, J. N. 'The identity of Aelius Gallus (Tacitus, Kennedy, D. F. Review of Woodman and West 1984 (в 204), Kienast, D. 'Horaz und die erste Krise des Prinzipats', Kienast, D. Kienast, D. ' Knibbe, D. 'Quandoque quis trium virorum rei publicae constituendae', Konig, I. 'Der doppelte Geburtstag des Augustus: 23, 24 September (Suet. Aug. 51, i [j/V])', Kraft, K. 'Zu Sueton Kromayer, J. Die rechtlkhe Begriindung des Prinzipats. Marburg, 1888 Kromayer, J. 'Kleine Forschungen zur Geschichte des zweiten Triumvirats, IV: Der Partherzug des Antonius', Kromayer, J. 'Kleine Forschungen zur Geschichte des zweiten Triumvirats, VI: Die Vorgeschichte des Kriegs von Acdum', Kromayer, J. 'Der Feldzug von Actium und der sogenannte Verrath der Cleopatra', Kunkel, W. 'Uber das Wesen des augusteischen Prinzipats', Lacey, W. K. 'Octavian in the senate, January 27 B.C.', Lacey, W. K. 'Summi fastigii uocabulum. The story of a title', 28-34 Lacey, W. K. '2 в.с. and Julia's adultery', Lacey, W. K. '19 в.с.', Lacey, W. K. 'Augustus and the senate, 23 в.с.', Laet, S. J. de 'Oŭ en est le probleme de la juridiction imperiale?', 15 2. Last, H. M. Last, H. M. 'On the "tribunicia potestas" of Augustus', R/L 84 (1951) 93-110 ( = c 208, 241-6, in German) Leon, E. F. 'Scribonia and her daughters', Levick, В. M. 'Drusus Caesar and the adoptions of a.d. 4', Levick, В. M. 'The beginning of Tiberius' career', Levick, В. M. 'Abdication and Agrippa Postumus', Levick, В. M. 'Atrox fortuna', CR 22 (1972) 309-11 Levick, В. M. 'Tiberius' retirement to Rhodes in 6 в.с.', Levick, В. M. 'Julians and Claudians', Levick, В. M. 'Primus, Murena, and Levick, В. M. 'The fall of Julia the Younger', Liebeschuetz, J. H. W. G. 'The settlement of 27 в.с.', in a 20, iv 345-65 Linderski, J. 'Rome, Aphrodisias and the Rer Linderski, J. 'Julia in Regium', Mackie, N. K. 'R« Magdelain, A. Auctoritas Principis. Paris, 1947 Malcovati, E. 'II nuovo frammento augusteo della Laudatio Agrippae', Malitz, J. 'Caesars Partherkrieg', Manfredini, A. D. 'Ottaviano l'Egitto i senatori e l'oracolo', Mannsperger, D. 'Apollo gegen Dionysos', Martin, P. M. 'A propos de l'exil d'Ovide et de la succession d'Auguste', Maschkin, N. A. Zwischen Republik und Kaiserreich. Ursprung und so^ialer Charakter des augusteischen Principals (transl. by M. Brandt). Leipzig, 1954 Millar, F. 'Two Augustan notes', CR 18 (1968) 263—6 Millar, F. 'Triumvirate and principate', Millar, F. and Segal, E. (eds.) Mitchell, T. N. 'The inevitability of the Principate', Nenci, G. 'Gaio e Lucio Cesari nella politica Augustea', Newman, J. K. Nicolet, C. 'Augustus, government and the propertied classes', in с 176, 89-128 Oliver, J. H. 'On the Hellenic policy of Augustus and Agrippa in 27 в.с.', Orestano, R. 'Rivisitazione di Augusto', in а 82А, 270-316 Paladini, M. L. 'I poteri di Tiberio Cesare dal 4 al 14 d.C.', in Palmer, R. E. A. 'Octavian's first attempt to restore the constitution (36 b.c.)', Pani, M. Tenden^e politiche della successione alprincipato di Augusta. Bari, '979 Pelling, С. B. R. 'Puppes sinistrorsum citae', Piganiol, A. 'Les pouvoirs constitutionnels et le principat d'Auguste', Polverini, L. 'L'aspetto sociale del passaggio dalla repubblica al principato', Pouilloux, J. 'Deux amis: le Stratege Diogenes fils de Noumenios et le Gymnasiarche Stasicrates fils de Stasicrates', Raaflaub, K. A. 'The political significance of Augustus' military reforms', in Hanson, W. S. and Keppie, L. J. F. (eds.) Raaflaub, K. and Toher, M. Between Republic and Empire: Interpretations of Augustus and his Principate. Berkeley, 1990 Raepsaet-Charlier, M.-Th. 'Clarissima femina', Rapke, Т. T. 'Julia and C. Proculeius. A note on Suetonius, Rapke, Т. T. 'Varrones Egnatios Iullos: Tacitus Annals 110,4', Rapke, Т. T. 'Some unexpected consulships', Reinhold, M. 'Augustus' conception of himself', Rich, J. W. 'Agrippa and the nobles. A note on Dio 54.29.6', Rieks, R. 'Sebasta und Aktia', Roddaz, J.-M. 'Un theme de la "propagande" augusteenne. L'image populaire d'Agrippa', Roddaz, J.-M. Roddaz, J.-M. 'Lucius Antonius', Rowland, R. J. 'The conspiracy of Varro Murena', C/62 (1966/7) 362-3 Ruikes, P. W. Samenyweringen en Intriges tegen Octavianus Augustus Princeps (Diss., Nijmegen, 1966). Maastricht, 1976 Salmon, E. T. 'The evolution of Augustus' principate', Salmon, E. T. 'Augustus the patrician', in Dunston, A. J. (ed.) Samuel, A. E. 'The joint regency of Cleopatra and Caesarion', Scheid, J. 'Scribonia Caesaris et les Julio-Claudiens. Problemes de vocabulaire de parente', Schmitthenner, W. (ed.) Schumacher, L. 'Die imperatorischen Akklamationen der Triumvirn und die Auspicia des Augustus', Schwartz, J. 'Recherches sur les dernieres annees du regne d'Auguste (414)', Scott, K. 'Octavian's propaganda and Antony's Scott, K. 'The political propaganda of 44-30 в.с.', Shotter, D. C. A. 'Julians, Claudians, and the accession of Tiberius', Siber, H. Das Fiihreramt des Augustus. AS AW 44, no. 2. Leipzig, 1940 Signon, H. Agrippa. Freund und Mitregent des Augustus. Frankfurt, 1978 Simpson, C. J. 'The change in Sirago, V. A. IIprincipato di Augusto: concentra^ione diproprieta. Bari, 1978 Sirago, V. A. 'L'aspetto economico dell'opera di Augusto', Skeat, Т. C. 'The last days of Cleopatra', Starr, C. G. 'How did Augustus stop the Roman revolution?', Stockton, D. L. 'Primus and Murena', Stockton, D. L. 'Augustus sub specie aeternitatis', Thought 55. 216 (1980) 5-17 Suerbaum, W. 'Merkwiirdige Geburtstage. Der nicht-existierende Geburtstag des M. Antonius, der doppelte Geburtstag des Augustus, der neue Geburtstag der Livia und der vorzeidge Geburtstag des alteren Drusus', Sumner, G. V. 'Germanicus and Drusus Caesar', Sumner, G. V. 'Varrones Murenae', Swan, M. 'The consular fasti of 23 в.с. and the conspiracy of Varro Murena', Swan, M.' Syme, R. 'Imperator Caesar: a study in nomenclature', Syme, R. 'The crisis of 2 в.с.', Syme, R. 'Some imperatorial salutations', Syme, R. 'Neglected children on the Tarn, W. W. 'The Battle of Actium', Tarn, W. W. 'Alexander Helios and the Golden Age', Thibault, J. C. Tibiletti, G. Principe e magistrati repubblicani. Rome, 1953 Timpe, D. 'Die Bedeutung der Schlacht von Carrhae', Valvo, A. 'M. Valerio MessallaCorvino negli studi piu recenti', Vassileiou, A. 'Sur les dates de naissance de Drusus, de Caius et Lucius Cesar', Vittinghoff, F. R Vittinghoff, F. Volkmann, H. 'Mos maiorum als Grundzug des augusteischen Prinzipats', in Berve, H. (ed.) Wallmann, P. 'Zur Zusammensetzung und Haltung des Senats im Jahre 32 v. Chr.', Wallmann, P. Triumviri reipublicae constituendae. Frankfurt, 1989 Watkins, O. D. 'Horace, Odes 2.10 and Licinius Murena', Weigel, R. D. 'Augustus' relations with the Aemilii Lepidi: persecution and patronage', R Weller, J. A. 'Tacitus and Tiberius' Rhodian exile', Welwei, K. W. 'Augustus als vindex libertatis. Freiheitsideologie und Propaganda im frŭhen Prinzipat', Wickert, L. 'Der Prinzipat und die Freiheit', in Wieacker, F. 'Zur Verfassungsstruktur des augusteischen Prinzipats', (Festschr. Grewe) 639-53. Baden-Baden, 1981 Wilinski, A. and Kurylowicz, M. 'Dalla repubblica al principato', in A 82A, 217—22 Williams, G. 'Poetry in the moral climate of Augustan Rome', Yavetz, Z. Julius Caesar and his Public Image. London, 1983 2. the expansion of the empire, 43 b.c.—a.d. 69 Barnes, T. D. 'The Victories of Augustus', Braund, D. Rome and the Friendly King: the Character of Client Kingship. London—Canberra-New York, 1984 Braunert, H. 'Omnium provinciarum populi Romani fines аихГ, Chiron 7 (1977) 207-17 Brunt, P. A. Review of Meyer, H. Brunt, P. A. Burstein, S. M. 'Cornelius Gallus and Aethiopia', AHB 2 (1988) 16-20 Christ, K. 'Zur romischen Okkupation der Zentralalpen und des nordlichen Alpenvorlandes', Christ, K. 'Zur augusteischen Germanienpolitik', Deman, A. 'Materiaux et reflexions pour servir a une etude du developpement et du sous-developpement dans les provinces de l'empire romain', Desanges, J. 'Le triomphe de Cornelius Balbus', R Desanges, J. 'Les relations de l'empire rornain avec Г Afrique nilotique et erythreene, d'Auguste a Probus', Dobias, J. 'King Maroboduus as a politician', Doblhofer, E. 'Horaz und Augustus', Dyson, S. L. 'Native revolt-patterns in the Roman Empire', 3 o975) ч8"75 Fears, J. R. 'The cult of virtues and Roman imperial ideology', Fears, J. R. 'The theology of victory at Rome: approaches and problems', Griffin, J. 'Augustus and the poets: "Caesar qui cogere posset"', in с 176, 189-218 Grosso, F. 'La Media Atropatene e la politica di Augusto', Gruen, E. S. 'Augustus and the ideology of war and peace', in Grummond, N. de. 'Pax Augusta and the Horae on the Ara Pacis Augustae', A]A 94 (1990) 663—77 Harris, W. V. War and Imperialism in Republican Rome, 327-70 в. с. Oxford, '979 Hartley, B. and Wacher, J. (eds.) Hoffman, M. 'Ptolemaios von Mauretania', RE xxiii, 3 (1959) 1780—82 Horrent, J. 'Nota sobre el desarrollo de la guerra Cantabra del ano 26 a.C.', Huzar, E. 'Augustus, heir of the Ptolemies', Isaac, B. The Limits of Empire: the Roman Army in the East. Oxford, 1990. 2nd edn. 1992 Jal, P. 'L'imperialisme romain: observations sur les temoignages litteraires latins de la fin de la Republique romaine', Kneissl, P. 'Zur Entstehung der Provinz Noricum', Koestermann, E. 'Der pannonisch-dalmatische Krieg 6-9 n. Chr.', Koestermann, E. 'Die Feldzuge des Germanicus, 14-16 n. Chr.', (1957)429-79 Letta, C. 'La dinastiadei Cozii e la romanizzazionedelle Alpioccidentali', Luce, T. J. 'Livy, Augustus, and the Forum Augustum', in с 191, 123-38 Magie, D. 'Augustus' War in Spain', Mann, J.C. 'The frontiers of the Principate', Martino, E. Roma contra Cantabrosу Astures. Nueva lectura de las fuentes. Santander, 1982 Meyer, H. Die Aussenpolitik des Augustus und die augusteische Dichtung (Kolner hist. Abhandlungen 5). Cologne, 1961 Mocsy, A. 'Der vertuschte Dakerkrieg des M. Licinius Crassus', Momigliano, A.' Moynihan, R. 'Geographical mythology and Roman imperial ideology', in Negev, A. 'The Nabataeans and the Provincia Arabia', Ober, J. 'Tiberius and the political testament of Augustus', Oldfather, W. A. and Canter, H. V. The Defeat of Varus and the German Frontier Policy of Augustus. Urbana, IL, 1915 Pani, M. Roma e i re dOriente da Augusto a Tiberio. Bari, 1972 Pavis d'Escurac, H. 'L'imperialisme romain en Mauretanie de 33 av. J.- C. a 40 ap. J.-C.', Rachet, M. Rome et les Berberes. Unprobleme militaire d Auguste a Dioctitien. Brussels, 1970 Raschke, M. 'New studies in Roman commerce with the East', Ritter, H. W. Romer, F. E. 'A numismatic date for the departure of C. Caesar', Romer, F. E. 'Gaius Caesar's military diplomacy in the East', Romer, F. E. 'A case of Client Kingship', Santos, F. D. 'Die Integration Nord- und Nordwestspaniens als romische Provinz in der Reichspolitik des Augustus. Von der konsularischen zur hispanischen Ara', Schmitthenner, W. 'Octavians militarische Unternehmungen in den Jahren 35-33 v. Chr.', Schmitthenner, W. 'Augustus' spanischer Feldzug und der Kampf urn den Prinzipat', Schmitthenner, W. 'Rome and India. Aspects of universal history during the principate', Scholz, U. W. 'Herculis ritu - Augustus - consule Planco', 123-37 Seager, R. 'The return of the standards in 20 в.с.', Seager, R. Sidebotham, S. E. Roman Economic Policy in the Erythra Thalassa, }0 b.c.- a.d. 217 (Mnemosyne supplement 91). Leiden, 1986 Sidebotham, S. E. 'Aelius Gallus and Arabia', Syme, R. 'The northern frontiers under Augustus', 313. Syme, R. 'The Spanish war of Augustus', Telschow, K. 'Die Abberufung des Germanicus (16 n. Chr.). Ein Beispiel fur die Kontinuitat romischer Germanienpolitik von Augustus zu Tiberius', in a 5 5 a, 148-82 Timpe, D. 'Drusus' Umkehr an der Elbe', Timpe, D. 'Zur Geschichte und Uberlieferung der Okkupation Germaniens unter Augustus', Timpe, D. Der Triumph des Germanicus. Untersuchungen den Feld^ugen der Jahre 14—16 n. Chr. in Germanien. Bonn, 1968 Timpe, D. Timpe, D. 'Zur augusteischen Partherpolitik zwischen 30 und 20 v. Chr.', Timpe, D. 'Zur Geschichte der Rheingrenze zwischen Caesar und Drusus', in A 5 5 a, 124-47 Vulic, N. 'The Illyrian war of Octavian', Welwei, K. W. 'Romische Weltherrschaftsideologie und augusteische Germanienpolitik', Whittaker, C. R. Williams, G. 'Did Maecenas "fall from favor"? Augustan literary patronage', in с 191, 258-75 Wissman, H. von. 'Die Geschichte des Sabaerreichs und der Feldzug des Aefius Gallus', Ziegler, F. H. Die Be^iehungen %a>ischen Rom und dem Partherreich. Ein Beitrag ^ur Geschichte des Volkerrechtes. Wiesbaden, 1964 3. the julio-claudians and the year a.d. 69 Alfoldy, G. 'La politique provinciale de Tibere', Ameling, W. 'Tyrannen und schwangere Frauen', Baldwin, B. 'Executions under Claudius', Balsdon, J. P. V. D. Barrett, A. A. 'Chronological errors in Dio's account of the Claudian invasion', Barrett, A. A. Caligula: the Corruption of Power. London, 1989 Brunt, P. A. 'The revolt of Vindex and the fall of Nero', (1959) 531-59 ( = a i2> 9-3*) Brunt, P. A. 'Lex de Imperio Vespasiani', Burr, V. Tiberius Iulius Alexander. Bonn, 1955 Ceau§escu, P. 'Caligula et le legs d'Auguste', Chandler, D. C. 'Quaestor Ostiensis', Chilver, G. E. F. 'The army in politics, a.d. 68-70', Cizek, E. L'Epoque de Neron et ses controverses idiologiques. Leiden, 1972 Cizek, E. 'L'experience nĉronienne', Daly, J. L. 'Verginius at Vesontio', Ehrhardt, C. 'Messalina and the succession to Claudius', Gallivan, P. A. 'Some comments on the Gallivan, P. A. 'The Gallivan, P. A. 'The fasti for the reign of Gaius', Gallivan, P. A. 'The fasti for a.d. 70-96', Gallotta, B. Gapp, K. S. 'The universal famine under Claudius', Gordon, A. E. Greenhalgh, P. A. L. Hennig, D. 'Zur Agyptenreise des Germanicus', Hennig, D. L. Hind, J. G. F. 'The middle years of Nero's reign', 37 (1978) 874-93 Houston, G. W. 'Tiberius on Capri', Jakobson, A. and Cotton, H. M. 'Caligula's recusatio imperii', Jones, B. W. Jones, B. W. 'Agrippina and Vespasian', Jung, H. 'Die Thronerhebung des Claudius', Koestermann, E. 'Die Feldzŭge des Germanicus 14 — 16 n. Chr.', Koestermann, E. 'Die Mission des Germanicus im Orient', Kokkinos, N. Antonia Augusta: Portrait of a Roman Lady. London, 1992 Levick, В. M. 'Imperial control of elections under the early principate', Levick, В. M. Levick, В. M. 'Antiquarian or revolutionary? Claudius Caesar's conception of his principate', Levick, В. M. 'Nero's Quinquennium', in a 20, in, 211-25 Levick, В. M. 'The Levick, В. M. 'L. Verginius Rufus and the four emperors', Levick, В. M. 'The politics of the early Principate', in a 108, 45-68 Levick, В. M. McAlindon, D. 'Senatorial opposition to Claudius and Nero', McAlindon, D. 'Claudius and the senators', Meise, E. Untersuchungen Geschichte der Ĵulisch-Claudischen Dynastie. Munich, 1969 Moeller, W. O. 'The riot of a.d. 59 at Pompeii', Momigliano, A. Murison, C. L. 'Some Vitellian dates', Murison, C. L. 'Galba in Germany a.d. 43', Murray, O. 'The Quinquennium Neronis and the Stoics', Nicols, J. Vespasian and the Partes Flavianae. Wiesbaden, 1978 Oliver, J. H. 'The descendants of Asinius Pollio', Oost, S. J. 'The career of M. Antonius Pallas', Orth, W. Die Provimjalpolitik des Tiberius. Munich, 1970 Pippidi, D. M. Raaflaub, K. A. 'Grundzŭge, Ziele und Ideen der Opposition gegen die Kaiser im 1. Jh. n. Chr.: Versuch einer Standortbestimmung', Reece, B. R. 'The date of Nero's death', Rogers, R. S. Roper, Т. K. 'Nero, Seneca and Tigellinus', Sancery, J. Schmitt, H. H. 'DerPannonische Aufstandd. J. 14 n. Chr.', Seager, R. Shotter, D. C. A. 'Tiberius and Asinius Gallus', Simpson, C. J. 'The "conspiracy" of a.d. 39', in a 20 n, 347-66 Swan, M. 'Josephus, A. J. XIX 251—252: Opposition to Caius and Claudius', Syme, R. 'Piso Frugi and Crassus Frugi', Syme, R. 'Domitius Corbulo', Syme, R. 'History or biography: the case of Tiberius Caesar', Syme, R. 'The march of Mucianus', Syme, R. 'Partisans of Galba', Syme, R. 'The marriage of Rubellius Blandus', Timpe, D. 'Romische Geschichte bei Flavius Josephus', Townend, G. 'Some Flavian connections', Turner, E. G. 'Tiberius Julius Alexander', Urban, R. Wallace, K. G. 'The Flavii Sabini in Tacitus', Wankenne, J. 'Encore et toujours Neron', Warmington, В. H. Waters, К. H. 'The character of Domitian', Weinrib, E. J. 'The family connections of M. Livius Drusus Libo', Wellesley, K. Wellesley, K. 'What happened on the Capitol in December a.d. 69?', A]AH 6 (1981) 166-90 Wilkes, J. J. 'A note on the mutiny of the Pannonian legions in a.d. 14', 02 56 (1963) 268-71 D. GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION i. the imperial court Alfoldi, A. 'Die Ausgestaltung des monarchischen Zeremoniells am romischen Kaiserhofe', Alfoldi, A. 'Insignien und Tracht der romischen Kaiser', Alfoldi, A. Die monarchische Repriisentation im romischen Kaiserreiche. 3rdedn. Darmstadt, 1970 Amarelli, F. Bang, M. 'Die Freunde und Begleiter der Kaiser', in a 30, iv, 56-76. Leipzig, 1921 Boulvert, G. Esclaves et affranchis imperiaux sous le haut-empire romain, role politique et administratif. Naples, 1970 Boulvert, G. Domestique etfonctionnaire sous le haut-empire romain: la condition de Faffranchi et de I'esclave. Paris, 1974 Burton, G. Review of Boulvert 1970 (d 6) and 1974 (d Chantraine, H. Freigelassene und Sklaven im Dienst der romischen Kaiser: Studien ihrer Nomenklatur. Wiesbaden, 1967 Crook, J. A. Consilium Principis: Imperial Councils and Counsellors from Augustus to Diocletian. Cambridge, 1955 Frezouls, E. 'Les Julio-Claudiens et le Palatium', in Levy, E. (ed.) Herman, G. 'The "friends" of the early hellenistic rulers: servants or officials', Hirschfeld, O. Die Kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diocletian. 2nd edn. Berlin, 1912 Millar, F. 'Epictetus and the imperial Millar, F. 'Emperors at work', Mooren, L. La hierarchie du cour ptolemaique. Louvain, 1977 Parsi, B. Designation et Investiture de FEmpereur Romain. Paris, 1963 Pavis d'Escurac, H. 'La Rogers, R. S. 'The emperor's displeasure - amicitiam renuntiare', Turcan, R. Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'Civilis princeps: between citizen and king', Weaver, P. R. C. Familia Caesaris. A Social Study of the Emperor's Freedmen and Slaves. Cambridge, 1972 2. the senate and the 2 3. Alfoldy, G. 'Die Stellung der Ritter in der Fiihrungsschicht des Imperium Romanum', Bonnefond-Coudry, M. Le senat de la republique romaine de la guerre Bowersock, G. W. 'Roman senators from the Near East', in d 42, 651-68 Brunt, P. A. 'Princeps and equites', Brunt, P. A. 'The role of the senate in the Augustan regime', 423-44 Brunt, P. A. 'The equites in the Late Republic', in a 11, 144—93 Cadoux, T. J. Review of Vitucci, G. R Chastagnol, A. 'Les modes d'acces au senat romain au debut de l'empire. Remarques a propos de la table claudienne de Lyon', Chastagnol, A. 'La naissance de l'ordo senatorius', Chastagnol, A. 'Les senateurs d'origine provinciale sous le regne d'Auguste'. Chastagnol, A. '"Latus clavus" et "adlectio"; l'acces des hommes nouveaux au senat romain sous le haut-empire', (=D 54, i99-27) Chastagnol, A. 'Le laticlave de Vespasien', Chastagnol, A. 'La crise de recrutement senatorial des annees 16—11 av. J.- C.', Demougin, S. Demougin, S. Devreker, J. 'Les orientaux au Senat romain d'Auguste a Trajan', Eck, W. 'Senatorial self-representation: developments in the Augustan period', in с 176, 129-67 Eck, W. 'Die Ausformung der ritterlichen Administration als Antisenatspolitik?', in Ensslin, W. 'Praefectus Praetorio', Epigrafia e ordine senatorio: Attidel Colloquio Internationale AIEGL, Roma, 14-20 Maggio 1981 (ed. Panciera, S.). Rome, 1982 Frei-Stolba, R. Untersuchungen \u den Wahlen in der romischen Kaiser^eit. Zurich, 1967 Halfmann, H. Die Senatoren aus den ostlichen Teilen des Imperium Romanum bis Zum Ende des 2. Jh. n. Chr. (Hypomnemata 58). Gottingen, 1979 Hammond, M. 'Curatores tabularum publicarum', in Jones, L. W. (ed.) Henderson, M. I. 'The establishment of the equester ordo', Jones, A. H. M. 'The elections under Augustus', Laet, S. J. de. De Samenstelling van den romeinschen Senaatgedurende de eerste Eeuw van bet Principaat (28 voor Chr.-68 na Chr.). Antwerp, 1941 Millar, F. 'Some evidence on the meaning of Tacitus, Annals xii. 60', Millar, F. 'The development of jurisdiction by imperial procurators: further evidence', Morris, J. 'Leges annales under the Principate, 1. Legal and constitutional', Nicolet, C. j 3. Nicolet, C. 'Le cens senatorial sous la republique et sous Auguste',/RĴ 66 (1976) 20—38. (Repr. with revisions in d 54, 143—74) Nicolet, C. (ed.) Pavis d'Escurac, H. La Prefecture de I'annone: service administratif imperial tf Auguste a Constantin. Rome, 1976 Pflaum, H.-G. Les procurateurs iquestres sous le haut-empire romain. Paris, 1950 Pflaum, H.-G. 'Procurator', Pflaum, H.-G. Abrigi des procurateurs iquestres. Paris, 1974 Pflaum, H.-G. Les carrieres procuratoriennes iquestres sous le Haut-Empire Romain. 3 vols. Paris, 1960-1, with Supplement. Paris, 1982 Pistor, H.-H. 'Prinzeps und Patriziat in der Zeit von Augustus bis Commodus'. Diss., Freiburg, 1965 Raepsaet-Charlier, M. T. Prosopographie des femmes de I'ordre senatorial. Louvain, 1987 Sailer, R. P. 'Patronage and promotion in equestrian careers', Sattler, P. Augustus und der Senat. Untersuchungen \ur romischen Innenpolitik Zwischen jo und 17 v. Chr. Gottingen, i960 Shatzman, I. Sherwin-White, A. N. 'Procurator Augusti', Stein, A. Syme, R. 'Who was Decidius Saxa?', Syme, R. 'Caesar, the senate and Italy', Syme, R. 'Who was Vedius Pollio?' Syme, R. Syme, R. 'The sons of Piso the Pontifex', Syme, R. 'Clues to testamentary adoption', Syme, R. 'Marriage ages for Roman senators', Syme, R. 'Paullus the censor', Szramkiewicz, R. Talbert, R. J. A. 'Augustus and the senate', Talbert, R. J. A. Talbert, R. J. A. 'Commodus as diplomat in an extract from the acta senatus', Thompson, D. L. 'The meetings of the Roman senate on the Palatine', Wiseman, T. P. 'The definition of "Eques Romanus" in the late Republic and early Empire', Wiseman, T. P. Wiseman, T. P. 'Legendary genealogies in late Republican Rome', 3. provincial administration Abbott, F. F. and Johnson, A. C. Badian, E. Publicans and Sinners. Private Enterprise in the Service of the Roman Republic. Ithaca, 1972 Braunert, H. 'Der romische Provinzialzensus und der Schatzungsbericht des Lukas-Evangeliums', Brunt, P. A. 'Charges of provincial maladministration under the early Principate', Brunt, P. A. 'Procuratorial jurisdiction', Burton, G. P. 'Proconsuls, assizes and the administration of justice under the Empire', Burton, G. P. 'The issuing of mandata to proconsuls and a new inscription from Cos', Cardinali, G. 'Amministrazione territoriale e finanziaria', in с 12л, 161-94 Deininger, J. Die Provin%iallandtage der romischen Kaiser^eit von Augustus bis %um Ende des dritten Jahrhunderts n. Chr. ( Vestigia 6). Munich, 1965 Galsterer, H. 'La loi municipale des romains: chimere ou rĉalitĉ?' Isaac, B. 'The Decapolis in Syria, a neglected inscription', Jones, A. H. M. The Greek City from Alexander to Justinian. Oxford, 1940 Jones, A. H. M. 'Procurators and prefects in the early empire', in a 47, 115-25 Jones, A. H. M. Laffi, U. Attributio e contributio: problemi del sistema politico-amministrativo dello stato romano. Pisa, 1966 Levick, В. M. The Government of the Roman Empire. London, 1985 Lintott, A. W. Imperium Romanum: Politics and Administration. London, 1993 Millar, F. 'The emperor, the senate and the provinces', Millar, F. 'Empire and city, Augustus to Julian: obligations, excuses, and status', Millar, F. 'State and subject: the impact of monarchy', in с 176, 37-60 Millar, F.' "Senatorial provinces": an institutionalised ghost', Nicolet, C. Tributum: recherches sur la fiscalitidirecte sous la republique romaine. Bonn,1976 Norr, D. Norr, D. 'Die Stadte des Ostens und das Imperium', Purcell, N. 'The arts of Government', in Boardman, J., Griffin, J. and Murray, O. Pflaum, H.-G. 'De nouveau sur les Sherwin-White, A. N. Roman Society and Roman Lav in the New Testament. Oxford, 1963 Thomasson, B. hi. Weaver, P. R. C. 'Freedmen procurators in the imperial administration', 4. the imperial wealth Bellen, H. 'Die "Verstaatlichung" des Privatermogerns der romischen Kaiser im I. Jahrhundert n. Chr.', Bolin, S. State and Currency in the Roman Empire to joo a.d. Stockholm, 1958 Boulvert, G. 'Tacite et le fiscus', Bourne, F. C. The Public Works of the Julio-Claudians and Flavians. Princeton, 1946 Brunt, P. A. 'The fiscus and its development', Brunt, P. A. 'Free labour and public works at Rome', Brunt, P. A. 'The revenues of Rome', review of Neesen 1980 (d i 5 Brunt, P. A. 'Publicans in the Principate', ( = in A 12, ch. 17) Cimma, M. R. Reges socii et amici populi romani. Milan, 1976 Cimma, M. R. Ricerche suite societa di publicani. Milan, 1981 Corbier, M. U Aerarium Saturni et Г Aerarium Militate: administration et prosopographie senatorial. Rome, 1974 12 j. Corbier, M. 'L'aerarium militare', in Corbier, M. 'Fiscalite et depenses locales', in Crawford, D. 'Imperial estates', in a 27, ch. 3 Crawford, M. H. 'Money and exchange in the Roman world', Dodge, H. and Ward-Perkins, B. (eds.) Marble in Antiquity. Collected Papers of J. B. Ward-Perkins. London, 1992 Frank, T. Gabrici, E. 'La monetazione di Augusto', in с 12a 379-404 Garnsey, P., Hopkins, K. and Whittaker, C. R. (eds.) Garzetti, A. 'Aerarium e fiscus sotto Augusto. Storia di una questione in parte di nomi', Goodman, M. 'Nerva, the Hopkins, K. 'Taxes and trade in the Roman empire (200 b.c.-a.d. 400)', Howgego, C. J. 'Coinage and military finance: the imperial bronze coinages of the Augustan east', Howgego, C. J. 'The supply and use of money in the Roman world 200 в.с. to a.d. 300', Jones, A. H. M. 'The aerarium and the fiscus', Jones, A. H. M. 'Taxation in antiquity', in a 48 Kloft, H. Liberalitas Principis. Herkunft und Bedeutung. Cologne, 1970 Laet, S. J. de. 'Note sur l'organisation et la nature juridique de la "uicesima hereditatum"', Laet, S. J. de. Portorium. Etude sur Г organisation douaniere che\ les romains surtout a Fipoque du Haut-Empire. Bruges, 1949 Last, H. M. 'The Le Gall, J. 'Les habitants de Rome et la fiscalite sous le haut-empire', in van Effenterre, H. (ed.) Lo Cascio, E. 'La riforma monetaria di Nerone: l'evidenza dei ripostigli', Lo Cascio, E. 'State and coinage in the late republic and early empire', Lo Cascio, E. 'La struttura fiscale dell'impero romano', in Crawford, M. H. (ed.) MacMullen, R. 'The Roman Emperor's army costs', MacMullen, R. 'Tax-pressure in the Roman empire', Millar, F. 'The fiscus in the first two centuries', Millar, F. 'The aerarium and its officials under the empire', Mitchell, S. 'Imperial building in the eastern Roman provinces', in f 479, 18-25 Neesen, L. Untersuchungen den direkten Staatsabgaben der romischen Kaiser^eit (27 v. Chr—284 n. Chr.). Bonn, 1980 15 2. Noĉ, E. 'La fortuna privata del Principe e il bilancio dello Stato romano: alcune riflessioni', Pflaum, H.-G. 'Essai sur le Cursus Publicus sous le Haut-Empire romain', Rogers, R. S. 'The Roman emperors as heirs and legatees', Rodriguez Alvarez, L. 'Algunas precisiones in materia de impuestos indirectos de la epoca augustea', Thornton, M. K. (ed.) Julio-Claudian Building Programs: A Quantitative Study in Political Management. Wauconda, 1989 Wesener, G. 'Uicesima hereditatum', 5. the army and the navy Adcock, F. E. The Roman Art of War under the Republic. Cambridge, MA, 1940 Alfoldy, G. Romische Heeresgeschichte. Beitrage 1962-8;. Amsterdam, 1987 Bellen, H. Diegermanische Leibwache der romischen Kaiser des julisch-claudischen Houses. Wiesbaden, 1981 Birley, E. B. 'A note on the title Gemina', Birley, E. B. 'Alae and cohortes milliariae', in Birley, E. B. Birley, E. B. Boren, H. C. 'Studies relating to the stipendium militum', Breeze, D. J. 'The organisation of the legion: the First Cohort and the Breeze, D. J. 'The career structure below the centurionate during the Principate', Brisson, J. P. (ed.) Problemes de la guerre a Rome. Paris, 1969 Brunt, P. A. 'Pay and superannuation in the Roman army', Brunt, P. A. 'The army and the land in the Roman Revolution', Brunt, P. A. 'Conscription and volunteering in the Roman imperial army', Campbell, B. 'The marriage of soldiers under the Empire', Campbell, J. B. The Emperor and the Roman Army p b.c.-a.d. 2jj. Oxford, 1984 Cheesman, G. L. The Auxilia of the Roman Imperial Army. Oxford, 1914 Connolly, P. Davies, R. W. 'The daily life of the Roman soldier under the Principate', Davies, R. W. Devijver, H. 'Suetone, Devijver, H. 'Equestrian officers from the East', in Freeman, P. and Kennedy, D. (eds.) Devijver, H. The Equestrian Officers of the Roman Army. Amsterdam, 1989 Dobson, B. 'The centurionate and social mobility', in Nicolet, C. (ed.) Dobson, B. 'The significance of the centurion and "primipilaris" in the Roman army and administration', Dobson, B. Domaszewski, A. von Durry, M. Les cohortespre'toriennes (BEFAR 146). Paris, 1938 Durry, M. 'Praetoriae cohortes', RExxii (1954) 1607-34 Echols, E. 'The Roman city police: origins and development', Forni, G. II reclutamento delle legioni da Augusto a Diocle^iano. Milan-Rome, '95 3 Forni, G. 'Estrazione etnica e sociale dei soldati delle legioni nei primi tre secoli dell'impero', Freis, H. Gabba, E. 'Le origini dell'esercito professionale in Roma: i proletari e la riforma di Mario', Gilliam, J. F. Harmand, J. Uarmee et le soldat a Rome de ioy a jo avant notre ire. Paris, 1967 Harmand, J. Une campagne cesarienne: Alesia. Paris, 1967 Holder, P. A. Studies in the Auxilia of the Roman Army from Augustus to Trajan (BAR International Series 70). Oxford, 1980 Ilari, V. Gli Italici nelle strutture militari romane. Milan, 1974 Johnson, A. Roman Forts of the 1st and 2nd centuries a.d. in Britain and the German Provinces. London, 1983 Kennedy, D. L. 'Some observations on the Praetorian Guard', Kennedy, D. L. 'Milliary cohorts: the evidence of Josephus B/4.2 (67) and of epigraphy', Keppie, L. 'Vexilla veteranorum', Keppie, L. Review of Schneider, H.-C. Keppie, L. The making of the Roman Army: from Republic toEmpire. London, 1984 Keppie, L. 'Legions in the East from Augustus to Trajan', in Freeman, P. and Kennedy, D. (eds.) Kienast, D. Untersuchungen %u den Kriegsflotten der romischen Kaiser%eit. Bonn, 1966 Kromayer, J. 'Die Entwicklung der romischen Flotte von Seerauberkriege des Pompeius bis zur Schlacht von Aktium', Kromayer, J. and Veith, G. Heerwesen und Kriegfŭhrung der Griechen und Rtimer. Munich, 1928 Kubitschek, W. 'Legio', RE xn (1925) 1186-1210 Le Bohec, Y. L'armee romaine sous le Haut-Empire. Paris, 1989 Le Bohec, Y. Le Gall, J. 'Evocatio', in Le Glay, M. 'Le commandement des MacMullen, R. 'The legion as a society', Mann, J. C. 'The raising of new legions during the Principate', Mann, J. C. 'The development of auxiliary and fleet diplomas', Mann, J. C. Maxfield, V. A. The Military Decorations of the Roman Army. London, 1981 Momigliano, A. 'I problemi delle istituzioni militari di Augusto', in с 12л, 195-215 Paget, R. F. 'The ancient ports of Cumae', /RĴ 58 (1968) 152-69 Parker, H. M. D. Passerini, A. Passerini, A. 'Legio', Redde, M. 22}. Ritterling, E. 'Legio', RE xii (1925) 1211-829 Roxan, M. M. 'The distribution of Roman military diplomas', Royen, R. A. van. 'Colonia Augusta Praetoria and Augustus' Cohortes Praetoriae', Saddington, D. B. 