Roman Policy Research Articles

Diaspora: Jews Amidst Greeks and Romans (review)

Erich Gruen's published research demonstrates a seamless transition from his early scholarship in Hellenistic and early Roman historiography to his current well-established role as a leading specialist on in antiquity. This breadth of study adds persistent illumination to the present book's argument that in the period before 70 CE usually did not sense any conflict between living in the and identity. book serves as an important new installment in Gruen's ongoing effort to dismantle paradigms of ancient history derived from exile, antisemitism, and other negative experiences. After a brief preface, the introduction makes two programmatic observations: (1) seem to have preferred to live in the rather than Palestine; (2) never developed a philosophy of to justify or explain life in the Diaspora. Chapter 1, The in Rome, argues that Roman policy toward was characterized primarily by indifference. Rare instances of negative Roman actions toward occurred when the Roman state made a show of maintaining its traditions against a wide variety of foreign elements, not just Jews. Chapter 2, The in Alexandria, breaks with a long tradition of previous research by suggesting that in Alexandria were not engaged in a struggle over civic rights that climaxed in the violence of 38. This violence was instead a brief interruption in generally positive relations between Greeks and occasioned by temporary circumstances and indigenous Egyptian hostility. Chapter 3, Jews in the Province of Asia, argues that conflicts between and Greeks in Asia Minor were rare. Gruen emphasizes that Roman policies toward in Asia Minor were motivated by Rome's broader imperial concerns, not favoritism of or hostility toward Jews. Chapter 4, Civic and Sacral Institutions in the Diaspora, suggests that were integrated into the civic life and political institutions of the Greco-Roman world but still maintained their own unique communal identity in the synagogue. Chapters 5 and 6 focus on Diaspora Humor as it is expressed in Esther, Tobit, Testament of Abraham, and other texts in which Gruen finds evidence of a comic element. This comic element demonstrates that were quite at home in the Gentile world. Chapter 7, Jewish Constructs of Greeks and Hellenism, argues that both negative and positive views toward Greek culture can be found even in the same texts. Gruen suggests that authors adopted and appropriated Greek culture, but did so in a way that emphasized the superiority of culture. Chapter 8, Diaspora and Homeland, unites various threads traced in the preceding chapters. Gruen boldly affirms that developed no theory explaining or justifying their ongoing presence in the because they quite simply felt no need to do so. exile had ended with the restoration of the temple in the Persian period. Subsequent did not view their own choice to leave or remain outside of Palestine in a negative fashion. They maintained a loyalty to Jerusalem as their mother city while viewing themselves as colonists living in other lands that they were proud to call their fatherlands. They identified so deeply with these homelands that they did not even consider themselves to be part of a diaspora (p. 243). book concludes with a list of abbreviations, endnotes, a bibliography, and a topical index. …

Ancient Umbria: State, Culture, and Identity in Central Italy from the Iron Age to the Augustan Era

How should we understand the ways in which the regions of Italy were affected by Roman imperialism? This book, which is the first full-scale treatment of ancient Umbria in any language, takes a balanced view of the region's history in the first millennium BC, focusing on local actions andmotivations as much as the effect of outside influences and Roman policies. Through a careful reading of all the types of evidence it provides an important challenge to traditional treatments emphasising the 'Romanization' of the region, arguing that this is a poor explanation for the complexity oflocal societies in the late Republican period. Instead it proposes that other trends, particularly the organization of states, help to explain the fascinating plurality of identities that are evident in the imperial period and allow us to appreciate the diversity of local societies that emerged inboth mountain and lowland areas of Umbria.

Roman policy on the Rhine and the Danube in Ammianus

On the northern frontiers, as on the eastern, Ammianus conceives of Rome's policy as fundamentally defensive. The essential requirement is to keep the barbarians out, or, if past negligence or failure has let them in, to drive them out, then keep them out for the future. But throughout his work there emerges a consistent constellation of themes.

The Roman Frontier in Britain: Hadrian's Wall, The Antonine Wall and Roman Policy in the North

The Roman Frontier in Britain: Hadrian's Wall, The Antonine Wall and Roman Policy in the North

The Roman Frontier in Britain: Hadrian's Wall, The Antonine Wall and Roman Policy in the North By David Shotter. Pp. xvi, 176 Preston: Carnegie Publishing. 1996. Pb. £9.95.

The Roman Frontier in Britain: Hadrian's Wall, The Antonine Wall and Roman Policy in the North By David Shotter. Pp. xvi, 176 Preston: Carnegie Publishing. 1996. Pb. £9.95.

