Panaetius, Scipio Aemilianus, and the Man of Great Soul

This thesis discusses ager publicus, a kind of public land specific to the Roman Republic. Although many works have been devoted to this kind of land, there is as yet no book which investigates in depth its role in the society, economy, and politics of the Roman Republic. Many aspects of the history of this type of land are still hotly debated, from its development in the early Republic and the legal rights that could be held on it by Roman citizens and allies, to its role in the developments of the second century BC and the Gracchan period. This book aims to fill the gaps in our knowledge by giving a comprehensive overview of the history of ager publicus in the Roman Republic. By discussing ager publicus in its wider context and connecting it to such themes as population growth and proletarianization, its importance in the Republic will become clear. At the same time the legal developments concerning this land will be discussed in a new light, by putting the relevant laws in their social context. The thesis shows that the privatization of this land in the late third and second centuries BC was direct result of growing pressure on the land as a result of population growth and an increase in agricultural production for the market.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES ABBREVIATIONS INTRODUCTION PART I: SOURCES OF REVENUE PART II: THE ROMAN MONEY SUPPLY PART III: THE APPLICATION OF FUNDS PART IV: QUANTIFICATION SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS BIBLIOGRAPHY INDEX OF LITERARY SOURCES GENERAL INDEX

IN an attempt to make this volume as accessible as possible to non-specialists, we have explained or translated most technical terI)ls and quotations in Latin and Greek as they occur through the chapters. Some specific historical examples recur, e.g. Pompey’s marriages, divorces, remarriages, and children; the Cato--Marcia-Hortensius triangle; Augustus’ family. This involves some repetition of detail, in order to make the context intelligible on each occasion. The Index provides a means to compare these contexts, and further details can be found in any basic reference work such as the Oxford Classical Dictionary. A few general matters are best explained here, as they underlie much of what follows: chronological boundaries and descriptive terms, the system of family and personal names in Roman society, and common terms in Roman legislation. The period covered by this volume is approximately four centur¬ies, from the early second century BC to the early third century AD, although there are some references to times before and after this. The focus is particularly on the first century BC and the first two centuries AD. There are a few references to Christian thought and legislation, but no serious attempt to analyse the social behaviour of the Christian groups which were developing in various parts of the Roman world at this time. The interaction of Christians and pagans, and their influence on each other, are large subjects, and of great relevance to the topics of this book-marriage,divorce, and children-but they require a separate study, and the chronological focus for such a study would be somewhat later than that of this volume. The Roman Republic, established in the sixth century BC, was transformed into an autocracy in the latter half of the first century BC.

During the final four centuries BC, many political and stateless entities of the Mediterranean headed towards anarchy and militarism, while stronger powers -Carthage, the Hellenistic kingdoms and Republican Rome- expanded towards State formation, forceful military structures and empire building. Edited by T. Naco del Hoyo and F. Lopez Sanchez, this volume presents the proceedings from an ICREA Conference held in Barcelona (2013), addressing the connection between war, warlords and interstate relations from classical studies and social sciences perspectives. Some twenty scholars from European, Japanese and North American Universities consider the scope of ‘multipolarity’ and the usefulness of ‘warlord’, a modern category, in order to feature some ancient military and political leaderships.

The subject of religious pluralism and diversity is much debated today, but has attracted much less attention in discussions of ancient Greek and Roman religion. In my contribution, I first look at the genealogy of the term ‘religious pluralism’ and differentiate it from diversity as being more normative. Subsequently, I look at Herodotus’ view of Persian religion as an example of religious diversity. I note that this Greek author, himself from a multicultural background, would today be considered a relativist. In his time, though, there was not yet a specific term for religious deviancy, which, as noted, started to emerge in the later fourth century BC (§ 1). I continue by looking at the Roman Republic and the early Principate. From a quantitative analysis, it is clear that the Roman term religio becomes more important in the first century BC and also acquires the meaning of a system of religious observances that can be regulated, which is an important step towards its later meaning ‘religion’. At the same time, we note the rise of the concomitant term superstitio as the wrong religio. Still, the Roman elite tolerated a wide variety of new cults outside civic religion and basically practised diversity (§ 2). After this, I will turn to the demise of religious diversity and pluralism in Late Antiquity, where we start to see religious persecutions for the very first time (§ 3). I conclude with some final considerations on the necessity of dialogue in negotiating religious differences.