'Prefects and lesser officers in the auxilia at the beginning of the Roman Empire', Saddington, D. B. The Development of the Roman Auxiliary Forces from Caesar to Vespasian (49 b.c.-a.d. 79). Harare, 1982 Saxer, R. Untersuchungen \u den Vexillationen des romischen Kaiserheeres von Augustus bis Diokletian ( = EpStud 1). Cologne—Graz, 1967 Schleussner, B. Die Legaten der romischen Republik. Munich, 1978 250. Schmitthenner, W. C. G. 'The armies of the Triumviral period: a study of the origins of the Roman imperial legions'. D. Phil, thesis, University of Oxford, 1958 Smith, R. E. Service in the Post-Marian Roman Army. Manchester, 1958 Speidel, M. P. 'The pay of the auxilia', Speidel, M. P. 'Citizen cohorts in the Roman imperial army', Speidel, M. P. Speidel, M. P. 'Germani corporis custodes', Starr, C. G. Syme, R. 'Some notes on the legions under Augustus', Vendrand-Voyer, J. Normes civiques et metier militaire a Rome sous le Principal, Clermont-Ferrand, 1983 Watson, G. R. Webster, G. Wierschowski, L. Heer und Wirtschaft. Das romische Heer der Principats^eit als Wirtschaftsfaktor. Bonn, 1984 6. the administration of justice Bauman, R. A. 'The "leges iudiciorum publicorum" and their interpretation in the Republic, Principate and Later Empire', Bauman, R. A. 'Hangman, call a halt!', Behrends, O. Die romische Geschworenenverfassung. Gottingen, 1970 Behrends, O. Review of Jones 1972 (d 264), Birks, P., Rodger, A. and Richardson, J. S. 'Further aspects of the Bleicken, J. Senatsgericht und Kaisergericht. Eine Studie %ur Entwicklung des Pro%essrechtes im friiben Principat. (Abh. Ak. Gottingen, phil.-hist. Klasse, ser. 3, 53) Gottingen, 1962 Bringmann, К. 'Zur Gerichtsreform des Kaisers Augustus', Brunt, P. A. Review of Kunkel 1962 (d 268) R Brunt, P. A. Review of Jones 1972 (d 264), CR 88 (1974) 265-7 Buti, I. 'La "Cognitio extra Ordinem": Da Augusto a Diocleziano', HNRITII, 14(1982) 29-59 Cuq, E. Manuel des institutionsjuridiques des Remains. 2nd edn. Paris, 1928 Frezza, P. 'Storia del processo civile in Roma fino all'eta di Augusto', Galsterer, H. Review of Behrends, 1970 (d 245), Galsterer, H. Review of Simshauser 1973 (d 275), Garnsey, P. D. A. 'The Garnsey, P. D. A. 'Adultery trials and the survival of the Garnsey, P. D. A. 'Thecriminal jurisdiction of governors', Greenidge, A. H. J. The Legal Procedure of Cicero's Time. London, 1901 Guarino, A. 'La formazione dell'editto perpetuo', Jones, A. H. M. '"I appeal unto Caesar"', Jones, A. H. M. 'Imperial and senatorial jurisdiction in the early Principate', Jones, A. H. M. The Criminal Courts of the Roman Republic and Principate. Oxford, 1972 Kelly, J. M. Kelly, J. M. Kelly, J. M. Studies in the Civil Judicature ofthe Roman Republic. Oxford, 1976 Kunkel, W. 'Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung des romischen Kriminalverfahrens in vorsullanischer Zeit', Kunkel, W. 'Oberdie Entstehung des Senatsgerichts', Laffi, U. 'La lex Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina', Lintott, A. W. 'Provocatio. From the struggle of the orders to the principate', Luzzatto, G. I. Mommsen, T. R Polay, E. 'Der Kodifizierungsplan des Julius Caesar', Simshauser, W. Iuridici und Muni\ipalgerichtsbarkeit in Italien. Munich, 1973 Stroux, J. 'Eine Gerichtsreform des Kaisers Claudius (BGU 61 Torrent, A. La 'Iurisdictio' de los Magistrados Municipales. Salamanca, 1970 Wolff, H.-J. 'Romisches Provinzialrecht in der Provinz Arabia', i. italy Ampolo, C. Review of Torelli, M. Anderson, J. C. Bermond Montanari, G. 'Monumenti funerari atestini', Bleicken, J. 'Vici magister', Boatwright, M. T. 'The pomerial extension of Augustus', Boethius, A. Review of Shipley, F. W. Bonjour, M. Terre natale. Etudes sur une composante effective du patriotisme romain. Paris, 1975 Boyance, P. 'Properce aux fetes de quartier', Braunert, H. 'Verfassungsnorm und Verfassungswirklichkeit im spatrepublikanischen Rom', Briquel, D. 'Le temoignage de Claude sur Mastarna/Servius Tullius', Carettoni, G., Colini, A. M., Cozza, L. and Gatti, G. Castren, P. Ordo Populusque Pompeianus. Rome, 1975 Castren, P. 'Cambiamenti nel gruppo dei notabili municipali dell'Italia centro-meridionale nel corso del I secolo a.C.', in E 77, 91—7 Cĉbeillac Gervasoni, M. 'Problematique de la promotion politique pour les notables des cites du Latium a la fin de la Republique', Chevallier, R. La romanisation de la Celtique du Po (BEFAR 249). Rome, 1983 Ciampoltrini, G. 'Note sulla colonizzazione augustea nell'Etruria settentrionale', La citta neW Italia settentrionale in eta romana. Morfologia, strutture e fun^ioni dei centri urbani delle Regiones X e XI (Collection de l'ecole franfaise de Rome 130) Trieste-Rome, 1990 Coarelli, F. 'II Vallo di Diano in eta romana. I dati dell'archeologia', in D'Agosuno, B. (ed.) Coarelli, F. Coarelli, F. Coarelli, F. Coleman, R. G. 'The central Italic languages in the period of Roman expansion', Conway, R. S. Cornell, T. J. 'Etruscan historiography', Cornell, T. J. Crawford, M. H. 'Italy and Rome', Crawford, M. H. 'Early Rome and Italy', in Boardman, J., Griffin, J. and Murray, O. (eds.) Crawford, M. H. 'Ateste and Crawford, M. H. 'Rome and Italy after the Social War', forthcoming D'Arms, J. H. Romans on the Bay of Naples. A Social and Cultural Study of the Villas and their Owners from ijo b.c. to a.d. 400. Cambridge, MA, 1970 D'Arms, J. H. 'Upper-class attitudes towards David, J.-M. 'Les orateurs des municipes a Rome: integration, reticences et snobismes', in e 77, 309—23 3 3. Deininger, J. 'Brot und Spiele; Tacitus und die Entpolitisierung der Demougin, S. 'Notables municipaux et ordre equestre a l'epoque des dernieres guerres civiles', in e 77, 279-98 Devijver, H. and Wonterghem, F. van. 'II Dumont, J. C. 'Les gens de theatre originaires des municipes', in e 77, 333-45 Duthoy, R. 'Les Augustales', Eck, W. Die staatliche Organisation Italiens in der hohen Kaiser^eit (Vestigia 28). Munich, 1979 Emiliozzi, A. 'Sull'epitaffio del 67 a.C. nel sepolcro dei Salvii a Ferento', Franciscis, A. de. 'Sculture connesse con la scuola medica di Elea', PP 25 (1970) 267-84 Frederiksen, M. W. 'Republican Capua. A social and economic study', Frederiksen, M. W. 'Changes in the pattern of settlement', in e 141, n, 341-5 5 Frederiksen, M. W. Gabba, E. 'Urbanizzazione e rinnovamenti urbanistici nell'Italia centro- meridionale del I sec. a.C.', Gabba. E. 'II problema dell' "unita" dell'Italia romana', in Campanile, E. (ed.) Gabba, E. 'Proposta per l'elogio tarquiniese de Velthur Spurinna', Gabba, E. 'La rifondazione di Salapia', Gabba, E. 'Ticinum: dalle origini alia fine del III sec. d.C.', in Gabba, E. (ed.) Gabba, E. 'Le citta italiche del I sec. a.C. e la politica', Gaggiotd, M. ji. Vacat Gely, E. Hammond, M. 'Germana patria', 5 5. Harris, W. V. 56. Harris, W. V. 'The era of Patavium', 5 7. Harvey, P. B. Hauber, R. C. 'Zur Topographie der Horti Maecenatis und der Horti Lamiani auf dem Esquilin in Rom', Heurgon, J. 'La vocation etruscologique de l'empereur Claude', Homo, L. Rome imperiale et Furbanisme dans Fantiquite. Paris, 1971 Humbert, M. 'Municipium' et 'civitas sine suffragio'. Rome, 1978 Jongman, W. The Economy and Society of Pompeii. Amsterdam, 1988 Jordan, H. and Hŭlsen, G. Kaimio, J. 'The ousting of Etruscan by Latin in Etruria', in Bruun, P. Keppie, L. Colonisation and Veteran Settlement in Italy, 47-14 b.c. London, 1983 Keppie, L. 'Colonisation and veteran settlement in Italy in the first century a.d.', Keuls, E. C. 'Aspetti religiosi della Magna Grecia nell'eta romana', in Labrousse, M. 'Le Laffi, U. 'La Lampe, P. Die stadtromischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten: Untersuchungen %ur So%ialgeschichte. 2nd edn. Tubingen, 1989 Lanciani, R. The Destruction of Ancient Rome. London, 1906 Lavizzari Pedrazzini, M. P. Ceramica romana di tradi^ione ellenistica in Italia settentrionale. II vasellame 'tipo Aco'. Florence, 1987 Le Gall, J. Те Tibre,fleuve de Rome, dans Fantiquite. Paris, 1953 Lejeune, M. 7 5. Lepore, E. 'Geografia del modo di produzione schiavistica e modi residui in Italia meridionale', in Giardina, A. and Schiavone, A. (eds.) Lepore, E. 'Roma e le citta greche о ellenizzate nell'Italia meridionale', in e 77. 347-54 Linderski, J. 'Natalis Patavii', Lo Cascio, E. 'I Lugli, G. I monumenti antichi di Roma e suburbio. 3 vols. Rome, 1931-40 Lugli, G. Кота antica: II centre monumentale. Rome, 1946 Lugli, G. Martino, F. de 'Note sull'Italia augustea', Meiggs, R. Moreau, P. 'Structures de parente et d'alliance a Larinum', in e 77, 99-123 Nash, E. Nash, E. Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome. 2nd edn. London, 1968 Pais, E. 'Cittadinanza romana e cittadinanza attica', in Panciera, S. 'Tra epigrafia e topografia - Г, Panciera, S. 'Nuovi luoghi di culto a Roma dalle testimonianze epigrafiche', Panciera, S. 'In operis publicis esse', in Broilo, F. (ed.) Panciera, S. 'Ancora tra epigrafia e topografia', Panciera, S. 'Due nuovi frammenti di calendario romano', Picard, G. C. Rome et les villes d'ltalie des Gracques a la mort d'Auguste. Paris, 1978 Platner, S. and Ashby, T. Poccetti, P. 'Romani e Italici a Delo', Poccetti, P. 'Per una definizione delle iscrizioni "bilingui" in area etrusca ed italica', in Campanile, E. Potter, T. W. Prontera, F. 'L'ltalia meridionale di Strabone. Appunti tra geografia e storia', in Maddoli, G. (ed.) Prosdocimi, A. 'Contatti e conflitti di lingue nell'Italia antica: l'elemento greco', in Pucci, G. 'La ceramica italica', in Giardina, A. and Schiavone A. (eds.) Purcell, N. 'The city of Rome and the Plebs Urbana in the late Republic', in САН ix2, 644-88. Cambridge, 1994 Purcell, N. 'The capital of Italy and the world: Rome from Vespasian to Constantine', in САН xi2. Forthcoming Rainbird, J. S. 'The fire stations of Imperial Rome', Ramage, С. T. The Nooks and Byways of Italy. Wanderings in Search of Its Ancient Remains and Modern Superstitions. Liverpool, 1868 Rawson, E. D. 'Caesar, Etruria and the Rawson, E. D. 'Cicero and the Areopagus', Reynolds, P. К. B. Rickman, G. The Corn Supply of Ancient Rome. Oxford, 1980 Robinson, O. 'The water supply of Rome', Roma, Archeologia nel centre urbano 1-11. Rome, 1985—6 Roma Capitate 1870—1911. L'archeologia di Roma Capitate tra sterro e scavo. Exhibition Catalogue, 1983 La romani%piaVone della Basilicata. Forthcoming Rossignani, M. P. 'Gli edifici pubblici nell'Italia settentrionale fra Г89 a.C. e l'eta augustea', in Sablayrolles, R. 'Espace urbain et propagande politique: l'organisation du centre de Rome par Auguste (Res Gestae 19 a 21)', Sachers, E. 'Praefectus urbi', RE xxii (1954) 2502-34 Sartori, F. 'Le citta italiote dopo la conquista romana', in La Magna Grecia nelFeta romana. Atti del quindicesimo Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia. 83-137. Naples, 1976 Sena Chiesa, G. 'Frammenti con fregio dorico al Museo Archeologico di Milano', in Sensi, L. 'Assisi: aspetti prosopografici', in e 77, 165-73 Simone, C. de 'Italien', in Neumann, G. and Untermann, J. (eds.) 'Sommella, P. Italia antica. L'urbanistica romana. Rome, 1987 Susini, G. 'I profughi della Tagliaferri, A. Coloni e legionari romani nel Friuli celtico. Pordenone, 1986 Tchernia, A. Thomsen, R. The Italic Regions from Augustus to the Lombard Invasion. Copenhagen, 1947 Tibiletti, G. 'Italia Augustea', Torelli, M. 'Monumenti funerari romani con fregio dorico', Torelli, M. 'La situazione in Etruria', in e 141, 1, 97—109 Torelli, M. 'Una nuova epigrafe di Bantia e la cronologia dello statuto municipale bantino', Torelli, M. 'Gesellschaft und Wirtschaftsformen der augusteischen Zeit: der Torelli, M. ' "Tribuni Plebis" municipali?', in Toynbee, J. and Ward Perkins, J. The Shrine of St Peter and the Vatican Excavations. London, 1956 Visscher, F. de Vitucci, G. Ricerche sullapraefectura urbi in eta imperiale. Rome, 1956 Wiseman, T. P. 'The census in the first century Wiseman, T. P. Wiseman, T. P. Wiseman, T. P. 'Reading the city: history, poetry and the topography of Rome', Zanker, P. (ed.) Zevi, F. 'Monumentieaspetticulturali di Ostia repubblicana', in e 141,1, 52-63 2. sicily, sardinia and corsica Acquaro, E., Barreca, F., Gecchini, S. M., Fantar, D. and M., Guzzo Amadasi, M. G. and Moscati, S. R Angiolillo, S. Ascari, M. C. Balmuth, M. S. and Rowland, R. J. Jr. (eds.) Bejor, G. 'Ricerche di topografia e di archeologia romana nella Sicilia sud-occidentale', Bejor, G. 'Aspetti della romanizzazione della Sicilia', in Beloch, K. J. 'La popolazione antica della Sicilia', Belvedere, O. 'Opere pubbliche ed edifici per lo spettacolo nella Sicilia di eta imperiale', Boninu, A., Le Glay, M. and Mastino, A. Bouchier, E. S. Brown, P. J. 'Malaria in Nuragic, Punic and Roman Sardinia: some hypotheses', in e 146, 209—35 Clemente, G. 'La Sicilia nell'eta imperiale', in Gabba, E. and Vallet, G. (eds.) Clemente, G. 'Considerazioni sulla Sicilia nell'impero romano (III sec. a.C.-V sec. d.C.)', Cuntz, O. 'Zur Geschichte Siciliens in der casarisch-augusteischen Epoche', Dyson, S. L. The Creation of the Roman Frontier. Princeton, 1985 15 8. Finley, M. I. 159. Fraschetti, A. 'Per una prosopografia dello sfruttamento: romani e italici in Sicilia (212-44 a.C.)', in Giardina, A. and Schiavone, A. (eds.) Gabba, E. 'La Sicilia romana', in Crawford, M. H. (ed.) Goldsberry, M. Guzzo Amadasi, M. G. Iscrizioni fenicie e puniche delle colonie in Occidente. Rome, 1967 Holm, A. Geschichte Si^iliens im Alterthum in. Leipzig, 1878 Jehasse, J. 'La Corse antique d'apres Ptolemee', Jehasse, J. and L. 'La Corse romaine', in Arrighi, P. (ed.) Jehasse, J. and L. Kahrstedt, U. 'Die Gemeinden Siziliens in der Romerzeit', Maetzke, G. 'Architettura romana in Sardegna', Manganaro, G. 'Per una storia della Sicilia romana', Manganaro, G. 'La provincia romana', in Gabba, E. and Vallet, G. (eds.) Manganaro, G. 'I senatori di Sicilia e il problema del latifondo', Manganaro, G. 'La Sicilia da Sesto Pompeio a Diocletiano', Manni, E. Geografia fisica epolitico della Sicilia antica. Rome, 1981 Meloni, P. L'amministra^ione della Sardegna da Augusto all'invasions vandalica. Rome, 1958 Meloni, P. Michon, E. 'Administration de la Corse sous la dominion romaine', Moracchini-Mazel, G. Les Fouilles de Mariana (Corse). 1. La necropole de Palacetto-Murotondo ( = Cahiers Corsica 4—7). Bastia, 1971 Moracchini-Mazel, G. Les Fouilles de Mariana (Corse). 6. La necropole di ponti ( = Cahiers Corsica 37-9). Bastia, 1974 Pace, B. Pais, E. 'Alcune osservazioni sulla storia e sulla amministrazione della Sicilia durante il dominio romano', Pais, E. Storia della Sardegna e della Corsica durante il dominio romano. Rome, 1923 Rowland, R. J. Jr. I ritrovamenti romani in Sardegna. Rome, 1981 Rowland, R. J. J r. 'The case of the missing Sardinian grain', Rowland, R. J. Jr. 'The countryside of Roman Sardinia', in e 146, 285—300 Rowland, R. J. Jr. 'The Roman invasion of Sardinia', in Malone, C. and Stoddart, S. (eds.) Sartori, F. 'Appunti di storia siceliota: la costituzione di Tauromenio', Scramuzza, V. M. 'Roman Sicily', in d 128, in, 225—377 Stone, S.C. 'Sextus Pompey, Octavian and Sicily', Tarn, W. W. 'Sicily and the end of Sextus Pompeius', Thomasson, В. E. 'Zur Verwaltungsgeschichte der Provinz Sardinia', Tronchetti, C. 'The cities of Roman Sardinia', in e 146, 237—83 Vismara Pergola, C. 'Prima miscellanea sulla Corsica romana', Wilson, R. J. A. 'Sardinia and Sicily during the Roman Empire: aspects of the archaeological evidence', Wilson, R. J. A. 'Changes in the pattern of urban settlement in Roman, Byzantine and Arab Sicily', in Malone, C. and Stoddart, S. (eds.) Wilson, R. J. A. 'Un insediamento agricolo romano a Castagna (Comune di Cattolica Eraclea)', Wilson, R. J. A. 'Towns of Sicily during the Roman Empire', Wilson, R. J. A. Sicily under the Roman Empire: the Archaeology of a Roman Province j6 b.c.—a.d. jjj. Warminster, 1990 3. spain Albertini, E. Les divisions administratives de PEspagne romaine. Paris, 1923 Albertos Firmat, M. L. La onomastica personal primitiva de Hispania Tarraconenseу Bitica. Salamanca, 1966 Albertos Firmat, M. L. Alfoldy, G. Fasti Hispanienses. Senatorische Reichsbeamte und Offi^iere in den spanischen Provinqen des romischen Reiches von Augustus bis Diokletian. Wiesbaden, 1969 Alfoldy, G. 'Tarraco', RE Suppl. xv (1978) 570-644 Alfoldy, G. 'Zur Geschichte von Asturia et Callaecia', Alfoldy, G. 'Drei stadtische Eliten im romischen Hispanien', Alfoldy, G. Blazquez, J. M. 'Estado de la romanizacion de Hispania bajo Cesar у Augusto', Blazquez (Martinez), J. M. Religiones primitivas de Hispania 1. Fuentes literariasy epigrdficas. Madrid, 1962 Blazquez (Martinez), J. M. Ciclosу temas de la Historia de Espana: la Romanizacion. n. La Sociedady la Economia en la Hispania Romana. Madrid, 1975 Blazquez (Martinez), J. M. Blazquez (Martinez), J. M. et al. Historia de Espana antigua n. Hispania romana. Madrid, 1982 Brancati, A. Broughton, T. R. S. 'The Romanization of Spain. The problem and the evidence', Castillo Garcia, C. 'Stadte und Personen der Baetica', Castillo Garcia, C. 'Los senadores beticos. Relaciones familiares у sociales', Diego Santos, F. 'Die Integration Nord- und Nordwestspaniens als romische Provinz in der Reichspolitik des Augustus', Domergue, C. Les mines de la peninsule iberique dans Гantiquite romaine. Rome, 1990 Etienne, R. Le culte imperial dans la peninsule iberique d' Auguste a Diocletien. Paris, 1958 Etienne, R. 'Senateurs originaires de la province de Lusitanie', Fabre, G., Mayer, M. and Roda, I. 'A propos du pont de Martorell: la participation de l'armee a l'amenagement du reseau routier de la Tarraconnaise orientale sous Auguste', Fishwick, D. 'The altar of Augustus and the municipal cult of Tarraco', Galsterer, H. Untersucbungen zum romischen Stadtewesen auf der Iberischen Halbinsel (Madrider Forscbungen 8). Berlin, 1971 Galsterer, H. 'Bemerkungen zur Integration vorromischer Bevolkerungen auf der Iberischen Halbinsel', Garcia у Bellido, A. 'Las colonias romanas de Hispania', Garcia у Bellido, A. 'Die Latinisierung Hispaniens', Gonzalez Rodriguez, Ma. Cruz Las unidades organizativas indigenas del area indoeuropea de Hispania. Vitoria a Gasteiz, 1986 Jones, R. F. J. 'The Roman military occupation of north-western Spain', Keay, S. J. Le Roux, P. L'armee romaine et Г organisation des provinces ibiriques d'Auguste а Гinvasion de 409. Paris, 1982 Le Roux, P. 'Les senateurs originaires de la province d'Hispania citerieure au Haut-Empire romain', in d 42, 439-64 Lomas Salmonte, F. J. Mackie, N. Maluquer de Motes Nicolau, J. Montenegro Duque, A. et al. Historia de Espana 11. Espana romana (218 a. de J. C.—414 de J. C.). 2 vols. Madrid, 1982 Palomar Lapesa, M. La onomasticapersonalpre-latina de la antigua Lusitania. Salamanca, 1957 Roldan Hervas, J. M. Hispaniaу elejercito romano. Contribution a la historia social de la Espana antigua. Salamanca, 1974 Roldan Hervas, J. M. Itineraria Hispana. Fuentes antiguaspara elestudio de las vt'as romanas en la Peninsula Ibe'rica. Madrid, 1975 Santos Yanguas, N. 'La conquista romana del N. O. de la Peninsula Iberica', Schulten, A. Los Cantabrosy los Asturesy suguerracon Roma. Madrid, 1943 Solana Sainz, J. M. Sutherland, С. H. V. Syme, R. 'The conquest of north-west Spain', Thouvenot, R. Essai sur la province romaine de Betique. Paris, 1940 Tovar, A. Iberische Landeskunde n. Die Volker und die Stddte des antiken Hispanien. 2 vols. Baden-Baden, 1974—6 Tranoy, A. La Galice romaine. Rechercbes sur le nord-ouest de la peninsule ibirique dans Fantiquite. Paris, 1981 Wiegels, R. Die Tribusinschriften des romischen Hispanien. Ein Katalog (Madrider Forschungen 13). Berlin, 1985 4. gaul Actes du colloque: Minesetfonderies antiques de la Gaule, 1980. Toulouse, 1982 Actes du colloque: La patrie gauloise, 1981. Lyons, 1983 Actes du colloque: Le vicus gallo-romain (Caesarodunum XI). Paris, 1976 Agache, R. 'Detection aerienne de vestiges protohistoriques gallo- romains et medievaux dans le bassin de la Somme et ses abords'. 2 5 o. Agache, R. 'La villa gallo-romaine dans les grandes plaines du nord de la France', Agache, R. 'La campagne a l'epoque romaine dans les grandes plaines du Nord de la France', Agache, R. Amy, R. and Gros, P. Ancien, В. and Tuffreau-Libre, M. Soissons gallo-romain, dicouvertes anciennes et recentes. Soissons, 1980 Arcbeotogie urbaine, Actes du colloque international de Tours if So. Paris, 1982 Architecture domestique de terre et de bois dans les provinces occidentales de FEmpire remain, Actes du 2е congres de Gaule miridionale. Lyons, 1983 Aspects de la construction de bois en Normandie du I" au XIV siecle, ed. P. Halbout and J. Le Maho. Caen, 1984 Aubin, G. 'L'or romain dans l'ouest de la Gaule, circulation et stagnation', Audin, A. Audin, A. and Burnand, Y. 'Le marche lyonnais de la pierre sous le Haut- Empire romain', Audin, A. and Reynaud, J.-F. 'Le mur de bord de Saĉne et ses inscriptions antiques', Autun-Augustodunum, capitale des Eduens. Exhibition catalogue. Autun, 264. Badian, E. 'Notes on Provincia Gallia in the late Republic', in Chevallier, R. (ed.) Baity, J.-Ch., 'La basilique de Bavay et les basiliques de forum', Barbet, A. 'Peintures de second style schematique en Gaule et dans l'Empire romain', Barbet, A. 'Glanum', Barbet, A. 'La diffusion du 3е style pompeien en Gaule', Barbet, A. 'L'introduction de la peinture murale romaine en Transalpine', Barraud, D. Barruol, G. 'Les peuples preromains du Sud-Est de la Gaule', Barruol, G. 'La resistance des substrats preromains en Gaule meridionale', Bayard, D. and Massy, J.-L. 'Amiens romain. Samarobriva Ambianorum', Bemont, C. and Jacob, J.-P. (eds.) 275. Benoit, F. Fouilles de Cemelenum 1. Cimie^, la ville antique. Paris, 1977 Benoit, J. 'Nimes: etudes sur l'urbanisme antique', Berchem, D. van 'Avenches, colonie latine', Berchem, D. van Bloemers, J. H. F. 'Acculturation in the Rhine/Meuse basin in the Roman period', in Brandt, R. and Slofstra, J. (eds.) Bogli, H. and Weidmann, D. 'Nouvelles recherches a Aventicum', Boiron, R., Landure, C. and Nin, N. 'Les fouilles de l'aire du Chapitre', Bordeaux, Saint-Christoly, sauvetage archeologique et histoire urhaine. Bordeaux, 1982—3 Bost, J.-P. 'Specificite des villes et effets de l'urbanisation dans l'Aquitaine augusteenne', Bost, J.-P. and Fabre, G. 'Aux origines de la province de Novempopulanie. Nouvel examen de l'inscription d'Hasparren', Bridel, P. 'Le nouveau plan archeologique de Nyon', Broise, P. Broise P. 'L'urbanisme vicinal aux confins de la Viennoise et de la Sequanaise', Brulet, R. Brulet, R. 'Les origines du Brun, J.-P. 'L'oleiculture antique en Provence', Burnand, Y. Burnand, Y. 'Senateurs et chevaliers romains originaires de la cite de Nimes', Burnand, Y. 'Le role des communications fluviales dans la genese et le developpement des villes antiques du Sud-Est de la Gaule', in Duval, P.-M. and Frĉzouls, E. (eds.) Burnand, Y. 'Primores Galliarum, Senateurs et chevaliers romains originaires de la Gaule de la fin de la Republique au IIIе siecle'. Diss., Paris, 1985 Cadoux, J.-L. 'Amiens dans l'Antiquite: Samarobriva Ambianorum', in Hulschen, R. (ed.) Cambon, C. 'Les thermes romains dans le Sud de la Gaule', Chapotat, G. 'Le probleme des enceintes successives de Vienne', Chevallier, R. 'Gallia Lugdunensis. Bilan de vingt-cinq ans de recherches historiques et archeologiques', Chevallier, R. 'Gallia Narbonensis', Chevallier, R. 'Cite et territoire: soludons romaines aux problemes de l'organisation de l'espace', Chossenot, F. Chouquer, G. and Favory, F. Contribution a la recbercbe des cadastres antiques. Paris, 1980 Christie, F. and Morel, J. 'Un nouveau quartier romain de Nyon: fouilles de Bel-Air, 1978-1980', Christol, M. 'Reflexions sur le provincialisme gallo-romain', Christol, M. and Goudineau, C. 'Nimes et les Volques Arecomiques', Clavel-Leveque, M. 'Pour une problematique des conditions economiques de l'implantation romaine dans le Midi gaulois', Clavel-Leveque, M. Clavel-Leveque, M. Pttsgk gaulois, les Gaules en mimoire. Paris, 1989 Clavel-Leveque, M. and Leveque, P. 'Imperialisme et semiologie. L'espace urbain a Glanum', Cuppers, H. 'Die Stadt Trier und die verschiedenen Phasen ihres Ausbaus', in Duval, P. M. and Frĉzouls, E. (eds.) Dangreaux, B. 'Recherches sur les origines de Grenoble d'apres l'etude du mobilier archeologique', Daubigney, A. 'Reconnaissance des formes de la dependance gauloise', Delplace, C. 'Les villes de la Gaule Belgique au Haut-Empire', RA (1983) 345-78 Deman, A. 'Germania Inferior et Gallia Belgica: etat actuel de la documentation epigraphique', Desbat, A. and Martin-Kilcher, S. 'Les amphores sur l'axe Rhin-Rhone a l'epoque d'Auguste', Desbordes, J.-M. 'Jalons pour l'etude des noyaux urbains dans l'antiquite gallo-romaine: exemples regionaux', Desbordes, J.-M. 'Les origines de la vie urbaine en Limousin: ebauche d'une problematique', RAC XVI (1977) 221-42 Dion, R. 'La ville en Gaule a l'epoque imperiale romaine', Doreau, J. Girardy, C. and Pichonneau, J.-F. 'Contribution a l'etude du forum de Vesone (Perigueux, Dordogne)', Doreau, J. Golvin, J.-C. and Maurin, L. Drinkwater, J.-F. 'Lugdunum: "natural capital" of Gaul?', Drinkwater, J.-F. 'The rise and fall of the Gallic Iulii', Drinkwater, J.-F. 'A note on local careers in the Three Gauls under the early Empire', Drinkwater, J.-F. 'Gallic personal wealth', Drinkwater, J.-F. Duby, G. Histoire de la France urhaine 1. La ville antique. Paris, 1980 Duncan-Jones, R.-P. 'The wealth of Gaul', Duval, P. M. Duval, P.-M. Les sources de Г histoire de France 1. La Gaulejusqu'au milieu du V' siecle. 2 vols. Paris, 1971 Duval, P.-M. 'Bilan et perspectives des etudes sur la Gaule romaine', Ebel, C. Transalpine Gaul, the Emergence of a Roman Province. Leiden, 1976 Ebel, C. 'Southern Gaul in the triumviral period: a critical stage of romanization', Les enceintes augusteennes dans ГOccident romain, Actes du colloque de Nimes 198!. Ecole Antique de Nimes, 1987 Es, W. A. van 'Das niederlandische Flussgebiet von der Romerzeit bis ins Forschungsprogramm', Etienne, R. Ettlinger, E. 'Die italische Sigillata von Novaesium', (1983) Euzennat, M. 'Les fouilles de la Bourse a Marseille', 29-5 2 Euzennat, M. 'Ancient Marseilles in the light of recent excavations', A]A 74(198°) ЧЗ-40 Faider-Feytmans, G. 'Les vici du Nord de la Gaule a l'epoque romaine', Favory, F. 'L'esclavage en Narbonnaise et en Lyonnaise', Ferdiere, A. 'Organisation et controle de l'espace rural par la ville', Feugĉre, M. Les fihules en Gaule meridionale de la conquete a la fin du V' siecle apres J.-C. Paris, 1985 Fĉvrier, P.-A. 'Les villes et campagnes des Gaules sous l'Empire', (1981) 359-72 Fevrier, P.-A., Fixot, M. and Rivet, L. Fevrier, P.-A., Janon, M. and Varoqueaux, C. 'Fouilles au Clos du Chapitre a Frejus', Fevrier, P.-A., Janon, M. and Varoqueaux, C. 'The origins and growth of the cities of southern Gaul', Fiches, J.-L. 'Processus d'urbanisation indigene dans la region de Nimes', Fiches, J.-L. Uoppidum Fiches, J.-L. 'Les transformations de l'habitat autour de Nimes au Haut- Empire', Fiches, J.-L. 'L'espace rural andque dans le Sud-Est de la France: ambitions et realites archeologiques', Fischer, F. Der Heidengraben bei Grabenstetten. Stuttgart, 1971 Fishwick, D. 'The temple of the Three Gauls', Fishwick, D. 'L'autel des Trois Gaules: le temoignage des monnaies', Formige, ).Le trophiedes Alpes (La Turbie) (Gallia Suppl. 2). Paris, 1949 Los foros romanos de lasprovincias occidentales. Madrid, 1987 Frere, S. S. 'Town planning in the western provinces', Frezouls, E. 'Metodo per lo studio dell'urbanistica, strutture e infrastrutture delle citta antiche d'Occidente', Frezouls, E. 'Etudes et recherches sur les villes en Gaule', Frezouls, E. Les villes antiques de France-. 1: Belgique (1982) 11: Germanie Supe'rieure 1 (Strasbourg, 1988) Frezouls, E. 'Evergetisme et construction urbaine dans les Trois Gaules et Germanies', Frezouls, E. 'L'empire romain et la cite. Reflexions sur la politique d'urbanisation', Furger-Gund, A. 'Die Ausgrabungen in Basler Muster', Galiniĉ, H. etal. Les archives du sol a Tours. Survie et avenir de Г archeologie de la ville. Tours, 1979 Galliou, P. Galliou, P. Les tombes romaines dArmorique, (DAF 17) 1989 Gascou, J. 'Quand la colonie de Gayraud, M. 'Narbonne aux trois premiers siecles apres J.-C.', Gayraud, M. Narbonne antique des origines a la fin du III' siecle (RAN Suppl. 8). 1981 Giard, J.-B. 'La penurie de petite monnaie en Gaule au debut du Haut- Empire', Goudineau, C. 'Le statut de Nimes et des Volques Arecomiques', Goudineau, C. 'Les fouilles de la Maison au Dauphin, recherches sur la romanisation de Vaison-la-Romaine', Goudineau, C. 'Note sur la fondation de Lyon', Goudineau, C. (ed.) Le goŭt du theatre a Rome et en Gaule romaine. Musee archeologique de Lattes, 1989 Grenier, A. 'Le recrutement des legionnaires romains en Narbonnaise', Gros, P. 'Traditions hellenistiques de l'Orient dans le decor architectural des temples romains de Gaule Narbonnaise', Gros, P. 'Les arcs de triomphe de Gaule Narbonnaise', Gros, P. 'Les temples gemines de Glanum, etude preliminaire', Gros, P. 'L' Gros, P. 'Un programme augusteen: le centre monumental de la colonie d'Aries', Guild, R., Guyon, J. and Rivet, L. 'Les origines du baptistere de la cathedrale Saint-Sauveur, etude de topographie aixoise', Harmand, J. Les origines des recherches franqaises sur I'habitat ruralgallo- romain (Coll. Latomus 51). Brussels, 1961 Hatt, J.-J. Heinen, H. 'Auguste en Gaule et les origines de la ville romaine de Treves', Hesnard, A. Hiernard, J. 'La topographie historique de Poitiers dans l'antiquite', Hirschfeld, O. 'Die Organisation der drei Gallien durch Augustus', Kaenel, G., Klausener, M. and Fehlmann, S. Lousonna 2: nouvelles recherches sur le vicusgallo-romain, CAR 18 (1980-) Kisch, Y. de 'Tarifs de donation en Gaule romaine d'apres les inscriptions', Kleiner, F. S. 'Artists in the Roman world: an itinerant workshop in Augustan Gaul', Labrousse, M. Toulouse antique des origines a Fetablissement des Wisigoths. Paris, 1968 Laet, S.-J. de 'Esquisse de la naissance et du developpement des agglomerations urbaines en Gaule septentrionale a l'epoque romaine', Laet, S.-J. de. 'Claude et la romanisation de la Gaule septentrionale', Lafon, X. 'Sur quelques representations iconographiques des habitants de Narbonnaise de Cesar a Auguste', Langouet, L. Lasfargues, J. and Vertet, H. 'L'atelier de potiers augusteen de la Muette a Lyon, la fouille de sauvetage de 1966', Lasfargues, J. and Le Glay, M. 'Decouverte d'un sanctuaire municipal du culte imperial a Lyon', Laubenheimer, F. La production des amphores en Gaule Narbonnaise. Paris, 1985 Laubenheimer, F. 'Production et fonction des amphores en Gaule sous l'Empire', Laubenheimer, F. 'Les amphores gauloises sous l'Empire: recherches nouvelles sur leur production et leur chronologie', Laur-Belart, R. Lauxerois, R. 'Le Bas-Vivarais a l'epoque romaine', (1983) Le Gall, J. Le Glay, M. and Tourrenc, S. 'L'originalite de l'architecture domestique a Vienne d'apres les decouvertes recentes de Saint-Romain-en-Gal', Leday, A. 'Trois vici du Cher', Leday, A. 'La campagne a l'epoque romaine dans le Centre de la Gaule' (BAR International Series). Oxford, 1980 Leman, P. 'Les villes gallo-romaines de la region Nord/Pas-de-Calais a la lumiere des fouilles recentes', Lerat, L. 