2013 Roman History
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Hadrian and the Greek East
HADRIAN AND THE GREEK EAST: IMPERIAL POLICY AND COMMUNICATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Demetrios Kritsotakis, B.A, M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2008 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Fritz Graf, Adviser Professor Tom Hawkins ____________________________ Professor Anthony Kaldellis Adviser Greek and Latin Graduate Program Copyright by Demetrios Kritsotakis 2008 ABSTRACT The Roman Emperor Hadrian pursued a policy of unification of the vast Empire. After his accession, he abandoned the expansionist policy of his predecessor Trajan and focused on securing the frontiers of the empire and on maintaining its stability. Of the utmost importance was the further integration and participation in his program of the peoples of the Greek East, especially of the Greek mainland and Asia Minor. Hadrian now invited them to become active members of the empire. By his lengthy travels and benefactions to the people of the region and by the creation of the Panhellenion, Hadrian attempted to create a second center of the Empire. Rome, in the West, was the first center; now a second one, in the East, would draw together the Greek people on both sides of the Aegean Sea. Thus he could accelerate the unification of the empire by focusing on its two most important elements, Romans and Greeks. Hadrian channeled his intentions in a number of ways, including the use of specific iconographical types on the coinage of his reign and religious language and themes in his interactions with the Greeks. In both cases it becomes evident that the Greeks not only understood his messages, but they also reacted in a positive way. -
Rebellious Legions and Senatorial Delegations: Tacitus’ Histories 1.19 and 1.74
Rebellious Legions and Senatorial Delegations: Tacitus’ Histories 1.19 and 1.74 Reports of the revolt of the Fourth and Twenty-Second Legions in Upper Germany during the first days of 69 prompted the Roman Senate to vote to send out a delegation. Tacitus discusses the make-up of this delegation in Histories 1.19.2. Members of the senate obviously were to participate, but there was also discussion secreto (Heubner 57; Sage ANRW II.33.2 899) as to whether Piso, newly adopted by Galba, should go “in order to add the prestige of a Caesar to the senate’s authority” (illi auctoritatem senatus, hic dignationem Caesaris laturus). The senate further resolved (placebat) to send Laco, the praetorian prefect, with the legati. Laco, however, refused (is consilio intercessit). At the end of Tacitus’ account we learn that the senate left the selection of the actual members of the delegation to Galba. The emperor consequently exposed the political nature of the delegation and the power struggles among the Romans by incompetently naming and then revising his list of envoys as they either begged to go or to stay in Rome, ut quemque metus uel spes impulerat. Otho recalled this delegation (1.74.2) after Galba’s murder and his own accession to power, only to send out another specie senatus (cf. Talbert 1984, 410), after adding praetorian guards per simulationem officii. In addition to being sent to the two legions in Upper Germany, Otho sent the delegation to the Italic Legion and an urban cohort stationed in Lugdunum. According to Tacitus, the praetorians were sent back without being granted the opportunity to “mix” (Damon 164) with the legions, although the senatorial envoys got to Vitellius and stayed with him longer than was justifiable (Chilver 137). -
Domitian's Arae Incendii Neroniani in New Flavian Rome
Rising from the Ashes: Domitian’s Arae Incendii Neroniani in New Flavian Rome Lea K. Cline In the August 1888 edition of the Notizie degli Scavi, profes- on a base of two steps; it is a long, solid rectangle, 6.25 m sors Guliermo Gatti and Rodolfo Lanciani announced the deep, 3.25 m wide, and 1.26 m high (lacking its crown). rediscovery of a Domitianic altar on the Quirinal hill during These dimensions make it the second largest public altar to the construction of the Casa Reale (Figures 1 and 2).1 This survive in the ancient capital. Built of travertine and revet- altar, found in situ on the southeast side of the Alta Semita ted in marble, this altar lacks sculptural decoration. Only its (an important northern thoroughfare) adjacent to the church inscription identifies it as an Ara Incendii Neroniani, an altar of San Andrea al Quirinale, was not unknown to scholars.2 erected in fulfillment of a vow made after the great fire of The site was discovered, but not excavated, in 1644 when Nero (A.D. 64).7 Pope Urban VIII (Maffeo Barberini) and Gianlorenzo Bernini Archaeological evidence attests to two other altars, laid the foundations of San Andrea al Quirinale; at that time, bearing identical inscriptions, excavated in the sixteenth the inscription was removed to the Vatican, and then the and seventeenth centuries; the Ara Incendii Neroniani found altar was essentially forgotten.3 Lanciani’s notes from May on the Quirinal was the last of the three to be discovered.8 22, 1889, describe a fairly intact structure—a travertine block Little is known of the two other altars; one, presumably altar with remnants of a marble base molding on two sides.4 found on the Vatican plain, was reportedly used as building Although the altar’s inscription was not in situ, Lanciani refers material for the basilica of St. -
Who Was St. Helen, and Why Is There a Well Bearing Her Name in Farnhill ?