The Marian reformation was a monumental event in the history of the late Roman Republic. It fundamentally changed the military system in the Roman Republic and facilitated the decline of the Republic in the first century BC. This paper will discuss the causes and process of the Marian reforms and examine the means by which the Marian reforms contributed to Romes transition from an aristocratic republic to a military autocracy. It will argue that although the Marian reforms initially intended to improve Romes military prowessby enhancing the armys efficiency and preparing it for wars against its enemiesthe reforms had long-lasting effects on the loyalty, motivations, and social status of soldiers. The reforms made it possible for Roman commanders to use their army for personal political ambitions and led to the emergence of private warlords who led Rome into repeated civil wars.

620 BOOK REVIEWS number of fields, and it will certainly contribute to our understanding of the cultural history of Catholicism in Britain, in addition to Irish studies and Romantic studies more broadly. Patrick R. O’Malley Georgetown University Jonathan Sachs. Romantic Antiquity: Rome in the British Imagination, 1789— 1832. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. Pp. x+ 304. $85. In Romantic Antiquity, Jonathan Sachs has produced a learned, wideranging , and compelling account of the numerous ways in which British Romantic writers debated the legacy of republican Rome, using Roman history to shape their understanding of British political and literary moder­ nity. Central to Sachs’s argument is the contention that “Romantic Antiq­ uity” is less Greek than Roman. Though Romantic classicism has tradi­ tionally been represented in terms of its Hellenism (one immediately thinks ofShelley’s declaration in the preface to Hellas, “We are all Greeks”), Sachs persuasively argues that “republican Rome becomes increasingly relevant in Romantic Britain because in a period ofpolitical unrest and imperial ex­ pansion, the appositeness of the Roman example for Britain provides a conceptual enhancement ofwhat Rome means” (3). Attending throughout to the generic diversity of“Roman example” available to British Romantic writers, Sachs maintains that a better understanding of Romanticism’s use ofRoman antiquity will ultimately “refine our understanding of Romanti­ cism itself” (36). To put this another way, Rome is both transformed by and transformative for Romanticism: “transformed in the sense that new models of historical understanding produced a changed conceptualization of the Roman past for certain Romantic thinkers and transformative be­ cause Rome became the locus of new conceptualizations of historicity it­ self” (5). Because of Rome, that is to say, the Romantic sense of history can be seen to be critically different from that of its predecessors. The historical parameters ofRomantic Antiquity are 1789 and 1832. While these dates immediately resonate for their political overtones, Sachs re­ minds us that they have important cultural ramifications as well: 1789 was the year thatJohn Philip Kemble debuted his production of Coriolanus with himself in what quickly became his signature role, and in 1832 Thomas de Quincey published the first of his important essays on the Caesars in Blackmood ’s Edinburgh Magazine. Thus the dates are simultaneously political and literary and underscore Sachs’s commitment to drawing out the volatile in­ terpellation of politics and literature during this period. Emphasizing that SiR, 51 (Winter 2012) BOOK REVIEWS 621 “we need to look for engagement with history beyond the production of historical narrative” (6), Sachs configures Romantic Antiquity in terms of a series of literary events: “because literature has been a prominent locus for the critical discussion of Romantic historicism, it provides a privileged site for thinking about the relationship between cultural production, history, and politics” (6). Part one, on political writing and the novel, first examines the role of Rome in the English controversy over the French Revolution (Burke as well as Thelwall and Godwin), then turns to the invocation of Roman historical models in the Jacobin novels of Godwin, Holcroft, Inchbald, and Hays. Part two takes up poetry and considers how Byron and Shelley debated the meaning of the Roman legacy in their thinking about the relations between poetics and politics, literature and history. Part three, also situated in the 1810s, analyzes the dramatization of the Roman republic and the role of the theater in representing Rome to audiences that may not have had a classical education. Central to these chapters is Kemble’s Coriolanus, and the impact of this production on matters as vari­ ous as Hazlitt’s criticism, Kean’s career, and later plays by John Howard Payne, J. S. Knowles, and George Croly. As is evident even in the brief synopsis provided here, Sachs addresses a significant number of texts, writ­ ers, and cultural productions in Romantic Antiquity. In doing so, he neces­ sarily runs the risk of writing a largely episodic history rather than a sus­ tained argument concerning the Romantic mediation of classical Rome. Integral to his success, however, is that he does not do so. Sachs manages throughout to produce a work of intellectual history that deftly draws on literary, political, and dramatic writing in the service...