'Vesontio. Besanjon antique', Lerat, L. La Gaule romaine, textes choisis etpresente's. Paris, 1977 Lewuillon, S. 'Histoire, societe et lutte des classes en Gaule', 4(1975)427-583 Loustaud, J.-P. MacKendrick, P. Mandy, B. Mangin, M. Un quartier de commerqants et Partisans dAlesia. Contribution a Г histoire de Phabitat urbain en Gaule. Paris, 1981 Mangin, M. Artisanat et commerce dans les agglomerations romaines du Centre- Est sous PEmpire. Origine des richesses, dipenses dans la ville antique. Aix-en- Provence, 1984 Mangin, M., Jacquet, R. and Jacob, J.-P. Martin, R. 'Formation et developpement de l'habitat urbain en Gaule romaine', in Actes du colloque international du CNRS, themes de recherches sur les villes antiques dOccident, Strasbourg iyj 1, 173-83. Paris, 1977 Martin, R. and Varene, P. 'Le monument d'Ucuetis a Alesia', 078 426. 427 428. 429. 430. 431. 432. 433' 434 435. 436. 437 438 439 44° 441 442. 443 444 445 446. 447' 448. 449 450. Martin-Kilcher S. Maurin, L. 'Gauloiset Lyonnais', in Mertens, J. 'Reflexions sur le rapport ville-campagne dans le Nord de la Mertens, J. L'armee romaine en Belgique', Middleton, P. 'Army supply in Roman Gaul', Nash, D. 'Plus 5a change: currency in Central Gaul from Julius Caesar to Nero', in Carson, R. A. G. and Kraay, С. M. (eds.) Neiss, R. Nicolini, G. 'Les sanctuaires ruraux de Poitou-Charentes: quelques exemples d'implantation et de structure interne', Nicolini, G. 'Stratigraphie et histoire de Poitiers aux iCI et IIе siecles', Oliver, J. H. 'North, South, East, West in Arausio and elsewhere', Pailler, J-M. 'Domitien et la cite de Pallas, un tournant dans l'histoire de Toulouse antique', Pape, L. 'Villes et urbanisme dans l'extreme ouest de l'Armorique a l'epoque gallo-romaine', RA (1975) 177—91 Passelac, M. 'Le vicus Eburomagus', Paunier, D. 'L'archeologie gallo-romaine en Suisse romande; bilan et perspectives', Paunier, D. et al. Le vicusgallo-romain de Vidy-Lausanne. Lausanne, 1989 Peinture murale en Gaule (Actes des siminaires de Limoges (1980) de Sarrebourg (1981). Nancy, 1984; de Lisieux (1982) de Bordeaux (198j) (BAR International Series 240). Oxford, 1985; de Vaison-la-Romaine (1987). Vaison, 1990 Pelletier, A. 'La superficie des exploitations agraires dans le cadastre d'Orange', Pelletier, A. Pelletier, A. Petrikovits, H. von 'Kleinstadte und nichtstadtische Siedlungen im Nordwesten des romischen Reichs', in 45 7. Petry, F. 'Observations sur les vici explores en Alsace', Petry, F. 'La culture gallo-romaine des sommets vosgiens', RA (1981) 161—7 Petry, F. 'La ville romaine: Argentoratum', in Livet, G. and Rapp, F. (eds.) Pflaum, H.-G. 'Les fastes de la province Narbonnaise', Picard, G.-C. 'Le trophee augusteen de La Turbie', Picard, G.-C. 'La mythologie au service de la romanisation', Picard, G.-C. 'La republique des Pictons', Picard, G.-C. 'Les centres civiques ruraux dans 1'Italie et la Gaule romaines', Pilet, C. 'Vieux antique (Araegenuae, Viducasses)', Py, M. L'oppidum des Castels a Nages (fouilles 19j8-1974). (Gallia Suppl. 3 5) 1978 Py, M. 'Recherches sur Nimes preromaine', Raepsaet-Charlier, M.-T. and Raepsaet, G. 'Gallia Belgica et Germania. i. Vingt-cinq annees de recherches historiques et archeologiques', Rambaud, M. 'L'origine militaire de la colonie de Lugdunum', Reddĉ, M. 'Le camp militaire romain d'Arlaines et l'aile des Voconces', Richard, J. С. M. 'Le probleme des origines de Montpellier', Rivet, A. Roblin, M. 'Les limites de la Roblin, M. 'Les limites de la Rolland, H. 'Fouilles de Glanum (Saint-Remy-de-Provence)', Rolland, H. 'L'arc de Glanum', Roman, D. 'Apollon, Auguste et Nimes', Roth-Conges, A. and Gros, P. 'Le sanctuaire des eaux a Nimes', Rouanet-Liesenfelt, A.-M. Sabrie, M. and Solier, Y. La Maison a portiques du Clos de la Lombarde a Narbonne et sa decoration murale, (RAN Suppl. 16). 1987 Salviat, F. 'Marseille grecque', and Euzennat, M. 'Marseille romaine', in Barader, E. (ed.) Salviat, F. 'Orientation, extension et chronologie des plans cadastraux d'Orange', Schnurbein, S. von Schnurbein, S. von 'Die Unverzierte Terra Sigillata aus Haltern', 48 5. Simpson, C. J. 'The birth of Claudius and the date of dedication of the altar Syme, R. 'Tacitus on Gaul', Syme, R. 'La richesse des aristocraties de Betique et de Narbonnaise', Syme, R. 'More Narbonensian senators', Tardy, D. Le decor architectonique de Saintes antique (Aquitania Suppl. 5). 1990 Tasseaux, D. and F. 'Aulnay-de-Saintonge: un camp augusto-tiberien en Aquitaine', Ternes, C.-M. Ternes, C.-M. 'Le vicus d'epoque gallo-romaine en pays trevire et rhenan', Ternes, C.-M. 'Recherches concernant la Gaule et les Germanies', Trier, Augustusstadt der Treverer. Mainz, 1984 Turcan, R. 'L'autel de Rome et d'Auguste ad Confluentem', Turcan, R. 'L'arc de Carpentras: problemes de datation et d'histoire', Ugernum, Beaucaire et le Beaucairois a Fepoque romaine. Caveirac, 1987 Ur- undfrŭhgeschichtlicbe Archaologie der Schwei\ }, Die Romer^eit, Sociĉtĉ suisse de Prehistoire et d'Archeologie. Basle, 1976 Vaginay, M. and Valette, P. 'Recherches sur les origines de l'urbanisme andque de Feurs', Le vicus gallo-romain (Caesarodunum 11). Tours, 1976 Vidal, M. 'Note preliminaire sur les puits et fosses funeraires du Toulousain aux IIе et I" siĉcle avant J.-C.', Villes augusteennes de Gaule, Actes du colloque dAutun 198; Les villes de la Gaule Belgique au Haut-Empire, Actes du colloque de Saint- Riquier 1982. (Revue archiologique de Picardie 3-4) 1984 Walker, S. 'Recentes recherches en archeologie gallo-romaine et paleochretienne sur Lyon et sa region' (BAR International Series 1980). Oxford, 1981 Walter, H. La Franche-Comte romaine. Histoire de la Franche-Comte 11. Weholsheim, 1979 Walthew, С. V. Werner, K.-J. Histoire de France, les origines. Paris, 1984 Wible, F. Forum Claudii Vallensium, la ville romaine de Martigny. Martigny, 1981 Wible, F. 'Nouvelles decouvertes de Martigny. Forum Claudii Vallensium', Wightman, E. M. Wightman, E. M. 'La Gaule Chevelue entre Cesar et Auguste', Wightman, E. M. 'Rural settlement in Roman Gaul', ANRW II, 4 (i975) 584-647 Wightman, E. M. 'Le vicus dans le contexte de l'administration et de la societe gallo-romaine: quelques reflexions', Wightman, E. M. 'II у avait en Gaule deux sortes de Gaulois. Assimilation et resistance a la culture greco-romaine', Wightman, E. M. 'Soldier and civilian in early Roman Gaul', Wightman, E. M. 'Military arrangements, native settlements and related developments in early Roman Gaul', Wightman, E. M. 'Peasants and potentates', Wightman, E. M. 'Imitation ou adaptation? Une note sur les inscriptions dans le Nord de la Gaule romaine', Wightman, E. M. Wiseman, A. and Wiseman, P. 523. Will, E. 'Recherches sur le developpement urbain sous l'Empire romain dans le Nord de la France', 525. Wolff, H. 'Kriterien fur lateinische und romische Stadte in Gallien und Germanien und die "Verfassung" der gallischen Stammesgemeinden', 527. Wuilleumier, P. 5. britain 5 28. Bennett, P. 'The topography of Roman Canterbury: a brief reassessment', 5 3 o. Burnham, В. C. and Johnson, H. B. (eds.) Burnham, В. C. and Wacher, J. Crummy, P. 'The origins of some major Romano-British towns', 535. Frere, S. 'Civitas — a myth?', Frere, S. Frere, S. and St Joseph, J. K. S. Fulford, M. Fulford, M. The Silchester Amphitheatre: Excavations of 1979—8}. London, 542. Greene, K. 'Imported fine wares in Britain to a.d. 250: a guide to identification', in Arthur, P. and Marsh, G. (eds.) Grew, F. and Hobley, B. (eds.) Roman Urban Topography in Britain and the Western Empire. London, 1985 Hanson, W. S. and Campbell, D. B. 'The Brigantes: from clientage to conquest', Hawkes, C. F. C. 'History of the Belgic Dobunni, their division and subjection', in Clifford, E. M. Jones, G. D. B. and Mattingly, D. 547. Margary, I. D. Millett, M. The Romanization of Britain, an Essay in archaeological Interpretation. Cambridge, 1990 Milne, G. 'Further evidence for Roman London Bridge?', 550.. Ordnance Survey. Piggott, S. Rivet, A. L. F. and Smith, C. Rodwell, W. 'Coinage, oppida and the rise of Belgic power in southeastern Britain', in Cunliffe, B. and Rowley, T. (eds.) Rodwell, W. and Rodwell, K. 'The Roman villa at Rivenhall, Essex', Ross, R. Salway, P. Todd, M. (ed.) Studies in the Romano-British Villa. Leicester, 1978 5 5 8. Todd, M. (ed.) Wacher, J. S. (ed.) Wacher, J. S. Wacher, J. S. Wacher, J. S. Walthew, С. V. 'The town house and the villa house in Roman Britain', Webster, G. Boudica: the British Revolt against Rome, a.d. 60. London, 1978 Webster, G. (ed.) Whittick, G. C. 'The earliest Roman lead-mining on Mendip and in North Wales: a reappraisal', 6. germany Alfoldy, G. Die Legionslega ten der romischen Rheinarmeen. EpStud 3. Koln, 1967 Alfoldy, G. Die Hilfstruppen der romischen Proving Germania Inferior. EpStud 6. Dusseldorf, 1968 Baatz, D. and Herrmann, F.-R. Bogaers, J. E. 'Civitates und Civitas-Hauptorte in der nordlichen Germania Inferior', Brandt, R. and Slofstra, J. (eds.) Capelle, W. (ed.) Das alte Germanien. Die Nachrichten der griechischen und romischen Schriftsteller. 2nd edn. Jena, 1937 Chevallier, R. Cuppers, H. Cuppers, H. and Riiger, С. B. Romische Siedlungen und Kulturlandschaften, Geschichtlicher Atlas der Rheinlande in. 1-2. Cologne, 1985 Doppelfeld, O. and Held, O. Fingerlin, G. 'Dangstetten, ein augusteisches Legionslager am Hochrhein', Follmann-Schulz, A.-B. 'Die romischen Tempelanlagen in der Provinz Germania Inferior', Heinen, H. Trier und das Trevererland in romischer Zeit. Trier, 1985 Horn, H.-G. (ed.) Klinĝhoffer, H. Germania Latina. Sammlung literarischer, inschriftlicher und arcbaologischer Zeugnisse %ur Gescbichte und Kultur Westdeutschlands in der Romer\eit. Dusseldorf, 1955 Krŭger, B. et al. Die Germanen, Gescbichte und Kultur der germanischen Stamme in Mitteleuropa 1. 4th edn. Berlin, 1983 Petrikovits, H. von 'Der Wandel romischer Gefasskeramik in der Rheinzone', Petrikovits, H. von Raepsaet-Charlier, M.-T. and Raepsaet-Charlier, G. 'Gallia Belgica et Germania Inferior, Vingt-cinq annees de recherches historiques et archeologiques', Roymans, N. 'Tribale samenlevingen in Noord-Gallie'. Diss., Amsterdam—Utrecht, 1987 Rtiger, С. B. Germania Inferior. Untersuchungen %ur Territorial-und Vern/altungsgeschichte Niedergermaniens in der Prin^ipats^eit (BJ Beih. 30). 1968 Schonberger, H. 'The Roman frontier in Germany, an archaeological survey', Schonberger, H. 'Die romischen Truppenlager der friihen und mittleren Kaiserzeit zwischen Nordsee und Inn', Schonberger, H. and Simon, H. G. Stein, E. Die kaiserlichen Beamten und Truppenkbrper im romischen Deutschland unter dem Principal. Vienna, 1932 Ternes, С. M. La vie quotidienne en Rhinanie romaine (I^-IV' siecles). Paris, 1972 Ternes, С. M. 'Die provincia Germania Superior im Bilde der jŭngeren Forschung', Todd, M. Vittinghoff, F. 'Die politische Organisation der romischen Rheingebiete in der Kaiserzeit', Weisgerber, J. L. Weisgerber, J. L. Wells, С. M. The German Policy of Augustus. An Examination of the Archaeological Evidence. Oxford, 1972 Wild, J. P. Textile Manufacture in the Northern Roman Provinces. Cambridge, 1970 7. raetia Archiiologie in Wiirttemberg, Ergebnisse und Perspektiven arcbaologischer Forschung von der Altstein^eit bis %ur Neurit, ed. D. Planck. Stuttgart, 1988 Berchem, D. van. 'La conquete de la Rhĉtie', MH 25 (1968) 1—10 Bilgeri, G. Geschichte Vorarlbergs 1: Vom freien Ratien \ит Staat der Monforter. 2nd edn. Vienna-Cologne—Graz, 1976 Chantraine H. 'Zu den neuen Fasten der raetischen Statthalter', Czysz, W., Dietz, K., Fischer, T. and Kellner, H.-J. Drack, W. and Fellmann, R. Eck, W. 'Senatorische Amtstrager und Ratien unter Augustus', Fischer, F. 'P. Silius Nerva, zur Vorgeschichte des Alpenfeldzuges 15 v. Chr.', Fischer, T. Frei, B. et al. Das Raterproblem in geschichtlicher, sprachlicher und archaologischer Sicht (Schriften d. Ratischen Museums Chur 28). Chur, 1984 Frei-Stolba, R. 'Die romische Schweiz: ausgewahlte staats- und verwaltungsrechtliche Probleme im Frŭhprinzipat', ANRW II, 5.1 (1976) 288—403 Frei-Stolba, R. 'Die Schweiz in romischer Zeit: der Vorgang der Provinzialisierung in rechtshistorischer Sicht', Frei-Stolba, R. Review of Schon 1986 (e 63 5), Gottlieb, G. et al. (eds.) Gescbicbte der Stadt Augsburg von der Rdmer%eit bis \ur Gegenwart. Stuttgart, 1984 Haider, P. W. 'Tirol unter romischer Herrschaft', Heuberger, R. Ratien im Altertum und Mittelalter, Forschung und Darstellung. Innsbruck, 1932 Keller, E. Die fruhkaiser^eit lichen Korpergraber von Heimstetten bei Mŭnchen und die verrvandten Funde aus Siidbayern (Mŭnchn. Beitrage z. Vor- u. Friihgeschichte 37). Munich, 1984 Kellner, H.-J. 'Zur romischen Verwaltung in den Zentralalpen', Kellner, H.-J. Kellner, H.-J. 'Die Zeit der romischen Herrschaft', Kellner, H.-J. 'Ein Jahrzehnt Romerforschung in Bayern (1974-1983)', in Kraus, A. (ed.) Laffi, U. 'Sull'organizzazione amministrativa dell'area alpina nell'eta giulio-claudia', Laffi, U. 'Zur Geschichte Vindeliciens unmittelbar nach der romischen Eroberung', Laffi, U. 'L'organizzazione dei distretti alpini dopo la conquista', in Vacchina, M. (ed.) Mackensen, M. Friihkaiser%eitliche Kleinkastelle bei Nersingen und Burlafingen an der oberen Donau (Miinchn. Beitrage z. Vor- u. Friihgeschichte 41). Munich, 1987 Meyer, E. 'Romische Zeit', Overbeck, B. Overbeck, B. 'Raeden zur Prinzipatszeit', ANRW 11,5.2 (1976) 658-89 Schon, F. Der Beginn der romischen Herrschaft in Ratien. Sigmaringen, 1986 Staehlin, F. Ulbert, G. Untermann, J. 'Alpen-Donau-Adria', Waasdorp, J. A. 'Immanes Raeti. A hundred years of Roman defensive policy in the Alps and Voralpenland', Walser, G. Die romischen Strassen und Meilensteine in Raetien. Stuttgart, 1983 Werner, J. (ed.) Winkler, G. 'Die Statthalter der romischen Provinz Raetien unter dem Prinzipat', Wolff, H. 'Einige Probleme der Raumordnung im Imperium Romanum, dargestellt an den Provinzen Obergermanien, Raetien und Noricum', Wolff, H. 'Zu den Anfangen des romischen Raetien' (Review of Schon 1986 (e 635)), 8. the balkans Alfoldy, G. 'Die Auxiliartruppen der romischen Provinz Dalmatien', Alfoldy, G. 'Des territoires occupes par les Scordisques', Alfoldy, G. 'Die Namengebung der Urbevolkerung in der romischen Provinz Dalmatia', B%N 15 (1964) 55—104 Alfoldy, G. 'Eine romische Strassenbauinschrift aus Salona', Alfoldy, G. 'Veteranendeduktionen in der Provinz Dalmatien', Alfoldy, G. 'Rider', Alfoldy, G. 'Senatoren in der romischen Provinz Dalmatien', Alfoldy, G. Batoviĉ, S. 'Investigation of the Illyrian settlement at Radovin', Batoviĉ, S. 'Les vestiges prehistoriques sur archipel de Zadar', Clairmont, C. W. Excavations at Salona, Yugoslavia, 1969—72. Park Ridge, NJ, 1975 Crijan, I. H. Curk, I. Mikl. Daicoviciu, H. Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea Romana. Cluj, 1972 Danoff, С. M. 'Zur Geschichte des westpontischen Danov, С. M. 'Die Thraker auf dem Ostbalkan von der hellenistischen Zeit bis zur Griindung Konstantinopels', Duŝaniĉ S. 'Aspects of Roman mining in Noricum, Pannonia, Dalmatia and Moesia Superior', Egger, R. Fitz, J. 'La division de Г Gajdukeviĉ, F. Garaŝanin, M. 'The early Iron Age in the central Balkan area', САН in2.i, 582-618. Cambridge, 1982 Gerov, B. 'Romische Biirgerrechtsverleihung und Kolonisation in Thrakien von Trajan', Gerov, B. 'Epigraphische Beitrage zur Geschichte des moesischen Limes in vorclaudischer Zeit', Gerov, B. 'Die Grenzen der romischen Provinz Thracia bis zur Griindung des aurelianischen Dakien', Gerov, B. Beitrage \ur Geschichte der romischen Provin^en Moesien und Thrakien. Gesammelte Aufsat^e. Amsterdam, 1980 Hoddinott, R. F. Klemenc, J. and Saria, B. Archaeologische Karte von Jugoslavien: Blatt Ptuj. Belgrade—Zagreb, 1936 Kraft, K. Mariĉ, Z. 'Archaeologische Forschungen auf der Akropolis der illyrischen Stadt DAORS ... in Oŝaniĉi bei Stolaĉ', Matijasiĉ, R. 'La produzione ed il commercio di tegole ad Aquileia', ю88 675 676. 677. 678. 679. 68о 681. 682. 683. 684. 685. 686. 687, 688. 689. 690. 691. 692. 693. 694. 695 696. 697. 698. 699. 700. Mocsy, A. 'Pannonia', Mdcsy, A. 'Die Einwanderung der Iazygen', 439-36 M6csy, A. 'The civilized Pannonians of Velleius', in с 274, 169—75. Gloucester, 1983 Novak, G. 'La province Illyricum etait-elle au temps d'Octavien Auguste et de Tibere divisee en Superior provincia Illyricum et Inferior provincia Illyricum?', in Chevallier, R. (ed.) Papazoglu, F. 'Quelques aspects de l'histoire de la province de Macedoine', Piccottini, G. 'Die Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg — ein spatkeltisches und frŭhromisches Zentrum im siidlichen Noricum', ANRW II, 6 (1977) 263—301 Piccottini, G. and Vetters, H. Pippidi, D. M. Rapaniĉ, Z. (ed.) Ŝaŝel, J. 'Keltisches Portorium in den Ostalpen', Ŝaŝel, J. 'Huldigung norischer Stamme am Magdalensberg in Karnten', Ŝaŝel, J. 'Emona', RE Suppl. xi (1968) 540-78 Ŝaŝel, J. 'Trajan's canal at the "Iron Gate"', Ŝaŝel, J. 'Siscia', Ŝaŝel, J. and Weiler, I. 'Zur Augusteisch-Tiberischen Inschrift von Emona', Stipĉeviĉ, A. Svoljlak, Dr. 'The prehistoric settlement at Most na Soĉi', Swoboda, E. Swoboda, E. Syme, R. Velkov, V. Cities in Thrace and Dacia in Late Antiquity. Amsterdam, 1977 Vulpe, R. and Barnea, I. Wilkes, J. J. Wilkes, J. J. Wilkes, J. J. 'Boundary stones in Roman Dalmatia: 1. The inscriptions', Wilkes, J. J. 'Romans, Dacians and Sarmatians in the first and early second centuries', in с 274, 255-89 Winkler, G. 'Noricum und Rom', Zabehlicky-Scheffenegger, S. and Kandler, M. Zaninoviĉ, M. 'The Economy of Roman Dalmatia', Zaninoviĉ, M. 'The territory of the Neretva valley as a foothold of Roman penetration', in e 688, 173—80 9. africa Aranegui, C. and Hesnard, A. 'Magon et les amphores a huile a Lepcis', forthcoming Benabou, M. 'Proconsul et legat; le temoignage de Tacite', Benabou, M. La resistance africaine a la romanisation. Paris, 1976 Benseddik, N. Les troupes auxiliaires de Carmie romaine en Mauretanie Ce'sarienne. Alger, 1982 Benseddik, N. and Potter N. 'Excavations at the forum site at Cherchel, 1977-81', Beschaouch, A. 'Mustitana', Recueil des nouvelles inscriptions de Mustis, cite romaine de Tunisie. 1 (Karthago 14). Paris, 1968 Beschaouch, A. 'Le territoire de Sicca Veneria (El Kef), nouvelle Cirta, en Numidie Proconsulaire (Tunisie)', Broughton, T. R. S. Broughton, T. R. S. 'The territory of Carthage', Cagnat, R. L'arme'e romaine d Afrique et Г occupation militaire de Г Afrique sous les empereurs. Paris, 1913 Carcopino, J. 'L'inscription d'Ain el-Djemala. Contribution a l'histoire des "saltus" et du colonat partiaire', Chevallier, R. 'Essai de chronologie des centuriations romaines de Tunisie', Daniels, C. The Garamantes of Southern Libya. New York, 1970 Debbasch, Y. '"Colonia Julia Karthago". La vie et les institutions municipales de la Carthage romaine', Desanges, J. 'Le triomphe de Cornelius Balbus', R Desanges, J. 'Les territoires getules de Juba II', Desanges, J. 'Un drame africain sous Auguste. Le meurtre du proconsul L. Cornelius Lentulus par les Nasamons', in Faur, J.-C. 'Caligula et la Mauretanie, la fin de Ptolĉmĉe', Fevrier, P.-A. 'Le culte des Cereres en Afrique', Fishwick, D. 'The annexation of Mauretania', Fishwick, D. and Shaw, B. D. 'The era of the Cereres', Flach, D. 'Inschriftenuntersuchungen zum romischen Kolonat in Nordafrika', Gascou, J. La politique municipale de Г empire romaine en Afrique proconsulaire de Trajan a Septime-Shere. Rome, 1972 Gascou, J. 'Les curies africaines: origine punique ou italienne?' Gascou, J. 'Les Gascou, J. 'La politique municipale de Rome en Afrique du Nord: 1. De la mort d'Auguste au debut du IIIе siecle', ANRW 11, (1982) 136-229 Gascou, J. 'Pagus et castellum dans la confederation cirteenne', Gascou, J. 'Les Gsell, S. Gutsfeld, A. Romische Herrschaft und einbeimischer Wider stand in Nordafrika. Militarische Auseinanderset^ungen Roms mit den Nomaden. Stuttgart, 1989 Haywood, R. M. 'Roman Africa'. Part I of Heurgon, J. 'L'agronome Carthaginois Magon et ses traducteurs en latin et en grec', Hurst, H. 'Fouilles britanniques au port circulaire et quelques idees sur le developpement de la Carthage romaine', Kehoe, D. P. The Economics of Agriculture on Roman Imperial Estates in North Africa. Gottingen, 1988 Kotula, T. Les curies municipales en Afrique romaine. Warsaw, 1968 Lancel, S. (ed.) Histoire et archeologie de FAfrique du Nord. II' Colloque International. Grenoble. 198}. Bull. Arch, du Comite des Trav. Hist. 19 в. Paris, 1985 Lassere, J.-M. Le Glay, M. Leschi, L. Etudes depigraphie, darcheologie et dhistoire africaines. Paris, 1957 Leveau, P. Caesarea de Mauritanie: une ville romaine et ses campagnes. Rome, 1984 Mackie, N. 'Augustan colonies in Mauretania', Nerom, С. van 'Colonia Julia Concordia Karthago', Pflaum, H.-G. 'La romanisation de l'ancien territoire de la Carthage punique a la lumiere des decouvertes epigraphiques recentes', Picard, G. C. 'Neron et le Ыё d'Afrique', Picard, G. C. Les religions de FAfrique antique. Paris, 1954 Picard, G. C. 'L'administration territoriale de Carthage', Poinssot, C. Romanelli, P. Storia delleprovincie romane delFAfrica. Rome, 1959 Salama, P. 'La colonie de Rusguniae', Saumagne, C. 'Colonia Julia Karthago', Smadja, E. 'Remarques sur les debuts du culte imperial en Afrique sous le regne d'Auguste', in Syme, R. 'Tacfarinas, the Musulami and Thubursicum', in Teutsch, L. Das romische Stadtewesen in Nordafrika in der Zeit von C. Gracchus bis %um Tode des Kaisers Augustus. Berlin, 1962 Thebert, Y. 'La romanisation d'une cite indigene d'Afrique', 85 (1973) 247-312 Thompson, L. A. and Ferguson, J. Trousset, P. 'Les bornes du Bled Segui nouveaux aper9us sur la centuriadon romaine du sud Tunisien', Werff, J. H. van der. 'Amphores de tradition punique a Uzita', Whittaker, C. R. 'Land and labour in North Africa', io. cyrene Alfoldi, A. 'Commandants de la flotte romaine stationnee a Cyrene sous Pompee, Cesar et Octavien', And, C. Sculturegrecbe e romane di Cirene. Padua, 1959 Applebaum, S. Jews and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene. Leiden, 1979 Area Handbook for Libya. Washington, 1969 77 5. Bacchielli, L. Bowsky, M. Baldwin, Chamoux, F. 778. Desanges, J. 'Un drame africain sous Auguste, le meurtre du proconsul L. Cornelius Lentulus par les Nasamons', Economic Development of Libya. Baltimore, i960 Ermeti, A. L. Benghazi, March 1968) Goodchild, R. G. 'Roman milestones in Cyrenaica', Goodchild, R. G. 783. Goodchild, R. G. Cyrene and Apollonia, an Historical Guide. Cyrene, 1963 Goodchild, R. G. Humphrey, J. H. (ed.) Apollonia, the Port of Cyrene, Excavations by the University of Michigan 1967—7. Tripoli, 1976 Huskinson, J. Roman Sculpture from Cyrenaica in the British Museum. London, 1975 Johnson, D. L. Jabal al-Akhdar, Cyrenaica: an Historical Geography of Settlement and Livelihood. Chicago, 1973 Jones, G. D. B. and Little, J. H. 'Coastal settlement in Cyrenaica', Kraeling, С. H. Ptolemais, City of the Libyan Pentapolis. Chicago, 1962 Laronde, A. Laronde, A. 'La Cyrenaique romaine des origines a la fin des Severes, 96 av. J.-C.-235 ap. Laronde, A. Lloyd, J. A. (ed.) Excavations at Sidi Khrebish, Benghazi (Berenice) Tripoli-. i. Buildings, Coins, Inscriptions, Architectural Decoration (1977); n. Economic Life at Berenice, Sculpture and Terracottas, Coarse Pottery (1979); hi. 1. Fine pottery (1985); hi. 2. Lamps (1985). Tripoli Masson, O. 'Grecs et Libyens en Cyrene, d'apres les temoignages de l'epigraphie', Mingazzini, P. Paribeni, E. Catalogo delle sculture di Cirene; statue e rilievi di carattere religiose. Rome, 1959 Perl, G. 'Die romischen Provinzbeamten in Cyrenae und Creta', Pernier, L. II tempio e Faltare di Apollo a Cirene. Bergamo, 1935 Pesce, G. II Palasgo delle Colonne in Tolemaide di Cirenaica. Rome, 1950 Redde, M. Prospection des vallies du nord de la Libye (1979-80). La region de la Syrte a l'epoque romaine (Armee romaine et les provinces 4). Paris, 1988 Reynolds, J. (ed.) Reynolds, J. M. 'Senators originating in the provinces of Egypt and of Crete and Cyrene', in d 42, 671-8} Romanelli, P. Rosenbaum, E. A Catalogue of Cyrenaican Portrait Sculpture. London, 1969 Stucchi, S. L' Agora di Cirene: 1.I lati Nord e Est dellaplatea inferiore. Rome, 1965 Stucchi, S. Stucchi, S. and Bacchielli, L. L' Agora di Cirene: 11. 4. II lato sud della platea inferiore e il lato nord della terraiga superiore. Rome, 1983 807A. Thrige, J. P. Vitali, L. Fontiper la storia della religione cirenaica. Padua, 1932 White, D. The Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Cyrene, Libya, Final Reportr. 1 (1984); 11 (1985); in (1987). Philadelphia ii. greece and asia minor Alcock, S. E. 'Archaeology and imperialism: Roman expansion and the Greek city', Alcock, S. E. Graecia Capta: The Landscapes of Roman Greece. Cambridge, 1993 Baladie, R. Le Pe'loponnese de Strabon: Etude degiograpbie historique. Paris, 1980 Bean, G. E. Aegean Turkey, an Archaeological Guide. London, 1966 Bean, G. E. Turkey's Southern Shore, an Archaeological Guide. London, 1968 Bean, G. E. Turkey Beyond the Maeander, an Archaeological Guide. London, 1971 Bintliff, J. and Snodgrass, A. 'The Cambridge/Bradford Boeotia Expedition: the first four years', Bowersock, G. W. 'Eurycles of Sparta', Bowersock, G. W. 'Zur Geschichte des romischen Thessaliens', Box, H. 'Roman citizenship in Laconia', Broughton, T. R. S. 'Roman landholding in Asia Minor', Broughton, T. R. S. 'Roman Asia', in d 128, iv Chaumont, M. L. 'Armenia', Daux, G. 'Les Empereurs romains et l'Amphictionie pyleo-delphique', Day, J. An Economic History of Athens under Roman Domination. New York, 1942 Erim, К. T. Aphrodisias. City of Venus Aphrodite. London, 1986 Fossey, J. M. 'The cities of the Kopais in the Roman period', ANR IF II, 7-1 (i979) 549-91 Frantz, A. The Fraser, P. M. and Bean, G. E. French, D. H. 'The Roman road system of Asia Minor', Geagan, D. J. The Athenian Constitution after Sulla (Hesperia Suppl. 12). Princeton, 1967 Geagan, D. J. 'Roman Athens, some aspects of life and culture: 1. 86 b.c.- a.d. 267', Graindor, P. Graindor, P. Groag, E. Gwatkin, W. E. Halfmann, H. 'Die Senatoren aus den kleinasiatischen Provinzen des romischen Reiches vom 1. bis 3. Jahrhundert (Asia, Pontus-Bithynia, Lycia-Pamphylia, Galatia, Cappadocia, Cilicia)', in d 42, 603-50 Hanfmann, G. M. A. Sardis from Prehistoric to Roman Times: Results of the Archaeological Exploration of Sardis rpjS-197 j. Cambridge, MA, 1983 Harris, B. F. 'Bithynia: Roman sovereignty and the survival of Hellenism', Hellenkemper, H. 'Zur Entwicklung des Stadtbildes in Kilikien', Hoben, W. Untersuchungen t^ur Stellung kleinasiatischer Dynasten in den Machtkdmpfen der ausgehenden Republik. Mainz, 1969 Hoff, M. C. .'Civil disobedience and unrest in Augustan Athens', Holtheide, B. Romische Biirgerrechtspolitik und romische Neubŭrger in der Proving Asia. Diss., Heidelberg, 1983 Jameson, S. A. 'Lycia and Pamphylia, an historical review', in Campbell, A. C. (ed.) Jameson, S. A. 'The Lycian League: some problems in its administration', Kahrstedt, U. 'Die Territorien von Patrai und Nicopolis in der Kaiserzeit'. Kahrstedt, U. 'Zwei Probleme im kaiserlichen Griechenland', Kahrstedt, U. Das virtscbaftliche Gesicbt Griechenlands in der Kaiserzeit: Kleinstadt, Villa, und Domiin (Diss. Bern I, 7). Berne, 1954 Knibbe, D. and Alzinger, W. 'Ephesos vom Beginn der romischen Herrschaft in Kleinasien bis zum Ende der Prinzipatszeit', 7.2 (1980) 748-830 Larsen, J. A. O. 'The policy of Augustus in Greece', Larsen, J. A. O. 'Roman Greece', in d 128 in, 259-498 Levick, B. Roman Colonies in Southern Asia Minor. Oxford, 1967 Macro, A. D. 'The cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium', Magie, D. Roman Rule in Asia Minor to tbe end of the Third Century after Christ. Princeton, 1950 Mitchell, S. 'Legio VII and the garrison of Augustan Galatia', Mitchell, S. 'Roman residents and Roman property in southern Asia Minor', Mitchell, S. 'Archaeology in western and southern Asia Minor 1971—8: 1979—84' in Mitchell, S. 'Iconium and Ninica: two double communides in Roman Asia Minor', Mitford, Т. B. 'A Cypriot oath of allegiance to Tiberius', Mitford, Т. B. 'Roman Cyprus', Mitford, Т. B. 'Roman Rough Cilicia', Oliver, J. H. 'Panachaeans and Panhellenes', Oliver, J. H. 'Roman Senators from Greece and Macedon', in d 42, 583—602 Olshausen, E. 'Pontos und Rom (63 v. Chr.-64 n. Chr.)', Pekary, T. 'Kleinasien unter romischer Herrschaft', 595-657 (bibliography) Radt, W. Pergamon. Geschichte und Bauten, Funde und Erforschung einer antiken Metropole. Cologne, 1988 Rawlinson, H. C. 'Memoir on the site of the Atropenian Ecbatana', Rigsby, K. J. 'Cnossus and Capua', Robert, L. Robert, J. and L. Rostovtzeff, M. 'Augustus und Athen', Sanders, I. F. Schmitt, H. H. Shear, T. L. 'Athens: from city state to provincial town', 356-77 Sherk, R. K. Sherk, R. K. 'Roman Galatia: the governors from 25 b.c.-a.d. 114', Speidel, M. 'Legionaries from Asia Minor', Strubbe, J. 'A group of imperial estates in central Phrygia', Sullivan, R. D. 'The dynasty of Commagene', Sullivan, R. D. 'Dynasts in Pontus', Sullivan, R. D. 'The dynasty of Cappadocia', Syme, R. 'Galatia and Pamphylia under Augustus: the governorships of Piso, Quirinius and Silvanus', Syme, R. 'Pamphylia from Augustus to Vespasian', Teja, R. 'Die romische Provinz Kappadokien in der Prinzipatszeit', Travlos, J. Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens. London, 1971 Vogel-Weidemann, U. Die Statthalter von Africa und Asia in den Jahren 1468 n. Chr.: eine Untersucbung %um Verhdltnis Princeps und Senat. Antiquitas I, 31. Bonn, 1982 Wallace, P. W. 'Strabo's description of Boiotia, a commentary', Wiseman, J. 'Corinth and Rome', 12. egypt el-Abbadi, M. A. H. 'The Alexandrian citizenship', Bagnall, R. S. 'Publius Petronius, Augustan prefect of Egypt', Barns, J. W. B. Bastianini, G. 'Lista dei prefetti d'Egitto dal 30a al 299P', Bastianini, G. 'Aggiunte e correzioni', Bell, H. I. 'Alexandria ad Aegyptum', Bell, H. I. Cults and Creeds in Graeco-Roman Egypt. Liverpool, 1953 Bell, H. I. Egypt from Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest. Oxford, 1956 Bingen, J. 'L' Egypte greco-romaine et la problematique des interactions culturelles', Bonneau, D. Im crue du Nil, divinite igyptienne a travers mille ans d histoire (ĵĵ2 av-641 ap. j.-c.). Paris, 1964 Bonneau, D. Bowman, A. K. 'A letter of Avidius Cassius?', Bowman, A. K. Bowman, A. K. Bowman, A. K. 'Public buildings in Roman Egypt,' Bowman, A. K. and Rathbone, D. W. 'Cities and administration in Roman Egypt', Braunert, H. 'IDIA: Studien zur Bevolkerungsgeschichte des ptolemaischen und romischen Agypten Braunert, H. Die Binnenwanderung: Studien fur So%ialgeschichte Agyptens in der Ptolemaer\eit und Kaiserzeit (Bonner Historische Forschungen 26). Bonn, 1964 Brunt, P. A. 'The administrators of Roman Egypt', Butzer, K. W. Early Hydraulic Civilisation in Egypt. Chicago, 1976 Cavenaile, R. 'Prosopographie de l'armee romaine d'Egypte d'Auguste a Diocletien', Chalon, G. Criniti, N. 'Supplemento alia prosopografia dell'esercito romano d'Egitto da Augusto a Diocleziano', Criniti, N. 'Sulle forze armate romane d'Egitto: osservazioni e nuove aggiunti prosopografiche', Daris, S. 'Le truppe ausiliarie romane in Egitto,' Davies, R. W. 