The Farnhill “Shelley Well” – the origin of this odd name Time and again have I pondered and sifted my thought in the prison of the night. From “Elene” by Cynewulf What is the Shelley Well ? For those of you that don’t know, “Shelley Well” is the local name for the stone trough, fed by a spring, and located on the road-side in front of Spout House, in High Farnhill. Fig 1: The curiously-named Shelley Well It’s an odd name, and some people in the village will tell you that it is properly called St. Helen’s Well. Of course this immediately poses two questions: who was St. Helen, and why is there a well bearing her name in Farnhill ? This article aims to offer some possible answers. Who was St. Helen ? It’s not an easy question to answer, because: There’s an historical St. Helen, the mother of the Roman emperor Constantine the Great. There’s also a mythologized St. Helen, where the basic facts associated with the historical Helen have been re-imagined, to provide a British origin. And, most confusingly, there’s a mythological Helen, whose mythology has subsequently been used to create an almost certainly imaginary early Welsh saint. The historical St. Helen, the mother of Constantine the Great Helen, or more correctly Helena, was born around 250AD, probably in Asia Minor, and was the daughter of an inn-keeper1. Around 270AD she married Constantius Chlorus, a Roman general. They had a one son, Constantine, who was born in 272 (or perhaps 274), but were divorced in 289 when Constantius made a politically advantageous marriage to the daughter of the emperor of the western half of the Roman empire, Maximian. -
General Index
Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-01256-1 - Ancient Libraries Edited by Jason König, Katerina Oikonomopoulou and Greg Woolf Index More information General index a studiis. See education Roman, 162, 167–82, 242, 246, 249, 252, ab epistulis, 244, 249, 251, 253, 254, 255 253, 254, 301, 303, 366, 367, 369, 381, ab epistulis graecis, 244, 249 382, 385, 387, 391, 392 Academy (of Plato), 86, 90 Alexis Aelius Largus, Titus. See librarians Linos,88 Aelius Stilo Praeconinus, Lucius, 217, 218, 242, Ammianus Marcellinus, 373, 379 288–9, 303, 304, 353 Andronicus of Rhodes, 153, 155, 161, 215, 388 Aelius Tubero, Quintus, 142, 144 Annaeus Seneca, Lucius (Seneca the Younger), Aemilius Paullus, Lucius, 3, 124, 125, 128, 131, 154, 171, 359, 369, 379, 400 132, 135, 136, 357 Annales Maximi, 130 Aeschines, 92 Annius Postumus. See librarians Aeschylus, 89, 364, 367, 376 antiquarianism, 64, 80–1, 94, 97, 100–6, 144–8, Akkadian 217, 351, 378 booksinlibraries,49 Antium, 298 language, 39, 44 Cicero’s house and library in, 215, 222–5, akousterion, 304, 305 227, 233, 338 Alcidamas imperial villa at, 238, 249, 298, 310–11 On those who write speeches,91 Antoninus Pius, 256, 257, 258 Alexander the Great, 39, 68, 126, 368 Antony (Antonius, Marcus), 234, 371, Alexandria 386 library at the Serapeum, 302 Anu-belsunu,ˇ 52, 53 library of Alexandria, 3–4, 6, 14, 31, 32, 75, Apellicon of Teos, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72, 73, 79, 80, 126, 141, 185, 242, 298, 302, 307, 155, 160, 161, 164, 165, 213, 214, 295, 332, 339, 363, 366, 368, 369, 379, 385, 371, 386 387, 392–4, 401, 402, 412 -
Domitian and the Vestals As Emperor and High Priest of Rome
Domitian and the Vestals As emperor and high priest of Rome, Domitian involved himself with moral and religious matters. Unfortunately, at least one group paid the price for his religious zeal—the Vestal Virgins. During his reign Domitian convicted four priestesses of incestum (broken vows of chastity) along with numerous alleged male conspirators. Concentrated attacks on this priesthood had not happened since 114/113 BCE and a Vestal had not been condemned for many generations. Domitian’s first assault against the Vestal Virgins occurred shortly after his accession. The year of the trial is uncertain, but 81-82 BCE seems likely (Southern, Domitian, 79) although 83 BCE is also proposed (Bauman, Crime and Punishment in Ancient Rome, 93). On this occasion the Emperor found guilty three of the six priestesses, the Oculata sisters and Varronilla. Remarkably, Domitian did not rely on the traditional punishment of inhumation for Vestals convicted of incestum, but instead let them choose the manner of their deaths. Moreover, their lovers were merely exiled and not beaten to death which was the standard punishment for violating a Vestal Virgin. These events must be compared with the trial of the chief Vestal at the time, Cornelia. Although she was not part of the case mentioned above, we are told that Cornelia had been accused and acquitted of breaking her vows once before (Suetonius, Dom., 8). During her second trial in 91 BCE she was found guilty. However, this time Domitian reverted to the customary punishment and ordered that Cornelia be buried alive. Likewise, her alleged lovers were beaten to death with the exception of Valerius Licinianus who admitted his crime and was instead exiled. -
