UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Integration of Italians in the Late Republic and Julio-Claudian Principate A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in History by Delbert James Conrad Committee in charge: Professor Elizabeth DePalma Digeser, Chair Professor John W. I. Lee Professor Rose MacLean June 2017 The dissertation of Delbert James Conrad is approved. ______________________________________________ John W. I. Lee ______________________________________________ Rose MacLean ______________________________________________ Elizabeth DePalma Digeser, Committee Chair June 2017 Integration of Italians in the Late Republic and Julio-Claudian Principate Copyright © 2017 by Delbert James Conrad iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank first Professor Beth Digeser for reading countless drafts and providing unfailing encouragement, and the rest of my committee, Professors John Lee and Rose MacLean, for their contributions to this project and their interest in it. I could not have completed this dissertation without the support of others beyond my committee. I thank my undergraduate adviser at Pacific Lutheran University, Professor Eric Nelson, who introduced me to Latin and encouraged me to pursue graduate study. I thank Professor Frances Hahn of the Classics department at UCSB, in whose class I first noticed the importance of Rome’s allies in Livy’s first book. I also thank Professor Sara Lindheim, also of the Classics Department at UCSB, who read my first essay on the topic of this dissertation, that I wrote to fulfill a requirement for her seminar on Ovid. Finally, I thank Professor Cynthia Kaplan, who directed my reading on nationalism. iv VITA OF DELBERT JAMES CONRAD June 2017 EDUCATION Bachelor of Arts in Classics, Pacific Lutheran University, December 2003 (cum laude) Master of Arts in Classics and Ancient History, Durham University, January 2005 (with honors) Master of Arts in Classics, University of California, Santa Barbara, June 2011 Doctor of Philosophy in History, University of California, Santa Barbara, June 2017 (expected) PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT 2007-2011: Teaching Assistant, Department of Classics, University of California, Santa Barbara 2011-2016: Teaching Assistant, Department of History, University of California, Santa Barbara Summer 2014: Teaching Associate, Department of History, University of California, Santa Barbara Summer 2015: Teaching Associate, Department of History, University of California, Santa Barbara AWARDS History Associates Graduate Fellowship, UCSB History Associates, 2012 History Associates Graduate Fellowship, UCSB History Associates, 2013 History Associates Graduate Fellowship, UCSB History Associates, 2014 FIELDS OF STUDY First Field: Roman History with Professor Elizabeth Digeser Second Field: Greek History with Professor John Lee Teaching Field: Early Islamic History with Professor Stephen Humphreys Outside Field: Political Science with Professor Cynthia Kaplan v ABSTRACT Integration of Italians in the Late Republic and Julio-Claudian Principate by Delbert James Conrad The Social War (90-88 BCE) was perhaps the most destructive conflict to occur in Italy besides Hannibal’s invasion one hundred years earlier. H. Mouritsen has criticized scholarship about the Social War for reproducing an understanding of the reasons and results of that war constructed from a nineteenth-century nationalist perspective, and for accepting uncritically the narrative of the first-century CE historian Appian, the only intact narrative of the war to survive from antiquity. I attempt to address these critiques by employing twenty- first-century models of nations and nation-state formation as comparative material for the political and social changes that occurred in Italy during and after the Social War, and make an argument that the foundation narratives of the second half of the first century BCE can provide evidence for contemporary ideas about Rome’s Italian allies and their place in Rome’s government and empire. This dissertation is divided into two parts of two chapters each. The first part discusses the idea of “Italy” and its development over time, both geographically and politically, and introduces Kymlicka’s model of the nation-building state as a comparative model to judge Roman Italy against. I support this comparative model with Smith’s criticisms of “modernist” nationalist thought, i.e. the position that the nation is inherently modern. The second part consists of a reading of three foundation narratives, those of Cicero, Livy, and Ovid. I read these foundation narratives as justifications of their contemporary political circumstances. I also examine the poetry of Propertius, and argu vi ethat Propertius does not portray a regional, Umbrian identity as an alternative to a Roman or Italian identity. I conclude that the nation-building institutions of Roman Italy reached their developed forms during the rule of Augustus, that Italian identity formed in this same period, and that the three foundation narratives are evidence for that Italian identity in a developmental phase. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF MAPS.......................................................................................................................ix ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................................x Introduction...............................................................................................................................1 I. The Idea of Italy..................................................................................................................24 II. Nations and Institutions of Nation-Building in Late Republican Italy..............................53 Introduction to The Second Part.............................................................................................81 III. Empire, Assimilation, or Slavery: Foundation Narratives and the Allies in Revolutionary Rome.......................................................................................................................................90 IV. Propertius and Umbria: An Alternative to Rome?..........................................................128 Conclusion............................................................................................................................152 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................161 viii LIST OF MAPS Map 1. Northern Italy and Southern Gaul............................................................26 Map 2. Southern Italy...........................................................................................29 Map 3. Circulation of Social War Coinage...........................................................31 ix ABBREVIATIONS CAH2 Cambridge Ancient History, 2nd edition CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum OCD3 Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3rd edition OLD Oxford Latin Dictionary App. Appian, BC Civil Wars Caes. Caesar B Civ. Civil War Cic. Cicero Att. Letters to Atticus Balb. For Balbus Div. On Divination Div. Caec. Divinatio against Q. Caecilius Fam. Letters to his Friends Leg. Laws Phil. Phillipics Q fr. Letters to Quintus Rep. Republic Verr. Against Verres Diod. Sic. Diodorus Siculus Dion. Hal. Dionysius of Halicarnasus Ant. Rom. Roman Antiquities Ovid Ovid Met. Metomorphoses Plin. Piny the Elder, HN Natural History Plut. Plutarch Caes. Caesar Cam. Camillus Quaes. Rom. Roman Questions Sull. Sulla Polyb. Polybius Prop. Propertius PS Pseudo-Skylax RG Res Gestae Rhet. Her. Rhetorica ad Herennium x Sall. Sallust, Cat. The Catilinarian Conspiracy Suet. Suetonius Aug. Augustus Tib. Tiberius Tac. Tacitus Hist. Histories Ann. Annals Verg. Virgil G. Georgics xi Introduction The document published as Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum 13.1668 is in different ways the beginning and end of my project, and a touchstone to which I return often in the following pages. It seems to be a verbatim record, very nearly complete, of a speech that the Roman emperor Claudius delivered to the Senate at Rome in 48 CE. It is interesting in all kinds of ways; a version of this speech also exists in Tacitus, Annales, 11.24, providing a rare opportunity to examine how an ancient historian put actual speeches to use in their histories, it provides insight into the character of the emperor Claudius, it preserves some unfamiliar traditions of Rome’s legendary past. Especially, it presents a characterization of the Roman world in the middle of the first century CE. Claudius asks the Senate to consider Roman citizens of the provinces of Gaul and whether they may be helpful in the administration of the Roman empire so far administered by Italians. Whether that characterization is true is another question; what we are looking for at this moment is how Claudius represented the Senate to itself. Claudius characterizes the Senate as populated by Italians. The point of Claudius’ argument is that it is no longer appropriate for the Senate to be Italian; provincials, namely the Gauls, should be included in government as well. In the event, the Senate conceded to Claudius the point and admitted Gauls to its ranks, ending a period of about 150 years in which it was possible to describe the Senate as in some way “Italian.” That period began with the settlement of the Social War, the war between Rome and some of her Italian allies during the years 91-88 BCE. The conclusion of the Social War brought a sudden and drastic