'Minicius Iustus and a Roman military document from Egypt', Devijver, H. 'The Roman army in Egypt (with special reference to the militiae equestres)', ANRW 11, 1 (1974) 452-92 Devijver, H. De Aegypto et exercitu romano sive prosopographia militiarum equestrium quae ab Augusto ad Gallienum seu statione seu origine ad Aegyptum pertinebant (Studia Hellenistica 22). Louvain, 1975 Devijver, H. 'L'Egypte et l'histoire de l'armee romaine', in Criscuolo, L. and Geraci, G. (eds.) Egitto e storia antica dalF ellenismo all eta araba, Attidel colloquio Internationale, Bologna, )i Agosto-2 Settembre, 19&7, 37-54. Bologna, 1989 Dobson, B. 'The praefectus castrorum Aegypti - a reconsideration', CE 57 o982) 322-37 Duncan-Jones, R. P. 'The price of wheat in Egypt under the Principate', Evans, J. A. S. 'A social and economic history of an Egyptian temple in the Greco-Roman period', Foti Talamanca, G. Ricerche sul processo пе1ГEgitto greco-romano: 1. L'organizzaz'one del 'Conventus' del 'Praefectus AegyptF-. 11. 1 Uintroduzjone delgiudizio. Milan, 1974—9 Fraser, P. M. Gara, A. Prosdiagraphomena e circolazione monetaria. Milan, 1976 Gara, A. 'Aspetti di economia monetaria dell'Egitto romano,' Geraci, G. Genesi della provincia romana dEgitto. Bologna, 1983 Geraci, G. 'Publio Petronio, il genetliaco di Augusto e il "Faraone Cesare'", Geraci, G. ' Grimm, G., Heinen, H. and Winter E. (eds.) Grimm, G., Heinen, H. and Winter E. (eds.) Das romisch-byzantinische Agypten, Akten des internationalen Symposions 26—30 September 1978 in Trier (Aegyptiaca Treverensia 2). Trier, 1983 Hagedorn, D. 'Zum Amt der Hanson, A. E. 'Publius Ostorius Scapula. Augustan Prefect of Egypt', ZPE 47 (1982) 243-53 Hanson, A. E. 'Two copies of a petition to the Prefect', Hanson, A. E. 'The keeping of records at Philadelphia in the Julio- Claudian period and the "Economic Crisis" under Nero', Haycock, B. G. 'The later phases of Meroitic civilization', Hobson, D. W. 'Women as property owners in Roman Egypt', Hobson, D. W. 'The role of women in the economic life of Roman Egypt: a case study from first century Tebtunis', Hohlwein, N. Hopkins, K. 'Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt', Humbert, M. La Juridiction duprefet d'Ĉgypte dAuguste a Diocletien. Paris, 1964 Jameson, S. 'Chronology of the campaigns of Aelius Gallus and C. Petronius', Johnson, A. C. Roman Egypt to the Reign of Diocletian. (= d 128, n) Kennedy, D. L. 'The composition of a military work party in Egypt ( Kirwan, L. P. 'Rome beyond the southern Egyptian frontier', РВА 5 3 (i977) ч-31 Lesquier, J. L'armee romaine dEgypte dAuguste a Diocletien (IFAO Me moires 41). Cairo, 1918 Lewis, N. 'Graeco-Roman Egypt: fact or fiction?', Lewis, N. Lewis, N. Life in Egypt under Roman Rule. Oxford, 1983 Lewis, N. 'The romanity of Roman Egypt: a growing consensus', Maehler, H. G. T. 'Egypt under the last Ptolemies', Meredith, D. 'The Roman remains in the eastern desert of Egypt', Milne, J. G. A History of Egypt under Roman Rule. London, 1924 Modrzejewski, J. 'La regie de droit dans l'Egypte romaine', 9$ 2. Montevecchi, O. 'L'amministrazione dell'Egitto sotto i Giulio-Claudi,' Nelson, C. A. Oertel, F. 95 6. Parassoglou, G. M. Pflaum, H.-G. 'Un nouveau diplome militaire d'un soldat de l'armee d'Egypte', Porter, B. and Moss, R. L. B. Preaux, C. 'L'attache a la terre: continuites de l'Egypte ptolemalque a l'Egypte romaine', in e 928, 1-5 Rathbone, D. W. 'The ancient economy and Graeco-Roman Egypt', in Criscuolo, L. and Geraci, G. (eds.) Rathbone, D. W. 'Villages, land and populadon in Graeco-Roman Egypt,' Rathbone, D. W. 'Egypt, Augustus and Roman taxation', Rowlandson, J. L. Landowners and Tenants in Roman Egypt: the Social Relations of Agriculture in the Oxyrbyncbite Nome. Oxford, 1996 Seidl, E. Recbtsgeschichte Agyptens als romische Proving: die Behauptung des agyptiscben Recbts neben den romischen. St Augustin, 1973 Sijpesteijn, P. J. Skeat, Т. C. 'The Augustan era in Egypt', Stead, M. 'The high-priest of Alexandria and all Egypt', Speidel, M. 'Nubia's Roman garrison', Speidel, M. P. 'Augustus' deployment of the legions in Egypt', Straus, J. A. 'L'esclavage dans l'Egypte romaine,' Strocka, V. M. 'Augustus als Pharao', Swarney, P. R. Thomas, J. D. The Epistrategos in Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt: 1. The Ptolemaic Epistrategos; n. The Roman Epistrategos (Papyrologica Coloniensia 6). 1975-82 Thomas, J. D. 'Compulsory public service in Roman Egypt', in e 928, 3 5-9 Tomsin, A. 'Etude sur lespresbyteroi des villages de la chora egyptienne', Academic royale de Belgique, Classe des Lettres et des Sciences morales et politiques, Bulletin 38 (1952) 95—130, 467-532 Torok, L. 'Geschichte Meroes. Ein Beitrag fiber die Quellenlage und den Forschungsstand', Turner, E. G. 'Roman Oxyrhynchus', Turner, E. G. 'Oxyrhynchus and Rome', Wallace, S. L. Taxation in Egypt from Augustus to Diocletian. Princeton, 1938 Weingartner, D. G. West, L. C. and Johnson, A. C. Whitehorne, J. E. G. 'More about L. Pompeius Niger, legionary veteran', 98 3. Whitehorne, J. E. G. 'Recent research on the Wolff, H.-J. Das Recht der griechischen Papyri Agyptens in der Zeit der Ptolemaer und des Principals: 11. Organisation und Kontrolle des privaten Rechtsverkehrs (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft 10). Munich, 1978 13. syria Baity, J. and J. C. 'Apamee de Syrie, archeologie et histoire, 1. Des origines a la Tetrarchie', Bawden, G. 'Khief El-Zarah and the nature of the Dedonite hegemony in the al- 'Ula oasis', Berchem, D. van. 'Leplan de Palmyre', Bietenhard, H. 'Die syrische Dekapolis von Pompeius bis Traian', Bindiff, J. L. 'Climatic change, archaeology and Quaternary science in the eastern Mediterranean region', in Harding, A. (ed.) Bowersock, G. W. Bowsher, J. 'The Nabataean army', in e 1008 в, 19-30 Brown, J. P. The Lebanon and Phoenicia-, 1 The Physical Setting and the Forest. Beirut, 1966 Cantineau, J. 'Textes Palmyreniens provenant de la fouille du Temple de Bel', Colledge, M. A. R. 'Le temple de Bel a Palmyre: qui l'a fait, et pourquoi?' in Colledge, M. A. R. 'Interpretado Romana: the semidc populations of Syria and Mesopotamia', in Henig, M. and King, A. (eds.) Cumont, F. 'The population of Syria', Dayton, J. E. 'A Roman/Byzantine site in the Hedjaz', Dentzer, J.-M. 'Sondages pres de Pare nabateen a Bostra', Dentzer, J.-M. Dentzer, J.-M. 'Developpement et culture de la Syrie du Sud dans la periode prĉprovinciale (ier siĉcle avant J.-C.-i" siĉcle aprĉs J.-C.)', in e 999.2> 387-420 Dentzer, J.-M. 'Les sondages de 1'arc nabateen et l'urbanisme de Bostra', Dentzer, J.-M. and J. 'Les fouilles de Si et la phase hellenistique en Syrie du Sud', DeVries, B. 'Umm el-Jimal in the first three centuries a.d.', in e 1008 a, 227-41 Dihle, A. 'Das Datum des Periplus des Roten Meeres', in Downey, G. 'The size of the population of Antioch', Dussaud, R. La penetration des Arabes en Syrie avant Flslam. Paris, 1955 Evenari, M., Shanan, L. and Tadmor, N. 1008a. Freeman, P. and Kennedy, D. (eds.) Gatier, P.-L. 'Philadelphie et Gerasa, du royaume nabateen a la province d'Arabie', Gracey, M. H. 'The Roman army in Syria, Judaea and Arabia'. 2 vols. Diss., Oxford, 1981 Graf, D. 'The Nabataeans and the Decapolis', in d 1008 a, 785—96 Heichelheim, F.M., 'Roman Syria', in d 128 iv, 121-258 Hŭtteroth, W.-D. and Abdulfattah, K. Historical Geography of Palestine. Transjordan and Southern Syria in the Late 16th Century. Erlangen, 1977 Ingraham, M. L., Johnson, T. D., Rihani, B. and Shatla, I. 'Preliminary report on a reconnaissance survey of the Northwestern Province (with a note on a brief survey of the Northern Province)', Isaac, B. 'Trade routes to Arabia and the Roman army', Isaac, B. 'The Decapolis in Syria. A neglected inscription', i о 17. Janssen, A. and Savignac, R. Jones, A. H. M. 'The urbanisation of Palestine', Jones, A. H. M. 'The urbanisation of the Ituraean principality', Jones, C. P. 'Three foreigners in Attica', Kennedy, D. L. 'Parthians in the Roman army', in Fitz, J. (ed.) Kennedy, D. L. 'The auxilia and numeri raised in the Roman Province of Syria', Diss., Oxford, 1980 Kennedy, D. L. 'C. Velius Rufus', Kennedy, D. L. and Riley, D. Kirwan, L. 'A Roman shipmaster's handbook', Kirwan, L. 'Where to search for the ancient port of Leuke Kome', Kraeling, С. H. 'The Jewish community at Antioch', Kraeling, С. H. Lassus, J. Lesportiques d"Antioche. Antioch on the Orontes, 5. Princeton, 1972 Lauffray, J. 'Beyrouth I', Lewis, N. N. Nomads and Settlers in Syria and Jordan, 1800-1980. Cambridge, 1987 103 5. Liebeschuetz, J. W. H. G. 'Epigraphic evidence on the Christianization of Syria', Lindner, M. Petra und das Konigreich der Nabatder. 2 vols. Munich, 1974 Matthews, J. F. 'The tax law of Palmyra. Evidence for economic history in a city of the Roman East', McKenzie, J. Millar, F. G. B. 'Empire, community and culture in the Roman Near East: Greeks, Syrians, Jews and Arabs', Millar, F. G. B. 'The Roman Miller, D. S. 'Bostra in Arabia: Nabataean and Roman city of the Near East', in Marchese, R. T. Miller, J. I. Tbe Spice Trade of tbe Roman Empire, 29 b.c. to a.d. 641. Oxford, 1969 Mouterde, R. 'Туг, les agoranomes de Pan 60', Muhly, J. D. 'Copper and tin', Negev, A. Tbe Nabataean Potter's Workshop at Oboda. Bonn, 1974 Negev, A. 'The Nabataeans and the Provincia Arabia', Negev, A. Parr, P. J., Harding, G. L. and Dayton, J. E. 'Preliminary survey in NW Arabia, 1968', Peters, F. E. 'The Nabataeans in the Hauran', Peters, F. E. 'City planning in Greco-Roman Syria; some new considerations', Ragette, F. Raikes, R. 'The climate and hydrological background to the postglacial introduction of farming in the Middle East and its subsequent spread, with examples from Jordan', in Hadidi, A. (ed.) Rey-Coquais, J.-P. 'Syrie romaine, de Pompee a Diocletien', Richmond, I. A. 'Palmyra under the aegis of Rome', Sartre, M. Sartre, M. Bostra. Des Origines a FIslam. Paris, 1985 Schlumberger, D. 'Bornes frontieres de la Palmyrene', Schmidt-Colinet, A. 'Nabataische Felsarchitektur: Bemerkungen zum gegenwartigen Forschungsstand', Seyrig, H. 'Questions heliopolitaines', Sourdel, D. Starcky, J. 'Petra et la Nabatene', Strong, E. 'Sulle tracce della Lupa Romana', in Paribeni, R. (ed.) Sullivan, R. D. 'Papyri reflecting the eastern dynastic network', Sullivan, R. D. 'The dynasty of Emesa', Teixidor, J. Unport romain du desert. Palmyre. (Semitica 34). Paris, 1984 Tirpan, A. 'Roman masonry techniques at the capital of the Commagenian kingdom', in e ioo8b, 519-36 Vita-Finzi, C. The Mediterranean Valleys. Geological Changes in Historical Times. Cambridge, 1969 Wenning, R. Die Nabataer- Denkmaler und Geschichte. Gottingen, 1987 Winnett, F. V. and Reed, W. L. Wright, G. R. H. 'The Khazneh at Petra: a review', 14. judaea Alon, G. Jews, Judaism and the Classical World. Jerusalem, 1977 Applebaum, S. 'The Zealots: the case for revaluation', Applebaum, S. 'Judaea as a Roman province; the countryside as a political and economic factor', Applebaum, S. Judaea in Hellenistic and Roman Times. Leiden, 1989 Archer, L. J. 'The role of Jewish women in the religion, ritual and cult of Graeco-Roman Palestine', in Cameron, A. and Kuhrt, A. (eds.) Archer, L. J. Her Price is Beyond Rubies. The Jewish Woman in Graeco- Roman Palestine. Sheffield, 1990 Avi-Yonah, M. and Stern, E. (eds.) Avi-Yonah, M., Baras, Z. and Peli, A. (eds.) Avigad, N. Avigad, N. Baer, Y. 'Jerusalem in the times of the Great Revolt', Bammel, E. 'Die Rechtsstellung des Herodes', Bammel, E. and Moule, C. F. D. (eds.) Bar-Adon, P. 'Another settlement of the Judaean desert sect at 'En el- Ghuweir on the shores of the Dead Sea', Bar-Kochva, B. 'Seron and Cestius at Beith Horon', Barnes, T. D. 'Trajan and the Jews', Barnett, P. W. 'Under Tiberius all was quiet', Barnett, P. W. 'The Jewish sign prophets a.d. 40-70 - their intendons and origin', Baron, S. W. A Social and Religious History of the Jews-. 1. Ancient Times: to the Beginning of the Christian Era. New York-London, 1952 Baumann, U. Rom und die Juden: die romisch-jiidischen Be^iehungen von Pompeius bis %um Tode Herodes, 6} v. Chr-4 v. Chr. Frankfurt, 1983 Ben-Shalom, I. 'The Shammai school and its place in the political and social history of Eretz Israel in the first century a.d.'. Ph.D. thesis, Tel Aviv, 1980. In Hebrew 109}. Benoit, P., Milik, J. T. and De Vaux, R. Bilde, P. 'The causes of the Jewish War according to Josephus', Blenkinsopp, J. 'Prophecy and priesthood in Josephus', Brandon, S. G. F. The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church. 2nd edn. London, 1957 Brandon, S. G. F. Jesus and the Zealots: a Study of the Political Factors in Primitive Christianity. Manchester, 1967 Brooten, B. J. Women Leaders of the Ancient Synagogue: lnscriptional Evidence and Background Issues. Chico, 1982 Brunt, P. A. 'Josephus on social conflicts in Roman Judaea', Busink, T. A. Der Tempel von Jerusalem von Salomo bis Herodes. 2 vols. Leiden, 1980 11 о i. Cohen, S. J. D. 'The origins of the matrilineal principle in rabbinic law', Cohen, S.J. D. 'Was Timothy Jewish (Acts 16:13)? Patrisdc exegesis, rabbinic law and matrilineal descent', Cohen, S. J. D. 'Crossing the boundary and becoming a Jew', Collins, J.J. Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora. New York, 1983 Corbishley, T. 'Quirinius and the census: a re-study of the evidence', Crook, J. A. 'Titus and Berenice', Davies, P. S. 'The meaning of Philo's text about the gilded shields', De Lange, N. R. M. 'Jewish attitudes to the Roman Empire', in Garnsey, P. D. A. and Whittaker, C. R. (eds.) Dimant, D., Мог, M. and Rappaport, U. (eds.) Bibliography of Works on Jewish History in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Periods. Publications of the Years 1981-198}. Jerusalem, 1987 Dupont-Sommer, A. 'Exorcismes et guerisons dans les recits de Qoumran', Epstein, L. M. Marriage Laws in the Bible and the Talmud. Cambridge, MA, 1942 Farmer, W. R. Maccabees, Zealots and Josephus, an Inquiry into Jewish Nationalism in the Greco-Roman Period. New York, 1956 Farmer, W. R. 'Judas, Simon and Athronges', Fasola, U. M. 'Le due catacombe ebraiche di Villa Torlonia', R Freyne, S. Galilee from Alexander the Great to Hadrian, j2j b.c.e. to rjj c.e. Notre Dame, 1980 об ii6. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. I23. I24. 125- 12б. 127. 128. I29. I30. 131. 132. 43 134. 135 136. 137 Fuks, G. 'Again on the episode of the gilded Roman shields at Jerusalem', Gabba, E. 'The finances of King Herod', in Kasher, A., Rappaport, U. and Fuks, G. (eds.) Ghiretti, M. 'Lo "status" della Giudea dall'eta Augustea all'eta Claudia', Gichon, M. 'Idumea and the Herodian limes', Golb, N. 'The problem of origin and identification of the Dead Sea Scrolls', Goodblatt, D. 'The place of the Pharisees in first century Judaism: the state of the debate', Goodenough, E. R. Goodman, M. D. 'The first Jewish revolt: social conflict and the problem of debt', Goodman, M. D. 'A bad joke in Josephus', Gracey, M. H. 'The armies of the Judaean client-kings', in e 1008 a, 311-23 Hachlili, R. and Killebrew, A. 'Jewish funerary customs during the Second Temple period, in the light of the excavations at the Jericho necropolis', Hengel, M. 'Proseuche und Synagoge: Judische Gemeinde, Gotteshaus und Gottesdienst in der Diaspora und in Palastina', in Jeremias, G., Kuhn, H. W. and Stegemann, H. (eds.) London,1989 Hengel, M. The Zealots: Investigations into the Jewish Freedom Movement in the Periodfrom Herod I until70 a.d. Edinburgh, 1989 Hoehner, W. W. Holum, K. G. et al. King Herod's Dream. Caesarea on the Sea. New York, 1989 Horsley, R. A. 'Josephus and the bandits', Horsley, R. A. 'The sicarii: ancient Jewish "terrorists'", Horsley, R. A. 'Ancient Jewish banditry and the revolt against Rome, a.d. 66—70', CBJ245 (1981) 409—32 Horsley, R. A. 'Menahem in Jerusalem: a brief messianic episode among the Sicarii - not "Zealot Messianism"', Horsley, R. A. 'High Priests and the politics of Roman Palestine. A contextual analysis of the evidence in Josephus', Horsley, R. A. 'Popular prophetic movements at the time of Jesus', Horsley, R. A. 'The Zealots: their origin, relationship and importance in the Jewish revolt', Horsley, R. A. and Hanson, J. S. Bandits, Prophets and Messiahs. Popular Movements in the Time of Jesus. Minneapolis, 1985 Isaac, B. 'Bandits in Judaea and Arabia', Isaac, B. 'Judaea after a.d. 70', 11 j i. Jeremias, J. Jones, A. H. M. Kasher, A. (ed.) The Great Jewish Revolt: Factors and Circumstances Leading to its Outbreak. Jerusalem, 1983. In Hebrew Kasher, A. 115 7. Kingdon, H. P. 'The origins of the Zealots', Klausner, J. Kloner, A. 'Underground hiding complexes from the Bar Kochba war in the Judaean Shephelah', Kloner, A. and Tepper, Y. Kochavi, M. (ed.) Judaea, Samaria and the Golan: Archaeological Survey 1967—1968. Jerusalem, 1972. In Hebrew Kokkinos, N. 'A fresh look at the gentilicium of Felix, procurator of Judaea', Kraabel, A. T. 'The Roman diaspora: six questionable assumptions', Kraft, R. A. 'The multiform Jewish heritage of early Christianity', in ю8 1165. 1166. 1167. 1168. 1169. 1170. 1171. 1172. 1173. 1174. 1175. 1176. 1177. 1178. 1179 1180. 1181. 1182. 1183. 1184. 1185. 1186. 1187. 1188 1189 Kreissig, H. 'Die landwirtschaftliche Situation in Palastina vor dem Judaischen Krieg', Levine, L. I. (ed.) Levine, L. I. (ed.) Lieberman, S. Theol. Sem. of America 18). New York, 1950 Lieberman, S. 1987 McEleney, N. J. 'Orthodoxy in Judaism of the first Christian century', Mantel, H. P. Millar, F. G. B. 'The background to the Maccabean revolution', Netzer, E. 'Miqvaot (ritual baths) of the Second Temple period at Jericho', j2 Piattelli, D. 'Ricerche intorno alle relazioni politiche tra Rome e Pucci, M. La Rivolta Ebraica al tempo di Traiano. Pisa, 1981 Rahmani, L. Y. 'Ancient Jerusalem's funerary customs and the tombs: part three', Rahmani, L. Y. 'Some remarks on R. Hachlili's and A. Killebrew's "Jewish funerary customs'", Rajak, T. 'Justus of Tiberias', Rajak, T. 'Was there a Roman charter for the Jews?' Rappaport, U. 'Jewish-pagan relations and the revolt against Rome in 66-70 c.E.', Rappaport, U. 'John of Gischala: from Galilee to Jerusalem', JJS 33 (1982) 479-9i Rappaport, U. and Мог, M. Bibliography of Works on Jewish History in the Hellenistic and Roman Period, 1976—1980. Jerusalem, 1982 Reynolds, J. and Tannenbaum, R. Rhoads, D. M. Israel in Revolution: 6-74 c.E.: a Political History Based on the Writings of Josephus. Philadelphia, 1976 Rivkin, E. A Hidden Revolution. The Pharisees' Search for the Kingdom Within. Nashville, 1978 Roth, C. 'The historical implications of the Jewish coinage of the First Revolt', Roth, C. 'The constitution of the Jewish republic of 66-70', Rowland, C. The Open Heaven: a Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity. London, 1982 Safrai, S. and Stern, M. (eds.) Sanders, E. P. Jewish Law from Jesus to the Mishnah: Five Studies. London- Philadelphia, 1990 Schalit, A. Konig Herodes: der Mann und sein Werk. Berlin, 1969 Schiirer, E. Schwartz, D. R. 'Ishmael ben Phiabi and the chronology of Provincia Judaea', Schwartz, D. R. Shanks, H. Judaism in Stone: the Archaeology of Ancient Synagogues. New York, 1979 Smallwood, E. M. 'High priests and politics in Roman Palestine', Smallwood, E. M. The Jews under Roman Rulefrom Pompey to Diocletian: a Study in Political Relations. Leiden, 1976 Smith, M. 'Zealots and sicarii: their origins and relations', Sparks, H. F. D. (ed.) Speidel, M. P. 'The Roman army in Judaea under the procurators', 1215 a. Stemberger, G. Stern, M. 'Herod's policy and Jewish society at the end of the Second Temple period', Stern, M. 'The status of Provincia Judaea and its governors in the Roman Empire under the Julio-Claudian dynasty', Stern, M. 'Aspects of Jewish society: the priesthood and other classes', in e 1204,11, 561-630 Stern, M. 'Sicarii and Zealots', in Avi-Yonah, M. and Baras, Z. (eds.) Stern, M. 'The expulsion of Jews from Rome in antiquity', Stern, M. 'Social and political realignments in Herodian Judaea', Stern, M. 'The suicide of Eleazar ben Jair and his men at Masada, and the "Fourth Philosophy"', Stone, M. E. Scriptures, Sects and Visions: a Profile ofJudaism from E%ra to the Jewish Revolt. Oxford, 1982 Sullivan, R. D. 'The dynasty of Judaea in the first century', Tcherikover, V. A. Tcherikover, V. A. 'Was Jerusalem a Polis?', Theissen, G. The First Followers of Jesus: a Sociological Analysis of the Earliest Christians. London, 1978 Urbach, E. E. Vaux, R. de Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls. London, 1973 Vermes, G. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective. London, 1977 Vermes, G. Vidal-Naquet, P. 'Du bon usage de la trahison', in Josephus, Wilkinson, J. 'Ancient Jerusalem: its water supply and population', Winter, P. Yadin, Y. Masada: Herod's Fortress and the Zealots' Last Stand. London, 1966 Yadin, Y. (ed.) Jerusalem Revealed: Archaeology in the Holy City 1968-1974. Jerusalem, 1975 Zeidin, S. The Rise and Fall of the Judaean State. A Political, Social and F. SOCIETY, RELIGION AND CULTURE 1. society and its institutions Alfoldy, G. Astolfi, R. Atkinson, К. M. 'The purpose of the manumission laws of Augustus', 1] n.s. i (1966) 356-74 Badian, E. 'A phantom marriage-law', Barrow, R. H. Bauman, R. A. 'Some remarks on the structure and survival of the Besnier, R. 'Properce (Elegies II, vii et viiA) et le premier echec de la legislation demographique d'Auguste', Bollinger, T. Theatralis licentia: die Publikumsdemonstrationen an den offentlichen Spielen im Rom. Winterthur, 1969 Bouvrie, S. des 'Augustus' legislation on morals. Which morals and what aims?' 10. Bradley, K. R. п. Brunt, P. A. '"Amicitia" in the late Roman Republic', Brunt, P. A. Social Conflicts in the Roman Republic. London, 1971 Brunt, P. A. 'Two great Roman landowners', Brunt, P. A. Brunt, P. A. 'Clientela', in a ii, 382-442 Cameron, A. Circus Pactions: Blues and Greens at Rome and Byzantium. Oxford, 1976 Clavel-Leveque, M. Cohen, B. 'La notion d'"ordo" dans la Rome antique', Corte, F. della. 'Le leges Iuliae e l'elegia romana', Crawford, M. H. 'Greek intellectuals and the Roman aristocracy in the first century в.с.', in Garnsey, P. D. A. and Whittaker, C. R. (eds.) Crook, J. A. D'Arms, J. H. Commerce and Social Standing in Ancient Rome. Cambridge, MA, 1981 D'Arms, J. H. 'Control, companionship and clientela: some social functions of the Roman communal meal', D'Arms, J. H. 'The Roman De Ruyt, C. Macellum, marche alimentaire des remains. Louvain, 1985 Dixon, S. 'Infirmitas sexus: womanly weakness in Roman law', 26л. Dixon, S. Domenicis, M. de. 'La Latinitas Iuniana e la legge Elia Senzia', Melanges dArcheologie et dHistoire offerts a Andre Piganiol in, 1419-31. Paris, 1966 Duff, A. M. Duncan-Jones, R.-P. 'Demographic change and economic progress under the Roman Empire', in Flambard, M. ' Frezouls, E. 'Le theatrum lapideum et son contexte politique', in Theatre et spectacles dans I' Antiquite, Actes du colloque de Strasbourg (1981), 193-214. Leiden, 1983 Galinsky, G. K. 'Augustus' legislation on morals and marriage', Gardner, J. F. Women in Roman Law and Society. London, 1986 Gardner, J. F. 'Proofs of status in the Roman world', Garnsey, P. 'Urban property investment', in a 27, 123-36 Garnsey, P. (ed.) Non-Slave Labour in the Greco-Roman World. Cambridge, 1980 Garnsey, P. 'Descendants of freedmen in local politics: some criteria', in Levick, В. M. (ed.) Hands, A. R. Charities and Social Aid in Greece and Rome. London, 1968 Harris, W. V. 'On the applicability of the concept of class in Roman history', in a hi, 598-610 Hopkins, M. K. 'The age of Roman girls at marriage', Ladage, D. 'Soziale Aspekte des Kaiserkultes', in Eck, W. MacMullen, R. 'Market days in the Roman Empire', MacMullen, R. Roman Social Relations jo b.c. to a.d. 284. New Haven, 1974 Montagna Pasquinucci, M. (ed.) Mrozek, S. 'Crustulum et mulsum dans les villes italiennes', Necropolis a incineration du Haut-Empire, Actes de la table ronde de Lyon 1986. Lyons, 1987 Nicolet, C. 'Plebe et tribus. Les statues de Lucius Antonius et le testament d'Auguste', Purcell, N. 'The 125-73 Purcell, N. 'Livia and the womanhood of Rome', Purcell, N. 'Town in country and country in town', in MacDougall, E. B. (ed.) 5 2. Purcell, N. 'Tomb and suburb', in Hesberg, H. von and Zanker, P. (eds.) Raditsa, L. F. 'Augustus' legislation concerning marriage, procreation, love-affairs and adultery', Rawson, B. The Family in Ancient Rome. New Perspectives. London, 1986 Rawson, E. D. 'Theatrical life in Rome and Italy', Rawson, E. D. 'Discrimina ordinum: the Lex lulia Theatralis', Robert, L. Sailer, R. Personal Patronage under the Early Empire. Cambridge, 1982 Sailer, R. 'Men's age at marriage and its consequences in the Roman family', Scheid, J. Les freres Arvales. Recrutement et origine sociale sous les empereurs julio-claudiens. Paris, 1975 Scheid, J. 'Les pretres officiels sous les empereurs julio-claudiens', Schumacher, L. 'Die vier hohen romischen Priesterkollegien unter den Flaviern, den Antoninen und den Severem (69—23 5 n. Chr.), Setala, P. Private Domini in Roman Brick Stamps of the Empire. A Historical and Prosopographical Study of Landowners in the District of Rome (Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae. Dissertationes humanarum litterarum 10). Helsinki, 1977 Shaw, B. D. 'The age of Roman girls at marriage: some reconsiderations', Spruit, J. E. De lex lulia et Papia Poppaea. Beschouwingen over de bevolkingspolitiek van Augustus (Univ. of Leiden Inaugural Lecture). Deventer, 1969 Toynbee, J. Death and Burial in the Roman World. London, 1971 Treggiari, S. Roman Freedmen During the Late Republic. Oxford, 1969 Treggiari, S. 'Lower-class women in the Roman economy', (1979) 65-g6 Treggiari, S. Roman Marriage. Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the TimeoflĴlpian. Oxford, 1991 Veyne, P. Le pain et le cirque. Sociologie historique dun pluralisme politique. Paris, 1976 (Translated and abridged as Bread and Circuses: Historical Sociology and Political Pluralism. London, 1990) Wacke, A. 'Manumissio matrimonii causa: le mariage d'affranchies d'apres les lois d'Auguste, RD 67 (1989) 413-28 Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'Family and inheritance in the Augustan marriage laws', Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'Propaganda and dissent? Augustan moral legislation and the love-poets', in а 54л, 180-4 Wallace-Hadrill, A., ed. Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'Patronage in Roman society', in f 75, 63-87 Weaver, P. R. C. ' White, P.' White, P. 'Positions for poets in early imperial Rome', in a 39A, 50-66 Whitehead, D. 'The measure of a millionaire: what Crassus really said', Wiseman, T. P. 'Conspicui postes templaque digna deo: the public image of aristocratic and imperial houses in the late Republic and early Empire', in a 96, 393-44 Witherington, B. 2. religion Alfoldi, A. Die %wei Lorbeerbaume des Augustus. Bonn, 1973 Altheim, F. Barnes, T. D. 'Legislation against the Christians', Barton, I. M. 'Capitoline temples in Italy and the Provinces (especially Africa)', Bauer, W. Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity. Philadelphia, 1971 Bayet, J. Les origines de FHercule romain (BEFAR 132). Rome, 1926 Bayet, J. 'Les sacerdoces romains et la ргё-divinisation imperiale', Beard, M. Review of McBain 1982 (f 177), Beard, M. 'Writing and ritual: a study of diversity and expansion in the Arval Acta', Beard, M. 'A complex of times: no more sheep on Romulus' birthday', 92л. Beard, M. and North, J. Beaujeu, J. La religion romaine а Г apogee de F empire 1. Paris, 1955 Becher, I. 'Tiberiiberschwemmungen. Die Interpretation von Prodigien in augusteischer Zeit', Bianchi, A. 'Disegno storico del culto Capitolino nell'Italia romana e nelle provincie dellTmpero', Bickerman, E. J. 'Filius Maiae (Horace, Odes, 1.2.43)', PP (1961) 519 Bomer, F. 'Kybele in Rom', Bomer, F. 'Wie ist Augustus mit Vesta verwandt?', Bornkamm, G. Bousset, W. Bowker, J. Boyance, P. 'Properce aux fetes de quartier', Boyance, P. 'Cybele aux Megalesies, Brelich, A. 'Offerte e interdizioni alimentari nel culto della Magna Mater a Roma', Bremmer, J. and Horsfall, N. Brind'amour, P. 'L'origine des jeux seculaires', Brunt, P. A. 'Stoicism and the principate', Burnett, A. Review of Rainer, A. Das Bild des Augustus auf den friihen Reichspragungen, Gnomon 55 (1983) 563—5 Cannadine, D. and Price, S. (eds.) Rituals of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies. Cambridge, 1987 Catalano, P. 'Aspetti spaziali del sistema giuridico-religioso romano. Mundus, templum, urbs, ager, Latium, Italia', ANRW 11, 16.1 (1978) 440-5 5 3 Chadwick, H. Charles worth, J. H. Charlesworth, M. P. 'The virtues of the Roman emperor. Propaganda and the creation of belief, РВА (1937) 105-33 Charlesworth, M. P. 'The refusal of divine honours, an Augustan formula', Coarelli, F. 'II Pantheon, l'apoteosi di Augusto e 1'apoteosi di Romolo', Collins, J. J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: an Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity. New York, 1987 Danielou, J. The Theology of Jewish Christianity. London, 1964 Davies, W. D. Diels, H. Dilke, O. A. W. 'Religious mystique in the training of Agrimensores', Dumĉzil, G. 'Augur', Dumĉzil, G. Dumĉzil, G. Dumĉzil, G. Fetes romaines d'ete et d'automne. Paris, 1975 Dunn, J. D. G. Duthoy, R. 'Recherches sur la repartition geographique et chronologique des termes Duthoy, R. 'Les Augustales', Erkell, H. Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna. Lateinische Wortstudien. Gothenburg, 1952 Erkell, H. 'Ludi saeculares und ludi Latini saeculares', Esler, P. F. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: the Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology. Cambridge, 1987 Evans, C. F. 'The New Testament in the making', Fauth, W. 'Romische Religion im Spiegel der "Fasti" des Ovid', Fayer, С. Fishwick, D. Fishwick, D. 'The development of provincial ruler worship in the western Roman empire', Fishwick, D. The Imperial Cult in the Latin West 1 (EPRO 108). Leiden, 1987 Fredriksen, P. From Jesus to Christ: the Origins of the New Testament Images of Jesus. New Haven, 1988 Frend, W. H. C. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church. Oxford, 1965 Frend, W. H. C. Gage, J. 'Romulus-Augustus', Gage, J. 'Les sacerdoces d'Auguste et ses reformes religieuses', Gage, J. 'Recherches sur les jeux seculaires II. Ce que nous apprennent les nouveaux fragments epigraphiques', 143A. Gage, J. 'Recherches sur les jeux seculaires III. Jeux seculaires et jubiles de la fondation de Rome', REL 11 (1933) 400-35 (= Gage, J. 'Actiaca', Gage, J. 'Le "Templum Urbis" et les origines de l'idee de "Renovatio"', Gage, J. Apollon romain. Essai sur le culte dApollon et le diveloppement du 'ritus Graecus' a Rome des origines a Auguste. Paris, 1955 Gager, J. G. Kingdom and Community: the Social World of Early Christianity. Englewood Cliffs, 1975 Gordon, R. L. 'The veil of power: emperors, sacrificers, and benefactors', in f 92л, 201-31 Grant, F. C. Grant, F. C. Grant, M. Grant, R. M. Guarducci, M. 'Enea e Vesta', MDAI(R). 78 (1971) 73-118 (= Scritti scelti sulla religione greca a romana e sul cristianesimo, 198—243. Leiden, 1983) Habicht, C. 