Violence Against Women on the Column of Marcus Aurelius
Violence Against Women on the Column of Marcus Aurelius The Column of Marcus Aurelius is an imperial Roman monument of uncertain date, like- ly either 176 or 180 CE. Its elements (pedestal, spiral frieze, and statue) and its content (a mili- tary narrative) are largely modeled on the earlier Column of Trajan. One major difference be- tween the columns is that the Column of Marcus Aurelius shows physical violence much more often and more explicitly than the Column of Trajan. This pattern of increased violence on the Column of Marcus Aurelius extends into non-military contexts that involve women. On the Column of Trajan, women never appear alone: they are unthreatened and accompanied by other women and by husbands and/or children. Meanwhile on the Column of Marcus Aurelius, women are more often isolated and sometimes victims of rape and murder. Only one scene on the Col- umn of Marcus Aurelius appears to represent intact unthreatened families. In this scene, XVII, emperor Marcus Aurelius stands on an upper register, while a group of non-Romans gathers on the lower register. The group is composed of families, many with young children. Eugen Petersen, a German scholar, documented the column’s frieze, publishing a series of photographs and descriptions in 1896. In his companion to the frieze, Petersen sug- gests that “perhaps” scene XVII may represent families being separated, though he gives no evi- dence for this claim (Petersen vol. 1, 59). More recently, Paul Zanker has analyzed the scene as part of his work on women and children on the Column of Marcus Aurelius. -
Five Good Emperors Nerva – Marcus Aurelius HIS 207 Oakton Community College Mitilineos November 17, 2011 Reminders
Five good emperors Nerva – Marcus Aurelius HIS 207 Oakton Community College Mitilineos November 17, 2011 Reminders All material due by 11/29/2011 Final study guide – 11/29/2011 Today: ◦ Film ◦ Boudicca ◦ Five good emperors Boudicca and the Iceni Roman Britain C.E. 60 The evidence ◦ Tacitus Agricola ◦ Archaeology not helpful Iceni ◦ Celtic tribe in East Anglia ◦ farming Prasutagus, king of the Iceni Women among the Iceni ◦ power and positions of prestige ◦ Owned land ◦ Right to divorce Prasutagus ◦ Client/king ◦ Left kingdom to two daughters and Nero Roman law prohibits inheritance by women Members of ruling class enslaved Boudicca flogged, her daughters raped The Iceni look to Boudicca for leadership Revolt begins Supported by neighboring tribes, the Iceni numbered about 100,000 Attacked Camulodunum (Cambridge) and Colchester Successful for awhile due to guerilla tactics, use of chariots, lack of respect Last victory at Londinium (London) 230,000 faced smaller Roman force (Midlands – location unknown) 70,000 killed as Roman weapons and tactics under Paulinas prevail Suicide c. 61/62 Nerva 96-98 Period of five good emperors generally prosperous Chosen by senate Recalled exiles Modified taxes Tolerated Christians Adopted Trajan as his successor Purchased land from wealthy and rented them to the needed Promoted public education including poor children Trajan 98-117 Born in Spain Father was a consul Patrician status Adopted by Nerva in 97 Extended the empire As emperor Deified Nerva Optimus Augustus – the -
Civic Responses to the Rise and Fall of Sol Elagabal in the Roman Empire
EMPIRE OF THE SUN? CIVIC RESPONSES TO THE RISE AND FALL OF SOL ELAGABAL IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE Martijn Icks During its long and turbulent history, the city of Rome witnessed many changes in its religious institutions and traditions. For many centuries, these came to pass under the benevolent eye of Iupiter Optimus Maximus, the city‟s supreme deity since time immemorial. Not until the fourth century AD would Iupiter finally loose this position to the monotheistic, omnipotent God of Christianity. However, the power of the thunder god had been challenged before. The first deity who temporarily conquered his throne was Sol Invictus Elagabal, a local sun god from the Syrian town of Emesa. This unlikely usurper was the personal god of the emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, whose short-lived reign lasted from 218 to 222 AD, and who has been nicknamed Elagabalus for his affiliation with Elagabal. Even before his rise to power, Elagabalus served as Elagabal‟s high priest. The deity was worshipped in the form of a conical black stone, a so-called baitylos or “house of god”, which resided in a big temple in Emesa. Elagabalus, at that time a fourteen-year-old boy, performed ritual dances in honour of his god. By doing so, he drew the attention of Roman soldiers who were stationed near the town. They proclaimed the boy emperor under the false pretense that he was a bastard son of emperor Caracalla (211-217 AD). Elagabalus won sufficient military support, defeated the reigning emperor and thus gained the throne. He installed himself in Rome and took his god with him. -