DeQuincey's initial essays on the Caesars use their assessment of the Roman republic's failure in order to articulate a particular vision for the British monarchy, the British polity, and the British empire more broadly. They thus participate in the cultural struggle over the meaning and relevance of the Roman example for contemporary Britain and suggest that the common assumption that Rome, from the late eighteenth‐century onwards, was displaced from a position of dominant cultural authority requires revision. Rather, as De Quincey and the book's other examples suggest, the Roman republic retains a prominent place in the symbolic landscape of Britain in the Romantic period. By revealing the relevance of Rome to Romantic poetics and theories of the imagination, and by demonstrating how such aesthetic concerns relate to fundamental aspects of political modernity like mass democracy and the spread of empire, the book initiates a major overhaul in how we understand the relationship between antiquity and modernity.

The chapters here address central problems in the development of Roman imperialism in the third and second century bc. Published in honour of the distinguished Oxford academic Peter Derow, they follow some of his main interests: the author Polybius, the characteristics of Roman power and imperial ambition, and the mechanisms used by Rome in creating and sustaining an empire in the east. Written by a distinguished group of international historians, all of whom were taught by Derow, the volume constitutes a new and distinctive contribution to the history of this centrally important period, as well as a major advance in the study of Polybius as a writer. In addition, the volume looks at the way Rome absorbed religions from the east, at Hellenistic artistic culture, and sheds new light on the important region of Illyria on the Adriatic Coast, which played a key part in Rome's rise to power. Archaeological, epigraphic, and textual evidence are brought together to create a sustained argument for Rome's determined and systematic pursuit of power.

The coins that we describe as «pseudo-Ebusan / Massaliot» use a number of types that imitate the coinages of Ebusus and Massalia, combined with Roman Republican and other types. They were struck in Campania, almost certainly at Pompeii. The pseudo-Ebusan / Massaliot complex was identified in the last ten years, on the basis of coins from excavations at Pompeii below the destruction level of AD 79. We identify the Ebusan and Massaliot prototypes, and for the first time the Roman prototypes, and possibly those of other Italian mints. The number of imitative types known, and the combinations of these types, continues to grow. Their production seems to begin in the first decade of the first century BC, and reaches its apogee in the late 90s and early 80s BC. A technical characteristic of this coinage is that dies might be - and often were - used in either the upper or lower position, so that the concepts of obverse and reverse do not apply. We therefore propose and apply a methodology for describing and analysing such a coinage. We lastly consider whether these imitative Massaliot types reached Gaul in antiquity. Their absence in the many finds from southern France assembled by M. Py is confirmed by their extreme rarity in French collections. With a single exception from Glanum, the few examples known probably reached France with travellers returning from the Grand Tour. Further research may show whether the rarity in France of Pompeian imitations of Massalia is the result of limited commercial exchanges between southern Gaul and Pompeii, or whether some other explanation is needed.

The early history of Rome has long been subjected to various forms of criticism. I am told that public-school boys in the United Kingdom used to read whole books of Livy’s history, which they (in turn) were told was the work of his imagination, and this view has become a communicative memory still propagated by many historians. This unstable construct began to shake under the weight of Ogilvie’s voluminous commentary (and its continuation by Oakley).1 A serious modern reconsideration began with Tim Cornell’s monograph The Beginnings of Rome in which he argued for the internal consistency of the traditions on early Rome.2 Cornell made the case that the main body of narrative is likely to go back a long way and shows a structure that could not simply be invented by historians of the late Republic and early Principate. Given that Roman historiography started only in the second half of the third century BC, there is a gap of several centuries between this and the regal period (traditionally dated 753–509 BC).3 Accordingly, if there was any earlier material, it must have been transmitted by means other than formal historiography, and oral tradition seems like the obvious candidate.

At the end of the third century bc, the Roman Republic had no coherent plan of imperial expansion or roadmap for transforming conquered territories into provinces. The year 197 is notable as one in which two different models of imperialism collide — a traditional model employed at the end of the third Macedonian war in Greece, and an experimental model, the arrival of praetors to govern new provinces in Spain. The lack of coherence may be explained by the structures of the Roman state, and the specific models for making peace and war that had been current at Rome in the previous centuries. Attention is given to the evidence for treaties and provincialization.

The origins of mercury gilding

‘Are you therefore mad, does my love not delay you?Am I worth less to you, than chilly Illyria?’Propertius, Elegies 1.8.1–2

1. Introduction 2. Ager publicus from the regal period to 133 3. The legal conditions of ager publicus 4. The second century and the economy of ager publicus 5. The Gracchi and the privatization of ager publicus 6. General conclusion