'Die augusteische Zeit und das erste Jahrhundert nach Christi Geburt', Harvey, A. E. Jesus and the Constraints of History. London, 1982 Hock, R. F. The Social Context of PauFs Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship. Philadelphia, 1980 Holladay, A. J. and Goodman, M. D. 'Religious scruples in ancient warfare', 15 8. Jal, P. 'Les dieux et les guerres civiles dans la Rome de la fin de la Republique', R Judge, E. A. The Social Pattern of Christian Groups in the First Century. London,i960 Kee, H. C. Medicine, Miracle and Magic in New Testament Times. Cambridge, 1986 Knoche, U. 'Die augusteische Auspragung der Dea Roma', Koch, C. Koch, C. 'Der altromische Staatskult im Spiegel augusteischer und spatrepublikanischer Apologetik', in Koeppel, G. M. 'Die historischen Reliefs der romischen Kaiserzeit II', La Rocca, E. La riva a mt%%aluna. Culti, agoni, monumentifuneraripresso il Tevere nel Campo Marvĵo occidentale. Rome, 1984 Ladage, D. 'Stadtischer Priester- und Kultamter im lateinischen Westen des Imperium Romanum zur Kaiserzeit'. Diss., Cologne, 1971 Lambrechts, P. 'Cybele, divinite etrangere ou nationale?', Lambrechts, P. 'Les fetes "phrygiennes" de Cybele et d'Attis', Latte, K. '()ber eine Eigentiimlichkeit der italischen Gottesvorstellung', Latte, K. Romische Religionsgeschichte. Munich, i960 Le Gall, J. 'Les Romains et l'orientation solaire', Levi, M. A. 'II ciclo religioso augusteo e il superamento delle guerre civili', Lewis, M. W. H. Liebeschuetz, J.H. W. G. Continuity and Change in Roman Religion. Oxford, 1979 Liebeschuetz, J. H. W. G. 'The religious position of Li vy's History', 57(1967)45-55 Lŭdemann, G. Opposition to Paul in Jewish Christianity. Minneapolis, 1989 McBain, B. Prodigy and Expiation: a Study in Religion and Politics in Republican Rome (Coll. Latomus 177). Brussels, 1982 MacDonald, M. Y. The Pauline Churches: a Socio-Historical Study of Institutionalization in the Pauline and Deutero-Pauline Writings. Cambridge, 1988 MacMullen R. Magdelain, A. Recherches sur Г'Imperium', la loi curiate et les auspices dinvestiture. Paris, 1968 Magdelain, A. 'L'inauguration de 11-29 Malherbe, A.J. Meeks, W. A. The First Urban Christians. The Social World of the Apostle Paul. New Haven, 1983 Meeks, W. A. The Moral World of the First Christians. Philadelphia, 1986 Meeks, W. A. and Wilkens, R. L. Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era. Missoula, MT, 1978 Mellor, R. &EA PQMH. the Worship of the Goddess Roma in the Greek World (Hypomnemata 42). Gottingen, 1975 Merkelbach, R. 'Aeneas in Cumae', MH 18 (1961) 83-99 Meslin, M. L'bomme romain, des origines au 1" siecle de notre ere. Essai danthropologic. Paris, 1978 Momigliano, A. D. Review of Sherwin-White, A. N. Niebling, G. 'Laribus Augustis magistri primi. Der Beginn des Compitalkultes der Lares und des Genius Augusti', Nilsson, M. P. 'Saeculares ludi', RE 1 A (1920) 1696-720 Nock, A. D. 'Religious developments from the close of the Republic to the reign of Nero', Nock, A. D. 'The Roman army and the Roman religious year', North, J. 'Conservatism and change in Roman religion', North, J. 'Religion and politics, from Republic to Principate', O'Connor, D. W. Peter in Rome. The Literary, Liturgical and Archaeological Evidence. New York-London, 1969 Pettazzoni, R. 'La religione', in с 12A, 217-49 Potscher, W. '"Numen" und "Numen Augusti'", 3 5 5 9z Price, S. R. F. Rituals and Power: tbe Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor. Cambridge, 1984 Price, S. R. F. 'From noble funerals to divine cult: the consecration of Roman emperors', in f 109, 56-105 Price, S. R. F. 'The City of Rome', in Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S. (eds.) Raubitschek, A. E. 'Octavia's deification at Athens', Rawson, E. D. 'Scipio, Laelius, and the ancestral religion', Richard, J.-C. 'Les funerailles de Trajan et le triomphe sur les Parthes', R Ristow, G. 'Gotter und Kulte in den Rheinlanden', in Roberts, С. H. Manuscript, Society and Belief in Early Christian Egypt. London, 1979 Rohde,G. Die Kultsat^ungender romischen Pontifices. RVV 25 (Berlin, 1936) Rowland, C. Christian Origins: from Messianic Movement to Christian Religion. London, 1985 Ryberg, I. S. Rites of the State Religion in Roman Art (MAAR 22). Rome, 1955 Sabbatucci, D. 'Mito e demitizzazione nell'antica Roma', Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: a Comparison of Patterns of Religion. London, 1977 Sanders, E. P. Sanders, E. P. Santero, J. M. 'The "Cultores Augusti" and the first worship of the Roman emperor', Saulnier, C. 'Le role des pretres fetiaux et Papplication du "ius fetiale" a Rome', Saulnier, C. 'Laurens Lavinas. Quelques remarques a propos d'un sacerdoce equestre a Rome', Scheid, J. Scheid, J. 'Les sanctuaires de confins dans la Rome antique', in a 96, 583-95 Schilling, R. 'Ovide interprete de la religion romaine', R Schippman, K. Die iranischen Feuerheiligtiimer. Berlin, 1971 Scholz, U. W. Studien \um altitalischen und altromischen Marskult und Marsmytbos. Heidelberg, 1970 Scott, K. 'The identification of Augustus with Romulus-Quirinus', Scullard, H. H. Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic. London, 1981 Segal, A. F. Rebecca's Children: Judaism and Christianity in the Roman World. Cambridge, MA-London, 1986 Syme, R. 'The Tamassia, A. M. 'Iscrizioni del Compitum Acili', Teixidor, J. The Pagan God. Popular Religion in the Greco-Roman Near East. Princeton, 1977 Theissen, G. The First Followers of Jesus: a Sociological Analysis of the Earliest Christians. London, 1978 Theissen, G. The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity. Philadelphia, 1982 Van Doren, M. 'L'evolution des mysteres phrygiens a Rome', Vermes, G. Versnel, H. S. 'Die neue Inschrift von Satricum in historischer Sicht', Warde Fowler, W. The Religious Experience of the Roman People. London, 1911 Watson, F. Paul, Judaism and the Gentiles. Cambridge, 1986 Weinstock, S. Whatmough, J. 'The calendar in ancient Italy outside Rome', Wiedemann, T. 'The Wilhelm, J. 'Das romische Sakralwesen unter Augustus als Pontifex Maximus'. Diss., Strasburg, 1915 Winter, J. G. 'The myth of Hercules at Rome', in Sanders, H. A. (ed.) Wiseman, T. P. 'Cybele, Virgil and Augustus', in в 204, 117-28. Cambridge, 1984 Wissowa, G. Wissowa, G. 'Die romischen Staatspriestertumer altlateinischer Gemeindekulte', Zanker, P. 'Der Larenaltar im Belvedere des Vatikans', 3. art and architecture Albert, R. Das Bild des Augustus auf den friihen Reichspragungen. Studien \ur Vergottlichung des ersten Princeps (Diss., Mannheim, 1980). Speyer, 1981 Albertson, F. C. 'An Augustan temple represented on a historical relief dating to the time of Claudius', Alfoldi, A. Alfoldi, A. Alzinger, W. Augusteische Arcbitektur in Epbesos. Vienna, 1974 Amelung, W. and Lippold, G. Anderson, M. L. 'The portrait medallions of the imperial villa at Boscotrecase', Anderson, W. J., Spiers, R. P. and Ashby, T. Andreae, B. 'Der Zyklus der Odysseefresken im Vatikan', 25 3. Andreae, B. 25 5. Arias, P. E. 'Teatro e odeon', s.v. in L'art decoratif a Rome a la fin de la Ripublique et au debut du Principal. Rome, 1981 Ashby, T. The Aqueducts of Ancient Rome. Oxford, 1935 Astolfi, F., Bauer, H., Guidobaldi, F. and Pronti, A. 'Horrea Agrippiana', Aymard, A. and Auboyer, J. Bacchielli, L. 'Le porte romane ad ordini sovrapposti e antecedenti greci', Barbet, A. Recueil general des peintures murales de la Gaule\ 1 Province de Narbonnaise 1, Glanum (Gallia Suppl. 27). Paris, 1974 Barbet, A. hapeinture murale romaine. Les styles decoratifspompeins. Paris, 1985 Bartels, H. Studien \um Frauenportrat der augusteischen Zeit. Fulvia, Octavia, Livia, Julia. Munich, 1963 Bastet, F. L. 'Domus transitoria. I', Bastet, F. L. and Vos, M. de. Proposta per una classifica^ione del ter^o stile pompeiano. The Hague, 1979 Becatti, G. 'Le varie correnti artistiche dei periodi sillano e cesariano e la formazione dell'arte romana', in Becatti, G. Bejor, G. 'L'edificio teatrale nell'urbanizzazione augustea', Bernoulli, J. J. Beyen, H. G. Diepompeianische Wanddekoration vom ц-weiten bis %um vierten Stili (1938); ii. i (i960). Haag Beyen, H. G. 'Pompeiani, Stili', s.v. in Bianchi Bandinelli, R. Bianchi Bandinelli, R. 'Romana Arte', s.v. in EAA vi. Rome, 1965 Bianchi Bandinelli, R. Rome, le centre du pouvoir. Paris, 1969 (= Roma. L'arte romana nel centra del potere. Milan, 1969; = Rome, the Centre of Power: Roman Art to a.d. 200. London, 1970) Bianchi Bandinelli, R. 'Noterella in margine ai problemi della pittura antica', in f 273, 245? Bianchi Bandinelli, R. 'Tradizione ellenistica e gusto romano nella pittura pompeiana', in f 273, 273ff Bianchi Bandinelli, R. Bianchi Bandinelli, R. 'Sulla formazione del ritratto romano', in Bianchi Bandinelli, R. Bianchi Bandinelli, R. and Torelli, M. Bieber, M. The History of the Greek and Roman Theater. Princeton, 1961 Bieber, M. Ancient Copies. Contributions to the History of Greek and Roman Art. New York, 1977 Blake, M. E. 'The pavements of the Roman Republic and the early Empire', Blake, M. E. Ancient Roman Construction in Italy from Tiberius through the Flavians. Washington, 1959 Blanck, H. Wiederverwendung alter Statuen als Ehrendenkmdler bei Griechen und Romern. Rome, 1969 Blanckenhagen, H. von, and Alexander, C. Bloch, H. I boШ lateri^i e la storia edili%ia romana. Rome, 1947 Boatwright, M. T. Boethius, A. The Golden House of Nero: Some Aspects of Roman Architecture. Ann Arbor, i960 Boethius, A. and Ward-Perkins, J. B. Bonanno, A. Portraits and Other Heads on Historical Reliefs up to the Age of Septimius Severus (BAR Supplementary Series 6). Oxford, 1976 Bonnefond, M. 'Transferts de fonctions et mutation ideologique: le Capitole et le Forum d'Auguste', in a 96, 251-78 Borbein, A. H. 'Die Ara Pacis Augustae. Geschichtliche Wirklichkeit und Programm', Borchhardt, J. 'EinKenotaph fur Gaius Caesar',89 (1974) 217-41 Borda, M. Bragantini, I. and Vos, M. de Museo Na^ionale Romano. Lepitture-. n. 1. Le decora^ioni della villa romana della Farnesina. Rome, 1982 Breckenridge, J. D. 'Roman Imperial portraiture from Augustus to Gallienus', Brendel, O. Prolegomena to the Study of Roman Art. New Haven—London, 1979 Brommer, P. 'Zur Datierung des Augustus von Primaporta', in f 356A, 78-80 Brown, F. E. Brunn, H. and Arndt, P. Buchner, E. 'Solarium Augusti und Ara Pacis', Buchner, E. 'Horologium Solarium Augusti', Buchner, E. Buchner, E. 'Horologium Augusti: Neue Ausgrabungen in Rom', Cagiano de Azevedo, M. 'I Cagnat, R. and Chapot, V. Calci, C. and Messineo, G. Camodeca, G. 'Una nuova fonte sulla topografia del foro di Augusto', Carandini, A. 'Domus e insulae sulla pendice settentrionale del Palatino', Carandini, A. and Ricci, A. (eds.) Settefinestre. Una villa schiavistica nelf Etruria romana. Modena, 1985 Carettoni, G. 'Nuove pitture del Palatino', Carettoni, G. 'Roma. Le costruzioni di Augusto e il tempio di Apollo sul Palatino' Carettoni, G. Das Haus des Augustus auf dem Palatin. Mainz, 1983 Carettoni, G. 'La decorazione pittorica della casa di Augusto sul Palatino', Castagnoli, F. (ed.) Castagnoli, F. 'Sul tempio "italico"', Castagnoli, F. Cavalieri Manasse, G. Та decorazione architettonica romana d'Aquileia, Trieste, Pola-. 1. L'eta repubblicana, augustea e giulio-claudia. Padua, 1978 Cerulli Irelli, G. 'Le pitture della Casa dell'Atrio a mosaico', Chamoux, F. 'Un portrait de Thasos, Lucius Caesar', Chamoux, F. 'Nouveaux portraits des fils d'Agrippa', Chamoux, F. 'Un nouveau portrait de Gaius Cesar decouvert a Mayence', Charbonneaux, J. Charbonneaux, J. 'Un portrait presume de Marcellus', MMAI51 (i960) 5 3_72 Cima, M. and La Rocca, E. Le tranquille dimore degli dei; la residence imperiale degli horti Lamiani. Venice, 1986 Citta e architettura della Roma imperiale (ARID Supplement 10). Odense, 198? Clavel, M. and Leveque, P. Villes et structures urbaines dans t Occident romain. Paris, 1971 Coarelli, F. Coarelli, F. 'II Panteon, l'apoteosi di Augusto e l'apoteosi di Romolo', in F 330, 41-6 Colini, A. M. 'Compitum Acili', Colledge, M. A. R. Corlaita Scagliarini, O. 'Spazio e decorazione nella pittura pompeiana', Crema, L. Cristofani, M. 'Sul rinvenimento deH'Arringatore', Croisille, J. M. Curtius, L. 'Ikonographische Beitrage zum Portrat der romischen Republik und der julisch-claudischen Familie', Dacos, N. 'Fabullus et l'autre peintre de la Domus Aurea', Danson, С. M. Romano-Campanian Mythological Landscape Painting. Yale, 1944 Darmon, J. P. 'Les mosalques en Occident, I', ANRW II, 12. 2 (1981) 266—319 Daut, R. Imago. Untersuchungen %um Bildbegriff der Romer. Heidelberg, 1975 Degrassi, A. 'Virgilio e il foro di Augusto', Degrassi, N. 'La dimora di Augusto sul Palatino e la base di Sorrento', Deman, E. B. van Deppert-Lippitz, B. 'Romischer Goldschmuck. Stand der Forschung', Dondin-Payre, M. 'Topographie et propagande gentilice: le Drerup, H. Zum Ausstattungsluxus in der romischen Arcbitektur. Miinster, 1957 Drerup, H. 'Die romische Villa', in Drerup, H. 'Architektur als Symbol', Ducati, P. Uarte in Кота dalle origini al secolo VIII. Bologna, 1938 Duval, P.-M. and Frĉzouls, E. (eds.) Themes de recherches sur les villes antiques dOccident. Paris, 1977 Eck, W., Fittschen, K. and Naumann, F. Kaisersaal. Portrats aus den kapitolinischen Museen in Rom. Rome, 1986 Eisner, M. Zur Typologie der Grahbauten im Suburbium Roms. Mainz, 1986 Elia, O. Engemann, J. Arcbitekturdarstellungen des Jriihen Zweiten Stils. Illusionistische romische Wandmalerei der ersten Phase und ihre Vorbilder in der realen Architektur. Heidelberg, 1967 Evans, H. B. 'Agrippa's water plan', Fabbrini, L. 'Marco Vipsanio Agrippa. Concordanze e discordanze iconografiche. Nuovi contributi', in f 356л, 96-107 Felletti Maj, В. M. Im tradi^ione italica nell'arte romana. Rome, 1977 Felletti Maj, В. M. and Moreno, P. C. 'Le pitture della casa delle Muse', Fittschen, K. and Zanker, P. Katalog der romischen Portrats in den Capitolinischen Museen und den anderen kommunalen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom: i. Kaiser- und Prinzenbildnisse. Mainz 1985; in. Kaiserin- und Prin%essinnenbildnisse. Mainz, 1983 Flory, M. B. '"Sic exempla parantur": Livia's shrine to Concordia and the Porticus Liviae', Forni, G. 'Anfiteatro', s.v. in EAA 1. Rome, 1958 Fomi, G. 'Teatro', s.v. in EAA Suppl. Rome, 1970 Franciscis, A. de 3 70. Fraschetti, A. 'La mort d'Agrippa et l'autel du Belvedere. Un certain type d'hommage', Fraschetti, A. 'Morti dei "principi" ed "eroi" della famiglia di Augusto', Freyer-Schauenburg, B. 'Augustus capite uelatus. Zu einer unpublizierten Portratbiiste von Samos', in a 5 5 a, 1—8 Frezouls, E. 'Aspects de l'histoire architecturale du theatre romain', Frova, A. L'arte di Roma e del mondo romano. Turin, 1961 Fuchs, M. Untersuchungen %ur Ausstattung romischer Theater. Mainz, 1987 Fullerton, M. D. 'The Domus Augusti in imperial iconography of 13—12 в.с.', Gabelmann, H. 'Romische Grabbauten in Italien und den Nordprovinzen', in Gabriel, M. M. Livia's Garden Room at Prima Porta. New York, 195 5 Gage, J. 'L'era del principato e le speculazioni astrologiche', in a 82A, 223-35 Ganzert, J. 'Der Mars-Ultor-Tempel auf dem Augustusforum in Rom', Garcia у Bellido, A. Gasparri, C. 'Le pitture della caupona del pavone', Gazzola, P. Gercke, W. B. 'Untersuchungen zum romischen Kinderportrat von den Anfangen bis in hadrianische Zeit'. Diss., Hamburg, 1968 Gerkan, A. von 'Griechische und Romische Architektur', Giuliani, C. F. 'Note sull'architettura delle residenze imperiali dal I al III secolod. Cr.', Giuliano, A. Catalogo dei ritratti romani del Museo ProJano Lateranense. Vatican City, 1957 Gnoli, R. Goethert, F. W. 'Studien zur Kopienforschung', Golvin, J.-C. Grieco, G. 'A propos de la statue d'Auguste de Prima Porta. Confirmation de la these de la creation Tiberienne...', Grimal, P. Grimm, G. 'Die Portrats der Triumvirn ... Ŭberlegungen zur Entstehung und Abfolge der Bildnistypen des Kaisers Augustus', Gros, P. 'Trois temples de la Fortune des I et II siecles de notre ere. Remarques sur l'origine des sanctuaires romains a abside', Gros, P. 'Hermodoros et Vitruve', Gros, P. Architecture et societe a Rome et en Italic centro-miridionale aux deux derniers siecles de la republique (Coll. Latomus 156). Brussels, 1978 Gros, P. 'La fonction symbolique des edifices theatraux dans le paysage urbain de la Rome augusteenne', in л 96, 319-46 Gross, W. H. Zur Augustusstatue von Primaporta. Gottingen, 1959 Gross, W. H. lulia Augusta. Untersuchungen %ur Grundlegung einer Livia- lkonograpbie. Gottingen, 1962 Gusman, P. Hafner, G. Spathellenistiscbe Bildnisplastik. Berlin, 1954 Hammond, M. Hanell, K. 'Das Opfer des Augustus an der Ara Pacis. Eine archaologische und historische Untersuchung', Hanfmann, G. M. A. Hanfmann, G. M. A. Roman Art: a Modern Survey of tbe Art of Imperial Rome. Greenwich-New York, 1964 Hanlein-Schafer, H. Veneratio Augusti. Eine Studie den Tempelndesersten romischen Kaisers (Archaeologica 39). Rome, 1985 Hannestad, H. Hanson, J. A. Harden, D. B. (ed.) Hassel, F. J. Der Trajansbogen in Benevent. Ein Bauwerk des romischen Senates. Mainz, 1966 Hausmann, U. 'Zur Typologie und Ideologic des Augustus-Portrats', Heintze, H. von Die antiken Portrats in Schloss Fasanerie bei Fulda. Mainz, 1968 Heintze, H. von Heintze, H. von (ed.) Helbig, W. Fiihrer durch die offentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertiimer in Rom i-iv. 1963-72 Hesberg, H. von and Zanker, P. (eds.) Himmelmann, N. 'Das Hypogaum der Aurelier am Viale Manzoni', Holland, L. A. 'The shrine of the Holloway, R. R. 'The tomb of Augustus and the princes of Troy', Holscher, T. Holscher,T.'ZuromischenhistorischenDenkmalern',^4^(1979)337-48 Holscher, T. Staatsdenkmal und Publikum. Xenia (Konstanqer alt-historische Vortrdge und Forschungeri) 9. Konstanz, 1984 Hommel, P. Studien %u den romischen Figurengiebeln der Kaiser(eit. Berlin, 1954 Honle, A. and Henze, A. Humphrey, J. Roman Circuses: Arenas for Chariot-Racing. London, 1986 Inan, J. and Rosenbaum, E. Roman and Early Byzantine Portrait Sculpture in Asia Minor. London, 1966 Ingholt, H. 'The Prima Porta statue of Augustus. The interpretation of the breastplate', Instinsky, H. U. Johansen, F. S. 'Ritratti marmorei e bronzei di Marco Vipsanio Agrippa', Jones, Stuart H. A Catalogue of the Ancient Sculptures Preserved in the Municipal Collections of Rome: 1. The Sculptures of the Museo Capitolino. Oxford, 1926; 11. Palavgo dei Conservatori. Oxford, 1926; repr. Rome, 1968 Jucker, H. Vom Verhdltnis der Romer ^«r bildenden Kunst der Griechen. Frankfurt, 1950 Jucker, H. Das Bildnis im Blatterkelch. Olten, 1961 1128 435 436. 437 438. 439' 44° • 441. 442. 443' 444. 445' 446. 447' 448. 449. 450. 451 452, 453 454 454* 45 5' 456. 457' 458. Jucker, H. 'Romische Herrscherbildnisse aus Agypten', Jucker, H. 'Iulisch-claudische Kaiser- und Prinzenportrats als "Palimpseste" Kahler, H. 'Triumph- und Ehrenbogen', s.v. in RE vnA I. Stuttgart, x939 Kahler, H. 'Die Ara Pacis und die augusteische Friedensidee', Kahler, H. 'Der Augustus von Primaporta', Kleiner, D. E. E. 'The great friezes of the Ara Pacis Augustae: Greek sources, Roman derivatives, and Augustan social policy', Kluge, K. and Lehmann-Hartleben, K. Kockel, V. 'Beobachtungen zum Tempel des Mars Ultor und zum Forum des Augustus', Koeppel, G. 'The grand pictorial tradition of Roman historical representation during the early empire', Koeppel, G. 'Die historischen Reliefs der romischen Kaiserzeit V, Ara Pacis Augustae', Pt. Krause, C. 'Rapporti di lavoro', in La Rocca, E. 'Sculture frontonali del tempio di Apollo Sosiano: notizia preliminare', La Rocca, E. L'eta d oro di Cleopatra. Indagine sulla ta%%a Farnese. Rome, 1984 Lahusen, G. Untersuchungen %ur romischen Ehrenstatue in Rom. Rome, 1983 Lambrechts, P. 'Auguste et la religion romaine', Lambrechts, P. 'La politique apollinienne d'Auguste et le culte imperial', Lancha, J. Mosaiquesgeometriques. Les ateliers de Vienne. Rome, 1977 Leach, E. W. 'Patrons, painter and patterns', in a 39A Lefevre, E. Levi, M. A. 'II regno degli api e la "domus Augusta"', Licht, K. de Fine. Ling, R. J. 'Studius and the beginnings of Roman landscape painting', Ling, R. Lippold, G. Gemmen und Kameen des Altertums und der Neurit. Stuttgart, 1922 Lippold, G. Kopien und Umbildungen griechischer Statuen. Munich, 1923 Little, A. M. G. Roman Perspective Painting and the Ancient Stage. Kenneburk, ME, 1971 Lloyd, R. B. 'The Aqua Virgo, Euripus and Pons Agrippae', Lyttleton, M. Baroque Architecture in Classical Antiquity. London, 1974 MacDonald, W. L. The Architecture of the Roman Empire-. 1. An Introductory Study, 1965, rev. 1982; 11. An Urban Appraisal, 1986. New Haven-London McKay, A. G. Houses, Villas and Palaces in the Roman World. London, 1975 Macready, S. and Thompson, F. H. (eds.) Maiuri, A. Mansuelli, G. A. 'El arco honorifico en el desarrollo de la arquitectura romana', Mansuelli, G. A. Mansuelli, G. A. Galleria degli Uffi^i- I ritratti. Rome, 1961 Mansuelli, G. A. Architettura e citta. Problemi del mondo classico. Bologna, 1970 Mansuelli, G. A. 'Programmi funerari e monumentalizzazione suburbana. Esempi di urbanistica romana' Mansuelli, G. A. Mansuelli, G. A. Mansuelli, G. A. 'Forme e significati dell'architettura di Roma nell'eta del principato', Mansuelli, G. A. 'La citta romana nei primi secoli dell'impero. Tendenze dell'urbanistica', Mansuelli, G. A. in Rasenna: Storia e civilta degli Etruschi, 679—713. Milan, 491. Mansuelli, G. A., Arslan, E. A. and Scagliarini, D. Marconi, P. Maria, S de 'Metodologia per una rilettura dei fornici di Roma antica', Marini Calvani, M. M. 'Urbanizzazione e programmi urbanistici nel settore occidentale della Cispadana Romana', Martin, H. Massner, A.-K. Bildnisangleichung, Untersuchungen %ur Entstebungs- und Wirkungsgeschichteder Augustusportrats (4) v. Chr— 68 n. Chr.). Berlin, 1982 Mau, A. Gescbichte der decorativen Wandmalerei in Pompeji. Berlin, 1882 Megow, W.-R. Kameen von Augustus bis Alexander Severus. Berlin, 1987 Memel, R. Mielsch, H. Mielsch, H. 'Funde und Forschungen zur Wandmalerei der Prinzipatszeit von 1945 bis 1975, miteinem Nachtrag 1980', Mielsch, H. Die romische Villa, Arcbitektur undLebensform. Munich, 1987 Mitchell, S. 'Imperial building in the eastern Roman provinces', in f 479, 18-25 Mobius, H. 'Sinn und Typen der romischen Kaiserkameen', Moretti, G. Morricone Matini, M. L. Mosaici antichi in Italia. Regioneprima. Roma: Reg X. Palatium, 1967 La mosaique greco-romaine. Paris, 1965 Mostra Augustea della Romanitd: Bimillenario della nascita di Augusto. Exhibition Catalogue. Rome, 1938 Mŭller, V. 'The Roman basilica', A]A 41 (1937) 250-61 Mustilli, D. 'L'arte augustea', in с 12a, 307-77 Napoli, M. Neppi Modona, A. Edifici teatraligreci e romani: teatri, odei, anfiteatri, circhi. Florence, 1961 Neudecker, R. Die Skulpturenausstattung romischer Villen in Italien. Mainz, 514. Neuerburg, N. L'architettura delle fontane e dei ninfei nelFItalia antica. Naples, 1965 Niemayer, H. G. Studien %иг statuariscben Darstellung der romischen Kaiser. Berlin, 1968 Pallottino, M. Arte figurativa e ornamentale. Rome, 1940 Pallottino, M. 'Arco onorario e trionfale', s.v. in EAA 1. Rome, 1958 Paribeni, R. 'Le opere pubbliche', in с 12л, 405-13 Parra, M. C. 'Per la definizione del rapporto fra teatri e ninfei', La peinture murale antique (.Actes du se'minaire de Paris 198), DAF 10, 1987) Pekary, T. Das romische Kaiserbildnis in Staat, Kult und Gesellschaft. Dargestellt anhand der Schriftquellen. Berlin, 1985 Peters, W. J. T. Landscape in Romano-Campanian Mural Painting. Assen, 1963 Phillips, E. J. 'The Roman law on the demolition of buildings', Picard, G.-C. Les trophies romains. Contribution а Г histoire de la religion et de Fart triomphalde Rome. Paris, 1957 Picard, G.-C. Picard, G.-C. Polacco, L. Polaschek, K. Portrattypen einer claudischen Kaiserin. Rome, 1973 Pollini, J. 'Studies in Augustan "historical" reliefs'. Diss., Berkeley, 1978 Pollitt, J. J. Poulsen, Greek and Roman Portraits in English Country Houses. Oxford, 1923 Poulsen, V. H. Les portraits romains: 1. Ripublique et dynastie julienne. Copenhagen, 1962 Rakob, F. 'Romische Architektur', in Ramage, E. S. 'Augustus' treatment of Julius Caesar', 223-45 Richard, J. C. 'Mausoleum. D'Halicarnasse a Rome, puis a Alexandrie', Rickman, G. 'Porticus Minucia', in f 330, 105-8 Riemann, H. 'Pons Agrippae', Rizzo, G. E. La pittura ellenistica-romana. Milan, 1929 Rizzo, G. E. 'Le pitture della "Casa dei Grifi"', in Rizzo, G. E. 'Le pitture dell'Aula Isiaca di Caligola', in Rizzo, G. E. 'Le pitture della "Casa di Livia"', in Roccos, L. J. 'Apollo Paladnus: the Augustan Apollo on the Sorrento base', Rodenwaldt, G. Kunst der Antike (Propylden Kunstgeschichte in). Berlin, 1927 Rodenwaldt, G. Roman Urban Defences in the West. London, 1983 Roques de Maumont, H. von Rowell, H. T. 'Vergil and the forum of Augustus', Rumpf, A. 'Romische historische Reliefs', Ryberg, I. S. 'The procession of the Ara Pacis', Ryberg, I. S. Rites of the state religion in Roman art (MAAR 22). Rome, 1955 Ryberg, I. S. 'Clupeus uirtutis', Sadurska, A. 'L'art d'Auguste: progres, regres, ou transformation?', in а 54А, 70-3 5 5 9. Santoro Bianchi, S. 'Alcune riflessioni su scuole e tipologie urbanistiche nell'Italia centro-settentrionale', Sauron, G. 'Le message symbolique des rinceaux de Г Ara Pacis Augustae', Sauron, G. 'Le message esthetique des rinceaux de Г Ara Pacis Augustae', Schefold, K. Lapeinturepompiienne. Essai sur Pevolution de sa signification. Brussels, 1972 Schefold, K. 'Caesars Epoche als goldene Zeit romischer Kunst', Schmidt Colinet, A. Schneider, B. Studien den kleinformatigen Kaiserportrats von den Anfagen der Kaiserzeit bis ins dritte Jahrhundert. Munich, 1976 Schumacher, W. N. Basilika: Untersuchungen zur antiken und friihmittelalterlichen Baukunst. Berlin, 1928 Sculture municipali delParea Sabellica tra Peta di Cesare e quella di Nerone. (Studi Miscellanei 10 (1963—1964)). Rome 1965 Sear, F. B. 5 69. Sena Chiesa, G. and Facchini, G. M. 'Gemme romane di eta imperiale: produzione, commerci, committenza', Settis, S. '"Esedra" e "ninfeo" nella terminologia architettonica del mondo romano', Shipley, F. 'Chronology of the building operations in Rome from the death of Caesar to the death of Augustus', Shipley, F. Agrippa'sBuilding Activities in Rome. St Louis, 1933 Sichtermann, H. 'Gemalte Garten in pompeianischen Zimmern', Simon, E. 'Zur Augustusstatue von Prima Porta', Simon, E. 'Das neugefundene Bildnis des Gaius Caesar in Mainz', Simon, E. 5 78. Simpson, C. J. 'The date of the dedication of the temple of Mars Ultor', 579. Sjoqvist, E. 'Kaisareion. A study in architectural iconography', 5 80. Smith, R. R. R. 'The Imperial reliefs from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias', Speyer, W. 'Das Verhaltnis des Augustus zur Religion', Stemmer, K. Untersuchungen %ur Typologie, Chronologic und Ikonographie der Pan%erstatuen. Berlin, 1978 Stewart, A. F. 'To entertain an emperor: Sperlonga, Laokoon and Tiberius at the dinner-table', Strong, E. Strong, E. 'The art of the Augustan age', in Studi sulla citta antica. Rome, 1983 Taeger, F. Charisma. Studien Geschichte des antiken Herrscherkultes. Stuttgart, 1957 and i960 5 89. Tamassia, A. M. 'La pittura nell'eta di Augusto', 591. Tamm, B. 5 92. Technau, W. 593. Thompson, H. 'The impact of Roman architects and architecture on Athens: 170 в.с,—a.d. 170', in Macready, S. and Thompson, F. H. (eds.) Todd, M. 'Forum and capitolium in the early Empire', in Grew, F. and Hobley, B. (eds.) Torelli, M. Toynbee, J. M. C. 'The Ara Pacis reconsidered and historical art in Roman Italy', РВА 39 (1953) 67-95 Toynbee, J. M. C. 'The Ara Pads Augustae', Toynbee, J. M. C. Tram Tan Tinh. Catalogue despeintures romaines du Muse'e du Louvre. Paris, 1974 Treves, P. II mito di Alessandro e la Roma d'Auguste. Milan and Naples, 1953 Tufi, S. R. 'Frammenti delle statue dei Vermeule, С. C. Roman and Imperial Art in Greece and Asia Minor. Cambridge, 1968 Vermeule, C. The Cult Images of Imperial Rome. Rome, 1987 Vierneisel, K. and Zanker, P. Die Bildnisse des Augustus. Herrscherbild und Politik im kaiser lichen Rom. Munich, 1979 Vos, M. de 'Due monumenti di pittura postpompeiana a Roma', Vos, M. de L'egittomania in pitture e mosaici romano-campani della prima eta imperiale. Leiden, 1980 Walker, S. and Burnett, A. Walker, S. and Burnett, A. Wallace-Hadrill, A. 'The golden age and sin in Augustan ideology', P&P 95 (1982) 19-36 Ward-Perkins, J. B. 'From Republic to Empire: reflections on the early provincial architecture of the Roman west', Ward-Perkins, J. B. Ward-Perkins, J. B. Cities of Ancient Greece and Italy. Planning in Classical Antiquity. London, 1974 Ward-Perkins, J. B. Wardman, A. Religion and Statecraft among the Romans. London, 1982 Weinstock, S. 'Pax and the "Ara Pads" West R. Wheeler, M. White, P. 'Julius Caesar in Augustan Rome', Williams Lehmann, P. Roman Wall Painting from Boscoreale in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Cambridge, MA, 1953 Wilson-Jones, M. 'Designing the Roman Corinthian Order', Winckes, R. Clipeata Imago. Studien %u einer romischen Bildnisform. Bonn, 1969 Winckes, R. 'Zum Illusionismus romischer Wandmalereien der Republik', Zanker, P. Zanker, P. Forum Romanum. Die Neugestaltung durch Augustus. Tubingen, 1972 Zanker, P. Zanker, P. Klassi^istiscbe Statuen. Studien \ur Veranderung des Kunstgeschmacks in der romischen Kaisenfeit. Mainz, 1974 Zanker, P. Provin^ielle Kaiserportrdts. Zur Reception der Selbstdarstellung des Princeps. Munich, 1983 Zanker, P. 'Der Apollontempel auf dem Palatin', in f 330, 21-40 Zanker, P. 'Zur Bildnisreprasentation fŭhrender Manner in mittelitalischen und campanischen Stadten zur Zeit der spaten Republik und der julisch-claudischen Kaiser', in e 77, 251—66 Zanker, P. Augustus und die Macht der Bitder. Munich, 1987 Zanker, P. Zazoff, P. Zevi,F. Та casa Reg, IX, j, 18—21 a Pompei (Studi Misc. 5 (1960—1)). Rome, 1964 Zinserling, G. 'Der Augustus von Primaporta als offizioses Denkmal', Cloud, J. D. 'The Augustan authorship of the lex Iulia de vi publica Corbett, P. E. Falchi, G. L. Le controversie tra Sabiniani e Proculiani. Milan, 1981 Girard, P. F. 'Les leges Iuliae iudiciorum publicorum et priuatorum', ZRG 34(1913) 295-371 Gualandi, G. Legislations imperiale egiurispruden^a. 2 vols. Milan, 1963 Hennig, D. 'T. Labienus und der erste Maiestatsprozess Honore, A. M. 'Proculus', Honore, A. M. Horak, F. Rationes Decidendi: Entscheidungbegrŭndungen bei den alteren romischen Juristen bis Labeo 1. Innsbruck, 1969 Johnston, D. Jolowicz, H. F. and Nicholas, B. Kaser, M. Das romische Zivilpro%essrecht. Munich, 1966 Kaser, M. Kaser, M. '"Ius Honorarium" und "Ius Civile"', Koschaker, P. Krampe, C. Proculi Epistulae: eine Frŭhklassische ĵuristenschrift. Karlsruhe, 1970 Kunkel, W. 'Das Wesen des ius respondendf, ZRG 66 (1948) 423-57 666a. Kunkel, W. Herkunft und So^iale Stellung der romischen Juristen. 2nd edn. Graz-Vienna—Cologne, 1967 Kunkel, W. Liebs, D. 'Rechtsschulen und Rechtsunterricht im Principat', ANRW II, 15 (1976) 197-286 Litewski, W. 'Die romische Appellation in Zivilsachen', Martini, R. Le definii{ioni deigiuristi romani. Milan, 1966 Mayer-Maly, T. 'Proculus', Norr, D. 'Pomponius: oder "Zum Geschichtsverstandnis der romischen Juristen'", Norr, D. 