Fertile in Tyrants Call for Papers
‘A Province Fertile in Tyrants’ Representations of Roman Emperors and Usurpers on the Island of Britain from the Second Century AD Onwards Call for Papers Statue of Constantine the Great near York Minster (work of Philip Jackson, 1998) In around 415 AD, Saint Jerome, from his retreat in Jerusalem, described the Isle of Britain, at the other end of the Roman world, as a ‘province fertile in tyrants’: ‘Britannia fertilis provincia tyrannorum’ (Jerome, Ep. 133). A century later, the monk Gildas repeated this phrase, ascribing it mistakenly to Porphyry, in his admonitory De Excidio Britanniae (§4.4.). Indeed, from the end of the second century AD onwards, numerous usurpations originated among the legions stationed on the Island. We can cite Clodius Albinus (193-197), Carausius (286-293), his assassin and successor Allectus (293-296), Magnus Maximus (383-388) and finally, in rapid succession, Marcus (406-407), Gratian (407) and Constantine III (407-411). On a completely different level, but remarkably similar in the way he was perceived by posterity, Constantine I (306-337), son of Constantius Chlorus, was proclaimed emperor at York in 306 and launched his imperial bid for power in Britain; the usurpers at the end of the fourth, beginning of the fifth century were keen to drape themselves in his mantle. The history and posterity of those emperors and usurpers will be the object of a one day (or more, if response to this call for papers warrants it) symposium, to be held in Boulogne-sur-Mer on Friday, February 9th 2018 (and the following day if necessary). -
A MESAMBRIAN COIN of GETA Luchevar Lazarov Unlike The
TALANTA XXXIV-XXXV (2002-2003) A MESAMBRIAN COIN OF GETA Luchevar Lazarov Unlike the abundant production during the Classical and Hellenistic periods, the activity of the mint at Mesambria Pontica in Roman times was relatively 1 limited . Until now, the following mints are known: Hadrian (117-138 AD), Septimius Severus (193-211 AD), Caracalla (198-217 AD), Gordian III (238- 244 AD), Philip the Arab (244-249 AD), Philip II (247-249 AD) and the empress Acilia Severa, wife of the emperor Elagabalus (218-222 AD) (Karayotov 1992, 49-66). Recently, a Mesambrian coin from the time of the emperor Augustus (27 BC - 14 AD) was found in the private collection of N. Mitkov from Provadija (NE 2 Bulgaria) , showing the beginning of the Roman mint in the city (Karayotov 1994, 20). In this present note, a Roman Mesambrian coin of the emperor Geta (209-212 AD) is presented, testifying that in the beginning of the 3rd century AD, also coins bearing the name of this son of Septimius Severus were minted in Mesambria. AUKPÇEP Obv.: / GETAC, showing a bust of Geta with laurel wreath and wearinMgEaÇcAuMiraBssR anId pAaNluPdaN mentum (Fig. 1). Rev.: / / , showing a naked Hermes with a purse in his right and a caduceus in his left hand. The face is turned to the left (Fig. 2) > AE; — ; D: 23-24 mm. Taking the size of this coin in account, it probably belongs to nominal III (Schönert-Geiss 1990, 23-99). 1 On Mesambrian coinage of the pre-Roman period, see: Karayotov 1992, Karayotov 1994, Topalov 1995. 2 I would like to thank mr. -
Let's Review Text Structure!
Grade 6 Day 18 ELA q I Grade 6 Day 18 ELA Grade 6 Day 18 ELA W o Grade 6 Bearcat Day 18 Math pl Grade 6 Bearcat Day 18 Math P2 Grade 6 Bearcat Day 18 Math 173 Grade 6 Bearcat Day 18 Math 104 Grade 6 Day 18 Science pl Grade 6 Day 18 Science P2 Grade 6 Day 18 Science 123 Question for you to turn in. Describe how processes were used to form a landform. Use vocabulary and evidence from the passage to support your answer. RACE. Grade 6 Day 18 Social Studies Grade 6 Day 18 Social Studies to . I ] l n n t t e o o r n n m i i i t r r t t a a p t t h e e a a . r r m h h 1 o o m m t t E r r 0 p p O O e o o n s f f m m r n a i i i l n n o i i r m e e o m p i R t / l m ? ? d d e l l a l l E e e h a a , ci s s T f f s e u u n n n a a m o sp w w o i C C r o o s/ f t t ct t n D D a a e n a s h h s s e i i t m e W W h h n o h r t / co s o t e d r i n n s s p o a i e e e e t i i m s v v n e p r r m m / e i l t e e e e g t c r s s n n a e e o o l E E R R e s.