'Planung in der Andke: Ober die Ehegesetze des Augustus', in Baier, H. (ed.) Norr, D. 'I giuristi romani: tradizionalismo о progresso?', Norr, D. 'C. Cassius Longinus: der Jurist als Rhetor (Bemerkungen zu Tacitus, Ann. i4.42ff.)', in Heine, H. (ed.) Norr, D. 'Zur Biographie des Juristen C. Cassius Longinus', in Orestano, R. II potere normative degli imperatori e le costitu%ioni imperiali. Rome, 1937; repr. Turin, 1962 Pernice, A. Labeo: Romisches Privatrecbt im Ersten Jahrhundert der Kaiser^eit 3 vols. Halle, 1873—1900 Provera, G. 'Ancora sul "ius respondendi"', Pugliese, G. IIProcesso Civile Romano и: IIprocessoformulare 1. Milan, 1963 Riccobono, S. 'La giurisprudenza dell'impero', in с 12A, 147-59 Rogers, R. S.' Ateius Capito and Tiberius', in Rohle, R. 'Praetor Fideicommissarius', Rotondi.G. jL Ruggiero, E. de Im patria net dirittopubblico romano. Rome, 1921 Sargenti, M. 'Considerazioni sul potere normativo imperiale', in Scacchetti, M. G. 'Note sulle differenze di metodo fra Sabiniani e Proculiani', in Schiller, A. A. Schulz, F. History of Roman Legal Science. Oxford, 1946 Seidl, E. 'Labeos geistiges Profil', in Sherwin-White, A. N. 'Poena legis repetundarum', Siber, H. 'Plautius', Stein, P. 'The relations between grammar and law in the early principate: the beginning of analogy', Stein, P. 'The two schools of jurists in the early principate', Sturm, F. 'Pegaso: un giureconsulto dell'epoca di Vespasiano', Syme, R. 'Fiction about Roman jurists', Thomas, J. A. C. 'Lex Iulia de adulteriis coercendis', Volkmann, H. Watson, A. The Law of Persons in the Later Roman Republic. Oxford, 1967 Watson, A. Watson, A. 'Roman slave law and Romanist ideology', Watson, A. Wieacker, F. Wieacker, F. 'Augustus und die Juristen seiner Zeit', Wieacker, F. 'Respondere ex auctoritate principis', in J. A. Ankum 30 Plut. 42 Plancus in Cic. 45 Dio XLVHI.25.2 implies that the garrisons were composed of old partisans of Brutus and Cassius, though this is scarcely credible in so sensitive an area: cf. Brunt 1971 (a 9) 497. Strab. xvi.2.24-5 (660Q; cf. Brunt 1971 (a 9) 497. So on coins, EJ2 8, RRC 524: cf. Strab. xiv.2.24-5 (660Q; Plut. « Dio XLvm.26.3-4; Strab. xiv.2.24—$ (660С); Tac. 47 Rehm 1914 (в 267) 128-9. 48 Plut. 247 Cf. Tarn 1932 (c 233) 13J-43, suggesting that 248 Eus. Someone scrawled under a statue of Antony,' 'Октаоиш Suet. 275 Samos honoured Titius as a benefactor, so he was probably still with Antony then: cf. 336 Plut. Cf. esp. Prop iv.6.63-6. If it were too dangerous to let her live longer than the triumph, she 27 Not until the second century a.d. was the 28.2.26. 29 Frier 1985 (f 652) 186-7. 105 Ov. 57 Friedlander 1922 (a 30) 1. 86-8; Millar 1977 (a 59) 83ff; Turcan 1987 (d 20) 2o8ff. 13 Nccsen 1980 (d t j 1) esp. 19-22. 14 Neesen 1980 (d 1 j 1) 22 n. 4. 46 Roman citizenship: Lex Irnitana, cap.21 (Gonzalez 1986 (в 235)), cf. Sherwin-White 1973 (a 87) ch. 14; the 33 Gonzalez 1986 (в zjj) chs. 62 and 82. 34 32 On the recruitment of Spaniards for the Roman army, see, above all, Roldan Hervas 1974 (e 235) esp. 233-86; cf. Le Rous 1982 (e 228) 284-90. 49 Diox1.v111.49. so Tib. 1.7.п. 51 Strab. iv.6.11 (208c). V. RURAL SETTLEMENT The Romanization of the countryside was generally a slower process, and there is little change to be observed in most farmsteads and agricultural communities until much later, their owners continuing to live in the traditional Iron Age manner, even though they began to use new agricultural and domestic equipment and utensils. The first villas, which are the best measure of the rate of adoption of Roman ways, were to be found, as might be expected, not far from the new towns, 37 Fulford 1984 (e 539)- 38 Margary 1973 (e 347). » Duncan-Jones 1974 (a 24) 366-9. VI. TRADE AND INDUSTRY Improved communications undoubtedly helped to expand trade connexions. But the introduction of Roman currency into the province, primarily to pay the army, will have created a pool of low-value coins for small, everyday transactions, thus performing a function which the mostly high-value coinage of the Iron Age had failed to do. Trade in Britain, and between Britain and the rest of the empire, increased rapidly, much of it at first probably connected with supplies under army contracts. Large quantities of samian pottery came mainly from factories 40 Walthew 1975 (e 563) 189-205. 41 Rodwell and Rodwell 1973 (e 554) 115-27. II. ROMAN GERMANY, l6 B.C.-A.D. 17 Agrippa's recall from his second period of acdvity in Gaul and the elaborate celebration of the extraordinary Secular Games marks the end of a phase in the military acdvity between the Mediterranean coast and the Euphrates and north-west Spain. With the achievement of pacification, the 13 Suet. 99 For auxiliaries, see Cheesman 1914 (d i 74); for consistent recruitment from provinces or tribes after which units were named as something exceptional, see also, Tac. 14 Porter and Moss 1939 (e 958) vi 114; 69 The only city for which we get anything approaching an insight into its internal economy at this period, is Palmyra through the Hadrianic Tax Law, elements of which are derived from a Julio- Claudian 'Old Law'. There one finds references to the importation of a wide range of produce from the Palmyrene territory, and extensive services in the city ranging from the selling of clothes to prostitution (Teixidor 1984 (e 1066) 69-90; Matthews 1984 (e 1037)). 90 Clark and Haswell 1970 (a 17) 19. 91 Gapp 1935 (c 349); cf. Gapp, 1934 (a 32) chs II and III, Garnsey 1988 (a 33). Bowersock 1982 (d 23) 6j2f. The best known of these, Q. Aemilius Secundus, who commanded regiments in Syria, campaigned against the Ituraeans, and conducted the famous census at Apameia for Quirinius in a.d. 6, is probably but not certainly from Berytus (Devijver 1986 (d 179) 183-9). Malalas, Joseph. 134 See D. Graf, 'The Nabataean army and the Cohortes Ulpiae Petraeorum', in E. Dabrowa (ed.) 31 Levick 1976 (c }66); Holladay 1978 (c 356); Brunt 1961(0 47). 32 Flory 1984 (f 366); Purcell 1986 (p 30). 45 On the ideology of 50 Ov. 70 Treggiari 1969 (f 68) 11 ff. ii. augustus' procedural reforms Iulius Caesar, during his dictatorship, allegedly contemplated a complete codification of Roman private law; his attempts at legal reform, though never carried out, thus looked mainly to substantive law.9 By contrast, three times during his long reign Augustus refused to accept any general grant of power to re-order the law and morals of the Roman people ( Cf. Frier 198) (f 652) 2j2-7. In addition to the ' Suet. 10 Augustus, RG 6.1; but contrast Suet. 11 See Kaser 1966 (f 661) 115-16, with further literature; for references, see 52 Sabinus' three-book 84 Kaser 1966 (f 661) 339—49. The expression does not occur in sources until the middle of the second century a.d. 4. law Allison, J. E. and Cloud, J. D. 'The Astolfi, R. I'Libri Tres Iuris Civilis' di Sabino. Padua, 1983 Atkinson, К. M. T. 'The education of the lawyer in ancient Rome', Bauman, R. A. The Crimen Maiestatis in the Roman Republic and Augustan Principate. Johannesburg, 1967 Bauman, R. A. Bauman, R. A. Lawyers in Roman Transitional Politics. Munich, 1985 Bauman, R. A. Lawyers and Politics in the Early Roman Empire: a Study of Relations Between the Roman Jurists and the Emperors from Augustus to Hadrian (Miinchener Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte, 82), Part 1, chs. 1 and 2. Munich, 1989 Brunt, P. A. 'The legal issue in Cicero, Buckland, W. W. The Roman Law of Slavery. Tbe Condition of the Slave in Private Law from Augustus to Justinian. Cambridge, 1908; repr. 1970 Buckland, W. W. Cancelli, F. 'II presunto "ius respondendi" istituito da Augusto', ('987) 5-31 Champlin, E. 'Pegasus', [1] Dio xlvii.18.3-19.3; cf. Weinstock 1971 (f 233) 386-98; Wallman 1989 (c 243) 52-8. [2] Brunt 1971 (a 9) 484-3; Botermann 1968 (c 36) 181-204. [3] Plut. [4] Plut. [5] Cf. App. ' Brunt 1971 (a 9) 485—8; Botermann 1968 (c 36) 204-11. [7] App. [8] Cf. esp. App. [9] App. [9] App. BCn>. v.j.12 and Dio XLViii.1.3 (cf. XLvm.22.2) suggest some equivocation. [10] Cf. Brant 1971 (a 9) 493-7. [11] "... Galliaque quae semper praesidet atque praesedit huic imperio', Gc. [12] App. 20 Plut. Plut. App. legions, comprising 170,000 men mass of another army'. The figure 170,000 may be realistic for the total of triumviral troops, including those in the West (01 [18] App. 26 Cf. App. [20] Virg. [21] App. [22] App. [23] For a different view, Gabba 1971 (c 93) 146—50; Roddaz 1988 (c 201). [24] EJ2 7, Dio XLvin.5.4 cf. Wallmann 1989 (c 243) 82-4. [25] App. M Keppie 1983 (e 65) 66-7. w App. [28] Cf. App. [29] Cf. the correspondence with Rhosus (EJ2 301, R [30] Reynolds 1982 (в 270) doc. 12; Millar 1973 (c 175) 56. At App. App. [33] Plut. [34] Joseph. [35] App. (c 175) 5 3_4- 81 Reynolds 1982 (в 270) 70-1. [37] It is suggestive that the offer of compensation was made directly to the proscribed, and was apparently more acceptable to them than to Sextus: App. s> App. 15 Reynolds 1982 (в 270) doc. 8 line 26, with her commentary. [41] On the date, Pelling 1988 (в i j8) 206; Wallmann 1989 (c 243) 234. [42] Stratoniceia: [43] 99 Dio xlviii. 39.2; Sen. least some basis). It need not follow that Octavia herself was regarded as Athena incarnate, as Raubitschek 1946 (f 202) thought. ,cn Cf. especially Mannsperger 1973 (c 171) 384-6. Here Dionysiac types were admittedly standard: Crawford 1974 (в 319) ii 743 n.4. 101 Socrates of Rhodes, 102 Dio xlix. 19-20 with Reinhold 1988 (в \<,6)adloc.\ cf. Sherwin-White 1984 (л 89) 304-6. The similarities to the events of 39 are in fact suspicious, and the same stories may have been used by historians for two different campaigns. But it is likely enough that Ventidius tried to repeat his waiting game, and just possible that Pacorus fell into the trap. [53] Plut. [54] Suet. [55] App. Dio XLvm.49.z-3; cf. App. Dio xLviii.43.1-3, cf. xlviii.j3.1-3, xlix.i6.2, xux.43.7; Frei-Stolba 1967 (c 92) 83. к» Dio xLviii.43.1, xlviii.j3.4-6; App. 110 So App. and Dio XLVin.54 cf. Pelling 1988 (в 138) 213-14. 111 Plut. 112 The treaty is normally put a litde later, in September or October, but the grounds for this are slight. A July/August date would be late enough to rule out a resumption of the Parthian War until 36 (cf. Plut. [63] For the details, Paget 1968 (d 218) 163-9; Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 95-114. [64] Dio xlvin.46.1; Strab. v.4.3-5 (24jQ. 124 For the date, Schŭrer 1973 (e 1207) 1.284-6. 125 The territorial extent of Polemo's realm is not precisely clear, but it was evidently similar to that of Darius: cf. Hoben 1969 (e 840) 42-4. [67] Possibly at first jointly with his elder brother Deiotarus Philopator. Cf. Strab. хи.3.40-2 (j62C); Hoben 1969 (e 840) 118-19. [68] Strabo. xn.6.2-7.1 (569C); Hoben 1969^ 840) 123-4. 128 Cf. Levick 1967 (e 851) 25-6. App. BCiv. v.7.31 (of 41 B.C., awenpa(fv is rqv fSaoiXclav: cf. Buchheim 1960(049) }j-6, observing Appian's careful phrasing. [71] Dio xux.32.3: on the date cf. Buchheim i960 (c 49) J9. [72] Strab. хи.3.6-8 (J43C), }-)J—J (h8Q. 3-57-8 ()6oC), 8.7-9 (5 74Q,xiv.j. 16-21 (676C), with Pelling 1988 (в 138) [74] Plut. [75] Porphyry [76] Dio xlix-32.5; cf. Grant 1946 (в 322) 55-8; Buttrey 1983 (в 315) 24-7. [77] Cf. Plut. ,<0 Suet. lul. 44; cf. Bengtson 1974 (c 22) 4-9, Malitz 1984 (c 169) 56-7. Dio xlix.2j. 1. In 54-3 he had advised Crassus similarly (Plut. That had been agreed at Brundisium (see above, p. 18). The strong stress in the tradition that Ventidius had [81] The city's site is uncertain: according to Dellius (cit. Strab. xi.i 3.1-4 (523С)) it was 2,400 stades, i.e. some 480 km, from the Armenian border. Its conventional location at Taht-i-Soleiman is not at all likely, and it was probably much further east, near Maragheh. Cf. Schippman 1971 (F220) 338-47; Bengtson 1974 (c 22) 29—30. Much of the standard topographical reconstruction of this campaign is in need of correction (it is mainly still based on Rawlinson 1841 (e 866) 113-17): cf. now Sherwin-White 1984 (a 89) 311-21 and Pelling 1988 (в 138) 220-43. Plut [83] Veil. Pat. 11.82.2; cf. Livy, [84] Plut [85] Plut. [86] It is embellished by Plutarch (cf. Pelling 1988 (в 158) 221), but perhaps originates with Dellius: so Jacoby on [87] Presumably the western rather than the eastern foothills, if Phraata was near Maragheh (cf. n. 152): cf. the map in Pelling 1988 (в 138) 230; Sherwin-White 1984 (a 89) 318 and n.53. [88] Plut. [89] App 162 Dio xlix.ii; cf. App. xlviii.46.2-3. 163 See above, p. 24. 164 Flor. 11.18.9; З00 fought at Naulochus (App. 507-8, Hadas 1930(0. 108) 123. 165 Dio xLvin.46.2. 166 Cf. App. [95] App. [96] There was a popular demonstration against Titius, Veil. Pat. 11.79.6. [97] Dio l.i.4; cf. App. [98] Dio XLvm.30.5-6. Titius was later unfairly represented as Sextus' personal enemy: cf. App. 1,1 Dio XLIX.18.4—5 with Reinhold 1988 (в 150) [100] So Dio xlix.}}.}, possibly conjecturing, but intelligently. [101] Cf. above, p. 30; Plut. [102] Plut. [103] Despite the implications of Plut. [104] App [105] See above, p. 26. 196 Their use against Sextus: cf. App. [107] His attacks on this front probably began as early as winter 35/4; cf. Plut. [108] To stay in Athens: Plut. [109] Dio хых.40.3; Plut. [110] 'Octavian claimed that Antony's treacherous arrest had brought great discredit on the Roman people', Dio l.1.4: cf. Tac. [111] [112] Silver: Dio xlix.59.6. Gold: Veil. Pat. 11.82.5, with Woodmann 1985 (в 205) xlix.40.5. я» Cf. Versnel 1970 (a 97), especially 20-58, 255-54, 288-9. [114] That is the emphasis of Plut. 288-91. 207 As Dio xux.40-1 implies. [116] Plut. [117] Pelling 1988 (в 138) 249-50, on Plut. [118] Dio xux.41.6, cf. Suet. [119] Especially RRC 543, the ARMENIA DEVICTA coin (see above, p. 40), but also some more minor local issues: cf. Buttrey 195 3 (в 314) 54—86 (esp. 84), 95; Wallmann 1989 (c 243) 2; 1-2, 255. [120] RRC 541: cf. Wallmann 1989 (c 243) 251-2. 213 Dio xlix.41.4. 214 Dio 215 Scott 1933 (c 212) collects the material; for subtler treatment, with illuminating modem parallels, cf. Kennedy 1984 (c 134), Watson 1987 (в 192) and especially Wallmann 1989 (c 243). On artistic questions Zanker 1987 (p 632) is outstanding. [124] Battle-record: Suet. settlements: Plut. [126] Suet. 225 This punctuation and interpretation is clearly right: cf. Kraft 1967 (c 140) and Carter 1982 [129] Hercules and Omphale: the Arretine cup in the Metropolitan Museum, New York Zanker 1987 (f 632) 61-5; cf. Wallmann 1989 (c 243) 273-4 and (on Apollo) Mannsperger 1973 (c 171). 227 See above, p. 17. Cf. Wallmann 1989 (c 243) 151-2, 159-61, 219-20, 339-43. [131] Cf. 230 Britain: Dio xlix.38.2 with Reinhold 1988 (в 150) vii. 7. The temple was not finished till 29 b.c., though celebrated on coins as early as 36 (RRC 540; cf. Weinstock 1971 (f 235) 399—400; Zanker 1987 (f 632) 44). [134] Я/в/XIII i 342-3, 369-60. 2,2 On all this cf. below, pp. 785-9, and Shipley 1931 (f 571), Zanker 1987 (f 632), 73-80. [136] For the details, Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 148-52. [137] Dio xlix.42-3 with Reinhold 1988 (в 150) [138] Dio xlix.43.3. 246 Suet. Suet. Dio xlix.43.5. 250 Plut. 504. 251 Dio xlix.44.2. 252 Plut. [142] Syme 1959 (a 9}) 278 and others state that there were more than 300: this is because RG 25.3 claims 'more than 700 senators' serving under Octavian's colours in the Actium war, and the Senate's total strength was more than 1,000. The inference is most precarious. 2" Plut. Ephesus and Samos. Plut. Brunt 1971 (a 9) 507, Levick 1967 (e 851) 58-60. Already in 38 some cohorts included 'many recruits from Syria', Joseph. 2« Plut. [149] Plut. exaggerated the superior size of Antony's ships (perhaps as early as Hor. 111.11.44, iv.6.47-50; Plut. bigger still. 298 Dio L.7.3. 299 See above, p. 52. *» Caes. [154] For the early stages of the Actium campaign cf. esp. Kromayer 1899 (c 144) 4-28. [155] [Plut.] [156] 'At hue frementes uerterunt bis mille equos|Galli canentes Caesarem' ( 301 The outstanding modern discussions of the battle are by Kromayer 1899(0 144); Tarn 1931 (c 232); and Carter 1970 (c 31). For further discussion and argument for the views presented here, cf. Pelling 1986 (c 186) and 1988 (в 138) 272-89, esp. 278-9. [159] Kromayer 1899 (c 144) 30-2; Brunt 1971 (a 9) 508: Pelling 1988 (в 138) 268, 276, 287-8. [160] Cleopatra Selene survived to marry Juba of Mauretania; Alexander Helios walked in the triumph of 29, but is not heard of after that and was probably murdered. Ptolemy Philadelphus is not mentioned at the triumph, and probably died even sooner. [161] The same tradition is reflected by Flor. 11.21.9-10 and Oros. vi. 19.18. It probably owes its currency to Livy, who had a taste for such final scenes (cf. his Sophoniba, xxx. 12-15) and certainly dwelt on the importance to Cleopatra of the triumph (fr. 54, [162] Cf. esp. Griffiths 1961 (c 105), Nisbet and Hubbard 1970 (в 133) on Hor. [163] I-37- [164] Cf. esp. Nisbet and Hubbard 1970 (в 153) on Hor [165] Dio Ы.17.4 with Reinhold 1988 (в 150) could of course be removed then: a tawdry execution would not be necessary, but an accident might happen a little later, or a wasting disease. These things could be managed. [168] Though some may not: cf. Pelling 1988 (в 138), 318-23. [169] 6-5 b.c. excerpt only; 4-3 b.c. no Dio at all; 2 в.с. begins with excerpt, becomes full again, but ends with excerpt; i b.c., a.d. i and ), excerpt only; a.d. 8, nothing except a scrap of excerpt at the end; a.d. 9, full Dio except for a gap after the 'Varian disaster', where there is only excerpt; summer a.d. 13 to summer a.d. 14, excerpt only. s Millar 1964 (в 128) T02-i8; McKechnie 1981 (в 116); Espinosa Ruiz 1982 (c 84). [171] Wallace-Hadriil 1983 (в 190) io-ij; Gascou 1984 (в 39) 390-6. [172] Veil. Pat. 11.88-123, cd. Woodman 1983 (в 203), with commentary. [173] E.g. Aufidius Bassus; Servilius Nonianus (on whom Syme in [174] Literature of the age discussed in ch. 19 below. 15 Dio li. 1.2. 16 Ch. 1 above, pp. J9-6J. He will always be so named in this chapter, until he becomes Augustus. Especially Sattler i960 (d 63) and Schmitthenner 1962 (c 305). " A major politico-agrarian problem; see Brunt 1971 (a 9) 332—42. 20 N. Purcell, САН ix2, ch. 17. [179] Strab. xvii.3.23 (840Q. 49 Suet. Text of the copy from Aries, EJ2 22; picture, Earl 1968 (c 81) pi. 38. Livy, evidence suggests a much later date for that change. Gardthausen 1891 (c 93) 1 806. 53 Suet. [184] Schmitthenner 1962 (c 305). See also ch. 1 above and ch. 4 below. [185] Syme 1986 (a 9j), chs. 15 and 16, and, on the prefecture of the city, esp. 211-12. [186] 'Claiming that he did not understand the job-description', Tac. [187] Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 3 39-51 has a full discussion; it is not in Dio. Essential now is EJ2 366, the Greek fragment of Augustus' funeral oration for Agrippa, with the additional fragment published by Gronewald 1983 (в 370) 61-2. 74 Dio tin.32.3. [189] Dio liii.32.5; Talbert 1984 (d 77) i6j. [190] Tac. [191] Though not immediately: Lacey 1979 (c 147). 80 Dio liii.32.5. [192] The story at Suet. " Perhaps separate trials: young Tiberius was prosecutor of Caepio. 41 Dio's his century. 93 Suet. [196] Twice, he says in the 96 Augustus probably just leant heavily on hoarders: cf. [198] Dio liv. 10.5, exactly analogous to'... for life, to the extent of not having to relinquish...' at Lin.32.5; see above p. 86. [199] Dio liv. 12.4. Agrippa's the correct inference from the [201] Dio liv. 19.6: Dio's Greek implies that title: it was probably a formal, even if not a standing, office. 124 Dio liv. 24.4-6. [203] Rajak 1984 (e 1194) favours the authenticity of the texts cited by Josephus, but minimizes their scope. ■я Dio liv.2ĵ-ĵ puts it in i} b.c. [205] Boatwright 1986 (c 53). 147 Dio lv.6.6. See n. 51 above. ,4S Veil. Pat. n.97.4; but see ch. 4 below, pp. 181-5. 149 The R [208] The epitome of Dio says others were executed, and on a charge of conspiracy, but names no names. 164 Syme 1986 (л 9;) 91. 165 Syme 1978 (в 179). 166 DioLV.io.ii. [210] See above, p. 90. [211] A propemptic eflusion: Antipater, Poem 47 (Gow and Page 1968 (в 65)). Cf. Ov. 1.171. 169 The year immediately following i в.с. 170 Romer 1979 (c 501). his death, in an [214] Velleius was present, and describes it, 11.201. [215] Bowersock 1984 (c 40) speculates about the divided allegiance in the East between Tiberius and Gaius Caesar. 175 DioLV.ioa.8. [216] He did, under popular pressure, allow his daughter to change her place of exile as far as Rhegium. 177 So Dio lv. 13.2. Suetonius is wrong. while. Domitius Ahenobarbus, who reached the Elbe, and Marcus Vinicius had both won [220] The 'conspiracy of Gnaeus Cornelius Cinna Magnus', placed in this year by Dio lv.14-22.1 (cf. Sen. [221] See ch. 18 below, pp. 893-7. 184 Suet. iss Veil. Pat. и.105-7; and see ch. 4 below, pp. 183-4. 386 five legions were very nearly cut to pieces in a.d. 7, with severe loss of junior officers: Veil. Pat. 11.112.6. 187 Dio lv.28.1-4. 188 Dio LV.27.6; Joseph. B/ii.ii i and 117. 189 DioLV.23.1. 100 He also set up a committee of consular senators to review expenditure in the public sector. [226] DioLv.2j.j. RC 17. 153 Dio 1_v.26.4-5. A new 2 per cent tax on sales of slaves was instituted to fund the new service. '« Dio Lv.27.2-j. EJ2 568. Dio lv.jki. 147 Veil. Pat. it. 115. ,,e Already stated by Dio LV.27.5. [230] Suet. Tac. of a propaganda campaign against Tiberius and Livia. [233] Dio lvi.1-9 invents two speeches; Suet. [234] Dio lvi.io; Suet. 2,1 Numerous subordinate commanders got [236] A'set piece'in Velleius, и.117.2-119; another in Dio, lvi.18—22.2. 213 DioLvi.2j. A vexed problem of chronology plagues these у ears,crystallizing round the question whether Tiberius' triumph was in a.d. 12 or 13 (we know at least the day: 23 October). [239] Of which the Gemma Augustea is the visual monument: Simon 1986 (p 577) 156-61 and PI. 11. 216 Dio lvi. 11 and 15. [241] Sailer 1982 (f 59) esp. ch. 2. 5 Herrmann 1968 (c 117). 6 Sailer 1982 (f 59) 73-4. Bowersock 1965 (c 39) ch. 3, and texts in Reynolds 1981 (в 270) nos. 10-12. Braund 1984(0 254). [244] The Greek is The Latin word that stood in that place was not known until discovery of the Antioch-in-Pisidia copy of the R Respectively, Magdelain 1947 (c 167); Grant 1946 (в 322); Grenade 1961 (c 103). [248] The view here argued for is mentioned, but dismissed, by Brunt 1977 (c 33]) 113. [249] For my negative argument, see Jolowicz and Nicholas 1971 (f 660) 365-6; for my positive argument, see Hammond 1959 (л 43) 306, n. 59; de Martino 1974 (л 58) fasc. 1, 501-2. [250] [251] And after the one great burst of 'Julian Laws' there are very few certain cases of even those. [252] For normative-looking edicts of Augustus see EJ2 282, and, in the law, [253] E.g. 2}.i. 31 Pomponius at [255] Essential still: Girard 1915 (f 655). On the [256] Suet. [257] The principal attempt is that of Jones i960 (a 47) ch. j. [258] Dio li.19.7; and see ch. 2 above, p. 74. 36 Though 37 Brunt 1984 (d 27). 38 Ov. [260] Suet. People who became Szramkiewicz 1975-6 (d 75). [263] Not only in the capital: Suet. Sutherland 1976 (в 356) ch. 4, and ch. 8 below, pp. 316-19. 80 See ch. 2 above, p. 93. [265] Respectively, [266] RG 8, j. The Greek version says 'i gave myself as an example'. [267] They are influenced by Weinstock 1971 (f 235). See, e.g., Gros 1976 (f 397) esp. ch. 1; Zanker 1987 (p 632) 110-13; 115- [268] Suet. 93 Millar 1984(0 102). The 'Common Councils'certainly pre-existed, but they were turned into a 95 Simon 1986 (f j77) 97-103; Zanker 1987 (f 632) 135-8. [271] Duthoy 1978 (e 57). " Augustus was, besides role on the Ara Pacis is evident. 96 Kienast 1982 (c 156) 211, with n. 168. [274] Coarelli 1985 (e 20) 129-55. 100 Suet. 101 Wiseman 1994 (f 81) esp. 101-8. »» [276] The Calendar for April 28, in EJ. 104 Dio lv. 12.4-5. side, via the Forum Romanum. I* Beginning with the grant of tribunician sacrosanctity to Livia and Octavia, the wives of the triumvirs, in 55 B.C. 107 EJ2 61. [280] Agrippa was offered a home there in 25 b.c., after Ms own had burnt down, Dio liii.27.5; but it is not clear that that was more than temporary. 109 Suet. [282] Wallace-Hadrill 1983 (в 190) 177-80; Kienast 1982 (c 136) 253-63. 1,1 Alfoldi 1971 (f 246) and 1980 (f 247). [284] EJ2 68-9, and the material in n. 58 above. [285] Consigliere 1978(064); Sutherland 1976(8 556); Levick 1982 (в 338); Wallace-Hadrill 1986 (в 1,5 Suet. [287] Campbell 1978 (d 172) esp. 15 5—4. [288] Illuminated by the new bronze from Larinum, [289] Julia: Macrob. 134 Vitr. [290] Raaflaub 1980 (c 190), and see ch. 4, below. [291] Nero's remark, in the course of murdering Britannicus (Suet. [291] See the studies in the bibliography, л 82л. [293] Strab. h.j.12 (118Q; xvi.4.22 (780C); xvii.i.53-4 (819-21C); Jameson 1968 (e 939), on the chronology and motives; cf. Bowersock 1983 (e 990J 46-7; Sidebotham 1986(0 311), >92-3; 1986(0 310) 120-4, 138-40; Desanges 1988 i(c 263) 4—7. On Roman commerce in the East, see Raschke 1978 (c 298) 650-76; Schmitthenner 1979 (c 306) 104-6. ' Aug. RG 26.5; Strab. xvi.4.23-4 (780-2Q; xvii. i. 5 3 (819Q; von Wissmann 1978 (c 326) 31318; Isaac 1980 (e 1015) 889-901; Bowersock 1983 (e 990) 46-9; Sidebotham 1986 (c 311); 1986 (c 310) 124-30; Desanges 1988 (c 263) 7—12. [295] Strab. xi.2.11 (495C); x(i.j,29(5 56C); Hoben 1969(e 840)47-53; Sullivan i98o(e 879) 91 j-22; Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 463-8. 1! Strab. xn.3.29 (5 56C); xn.3.37 (5 59~6оС); Pani 1972(0295) 140-2; Cimma 1976(0 120)293, n. 8. [297] Suet. [298] Dio lvii.17.4-5. Perhaps during Archelaus' trial; Romer 1985 (c 302) 76-84. [299] Cf. Pani 1972 (c 295) 131-45; Sullivan 1980 (e 880) 1149-61; Romer 1985 (c 302) 84-100. [300] Strab. xii.3.41 (562c). 24 Magie 1950 (e 853) 1283-4. [301] Magic 1950 (e 853) 1303-4; Levick 1967 (e 851) 26-8; Hoben 1969 (e 840) 1 30-8. [302] Dio LIII.26.J; Strab. xii.5.i (567Q; xn.6.j (569Q; xn.8.14 (577C); Levick 1967 (e 8ji) 30-2. [303] Strab. xiv. j.6 (671Q; Dio Lrv.9.2. [304] Magie 1950 (e 835) 465-6, 1328-9; Sherk 1980 (e 873) 960-1. » [305] Strab. xii.6.5 (569C); Tac. Augustus' part; cf. 203-14. 32 Dio Lv.28.3; Sherk 1980 (e 875) 970. [307] References and discussion in Bowersock 1965 (c 39) 46-51, 57-8. On Commagene, see Sullivan 1977 (e 878) 775-83. 34 Dio li.7.1-2, Lv.18.1. [308] Just. Debevoise 1938 (a 19) 136-7, Ziegler 1964 (c 327) 147, and, esp., Timpe 1975 (c 320) 157-60. On Tiridates' coinage, see Timpe, 1975 (c 320) 155-7. 54 Dio Liv.7, uv.9.1-3. [310] Dio Li v.9.4—5; Veil. Pat. 11.94.4; Aug. RG, 27.2; Tac. [312] Aug. RG 29.2; Strab. xvi.1.18 (748-9C); Veil. Pat. 11.100.1; Oros. vi.21.24. Parthia's acknowledgment of Roman interest in Armenia: Suet. [313] Aug. RG 29.2; Dio liv.8.1—3; [314] Tac. [315] Dio Lv.9.4—j; Tac. [316] Dio. lv.io.i8; Veil, Pat. 11.100.1. [317] Aug. RG 27.2; Tac. reconstructions of Chaumont 1976 (a i 5) 80-3, with numismatic testimony; Pani 1972 (c 295) 5 5 64; Cimma 1976 (d 120) 328—9. [320] Aug. [321] Joseph. [322] The distribution of provinces in Dio mi.12.4-5; rf- Syme 1934 (c 313) 300. Augustus' announced resolve for subjugation: Dio ып.13.1. The ferocity of the foe: Strab. 111.4.17-18 (164- 5C); Oros. vi.21.8. The opening of the gates: Oros. vi.zi.i. [323] Dio lin.26.5; cf. Flor. 11.33.53; Barnes 1974 (c 253) 21. 75 Suet. Aug. RG 26.2-3; cf. 29.1. Livy, xxvin.12.12; Flor. 11.33.59; Vel1- Pat- n.90.2-4. 78 Suet. [326] Dio liv.j.i-j. 87 Dio liv.: 1.2-6; cf. Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 402-10. A minor rising was quelled in 16 b.c.; Dio liv.20.5. Dio lrv.23.7, Liv.25.1, Liv.43.3; Aug. RG 12.2. Dio XLVin.9.4; App. " Carthage: Dio Lii.43.1; App. [331] Fasti Triumph, for the years 54, 33, 28, 21, 19. [332] Virg. [333] Cf. Romanelli 1959 (e 760) 186-7; Rachet 1970 (c 297) 74. * Veil. Pat. 11.116.2; cf. [335] Veil, Pat. 11.116.2; Flor. 11.31.40; Dio Lv.28.3-4; Oros. vi.21.18. L. Cornelius Lentulus may have been among the Roman generals who perished at the hands of the rebels; Just. [336] Dio Liv.22.1-2; cf. Flor. 11.22. 108 Dio Liv.22.5-4; Veil. Pat. 11.95.i-2. 109 Dio Liv.22.3-4; Veil. Pat. 11.95.1-2; Strab. iv.6.9 (206Q; Suet. Livy, 28; Waasdorp 1982/3 (e 639) 40-7; Schon 1986 (e 635) 43-56. A summary in Drack and Fellmann 1988 (e 608) 22-5. »0 Dio Liv.24.3. 111 [341] Strab. iv.6.9 (206Q. For the occupation and administration of Raetia, see Wells 1972 (e 601) 67-89; Overbeck 1976 (e 633) 668-72; Laffi 1975-6 (e 627) 406-20. 1,3 Dio Liv.20.2; Strab. tv.6.8-9 (206Q; Flor. 11.22 (inaccurate). [343] Veil. Pat. 11.39.}; Dio, Liv.20.2; Festus, [344] See, esp., Kraft 1973 (a 53) 1,181-208; cf. also Wells 1972 (e 601) 70; Kienast 1982(0 136)297. [345] Cf. van Berchem 1968 (e 605) 8-9; Christ 1977 (c 260) 188-9. [346] Christ 1957 (c 239) 425-7. I1S Hor. [348] VeU. Pat. п.78.2. 123 App. 124 App. 126 App. [350] Announcement of tribes subjugated: App. [351] The campaigns are recorded in detail by Dio li.23—7; cf. Flor. 11.26; Livy, [351] Veil. Pat. 11.96.2; Flor. 11.24.8; Dio uv.28.1. [352] Dio liv.} 1.2-4, "v.54.j; Veil. Pat. 11.96.3; Flor. 11.24.8; Suet. [353] Veil. Pat. 11.98.1-2; Dio uv.34.3-7; Flor. 11.27; Danov 1979 (e 660) 129-31. On Roman connexions with friendly Thracian dynasts, see Sullivan 1979 (e 698) 189-204. [354] Dio lrv.34.4. [355] Aug. RG 30.1; Diouv.36.2, Lv.2.4; cf. VelL Pat. 11.90.1. On the operations from 16 to 9 B.C., see Syme 1971 (e 702) 18-22; Mocsy 1962 (e 673) 340-1; Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 63-5. [356] Appuleius: Cassiod. [357] Dio Lv.29.3, Lv.30.4; Syme 1971 (e 702) jo-8. [358] Aug. RG 50.2; Strab. vii.3.11, vii.3.13 (304-5Q. Defeat of the Dacians may have been spurred by a Dacian invasion of 10 B.c.; Dio Liv.36.2. 145 Suet. [360] Dio lv.29.3—31.4, Lv.34.3; Veil. Pat. ii.i 10.5—112.2. [361] Veil. Pat. ii.i 12.3-6; Dio lv.33.3. Veil. Pat. 11.113.1-3. 147 So Koestermann 1933 (c 281) 362-3. 148 Veil. Pat. 11.114.4; Dio lv.33.1-2, lv.54.4-7. [363] Dio Liv.25.1. [364] For the archaeological evidence - which cannot fix specific dates - see Wells 1972 (e 601) 94148; cf. Schonberger 1969 (e 591) 144-7. [365] On Augustus' activities in Gaul, see Frei-Stolba 1976 (e 615) 355-65. 166 Dio uv.25.1. 161 Livy, 266) 155—6. [368] T)io Liv.32.1-3; Livy, [369] Dio uv.j). 1-5; Livy, [370] DioLtv.36.3-4;Oros.vi.21.ij;Livy,Prr. 141.AspeculativereconstructionbyTimpe 1967(0 316) 296-300. [371] Dio lv.1.2-j; Flor. 11.30.23-7; Strab. vii.1.3 (291C); Livy, [372] Dio Lv.1.3; cf. Suet. 289-306. 173 Dio lv.2.1-3; Livy, [374] Dio uv.33.4; Flor. 11.30.26. [375] Schonberger 1969 (e 591) 147-9; Wells 1972 (e6oi) 161-233. [376] Dio lv.6.2-3; Suet. [377] As, e.g., Wells 1972 (e 601) 46-7; Kienast 1982 (c ij6) }oo-i. [378] Veil. Pat. 11.97.4; Flor. n.30.29-30. Florus' claim, 11.30.22, that Augustus sought to make Germany a province in order to honour Julius Caesar is not to be taken seriously. [379] Dio lvi.i8.i; cf. Christ 1977 (c 260) 189-98. [380] Tac. [381] Veil. Pat. 11.108.2-109.4; Strab. vii.1.3 (290C). 1,1 Veil. Pat. 11.109.5; cf. Tac. 1,3 Tac. 195 Dio lvi. 18.1-2. On this passage, see the astute remarks of Christ 1977(0 260) 194-8, as against Timpe 1967 (c 317) 288-90; 1970(0 319) 81-90. 1* Veil. Pat. 11.117.2. For his relationship to the imperial family, m Dio lvi.18.3; Veil. Pat. 11.117.2-118.1; Flor. 11.30.31. [388] Epirote Nicopolis: Strab. vh.7.j-6 (524-5С); x.2.2 (450C); Pliny, 249-54. 225 Suet. [390] Aug. [391] Aug. [392] Aug. RG 13; cf. Dio Liv.36.2. [393] The only exception is a claim that the Alps were subdued without bringing an unjust war on any tribe; [394] For various views, see e.g., Meyer 1961(0 288); Brunt 1963 (c 256) 170-6; Seager 1980(0 309) 103-11; Williams 1990 (c 325) 258—75. Recent bibliographies in Doblhofer 1981 (c 265) 1922-6; Little 1982 (в 111) 352-70. See esp., Johnson 1973 (в 93) 171-80; Griffin 1984 (c 269) 189-218. [395] Virg. G. 11.169-72, hi. jo-}, lv. j j 9-62. [396] Virg. [397] Hor. 111.4.25-36. 234 Hor. [399] Hor. [401] Prop. 11.10.13-14,11.14.23-4,111.4.1-9, hi.9.54, in.12.3, iv.3.7-10, iv.3.35-40, iv.3.63-9. ** Prop. rv.6.79-80. [403] Bibliography on the Ara Pacis is immense. Among the more important publications, see Moretti 1948 (f 505); Toynbee 1953 (f 597)67-95; Kahler 1954 (F439) 67-100; Hanell i960 (f 405) 31-123; Simon 1967 (f 576); Borbein 1975 (f 294) 242-66; Pollini 1978 (f 531) 75-172; Torelii 1982 (f 596) 27-61; Zanker 1988 (f 633) 172-83, 205-6. de Grummond 1990 (c 272) 663-77, unconvincingly identifies the female deity with Pax. [404] See the meticulous calculations of Buchner 1976 (f 304) 319-65; 1983 (f 307) 494-508. [405] Luttwak 1976 (a 57) 13-50, 192. [406] See the list of scholars in Oldfather and Canter 1915 (c 294)9-10, and note, esp., Syme 1934(0 J12) ЗИ-4; Kraft 1973 (a 53) 181-208. [407] Brunt 1963 (c 256) 170-6; Wells 1972 (e 601) 1-15; Moynihan 1986 (c 291) 149-62; Nicolet 1988 (a 69) 41-8. [408] For imperial 'policy' as a response to initiatives from others, esp. Millar 1977 (л 59). Patronage: Wallace-Hadrill 1989 (f 75), esp. chs. j and 6. Showmanship: Gzek 1971 (c 540) (and below, on Nero). Succession in pre-industrial states: J. Goody (ed.) [409] Tiberius has attracted numerous biographers, among them Seager 1972 (c 992); Levick 1976 (c 366). Cf. Pippidi 1963 (c 385); Rogers 1943 (c 388); Syme 1974 (c 398). On the events of 2 B.C. and a.d. 8, Meise 1969 (c 373), chs. 2 and 3; Syme 1974 (c 229). [410] Elections: Levick 1967 (c 365). [411] On the military [412] Koestermann 1958(0 363); Hennig 1972 (c 35 5); Sutherland 1987(0 3s8)ch. 19. On Tiberius' own network of patronage in the East, Levick 1971 (c 156). Piso's temper: Sen. [413] Libo: Weinrib 1967 (c 411) [414] Bauman 1974 (f 641). Nero cut rewards to one fourth: Suet. [415] Only a late source, John of Antioch (FHG iv. j 70) states that Tiberius 'called him his child [ie., son-in-law] and successor'. [416] Syme 1956 (в 288). The [417] The prosopography of individuals' careers and family relationships often has to be based on epigraphical evidence and chance remarks in literature. Many questions remain unresolved (e.g. the relationship to each other and to the Caesars of different Scribonii and Pisones). Family background was an essential element of imperial biography, but even Suetonius' lives [418] Finance and credit: Rodewald 1976 (в 548); Sutherland 1987 (в j 5 8) ch. 14. Jurisprudence: chs 12 and 21 below. Note Sejanus' relationships with Aelius Tubero and the Cassii; and his son Decimus Capito Aelianus may have been adopted by C. Ateius Capito. Claudius blames the 'absentia pertinaci patrui mei' for failure to resolve the citizen status of the Anauni: [419] Provinces: Orth 1970 (c 384); Rectus: Dio Lvn.10.5. [420] Oaths: [421] [421] Britain: Barrett 1980 (с 352); Murison 1985 (c 379); Boatwright 1986 (c 33) plate 20. 43 Corbulo: Syme 1970 (c 397). [422] Corn: Momigliano 1934 (c 377); Meiggs 1973 (e 84); Chandler 1978 (c 338); Rickman 1980 (e 109). CERES AUGUSTA: [422] 'Crescent, rationemque a se omnium factorum acciperet': Suet. [423] Main sources: Tac. [424] Ephesus dossier: Engelmann and Knibbe 1986 (в 228). Egypt: edict of Tiberius Iulius Alexander, MW 528 = [425] Timarchus: Tac. Алл. xv.20 [426] Problems in the provinces: confiscations in Africa: Pliny, HN xvni.7.55. For Judaea, see ch. 14Л. Bullion shortage: Sutherland 1987(8 358) ch. 40. [427] The narrative sources for a.d. 68 are unsatisfactory: we cannot even be certain that Vindex's province was Lugdunensis, Suet. For discussions of the end of Nero's reign, Griffin 1984 (c 352); Reece 1969 (c 387); Warmington 1969 (c 409) ch. 13. The 'native revolt' interpretation of Vindex's uprising can still be found; Dyson 1971 (a 25). Galba's supporters are discussed in Syme 1982 (c 400). There is a readable biography of Galba in French; Sancery 1983 (c 390). [427] On the difficulties of evaluating the tradition about Vesontio, see Brunt 1959(0 354); Daly 1975 (c 342); Levick 1985 (c 370). Cassius Dio's account is at lxii(lxiii).24. Rufus' epitaph (Pliny, Hie situs est Rufus, pulso qui Vindice quondam imperium adseruit non sibi sed patriae. [428] For Vespasian's supporters, see Townend 1961 (c 404); Nicols 1978 (c 381); Gallivan 1981 (c 547); Jones 1984 (c 360); Wallace 1987 (c 407). See also following note. [429] On the fighting in Italy and Rome in a.d. 69, see Tac. ,J The [431] Slightly differing versions in: Suet. [432] Chantraine 1967 (d 9); Weaver 1972 (d 22); Boulvert 1970 (d 6) and 1974 (d 7). [433] Pflaum 1960-1 (d 59); cf. Brunt 1983 (d 26). [434] Syme's prosopographical work is informed by tacit understanding of the nature of the imperial court; for a rare statement, Syme 1939 (a 93) 385. [435] Dio Liii.19. 5 Syme 1938 (в 176) 206 and [436] For criticism of use of anecdotes, see Sailer 1980 (в 156). [437] So explicitly Momigliano 1954 (c 577) xiii. [438] See (for a later period) the fundamental analysis of N. Elias, [439] Friedlander 1922 (a 30) 1. 33—103 remains the best discussion of the court as social [440] See Carettoni 1983 (f 316); Zanker 1983 (f 630); Coarelli 1981 (p 332) 129-34. [441] Millar 1977 (a 59) 61-6; Turcan 1987 (d 20) 76ff. 28 Joseph. Asc. On the Domus Aurea and its extent, see Griffin 1984(0 352) 134-42; further Frezouls 1987(0 n). 31 Giuliani 1982 (f 387) 246-54 on structures beneath Domitian's palace. [445] D'Arms 1970 (e 30) 73-11 j. [446] For imperial ceremonial, Friedlander 1922 (a 30) 1. 90-103; Alfoldi 1934 (d i); for republican practice, Kroll 1933 (a 54) 11. 59-81. 34 Suet. [448] Epictetus, For hellenistic court hierarchy, Corradi 1929 (a i8),Mooren 1977(0 16); for analysis of status dissonance, Herman 1980-1 (d 12). [451] Friedlander 1922 (a 30) 1. 76f; Bang 1921 (d 5); Crook 1955 (d 10) 21-30. [452] Wallace-Hadrill 1982 (d 21). [453] Friedlander 1922 (a 50) i.goff. (imperial receptions), (f 59) i28f; Turcan 1987 (d 20) 1 jzfF. 41 Seneca [455] Suet. [456] Suet. [457] Crook 1955 (d 10) 4-7, 22—4; Millar 1977 (a 59) 110-18; Amarelli 1983 (d 4); Turcan 1987 (d 20) i43ff. [458] Busy: e.g. Sen. [459] Crook 19 5 5 (d i o) 104 and [459] Philo, [460] Millar 1977 (a 59) 112; Wallace-Hadrill 1982 (d 21) 40. Zanker 1988 (f 63 3) ch. 7 on the court circle as model for taste. On the parallel role of courts in the evolution of European culture, see Elias, [463] Suet. [464] Tac. [464] Tac. [465] Tac. [466] Griffin 1976 (в 71) [467] So Elias, 75 Epictetus, [468] Stat. [470] Tac. [471] Suet. [472] Suet. » Sailer 1982 (p 59) 73ff; Wallace-Hadrill 1989 (f 75) 78ff. [474] See Millar 1977 (a 59) 27jff; Brunt 1983 (d 26); Demougin 1988 (d 37). [475] Tac. Mela. 105 Hopkins 1983 (a 46) i76ff. [476] Hopkins 198} (a 46) 171; Elias, [477] Tac. [478] Sen. Tac. [480] Hopkins 1980(0 135) 124-5; MacMullen 1984(0 146). [481] Pliny, 7 Pflaum 1940 (d i 5 3); Jones 1974 (d 137) 169 n. 96, 180; Mitchell 1976 (в 255); Lewis 1982 (e 94 0- [484] Thornton 1989 (f 594) chs. V-VI; Frank 1940 (d 128) v. 42, 57; Noe 1987 (d 152) 49-51. 15 Brunt 1981 (d 118); Rathbone 1995 (e 962). 16 See n. 7 above; also Brunt 1974 (d 171). [486] Tac. [487] Domergue 1990 (e 216); Dodge 1992 (d 127) ch. 5. [488] Burnett, Amandry and Pipolles 1992 (в 312); Sutherland 1984 (в 357); Crawford 198; (в 320) ch. 17; Walker 1976 (в 361). [489] Dio liv.21. [490] Wallace-Hadrill 1986 (в 562); Kraft 1962 (в 334); Griffin 1984 (c 352) 57-9, 120-5. [491] Crawford 1985 (в 320) 271; Howgego 1982 (d 134). 30 Howgego 1992 (d 135). [492] Corbier 1974 (d 122); Corbier 1977 (d 123); Millar 1964 (d 149). [493] Millar 1963 (d 148); Brunt 1966 (d i 16); Jones 1950 (d 136); Rathbone 1993 (e 962). * Veil. Pat. 11.39.2; Tac. [495] Chastagnol 1975 (d 33); Sailer 198 2 (f j 9) 51 n. 5 8; Talbert 1984 (d 77) 513. [496] Millar 1983 (d ioi) 88-90. 7 Levick 1983 (c 369) 97-115. 8 Morris 1964 and 1965 (d ji). [498] Tac. [499] Brunt 197j (e 906). <1 Brunt 1966 (d 87); Alfoldy 1981 (d 23). 42 Tac. 44 Pavis d'Escurac 1976 (d 5 5); Rickman 1980 (e 109). « Eck 1979 (e 38) 88-94. 46 Brunt 1983 (d 26). [503] Calculation of the revenue to be derived in return for protection is explicit in Strabo iv.5.3 (200c), reflecting that Britain would need a legion plus cavalry forces to ensure collection of tribute and the expenditure on troops would equal the revenue. On the spread of currency and economic interests in general see Crawford 1985 (в 320) ch. 17. [504] App. [505] Reynolds 1982 (в 270) nos. 7, 11, 12; Mylasa, R [506] Dio lin. 12; Baetica was transferred to the Senate probably soon after 27 b.c., see Mackie 198 5 (e 753) 353—•4- 7 Dio liii.12.7, Liv.4.1, Thomasson 1975 (d 110) 1 87ff. [508] Strab xvii.3.24-j (8j9-40c); Egypt, Tac. ' Illyricum, divided into Pannonia and Dalmatia, was transferred from proconsuls to legates, as was Macedonia (see above, n. 7); Sardinia was governed by proconsuls, then [510] German forts: Schdnberger 1969 (e 591) 151, Tac. Л ля. XI. 19.7; soldiers: Tac. [511] Extortion: EJ2 311.72—141; Jews: Joseph. [512] 25 Vindex, governor of Lugdunensis in a.d. 68 an Aquitanian, Dio 1x111.22.1(2); Ti. Iulius Alexander, Tac. [515] Lampo, Philo, [516] Note the precision with which Pliny and Trajan describe the position Amisus, a [518] Elections at Malaca, MW 454, caps.55-9; the [519] AJ 68, cf. J.H. Oliver, [520] Thessalian League, EJ2 521; Sardinia, [521] [522] Civil functions: RAtfR 51; ccnsus: 11S z6S 3; transport annOTW- O. Gueraud, jyp 4 (19 50) 107— 15; resettlement: above, n. 21; peace-keeping: Joseph. [523] Evidence for the provincial census collected by Brunt 1981 (d i 18); public land in Egypt, Rowlandson 1996 (e 963). [524] Suet. 5 Different from the more familiar rectangular shield of the Principate (below, p. 3 79); illustrated at Keppie 1984 (d 202) 112-13, pi. 3. [526] App. [527] Breeze 1969 (d 166). 27 See below, pp. j24-8. 28 Le Roux 1982 (e 228) 105. 29 Tac. 31 Saddington 1982 (d 227). [530] Veil. Pat. II. 118. [531] Suet. [533] Veil. Pat. 11.109.1. 41 Tac. Dio lv.31, lvi.23; Veil. Pat. 11.111; Pliny, HjVvri.149; Suet. [535] Dio Lv.31.1, LVi.23.3; Veil. Pat. 11.111.1; Suet. [535] App. [536] Jsvri» [537] Tac. [539] 'City of Rome' being defined since Sulla at the latest by 'in urbe Roma propiusve mille passus", as e.g. in the [540] N.N., standing for Numerius Negidius, the man who denies, and A. A., i.e. Aulus Agerius, the plaintiff, are stock blanks, as well as 'Titius' for the judge. For introductions to the formulary system cf. Jolowicz and Nicholas 1972 (f 660) 199-232 and Kunkel 1973 (f 667) 91—8; also below, ch. 21, pp. 959-60. [541] Gell. [542] The procedure is best known from the Gracchan [543] During the Republic rewards had been mostly political, i.e. promotion in civic status. Pecuniary awards seem to be first introduced by the Lex Pedia against the murderers of Caesar and became usual (consisting in a quota of the condemned's fortune) in the Empire, especially in [544] [544] Jones 1972 (d 264) (but cf. the critical reviews of Behrens 1975 (d 246) and Brunt 1974(0 251)); Crook 1967 (f 21) 69 and Brunt 1964 (d 250) are sceptical about this capital jurisdiction; Cloud in САН ix2 501 accepts it as far as slaves, perhaps even working-class citizens were concerned. [544] Cf.Cic. Clu. 176 for capital proceedings initiated by municipal magistrates against Cluentius. These are probably the [544] Richardson 1983 (в 271) and Birks, Rodger and Richardson 1984 (d 247). a Sometimes the governor would call together [546] Habicht published an inscription from Ephesus giving a register of towns in Asia Minor by [546] Sen. [546] Dio li.19.7 and Lintott 1972 (d 271) 263-7. 38 Suet. proclamation of Nero as Tacitus. [548] Jones 1960 (a 47) 9of suggested that it was the [548] This is not the place to discuss the many problems connected with this archive, still not entirely published, which contains documents in Aramaic, Greek and Latin; cf. Wolff 1980 (d 278) and [549] [550] Cic. [551] Syme 1938 (d 68); Syme 1939^93)90-4; Wiseman 1971 (d 81), documents at length and for all periods down to Augustus the incorporation of Italians in the Roman governing class; see also Nicolet 1966 (d 32) I. 387-422; Сё be iliac Gervasoni 1978 (e 14); the papers in [552] See Rawson 198; (e 107); Pais 1918 (e 88) 1 antedates the process where Rome and a foreign state are concerned, as opposed to Rome and a [553] See Hammond 19; 1 (e 54); also de Ruggiero 1921 (f686); Bonjour 197) (e7). Gely i974(e j 3) romanticizes. 18 D'Arms 1970 (e 30). For what may be inferred about developments in municipal charters in the Caesarian and Augustan ages, see M.H. Crawford (n. 2j). [557] M.H. Crawford (n. 23). [558] Spoletium: [559] Praeneste: [560] See in genera] de Simone 1980 (e 121); Coleman 1986 (e 22). The best account of the disappearance of Etruscan is still that of Harris 1971 (e 55) 172-84; note also 1975 (e64); Michelsen 1975 (в 2 j4): Etruscan letters in texts inscribed in Latin are of extreme rarity. For the disappearance of Oscan at Pompeii, see Castren 1975 (e 12), 44-6. See Appendix III, p. 983. Poccetti 1988 (e 97): the single Umbrian bilingual seems earlier than the Social War. Heurgon 1953 (e 59); Briquel 1990 (e 10). Ilari 1974 (d 196); the ethnic contingents in the army of Spartacus perpetuate earlier Roman practice. [562] To the texts cited above, add Suet. 45 Л/л/ xiii 2, nos. j, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 24, 25, 37, 39; the [565] McBain 1982 (f 177), with the review by Beard 1983 (f 90). [566] E. Gabba (n. 40). 52 Frederiksen 1976 (e 42). [567] Vetter 195 (Lucania); see in general Lejeune 1976 (e 74), for the loss of the rich variety of Oscan [569] Domitian's letter to Irni shows for a later period how difficult the process was; Mourgues 1987 (в 2; 7) is not persuasive. [570] Frederiksen 1959 (e 4i) = (in part) Frederikson 1984 (e 43) 285-318, 281-4. [571] Degrassi 1961—2 (в 225). [572] See [573] Bejor 1979 (f 269) 126; Rossignani 1990 (e i i 5); Italy is hardly present in the great exhibition catalogue [574] A similar pattern on a smaller scale is also evinced by the red-gloss table-ware produced at Puteoli, Pucci 1981 (e ioi) 107—10; and in the pottery style discussed by Lavizzari Pedrazzini i987(e 72). See also M. Torelli (n. 20), at 34-6, for the spread throughout Italy between 50 B.C. and the turn of the eras of the 'villa system', whatever precisely that may have been. [575] Thomsen 1947 (e 127); Nicolet 1988 (a 69) 221-3; f°r Italy under the Empire, see Eck 1979 (e I")- [576] Smith 1958 (d 232); Harmand 1967 (d 193); Keppie 1983 (e 6j). [577] Vittinghoff 1952 (c 239); Keppie 1983 (e 65); for Schneider 1977 (d 231), see the review by Keppie 1981 (d 201), rightly dismissive; for some recent new evidence, see Tagliaferri 1986 (e 125); Solin 1988 (в 283) 99-101. [578] Note that in the eyes of Aulus Gellius intermarriage with other groups by men of the Marsi led to the loss of their magic powers, [580] Panciera 1985 (E91). [581] For the phenomenon in general, see the articles in [582] Torelli 1969 (e 129): one of the monuments at Beneventum is again that of a veteran; see now also Sena Chiesa 1986 (e 119) (at least from the area of Mediolanum). [583] L. Keppie (n. 69) supersedes the speculations of Ciampoltrini 1981 (e 16). [584] [585] Crawford 1989 (e 28), correcting (n. 3), 160; for the gravestones of the imperial period, see Bermond Montanari 1959 (e 3). [586] Coins: Grant 1946 (в 322) 190-2, 195; Burnett 1992 (в 311). Inscriptions: H. Willers, [587] Pace Stone 1983 (e 188). For this period in detail, Hadas 1930 (c 108) 71-150; Tarn 1934^ 189); Goldsberry 1982 (e 161) 489-97; Roddaz 1984 (c 200) 117-38. [588] Cessation of corn exports: App. [589] Lepidus: App. [590] Not all scholars agree. Beloch 1886 (a 4) 327 emended Pliny's text (HN nr.91) to imply that all the communities were [591] [592] Probably Augustan, certainly pre-Claudian: Tac. [593] Cf. Strab. vni.7.5 (386-8C) (on Patras) and vi. 1.6 (257-90) (on Reggio);cf. also RG 28.1; Suet. [595] Wilson 1988 (e 196); 1990 (e 197) with full discussion of the evidence. " Wilson 1985 (e 194); 1990 (e 197) 143-59. [597] Tac. [598] So all sources (and apparently [599] App. [600] Dio lin.12.4 (27 b.c.); lv.28.1-2 (a.d. 6), cf. Livy, xl.54.13. [601] 34 Strab. v.2.7 (224—5c). a.d. 19: Tac. [603] [604] Paus. vii.17.3; Suet. [605] Tac. [606] Per» Rowland 1985 (e 185) no and Dyson 1985 (e 157) 138. The inscription is [607] Sardinia: [608] Sen. [609] Pliny, [610] Meloni 1975 (e 175) [611] It is omitted in the list in [612] Sotgiu 1961 (в 286) no. 45 (Nora); Sotgiu 1961 (в 286) no.), [613] Exceptions include 1980-1 (e 193) 222, n. 7). The Porto Torres baths are not late first century 46 Grain: Rickman 1980 (e 109) 106-7; Rowland 1984 (e 183). Countryside in general: Rowland 1984 (e 184). Mines: Meloni 1975 (e 175) 157-61. Iron: DioxLii.56.3 (46 B.c.). Ingot: [616] AE 1907, ii9 = Sotgiu 1961 (в 286) no. 177. [617] Acquaro [618] Guzzo Amadasi 1967 (e 162) 135—6. [619] M.D. Dopico Cainzos, [620] Strab. ш.4.20 (167c). On the Roman army in Spain, see now, above all, Le Roux 1982 (e 228), cf. Alfoldy 1987 (d 159) 482-513. [621] Cf. Le Roux 1982 (e 228) 107-18, with the list of the inscriptions attesting the •o Strab. ш.4.9 (160c); P. Sillicres, [625] G. Fabre, M. Mayer and I. Roda, [627] On urbanization in Roman Spain, see, above all, Galsterer 1971 (e 221); Wiegels 1985 (e 245); Alfoldy 1987 (e 205). [628] Pliny, [629] [630] A list of the [631] Cf. Alfoldy 1987 (e 20j) 53-4 and 104-j; cf. also the lists and maps in Wiegels 198) (e 24J) 164-8. 18 AE 1971, 172; cf. Wiegels 1983 (e 245) 20-2. [633] On municipal institutions in Roman Spain, cf. Alfoldy 1987 (e 205) 27-9 (with further bibliography). [635] For what follows see Strab. in.2.3-10 (142-8c). [636] Cf. especially the development in the north-western part of the Iberian peninsula; on this Tranoy 1981 (e 244) esp. 261-384. [637] On clan organization, see now Gonzalez Rodriguez 1986 (e 225); on local magistrates and senates cf. now esp. Alfoldy 1987 (e 205) 50-1. 31 Alfoldy 1987 (e 205) 110-11. [639] Tac. 157) esp. 150-8, and 2:9—39. 34 Tac. [641] Strab. iv.j.j (194c). 41 See above, n. j. 42 e.g. Dio Lix.22; Tac. [643] Caes. Cic. [646] Tac. 58 Tac. [648] For example the [649] Strab. iv. 1.г (190-tc). [650] At least the allied states were awarded this, to judge from Tac. [651] the invasion and its aftermath Numerous reasons, apart from that advanced above, have been put forward to explain Rome's decision to invade Britain at this precise juncture. Among them can be listed the military ambition of Claudius, now emperor after Gaius' assassination; the prospect of mineral and other wealth; a surplus of legions on the German frontier after Gaius had created two more to back his abortive invasion attempt; the final suppression of druidism, which had been outlawed in Gaul, no doubt [652] Wacher 1995 (e 560) 242. It has, however, been argued that the Iceni lay outside the province, see Wacher 1981 (e 561) 136. " Tac. " Frere 1961 (e 535). Wacher 1995 (e 560) 23, 189-241. [655] Bennett 1984 (e 528) 47-56. 25 Tac. 29 Tac. 2 3 3-4- 30 Frere 1972 (e 536) 1 31 Frere 1983 (e 536) 11 69-72. 32 Frere 1983 (e 536) 11 35-54. [660] Greene 1978 (e 542). 43 Frere 1972 (e 536) 1. 18. 44 But see reservations expressed by Whittick 1982 (e 366) 113—24. 4S Strab. iv. 5.3 (200-1C). 46 R/B2091. 47 [663] Tac. ' Pliny, [666] Cuppers 1990 (e j74) 8}, Abb. $9. [667] Arminius: Veil. Pat. 11.118.2, Ahenobarbus, Dio Lv.10a.2-3. " Veil. Pat. 11.104.2. 20 Cŭppers 1990 (e 574) 85, Abb. 39. [669] Tac. [670] Iulia Tridentum in Mommsen, 243. 2 Dio liv. 20.1-2. 3 Pliny, HNih.i [673] Dio liv.22; Hor. [674] Ancient sources relating to Roman commanders are collected in AfRR vol. n (down to 30 b.c.), in but the sources are late and confused. Some have rejected the story, e.g. Syme 1979 (a 94) 1 18-30, while others have accepted it, Bosworth 1972 (c 34) 464-8. Antony's attack on the Dardani is noted in App. [676] Dio liv.20.3. Most have assumed the province of Silius to have been Illyricum, though nothing connects him with that region while a dedication honouring him as proconsul was erected at Aenona in Liburnia, [677] Most have accepted the identification of the [ ] QVS on the Tusculum elogium, [678] [679] Dio lv. ioa.2-3 (under a.d. 1). [680] Suet. [681] Tac. [681] By L. Arruntius Camillas Scribonianus, Suet. titles see Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 96. 24 Tac. [683] [684] Tac. Arval Brethren, MW p. i j. 27 Tac. [686] Tac. [687] Hoddinott 1981 (E670). [688] Alfoldy 1964 (e 647); Garaŝanin 1982 (e 665) 586-7 and 598-610. [689] Strab. vn.3.13 (josQ. [689] Cri$an 1978 (e 6)6); Crawford 1985 (в 520) 227-35. 35 Papazoglu 1978 (e 681) 272-8. Strab. vii.5.4 (314—15c); Dion. Hal. 39 Alfoldy 1968 (E650) 1213-14. [693] For example, 42 Batoviĉ 1968 (e 653) 1973 (e 654). 43 SvoljSak 1976 (E 699). Piccottini and Vetters 1981 (e 684) 10-17. [696] Daicoviciu 1972 (e 658) 127-99. [697] The date of the division of Illyricum into Pannonia and Dalmatia remains a problem and has most recently been considered by Fitz 1988 (e 663) (suggesting a.d. 19/20). A belief that a division of Illyricum, either in a.d. 8 or 9, produced two provinces known for a period as Illyricum Superius (Dalmatia) and Inferius (Pannonia) is now to be abandoned since it rests on a doubtful MS record of the full text of the now fragmentary C/L tn 1741 (Epidaurum) as a dedication to the early Tiberian legate Cornelius Dolabella by the 'civitates superioris provinciae Hillyrici'. See Novak 1966 (e 680). The earliest record of Dalmatia is a monument, probably of Claudian date, erected at Rome, AE 1913, 194, but Illyricum, evidently denoting Pannonia still appears in official documents as late as a.d. 60, [698] Alfoldy 1974 (e 6)2) 7-15. [699] Mocsy 1974 (e 677) j j—4. A more southerly line for the Pannonian-Dalmatian boundary has been suggested by'DuSanic 1977 (e 661) 64-6. 50 Gerov 1979 (e 668). [701] [702] Byzantium in a.d. 5 3). 54 [704] 235-44. 58 Tac. [706] [707] a.d. 61 under the procurator T. Iulius Ustus. 61 Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 456-9 and 1974 (e 707). [709] Dalmatia: Alfoldy 1987 (d 159) 259-97. Pannonia, Mocsy 1974 (e 677) 48-51. Noricum: Alfoldy 1974 (e 652) 65. « J.J. Wilkes in Hartley and Wacher 1983 (c 274) 266-7. [711] Zaninovic 1977 (e 711) 791-}, and 1980 (e 712) (Narona); Clairmont 1975 (e 6)5) 58-82 (Salona); Suiĉ 1976 (e 697) 1 jo-j (Iader and Aenona), 158 fig. 74 (Asseria), 88-104 (centuriation); ŜaSel 1968 (е 691) 549-55 (Emona); Mocsy 1974 (e 677) 74-89 (Emona and Savaria), 78-9 (centuriation);Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 559 fig. 15 and 569 (Aequum), 566-7 (Asseria); Alfoldy 1974 (e 652) 87-9 (Virunum). Bradford 1957 (a 7) 175—95 (centuriation). [712] Wilkes 1969 (e 706) 499-502; Matijaŝiĉ 1987 (e 674) 495-551. [713] Cic. [714] Dio xliii.14.1; Suet. Ы. 42.1. The best discussion of Caesarian settlements is Teutsch 1962 (e 765). 5 See Broughton 1971 (e 721), against Kornemann, who put forward this view. [716] EJ2 191 is a milestone recording the road. " Dyson 1975 (c 266). For causes in general, see Dio Lxvii.4.6; Tac. xxxi. " [719] Trousset 1978 (e 768) 141. [720] Desanges 1964 (E 728). [721] Tac. [722] Tac. [723] Aur. Vict. 4.2; [724] Land markers-C/Lvni 22786 (cf. EJ2 264), 22789; [725] Note the Numidians at Masculula not far from Simitthu (cf. n. 29 below), EJ2111. Tacfarinas' corn — Tac. [727] Tac. [728] E.g. EJ2 260 - a soldier who served nineteen years in an outpost at Simitthu in the north west of the province over this period; Tac. [729] Suet. [730] [731] [732] Romanelli 1959 (e 760) 260; cf. Dio Lx.24.5. Dio lx.8-9; Pliny, 54 Aur. Vict. 4.2; Suet. history of 'national consciousness' and 'permanent insurrection' in Roman Africa is discussed by Benseddik 1982 (e 716) 145-62. » Gascou 1982 (e 738) 145-J8, Mackie 1983 (e 753). [735] Chevallier 1958 (e 724) and [736] Republican taxes are discussed in САН ix2 585-9. Augustan edict on veterans - EJ2 302. Gaetulians - discussed below, p. 608. [737] [738] The evidence is now well collected by Gascou 1972 (e 735) and 1982 (e 738). [739] The complex difficulties are discussed by Teutsch 1962 (e 763). See also Brant 1971 (a 9) App. 4- [740] Thompson and Ferguson 1969 (e 767) 13 2-81; modified by Lassere 1977 (e 749) 152—3. [741] EJ2 163; [742] App. [743] For a summary and interpretation of the results of the UNESCO project at Carthage, see Hurst 1985 (e 745). Saumagne 1962 (e 762) discovered the centuriation. The latest information and bibliography on Carthage is published regularly in the bulletin of the Institut National d'Archeolo- gie et d'Art de Tunis, [744] Evidence given by Pflaum 1970 (e 755); most recently discussed by Gascou 1980 (e 737). [745] EJ2 330; [746] For Pliny's list, see n. 43; Utica - Dio xlix. i [747] Building at Lepcis - e.g. EJ2 iojb (9-8 b.c.). Thugga - [748] Cillium - [749] Massinissa - Vitr. [750] Bulla - Thebert 1973 (e 766); Thugga - Poinssot 1958 (e 759). [751] [752] Le Glay 1966 (e 750), esp. 62-80; Picard 1954 (e 7j7) 21-27. The evidence is summarized by Benabou 1976 (e 71;). [753] 'Resistance' is the theme of Benabou 1976 (e 715). [754] Caes. [755] Pliny, [756] [757] Fadel Ali and Reynolds, [758] Redde 198 8 (e 800); [758] Laronde 1987 (e 790) [759] Hdt. iv.196; Strab. xvii.3.23 (838-9C); Pliny, [760] [761] Hdt. iv.ij8f; G. Barker and G.D.B. Jones, [762] M. Luni, C.B.M. McBurney, [765] Plut. Мог. 2 5 ~ [766] App. [768] [770] [771] [772] Joseph. [773] [774] [775] For instance L. Gasperini in Stucchi 1967 (e 805л) 175, no. 38. [776] See the inscription cited in n. 28. 37 Unpublished. 38 E.g. [777] [778] Goodchild 1930 (e 781). « J. Reynolds, [779] Dio liii. 26.3 seemingly implying that Pamphylia was assigned to a governor of its own; but see Syme 1937 (e 882) 227—31, Garrison: Mitchell 1976 (e 834). [780] Quirinius: Levick 1967 (e 851) 24-41; 203-14; a.d. 6: Dio lv.28.3. [781] Plut. " Plut. [783] Dio Chrys. xxxi.66. [784] Delphi: J. Bousquet, 444. 32 Dio Lv.28.2; see Bowersock 1965 (e 818) 280-2. [786] Strab. vm.5.5-6 (366c), with Bowersock 1961 (e 817) and 1984 (c 40). [787] Blood: Dio Liv.7.3, with Bowersock 1964 (c 38) i2of. Discontent at the end of Augustus' reign: Eus.-Jer. 170 Helm (i46f Schoene), with Graindor 1927 (e 832) 41-3. Transfer requested: Tac. [788] Smallwood 1967 (в 284) 404, with A.J. Gossage, [789] EJ2 303 of 31 b.c.; Dio uv.23.7 (Cyprus); Eus.-Jer. 168 Helm (i44f Schoene) (j b.c.), with S.M. Sherwin-White, [790] Diouv.7.5. 43 Agathias, 11.17. 44 /GRR rv 202. 45 EJ2 98. 44 See Price 1984 (f 199) 140. <7 [792] [793] For Germe see H. von Aulock, 'Die romische Kolonie Germa in Galatien und ihre Mŭnzpragung', » Mitchell 1978 (e 85 j). * Pliny, [796] Jones 1971 (d 96) 119 and for Caesarea 168. [797] EJ2 316 (Nysa); 319 (Aezani); 102, with Bowersock 1961 (e 817) (Gytheum); 105*, with Mitford i960 (e 858) 75-9 (Palaepaphos); » Dio lv.27.6 (a.d. 6); Tac. [799] Treasury: [801] Vogel-Weidemann 1982 (e 885) 274-80 (Petronius); Tac. [802] Sen. [803] Tac. See Price 1984 (f 199) (8. See Smith 1987 (f 580). [807] Tac. [808] Tac. 84 Arist. [810] See Tac. [811] For legionary recruitment, see Forni 19 j 3 (d 188), and 1974 (d 189); for Galatia, see Mitchell, [812] Suet. 267 (Proclus). 103 For senators from the East see Halfmann 1979 (d 44) and 1982 (e 836). [814] Halfmann 1982 (e 836) nos. 1 (Macer), 2 (Rufus), 6 (Montanus), 8 (Plancius Varus), 5 (Servenius); 12 (unknown from Miletus). [815] Above, ch. i. s 1 Maehler 1983 (e 948). [816] bureaucracy and administration From the first, care was taken in the establishment of the status and administration of a province which yielded almost as much revenue as did the Gallic provinces added to the empire by Augustus' adoptive father and twelve times as much as the province of Judaea was to provide.13 The emperor immediately took on the role of a Pharaoh and the familiar cartouches were to appear on temple reliefs until the reign of Decius (a.d. 249-51); the lamplighters of Oxyrhynchus duly adapted their customary oath of office and swore by Caesar, 'god, son of a god' САН ix2, ch. 8r. Porter and Moss 1937, 1939 (e 958) v j 1, 35, 128, 135, 151-7, vi 79. Parassoglou 1978 (e 956) App. II, 69-8). Joseph. Tac. [821] [822] That the disappearance of Ptolemaic military ranks was gradual is indicated by the existence of a thirty-seven-year-old [823] Iustus, [824] Gilliam 1986 (d 192) 335-40; Whitehorne 1988 (e 982). [825] [826] Chalon 1964 (e 909), cf. [827] 55 N. Lewis, 'Un nouveau texte sur la juridiction du prefet d'F.gvpte', in [831] Joseph. Fraser 1972 (e 921) 90-1. Rathbone 1990 (e 961). 60 Bowman 1990 (e 901) App. II. [833] [Aur. Vict.] [834] [835] [836] Bowman 1990 (e 901) App. II. [837] [838] [839] Illustrated generally by the [840] See Hobson 1983 (e 934), 1984 (e 935). [842] E.g. [843] Chaeremon, fr. 10 (ed. P.W. Van det Horst, 71-96. « [846] Strab. xvii.i.8-10 (793—5c); Dio Chrys. xxxn.36, 55, 59, 62. 7' Strab. xvii.i.53 (819c); [848] Scholars arc generally agreed that while there has been no significant change in climate since Classical Antiquity, there have probably been minor changes which could have disproportionately large impacts in marginal areas. [849] The status of Palmyra [850] Teixidor 1984 (e 1066) 49. [851] Brunt 1961 (d 86); Cn. Piso was prosecuted for treason after attempting to regain control of the province by armed force (Tac, 43 That Antioch and Apameia are conspicuously absent from the cities in which Jews were massacred in 66 (above, p. 708 and n. 11) may reflect the long-standing grip the army had on those places. Note the immediately calming effect on the mob at Ephesus when a magistrate reminds them of the consequences of provoking the intervention of the proconsul for their ncar-riotious behaviour (Acts 19:3 5 -41). [856] The only such gatherings in which we know governors interested themselves, are those of the Jews, but there it is surely no coincidence that time and again they turn up in Jerusalem at the Passover, when, according to Josephus, huge numbers gathered (he claims 3 million) (Joseph. [858] Malalas, 235.3—6; Strong 1957 (e 1063). 47 Joseph. [859] The evidence is collected and discussed by Keppie 1986 (d 203). [860] Gracey 1981 (e ioio) chs. 1 and 4. In some cases at least, precise locations may have had much to do with the availability of supplies or the means of bringing in food and equipment for a large body of men. [861] Positive evidence detailing the origins of legionaries (Forni 1953 (d 188); 1974 (d 189)) and auxiliaries (Holder 1980(0 195) 109-39; esp. 121) serving in Syria, is slight. The supposition above is based on the likely implications of the known indications of Roman attitudes towards local recruitment in the region. [862] Foundation by Claudius is explicitly attested by Pliny ( [863] See now the important discussion of the ramifications of imperial building in Greece and Asia Minor by Mitchell 1987 (p 503). 65 Joseph. [865] Antioch: Lassus 1972 (e 1032) 72; Berytus: Lauffray 1978 (e 1033) 148 and 157. [866] Van Berchem 1976 (e 987) 170. [867] Lyttleton 1974 (f 476) 93-6, 183-5; Colledge 1976 (e 994). [868] Welles in Kraeling 1938 (e 1031) 373-8. nos. 2-7. 74 Ploug 1985 (e 1051) [870] Mouterde 1944-6 (e 1043). Cf. Aristomachus, son of Zabdion at Gerasa (Kraeling 1938 (e 1031) 373fno. 2). 97 Rey-Coquais 1973 (в 269) ji. [872] Kraeling 1932 (e 1030); Meeks and Wilken, 1978 (f 185) 2-13. Joseph. [874] Holum Tiberieum. 107 Sourdel 1952 (e 1061); Teiiidor 1977 (f 227); 1979 (e 1065 a). 106 Hands 1968 (f 39) 77-88. See e.g. Joseph. [876] Bowersock 1965 (c 59) ch. III. We might note too, apparently from Syrian Hierapolis, a great local benefactor at Athens, Julius Nicanor, hailed as the New Themistocles and New Homer (Jones 1978 (e 1020)). 110 Bowersock 1965 (c 39) 75-84. 111 Joseph. В/1.239; [879] App. 114 Caesar had recognized petty rulers on condition they defended the province (BA/r. 65.4). [881] Joseph. 1,6 AE 1976,677-8; Rey-Coquais 1975 (в 269). The Roman census at Apameia in a.d. 6 suggests the tetrarchy had ended by that time [883] Joseph. 1,8 By the end of Nero's reign at least, an entire legion was based only 45km away at Raphanaea (Joseph. by vii.18). 1,9 Joseph, [886] Tac. [887] As an [888] Joseph. [889] Tac. [890] Sullivan, 1978 (e 1065); (e 1224); (e 878); (e 1064). [891] Diod. 11.48. if or x1x.94.2-j. 128 xvi.4.21 (779c). xvi.2jo and 33j-j2 (9 and 6 b.c.); cf. Strab. xvi.4.2J (782-3C) (embassies). [893] Cf. Braund 1984(0 254) 39-j3. 131 Cf. Joseph. 132 Jaussenand Savignac 1909 (e 1017)1189^ no. 29; 1 j4f no. 7; 12of no. 20; 202ff no. 38; i92fno. 44.; 13s Caesar at Alexandria (47 b.c.), Aelius Gallus (26/5 b.c.), Varus (6 b.c.) and for the Jewish Revolt (a.d. 68-70). [898] Wenning, 1987 (e 1069). 161 Dentzer and Dentzer 1981 (e 1002). 162 Tac. 163 The text of this chapter was completed in 1987 and it has therefore not been possible to take account of recent important work, in particular, F. Millar, 1995); M. Sartre, [902] For events after Herod's death, see Joseph. Damascus, * See discussion of the role of this Judas in Freyne 1980 (e i ii j) 214—17. ' For the link to the Maccabees, see Farmer 19)8 (e 1115). 10 [906] Descriptions of Agrippa's death are given in [907] See Jones 1938 (e 1152) 259-61. [908] For the careers of Agrippa's children see Joseph. [909] On this uneasy coexistence, see Bowersock 198j (e 990) esp. pp. 50-3, 63-7. [910] Suet. [911] See Sullivan 1978 (e 1064)935-8 onC. Claudius Severus and other consular descendants of the eastern client kings; Smallwood 1976 (e i 111) 5 51, on C. Iulius Severus. [912] The history of Judaea from a.d. 6 to a.d. 70 is found in Joseph. [913] Joseph. [914] Burr 1935 (c jj6). 37 Tac. 38 Tac. 41 Joseph. [917] Joseph. [918] Joseph. [919] Joseph. B/tv. 554-44; v. 568; vi. 113. This point is argued more fully in Goodman 1987(61150) [920] Kadman i960 (в 528) 78. [921] Joseph. [923] Buildings dating before a.d. 70 have been identified as synagogues at Masada, Herodium and Gamala, although none of these identifications is beyond dispute. Cf. Levine 1981 (e i 168). [924] Joseph. [925] Joseph. [926] Joseph. [927] Jews' avoidance of pork was particularly notorious, cf. Joseph. [928] Lewis, Yadin and Greenfield 1989 (в 375); see in general the tractate [929] Joseph. [930] 2 Cor. 11:14. 112 Goodenough 1929 (e i 124). 113 Joseph. Philo, [932] For the temporary nature of these buildings and their vulnerability to redevelopment, Phillips 1973 (f 324). The vocabulary of s Pliny's description covers both the [934] Zanker 1988 (f 633) ch. 3 for the change; [935] For the platform under the Farnese gardens, Krause 1985 (f 458); on Augustus' house, Wiseman 1987 (f 81). The new discovery of the grand houses of the Via Sacra (Carandini) confirms his account strikingly. Houses too close to the Forum were already a risk politically in a.d. 20 (Tac. [936] Finley 198} (a 28) j i-j on the 'end of polities'. [937] Elections under the Principate: Talbert 1984 (d 77) 341-j. [938] Levick 1976 (c 366) 37—42. We may note also that the plebeian violence in a.d. 6 almost constituted popular revolution, if we are to credit the language of Dio lv.27.1—3. Ov. [940] suggests that some truly archaic elements in the Roman constitution (the [941] In general, Yavetz 1969 (a i 10); for messages about Rome's place in the world, Nicolet 1988 (a 69) esp. chs. 1, a, 5, 9; also 1980 (л 68) 383-98. [942] [943] North 1976 (f 194); North 1986 (f 193). 38 Altheim 1938 (p 84) 4ц(. [944] For banqueting, D'Arms 1990 (f 24); Mrozek 1972 (p 46). For the 'associative urge' among inhabitants of Rome, cf. САН ix2, 67 iff and Flambard 1981 (f 30). [945] Spectacle-architecture, Frczouls 1984 (f 31), Humphrey 1986 (f 427), Rawson 1983 (f 55), Gros 1978 (f 398); Clavel-Leveque 1984 (f 17). [946] Cf. Coarelli 1985 (e 19) 11 11-21; Gros 1987 (p 399). [947] Bollinger 1969 (f 8); cf. Levick 1983 (c 369). [948] Cameron 1976 (f 16); Millar 1977 (a 59) 568-75; Yavetz 1969 (a i 10); Deininger 1979 (e 53); Kloft 1970 (d 138). 44 Hobsbawm 1973:0 E. Bosworth [949] Roueche 1984 (в 277) 184, for imperial acclamations; cf. [950] For the [951] Markets: MacMullen 1970 (f 43), quoting [952] For the formation of Rome as capital of the world, Nicolet 1988 (a 69); cf. Purcell 1990^77). [953] Dion. Hal. [954] [955] [956] Macrob. [957] This perspective persisted through the imperial period. An inscription of the early third century, probably put up near the altar, commemorates the offering of the solemn sacrifice which Hercules had established at the time of Evander: [958] Ov. [959] Ov. [960] [961] Weinstock 1971 (f 235) 184-6. Prop. iv.i. 19-20 notes that the ritual had become more elaborate. a Ath. vm.j6icf; Beaujeu 1955 (F93) 128-35. [963] The execution of those who damaged city walls was justified in Roman law by the story of Remus: [964] Labrousse 1937 (e 68); Boatwright 1987 (f 289) 64-71. According to Varro, there were markers in the republican period, but they do not survive. The area enclosed by the [966] Tac. [967] Pliny, [968] Joseph. [969] Richard 1966 (f 204). [970] Dio lin.32.5. But note Tac. «"Alfoldi 1935 (d 2) 5-8, 47-9. 37 Val. Max. 1. [972] Obsequens, 69; Dio xlvi.46.1-3 gives six plus twelve. Suet. [973] Suet. [974] Hommel 1934 (f 425) 9-22; Koepel 1984 (f 164) j 1-3. In the original temple the Senate had erected in 43 b.c. a statue of Caesar: Cic. [975] Hor. [976] Cf. above, ch. 15, pp. 794, 801-02. [977] Wissowa 1912 (f 241) 167-73; Alfoldi 1973 (f 83) 18-36; Liebeschuetz 1979 (f 174) 69-71; Kienast 1982 (c 136) 164-7. [978] Boyance 1950 (f 102). Dion. Hal. [979] Festus, p. 108L; Am. [980] The only precedent for the [981] Nash 1968 (e 87) 1 290-1. For full publication see Colini 1961-2 (f 334)andTamassia i96i-2(f 226); Dondin-Payre 1987 (f 330) gives further details. Cf. Holland 1937 (f 420). [982] ss Zanker 1969 (f 243); Panciera 1987 (E92) 73-8. For example, one altar turned the victory with the official shield of Virtue into a Victory with a purely military shield in front of a trophy. [984] Panciera 1970 (e 89) 138—51; 1980 (e 90); 1987 (e 92) 61-73. ^H 1975, 14: an attempt to avoid the duties of [985] Sutherland and Carson, R/C1.69, nos 367-8. Cf. R [986] Weinstock 1971 (f 235) 28-34; Lewis 1955 (f 173) 23, 94-101. [987] R/C1.125, nos. 76—7, 129.no. 107, a.d. 50-4. For the history of this type see xliii. 60 Gage 1930 (f 141). [989] Revival: Suet. [990] RG 10.2; /Ыхш 2, p. 420; Ov. [991] Dio uv.27.3; lv.12.4-5. In 36 b.c. Octavian had been voted a house at public expense: xlix.15.5. Cf. Weinstock 1971 (f 255) 276-81. [992] Aeneas: Virg. [993] Bomer 1987 (f 98). 67 Ov. « Ov. [996] Wissowa 1912 (f 241) 74; Wilheim 1915 (f 238); Liebeschuetz 1979 (f 174) 70. [997] Beard and North 1990 (f 92л). 71 Dioxuv.5.3. 72 DioLin.17.8. 73 RG 25; Dio li.20.3. Scheid 1978 (f 62) against Schumacher 1978 (f 65) on numbers. Millar ■977 (A 5?) i 5 7 1 i on the first cumulation of major priesthoods. [1000] Scheid 1975 (f 61); Syme 1980 (d 70). [1001] This change might be connected with a development in the function of the previously carried out by the Arvals. 86 Suet. [1003] Dio Lix.11.5. 91 Ov. Lambrechts 1951 (f 167); Boyance i9h(f io3); Bomer 1964 (f 97); Wiseman 1984 (f 140). For later developments in the cult at Rome, see Wissowa 1912 (f 241) 519-27; Lambrechts 19)2 (f 168); Van Doren 1955 (f 230). [1006] Lightning: Suet. [1007] Liebeschuetz 1979 (f 174) 82-5; Zanker 1985 (F650). Gros 1976 (f 597) 211-29 disposes of the alleged restoration of the earlier temple by Sosius in 54-52 b.c. 95 GagЈ 1956 (f 144). [1009] Nilsson 1920 (f 191); Pighi 196) (в 265), who reprints the sources. There are two new fragments of the inscription in Moretti 1982-4 (в 2)6). La Rocca 1984 (f 16)) 5—j j discusses the Tarentum. [1010] Suet. [1011] Tac. [1012] Whatmough 19} 1 (p 236); [1013] Festus, p. 146L s.v. [1014] Wissowa 1912 (f 241) 157 11.4, 519-21, 555 11.2; Ladage 1971 (f 166) 8-10. "126 Wissowa 1915 (f 242); Purcell 1983 (f 49) 167-79; Saulnier 1984 (f 216). E.g. [1016] [1017] Levick 1967 (e 851) 35—7, [1018] [1019] Hyginus Gromaticus, [1020] Bianchi 1949 (f 95); Barton 1982 (f 86). Cologne and Xanten: Ristow 1967 (f 203); Follmann- Schulz 1986 (e 579) 735-8,766-9. Baalbek: Seyrig 1954 (e 1060); Liebeschuetz 1977 (e 1035) 485-9. [1021] Ladage 1971 (p 166) 10-11, 32—j, 39—41, 5 1-4, 79-80, 103; Galsterer 1971 (e 221) 59-61. [1022] [1023] Dion. Hal. [1024] [1025] Our next information is not until the early second century when Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, can refer to churches (plural) with bishops, in the immediate neighbourhood of Antioch, 10 (? including the port of Seleucia, Acts 13:4). " Other known missionaries at Antioch are converted Jews from Cyprus and Cyrene (Acts 11:io), Barnabas from Jerusalem but by birth a Cypriot (Acts 4:36, 11 :ii), the Gentile Titus (Gal. 2:zf), Simeon called Niger, Manaen, Lucius of Cyrene (Acts 13:1), John Mark (Acts 12:25, from Jerusalem) - as well as visitors from Jerusalem (Silas, Judas Barsabbas (Acts 15:22), Cephas (Gal. 2:11), Agabus (Acts i i:27f). " For these cities see Schŭrer 1979 (e 1207), и §23.7, 9, 11. [1028] Though we must be aware of fluctuating populations over time, and changing levels of tolerance, Schiirer 1979 (e 1207), 11 §23.31 and 33. [1029] Ep. Philemon (certainly Pauline, unlike Col.) also records many of these same names. Consult Hemer 1986 (в 80) i78ff on these cities of the Lycus. [1030] Note, incidentally, the Christian Jew, Aquila of Pontus, Acts 18:2. [1031] They include, during this period, Priscillaand Aquila (Acts 18:26). Timothy and Erastus(Acts 19:22), Gaius and Aristarchus (Acts 19:29). Col 4:7ff preserves some further names (cf. Philem. if, M.ijO- [1032] Two strong candidates are, of course. Magnesia on the Meander and Tralles, to whom Ignatius writes early in the second century. [1033] One thinks, for example, of Lydia the purple-seller, from Thyatira but domiciled at Philippi at the time of Acts i6:i4f, 40. [1034] See Frantz 1988 (e 827) i8ff. In 1 Cor. 16:15 we meet Stephanas and his household as the 'first converts in Achaea': are we to suppose they were in Athens at the time of Paul's visit? [1035] On [1036] To judge from the reception they give Paul on his arrival in Corinth we probably ought to surmise that Prisca and Aquila, the much-travelled Jewish artisans recently come from Rome, are already Christians (Acts i8:iff, cf. Acts 18:18, Rom. i6:jff) - though it was not to the writer's purpose to emphasize this fact, and Paul feels free to boast in 2 Cor. 10:14 'we were the first to reach you [Corinthians] in preaching the gospel of Christ'. [1037] To the households of Stephanas, Titius Iustus, Gaius, Prisca and Aquila (already noted) we should probably add that of Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11). It was a fact worth recording that Gaius could act as 'host of the whole church' in Corinth, Rom. 16:23. [1038] Acts, typically, places emphasis on the respect Paul wins of'the first man of the island, named Publius' and on Paul's wonder-working (Acts [1039] It is characteristic of our patchy information that we have to wait until the middle of the third century for the first firm evidence of Christianity in Sicily, [Cyprian], Ep. 50.5.2. [1040] Later documents understand the aspiration to have been realized, Clem, 44 It would not be unreasonable to conjecture that in other similar Italian port-cities such as Ostia - with the same combination of resident Jewish community and exposure to frequent travellers - some Christian cell, however small, might also have been found. But it must remain conjecture. [1042] There is a congregation at the Roman house of Prisca and Aquila and note the household groups of Aristobulus and Narcissus (Rom. i6:)f, 11) as well as the further two identifiable and separate groups in Rom. i6:i4f. And some ethnic enclaves could be expected. [1043] Meeks 1983 (f 18 j) en&(Corinth), 5 5 ff (other names in the Pauline churches) provides a useful survey. 52 For careful analyses, Witherington 1988 (f 82). [1045] Sec Brooten 1982 (e 1098). [1046] The neologism [1047] Emblematically encapsulated in the words of Agabus in prophecy: 'Thus will the Jews in Jerusalem bind the man whose belt this is and hand him over to the Gentiles' (Acts 21:11). [1048] See, for example, Sherwin-White 196) (d 109) 4off. [1049] Cohen 197; (f 18). For discussion of social structures over a longer period see Garnsey and Sailer 1987 (a 34) ch. 6; Alfoldy 1985 (f i) ch. 5. MacMullen 1974 (f 44) ch. 4 gives a broader perspective on the economic basis of class. See also de Ste Croix 1981 (A90) 35 off. [1050] Wiseman 1971 (d 81) 6jff, 1 i6ff. Cf. Harris 1988 (f40). [1051] Crassus: Whitehead 1986 (f 80); Ahenobarbus: Brunt 197; (f 13) 619it, 634^ Lucullus: Shatzman 1975 (d64) 378-81. For republican senatorial fortunes in general see Shatzman 1975 (d64). [1052] [1053] Pliny, [1054] EJ2 358. Maximus' father, Messalla Corvinus, had probably gained from the civil wars (Syme 1958 (в 176) li )7з). His mother was presumably the heiress of the Aurelii Cottae: Syme 1985 (a 95) 131-2. [1055] Wiseman 1971 (d 81) 9iff; Dobson 1974 (d 182) 392ff; Treggiari 1969 (f 68) ioiff, 109. [1056] On earnings, Wells 1984 (a ioi) 203-5 for a succinct and judicious summary; Duncan-Jones 1982 (л 24) 54. For more general accounts of lower-class workers Garnsey i98o(f 57); Brunt 1980(0 ii7);de Ste Croix 1981 (a 90) i87ff;MacMullen 1974 (f 44) 42-5, on a later period, is suggestive. On soldiers, Campbell 1984 (d 173) i77ff. [1057] Cf. Balsdon 1979 (a 2) i9f; Wiseman 1974 (d 82). [1058] Wiseman 1971 (d 81); Brunt 1982 (f 14); Hopkins 198} (a 46) j6ff; Syme 1986 (a 95). [1059] Sen. [1060] Brunt 1965 (f ii), 1988 (f 15); Wiseman 1971 (d 81) 3 jff; Sailer 1982 (f 59); Wallace-Hadrill I989 (F 75)- [1061] Tac. [1062] Hor. 316.) 36 Nep. 38 Yavetz 1985 (c 252) 154f. 35 Syme 1959 (a 93) jo6f; Wells 1984 (a ioi) ; jff. [1065] Cf. Balsdon 1971 (в 11). [1066] [1067] [1068] Prop. 11.7. Cf. Flor. 11.34; Oros. vi.22.3. The view given in the text is best presented by Williams 1962 (c 231). Badian 1983 (f 4) has recently challenged this reconstruction (with full bibliography). [1069] [1070] Tac. [1071] Brunt 1971 (a 9) 114 (birth registration mentioned in both the Lex Aelia Sentia and the Lex Papia Poppaea, cf. [1072] Dio lx.24.3 shows that the ban on soldiers' marriage predates Claudius. Cf. Campbell 1978 (d 172). [1073] [1074] Dio liv.i6.i. Seniority: Lex Malacitana 3).2. " Brunt 1971 (a 9) j6iff. [1076] Brunt 1971 (л 9) 104,114 argues that Augustus' motive was demographic, but the law 'would at best have had little demographic effect' (1J4). Galinsky 1981 (f 32) concentrates on the need to maintain the morality and moral prestige of the ruling class. Wallace-Hadrill 1981 (f 73) stresses economic motives. [1077] Shaw 1987 (f 65), modifying Hopkins 1965 (f 41); Sailer 1987 (f 60). [1078] Attested trials or punishments under Augustus and the Julio-Claudians usually concern members of the imperial family (e.g. the Iuliae, Appuleia Varilla, Aemilia Lepida, Claudia Pulchra, Livilla, Octavia). [1079] Suet. [1080] E.g. Sen. [1081] [1082] Cic. [1083] Gai. [1084] For a brief account of the history of manumission down to Justinian see Watson 1987 (f 703) zjff. On the Augustan legislation, Buckland 1908 (f 645) 533ff; Bradley 1984 (f 10) 87ff. [1085] AsBuckland 1908 (f 645) j }4ff, Duff 1928 (f 28) 2 loff and others argued, against those who, on the basis of a shaky late text (Just. [1086] Gai. [1087] Atkinson 1966 (f 3) 362f argues that the Lex Aelia Sentia incorporated part of the Lex Iunia. For further rulings on Junian Latins see Gai. [1088] Gai. [1089] [1090] Gai. [1091] As [1092] [1093] Under penalty of re-enslavement: Gai. [1094] Either Roman, because they were foreign, or peregrine, because they had no citizenship [1096] Gai. [1097] [1098] Gai. [1099] Suet. [1100] Weaver 1964 (f 77) 515, quoted by Crook 1967 (f 21) 64. [1101] Treggiari 1969 (f 68) 15 [1102] Suet. [1103] Cf. Syme 1984 (c 231). An arch at Pavia had statues of ten members of Augustus' family, including Livia and Germanicus' sons Nero and Drusus ( [1104] Dixon 1984 (p 26). 96 E.g. Setala 1977 (f 64) 239; Treggiari 1979 (p 69). 99 Cf. Syme 1939 (a 93)"36jf; Sherwin-White 1973 (a 87) 225ff. [1106] Suet. accuracy of variant details. 101 Syme 1959 (a 93) 3j9ff, [1108] Chastagnol 1973 (d 31); Brunt 1975 (e 906) and 1983 (d 26); Demougin 1982 (d 36). [1109] A pleasing example of the cultural mosaic is provided by EJ2 363, from Ithaca, in which a slave shopkeeper boasts of his passing there during the triumviral period and gives a trade address which the reader is expected to know refers to Rome: 'Epaphroditus (slave) of Novius, perfumer from the Sacred Way, was here on 1 October in the year when L. Cornificius and Sex. Pompeius were consuls' (33 B.C.). [1110] Quintilian gives a full list and discussion of the Greek genres at [1111] For a full list (perhaps unjustifiably full), see Cairns 1972 (a i3), esp. Ch. 3. [1112] It is far from clear what sort of performance actually filled the theatre in Rome and outside. In Augustus' reign they certainly handled scripts in Greek and Oscan (Suet. [1114] E.g. esp. [1115] [1116] Cf. the dismissal of the dichotomy 'poetry or propaganda?' in the Epilogue to Woodman and West 1984 (в 204) 195. 11 Aen. xii.946-7, 'furiis accensus et ira terribilis'. [1118] The poet Eumolpus (apparently not intended to represent any living writer) utters in [1119] Cf. Hubbard 1974 (в 89л) io-ii, 70-81. [1120] See R. G. Austin's note [1121] [1122] E.g. Otis 196} (в I5JA) 129, 228, etc. [1123] Few can have rivalled the elder Seneca, who wrote down extensive passages from declamations he had listened to. There is no reason to suppose that he made use of shorthand reports, although both Greek and Latin systems existed by that date. [1124] Kenney in Kenney and Clausen 1982 (в 95) 24-5. 29 Highet 1954 (в 84л) 186-7. [1125] T. Dohrn, [1126] L. Giuliani, 7 M. Hofter, in • The documentation is splendidly collected by Beyen 1938-60 (p 271). The highest urban level is that of the House of Augustus: Carettoni 1983 (f 316); also Barbet 1985 (f 262). [1130] P. Gros, G. Sauron, in Bastet and de Vos 1979 (p 265). [1133] This pediment, like others of the second century B.C. (Rome, in the Via Latina; Luni; Volterra, etc.) needs reconsideration. See meanwhile, M. J. Strazzulla in M. Martelli, M. Cristofani, eds., i [1134] On these ateliers, in addition to works cited in n. i, sec G. Becatti, 7 (1940) jS\ M. Torelli, 14 Clay [1135] E. La Rocca, in [1136] See the partial collections of K. Fuchs, [1137] Zanker 1974 (f 628); Bieber 1977 (f 283); Martin 1987 (f495); 2j iff, 343ff. 33 Zanker 1974 (f 628) 8iff. [1138] Cic. G. Traversari, Zevi 1976 (e 142) 56ff, fig. 15. [1141] On the relationship between painting and royal architecture: Engemann 1967 (f 559); and K. Fittschen, in Zanker 1976 (e 141) 5 jgff. [1142] Carettoni 1983 (f 316); Carettoni, in [1143] Bragantini and de Vos 1982 (f 297). [1144] On these works of Tiberius and Livia: Torelli 1982 (f 596) 6;ff. (Geneva, 1973); and Price 1984 (f199). 66 ae 1978, 295. [1147] T Holscher, in [1148] A. Viscogliosi, 1988 (f443) nos. 31-42, i44ff. [1150] On this historical unity: M. Torelli, in я This development is well illustrated by the collective taste for funerary monuments with a doric frieze: Torelli 1969 (e 129). 74 The definition is that of R. Bianchi Bandinelli, in [1153] M. Torelli, [1154] The only completely preserved [1155] These developments are further described in Frier 198; (f 6; 2) 261-6. See esp. Cic. written in 44 B.C. [1157] Gai. [1158] See Suet. [1159] Gai. [1160] Pomponius, [1161] Pomponius, [1162] Pomponius, [1163] Cf. Pomponius, [1164] A good example of close edictal interpretation is Ulpian, [1165] Javolenus, [1167] Paul, 4J Ulpian, D 9.2.11 and background (both uncertain): Kunkel 1967 (f 666a) 116. Other contemporary jurists, like Blaesus and Vitellius, are just names. [1171] Labeo may have commented on the Lex Papia Poppaea of a.d. 9 (cf. Labeo, [1172] See Schiller 1978 (p 689) $27-30, summarising the scholarship. In any case, the division is not likely to be based on either political or philosophical disagreement. 44 Cf. Liebs 1976 (p 668) 215-42 (very speculative). [1174] Liebs 1976 (p 668) 243-75, lists known controversies, not all of them certain; see also Falchi 1981 (f 651) 263-8. [1175] Tiberius, who preferred consuls distinguished in civilian arts (Tac. [1176] On Proculus, see Pomponius, [1177] The family, from Narnia in Umbria, first rose to notice in the triumviral period: Kunkel 1967 (p 666a) i 20-30. Fragments: [1178] Pomponius, [1179] Pomponius, [1180] [1181] For instance, Schulz 1946 (f 690) 119-23; and so still Schiller 1978 (f 689) 329-30, with bibliography. [1182] Stein 1972 (f 695); Liebs 1976 (f 668) 275-82; Falchi 1981 (f 651); Scacchetti 1984 (f 688). These authors differ in many details, implying that reconstruction is very difficult. [1183] Pomponius, he taught Nerva M Venuleius, Z? 45.1.128 [1186] Gai. 62 Gai. [1188] Caligula: Suet. [1189] Sabinus comments on an [1190] Tac. [1191] Still essential on forms of juristic writing is Schulz 1946 (p 690) 141-261, despite its dogmatism. [1192] Cf. Petron. [1193] The pupils who 'supported' Sabinus (Pomponius, [1194] Standard handbook: Pers. v.90 (the [1195] Collections of legal maxims (rcffdae) first appear in the high classical period; the earliest is by Neratius. The relation of these works to legal education remains uncertain. [1196] Imperial statutes are collected in Rotondi 1912 (p 685). On Augustus' moral legislation, see esp. Norr 1977 (f 673). [1197] On the basis of the emperor's power to issue norms, see recently Sargenti 1984 (f 687), with literature. Not until the second century were imperial decisions recognized as sources of general norms: Gai. [1198] See esp. Just. [1199] Tac. [1200] Kaser 1966 (f 661) 371-409, based mainly on later sources. See also Jolowicz and Nicholas 1972 (f 660) 395-404; Buti 1982 (d 252). [1201] See generally Kaser 1966 (f 661) 349-55; Millar 1977 (a 59) 507-37. Cf. Dio li.19.6-7, a garbled report of a law of 30 B.C. On Augustus, see esp. Val. Max. vn.7.3-4, 9.15 ext. 1. Caligula: Dio lix.18.1; Ath. I48d. Claudius: Sen. [1202] Kaser, 1966 (f66i) 397-465; Litewski 1982 (F669) 3 56-370. Of course, the emperor could also delegate the decisions of appeals; cf. Suet. [1203] Augustus: Val. Max. vii.7.3-4. Claudius: Suet. [1204] See Bove 1979 (в 212) 123-6; also Bove 1984 (в 213). For a survey of surviving documents on private law, see Schiller 1978 (f 689) 86-8. [1205] Augustus: Dio liv. 18.2; cf. Gell. xn.12. Claudius: Tac. [1206] Tac. [1207] Fragments: Lenel, 1889 (в 109) i 77-82 (twelve citations, mostly from his commentary on the curule aediles' Edict). Pomponius, [1208] Juv. iv.75—81; cf. Pomponius, [1209] Fragments: Lenel 1889 (в 109) n 13-14 (two citations, seven fragments). His work was annotated by Javolenus and Neratius, and edited by Pomponius [1210] Fragments: Lenel 1889 (в 109) i 127-8 (four citations, through his son or Neratius). He survived to at least a.d. 9;: Celsus [1211] The other known Flavian jurists (Aufidius Chius, Fufidius, Fulcinius Priscus, Varius Lucullus) are little but names. [1212] This account of classical private law will continue in
Похожие книги
- Мистика
- Историческое фэнтези
- Ироническая фантастика
- Альтернативная история
- Технофэнтези
- Постапокалипсис
- Киберпанк
- Детективная фантастика
- Стимпанк
- Героическая фантастика
- Научная Фантастика
- Эпическая фантастика
- Ненаучная фантастика
- Сказочная фантастика
- Космоопера
- Юмористическое фэнтези
- Ироническое фэнтези
- Ужасы и мистика
- Юмористическая фантастика
- Социально-философская фантастика
- Космическая фантастика
- Городское фэнтези
- Боевая фантастика
- ЛитРПГ
- Фантастика
- Современная сказка
- Социально-психологическая фантастика
- Хроноопера
- Ужасы
- Мифологическое фэнтези
- Фэнтези
- Фантастика: прочее
- РеалРПГ
- Славянское фэнтези
- Бояръ-Аниме
- Попаданцы
- Шпионский детектив
- Прочие Детективы
- Маньяки
- Полицейские детективы
- Исторический детектив
- Шпионские детективы
- Классические детективы
- Триллеры
- Криминальные детективы
- Иронические детективы
- Криминальный детектив
- Крутой детектив
- Детективы
- Триллер
- Иронический детектив, дамский детективный роман
- Советский детектив
- Классический детектив
- Политический детектив
- Боевик
- Про маньяков
- Медицинский триллер
- Дамский детективный роман
- Техно триллер
- Юридический триллер
- Боевики
- Исторические детективы
- Политические детективы
- Поэзия
- в стихах
- Эпическая поэзия
- Басни
- Песенная поэзия
- Лирика
- Визуальная и экспериментальная поэзия, верлибры, палиндромы
- Поэма, эпическая поэзия
- Классическая зарубежная поэзия
- Классическая русская поэзия
- Поэзия Востока
- Современная поэзия
- Классическая поэзия
- Современная зарубежная поэзия
- Современная русская поэзия
- Юмористические стихи, басни
- Верлибры
- Палиндромы
- Экспериментальная поэзия
- Визуальная поэзия
- Историческая фантастика
- Историческая литература
- Политика
- Геология и география
- Ветеринария
- Экология
- Государство и право
- Астрономия и Космос
- Математика
- Шпаргалки
- Биохимия
- Обществознание
- Педагогика
- Психология
- Учебники
- Иностранные языки
- Детская психология
- Биофизика
- Прочая научная литература
- Языкознание
- Биология
- Психотерапия и консультирование
- Юриспруденция
- Военная история
- Альтернативная медицина
- Философия
- Медицина
- Зоология
- Физика
- Литературоведение
- Зарубежная образовательная литература, зарубежная прикладная, научно-популярная литература
- Языкознание, иностранные языки
- Биология, биофизика, биохимия
- Обществознание, социология
- Психология и психотерапия
- Востоковедение
- Химия
- История
- Ботаника
- Экономика
- Альтернативные науки и научные теории
- Научная литература
- Рефераты
- Секс и семейная психология
- Книги о войне
- Популярно об истории
- Книги о путешествиях
- Книги по психологии
- Религия и духовная литература
- Детская познавательная и развивающая литература
- Детская образовательная литература
- Книги для дошкольников
- Прочая детская литература
- Детские приключения
- Детская проза
- Детские стихи
- Детские остросюжетные
- Детская фантастика
- Книга-игра
- Буквари
- Фантастика для детей
- Детская литература
- Проза для детей
- Внеклассное чтение
- Игры, упражнения для детей
- Классическая детская литература
- Стихи для детей
- Русские сказки
- Зарубежная литература для детей
- Сказки народов мира
- Зарубежные детские книги
- Сказки
- Детские детективы
- Школьные учебники
- Учебная литература
- Книги для подростков
- Экономика
- Поиск работы, карьера
- Отраслевые издания
- Недвижимость
- Корпоративная культура
- Делопроизводство
- Внешнеэкономическая деятельность
- Бухучет и аудит
- Торговля
- Малый бизнес
- Личные финансы
- Государственное и муниципальное управление
- Краткое содержание
- Ораторское искусство / риторика
- Работа с клиентами
- Стартапы и создание бизнеса
- Маркетинг, PR, реклама
- Карьера, кадры
- Маркетинг, PR
- Финансы
- Личная эффективность
- О бизнесе популярно
- Интернет-бизнес
- Банковское дело
- Менеджмент
- Менеджмент и кадры
- Тайм-менеджмент
- Ценные бумаги, инвестиции
- Кадровый менеджмент
- Политическое управление
- Управление, подбор персонала
- Зарубежная деловая литература
- Деловая литература
- Педагогика, воспитание детей, литература для родителей
- Медицина и здоровье
- Семейные отношения, секс
- Семейные отношения
- Рыбалка
- Отдых / туризм
- Автомобили и ПДД
- Сделай сам
- Прочее домоводство
- Спорт
- Здоровье и красота
- Охота
- Домашние животные
- Коллекционирование
- Хобби и ремесла
- Кулинария
- Развлечения
- Сад и огород
- Боевые искусства, спорт
- Домоводство
- Здоровье
- Эротика и секс
- Домашнее хозяйство
- Интерьеры
- Хобби / увлечения
- Мода и стиль
- Красота
- Секс / секс-руководства
- Йога
- Изобразительное искусство
- Рукоделие и ремесла
- Спорт / фитнес
- Прикладная литература
- Компьютерное «железо»
- Базы данных
- ОС и Сети
- Интернет
- Программное обеспечение
- Программирование
- Прочая компьютерная литература
- Учебные пособия, самоучители
- ОС и Сети, интернет
- Программирование, программы, базы данных
- Компьютерное 'железо' (аппаратное обеспечение), цифровая обработка сигналов
- Зарубежная компьютерная, околокомпьютерная литература
- Цифровая обработка сигналов
- Средневековая классическая проза
- Современная проза
- Классическая проза
- Готический роман
- Антисоветская литература
- Военная проза
- Проза прочее
- Роман
- Повесть
- Новелла
- Сентиментальная проза
- Рассказ
- Историческая проза
- Контркультура
- Эпистолярная проза
- Русская классическая проза
- Советская классическая проза
- Магический реализм
- Проза
- Зарубежная классическая проза
- Классическая проза ХX века
- Классическая проза ХIX века
- Роман, повесть
- Фантасмагория, абсурдистская проза
- Афоризмы, цитаты
- Экспериментальная, неформатная проза
- Проза о войне
- Современная русская и зарубежная проза
- Классическая проза XVII-XVIII веков
- Афоризмы
- Эпопея
- Феерия
- Семейный роман/Семейная сага
- Эссе, очерк, этюд, набросок
- Малые литературные формы прозы: рассказы, эссе, новеллы, феерия
- Зарубежные приключения
- Современная зарубежная литература
- Зарубежная драматургия
- Зарубежная фантастика
- Зарубежный юмор
- Зарубежная религиозная литература
- Зарубежная образовательная литература
- Зарубежная публицистика
- Зарубежная психология
- Зарубежные любовные романы
- Зарубежная поэзия
- Зарубежная классика
- Зарубежная старинная литература
- Зарубежная компьютерная литература
- Зарубежная литература о культуре и искусстве
- Зарубежные детективы
- Зарубежная прикладная литература
- Зарубежное фэнтези
- Зарубежная справочная литература