Perceptions of eastern frontier policy in Ammianus, Libanius, and Julian (337–363)

It is the purpose of this paper to examine how Ammianus, Libanius, and Julian conceived of Roman policy on the eastern frontier from the death of Constantine to failure of Julian′s invasion of Persia. Any consideration of the actual facts is secondary. The predominant conclusion will be that all three saw Rome′s as essentially defensive, her objective as the containment of persistent aggression. This will be seen to hold good even for Julian′s invasion., when they are offered by the sources, are presented in terms of, whether national or that of individuals: Constantius, Julian, Jovian, and. It will become apparent, and is sometimes implied, that these attitudes derive the peace imposed by Rome in 299, with which Rome could well rest content, Persia clearly could not.

Making a Drama Out of a Crisis: Livy on the Bacchanalia

Livy's celebrated account of the Bacchanalia has long been a magnet for students of Roman politics, social life, religion, and private law. Two recent surveys document this extensive range of scholarship. J-M. Pailler, the wellknown French archaeologist, has published a massive monograph of 850 pages, admirably documented and containing a chapter of sixty pages reviewing the bibliography of the past hundred years. Erich Gruen, in his collected papers entitledStudies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy, has contributed a long essay on the political aspects, again with a full bibliography. This paper has the more modest aim of reviewing Livy's account primarily from the literary aspect, concentrating in particular on the opening chapters which describe how the allegedconiuratiowas detected.

Roman Penetration in Strathclyde South of the Antonine Wall PART TWO: ROMANIZATION

SummaryIt will be shown that at the time of Roman conquest, the Damnonii in Strathclyde consisted probably of a decentralised grouping of tribesmen whose political fragmentation is evidenced by their ubiquitous smallscale structures. Some form of hierarchical society is indicated with wealth based on ownership of land and stock and mixed farming the basic element in an embedded economy. Archaeological evidence suggests the Damnonii may have undergone a degree of agricultural revolution in the pre-Roman Iron Age sufficient to meet the demands of an invading and standing army. Roman finds clearly datable to the 1st century AD have been found on only three native sites at the extremities of the area under investigation, their presence suggesting not casual drift from Roman to native, but deliberate Roman policy to control the Damnonii through a few leaders rewarded with Roman patronage. The points of contact are widened in the 2nd century AD. Bearing in mind that Romanization in southern Scotland is different from that of the fully Romanized province of southern Britain and that Roman occupation in Scotland was relatively brief and essentially military, southern Scotland in effect being a frontier zone, it will be shown that the degree of Romanization is not insignificant and Romanization itself may even have gained momentum after the departure of the Roman army. An examination of the finds from Buiston crannog shows elements of continuity as well as discontinuity with Roman culture and technology. Perhaps the clearest expression of Romanization in the longer term, is the emergence of the Romano-British church in the Early Historic period in south-west Scotland.

Le Saint-Siège, l'état d'Israël et la paix au moyen-orient

The Holy See, the state of Israël and peace in the Middle East, Frédéric Yerly. The agreement reached on December 30, 1993 between the Holy See and the state of Israël and followed by the exchange of ambassadors crowns a normalization process of diplomatic relations begun during Abba Eban's visit to Rome in 1969. Prior to the proclamation of the state of Israël in 1948, the Roman hostility to the settling of the Jews in Palestine stemmed from the conviction that Catholic interests in the holy places and the protection of the Christians in the Middle East should take precedence over the recognition of the Jewish people. The so-called Roman neutrality over the beginning of the state of Israël turned to hostility when confronted with the Palestinian cause. The 1993 turning point was partially due to the failure of the Roman policy in the Middle-East, a failure confirmed by the Gulf War. Rome had to rethink its positions very hastily, considering the development of the regional situation. But the December agreement included some ethical clauses that are also part of the ongoing theological dialogue between Jews and Christians.

Roman Policy towards the Jews: Expulsions from the City of Rome during the First Century C.E.

In the first century, Jews were expelled from Rome on various occasions. Ancient literary sources offer contradictory information on these expulsions. As a result, scholars have offered different reconstructions of what really happened. In contrast to earlier scholarship on the subject, this article seeks to place the expulsions of Jews from first-century Rome into the larger framework of Roman policy toward both Jews and other non-Roman peoples. It is argued that the decision to banish Jews from Rome resulted from pragmatic and not from specifically anti-Jewish considerations: Roman magistrates just wanted to maintain law and order. It is then suggested that the reasons underlying the decision to expel Jews from Rome were essentially the same as those triggering expulsions of other groups such as Isis worshipers, devotees of Bacchus, or astrologers. Such evidence serves to illustrate the two main theses of this article. First, it is argued that in late Republican and early Imperial times, Rome never developed a systematic "Jewish policy." During this period, Rome rather responded to situations when confronted with disputes over Jewish rights. This conclusion then serves to bolster the second thesis of this paper, namely that in the first century, Rome never pursued a consistent policy of tolerance (or intolerance) toward its Jewish subjects.

Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy

This book is an examination of the impact of Greek learning, literature, and religion on central aspects of Roman life in the middle Republic. Acclaimed historian Erich S. Gruen discusses the introduction of and resistance to new cults, the relationship between Roman political figures and literary artists schooled in Greek, and the reaction to Hellenic philosophy and rhetoric by the Roman elite. This book contributes new and important information on the place of Greek culture in Roman public life.

Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy

Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy

The Noblest Roman of Them All: A Tribute To Justice Marshall

The Noblest Roman of Them All: A Tribute To Justice Marshall Louis F. Claiborne THURGOOD MARSHALL. The name must be writlarge, in bold, unadornedcapitals. Straight Roman: no elegantly leaning English script or Gothic curlicues. Come to think of it, Justice Marshall is very like a Roman, Not, needless to say, one ofthose stem marble busts that adorn public spaces. Our subjectisnotunsmilingstone. Nortruncated. But before immortality, Romans, too— Romans, especially— wereverymuchalive. Onlyremotely do I invoke the severe and tragic heroes ofancient Rome: Horatius at the bridge, Cato the Elder, the Gracchi, Marius, Cicero, Brutus. And not at all the too frequent abusers of power mercilessly depicted by Suetonius and Tacitus. There is, however, a common threadwiththe giants: Julius Caesar, Pompey, Antony, Augustus, Trajan, Hadrian, MarcusAurelius,Constantine, Justinian. Besides, the life of Rome offers innumerable exemplars, named and unnamed, who bring to mind-or, at least, to my mind- the particular qualities of Thurgood Marshall. One such attribute is largeness—largeness of body, of mind, of spirit. The first time I saw Marshall was in 1960 when I was an over-age law clerkto U.S. DistrictJudge Skelly Wright in New Orleans. The huge federal courtroom waspacked for one of the many disreputable chapters in Louisiana’s full-fledged resistance to school desegregation. Ifl rememberright, a three-judge court was about to hear a challenge to a series of specially concocted state statutes designed to avoid or at leastretard, the inevitable. At counsel table, on one side, were the Louisiana Attorney General, Jack Gremillion, along with a coterie of state lawyers. On the other side were the U.S. Attorney and the attorney for the New Orleans School Board, intent on obeying the Court’s desegregationorders. Then, as I picture it, in came ThurgoodMarshall,“bestridingthisnarrowworld like a Colossus.” No doubt, Marshall, too, had assistants with him, local NAACP lawyers helping to represent the African-American plaintiffs in the case. But everyone else was eclipsed. When his turn came, the chiefNAACP lawyerunbentto his full stature and, once silent expectation had taken hold, addressed the court with simple eloquence. He was forceful, clear, calm, understated, and to the point. A briefer Cicero, though not as pithy as the Marshall of the bench. He was winning and he won althoughtherewere other lawyersthereofno meantalent. Atallevents, itwasclearto everyone that Marshall had entirely dominated the scene.1 Long before my time, Marshall had demon­ strated the Roman qualities ofcourage and lead­ 20 JOURNAL 1992 ership. But my next encounter with our Roman revealedtwo relatedvirtuesthatPlutarch attributes to the best citizens of Rome, generosity and for­ bearance. I was one of the senior lawyers in the Office when Thurgood Marshall became Solici­ tor General in the Summer of 1965. Immediately, he showed restraint and kindness. Thus instead of insisting on the traditional prerogatives, he in­ vited his predecessor, Archibald Cox, to preside in his place at the meeting ofthe Supreme Court Bar when it prepared memorial resolutions in honor ofJustice Frankfurter in October, and per­ mitted Dean Acheson to read those resolutions to the Court.2 This was the generosity of a big man who knew how much Harvard graduates would cherish the honor. But it was also good Roman policy: winning gratitude at little cost. And Thurgood Marshall did the same with us, his senior colleagues in the Solicitor General’s Office. He flattered us with unusual deference. But, as we soon learned, although he was good at delegation,therewasto beno abdication. Marshall read all the papers, with extraordinary speed and SolicitorGeneral Thurgood Marshallwith Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach, left, in front of the SupremeCourt October 11,1965, openingday ofthe 1965 Term. Thiswas Marshall's first“FirstMonday” as Solicitor General. retention. Nor was he reluctant to take the really important decisions himself. And he backed his lawyersto the hilt, assumingfullresponsibilityfor what was done, even when the controversial act was initiated by us. There were otherreasons, also, for Marshall’s effectivenessas arbiterof federal litigatingpolicy- - a not unimportant role ofthe Solicitor General. Like the best of the Romans, he was entirely lackinginpompousness or affectation:his straight­ forward questions and unassuming manner, com­ bined with a commanding presence and a keen sense ofthejugular, disarmed those with contrary views. And, if this were not...

Aphrodisias and Rome: Documents from the Excavation of the Theatre at Aphrodisias Conducted by Professor Kenan T. Erim, together with Some Related Texts

The texts from Aphrodisias in Caria at the core of this book provide remarkable documentation for Roman history during the Mithridatic War, the Second Triumvirate and the 2nd-3rd centuries AD. They include a Greek translation of the longest senatus consultum so far known and a number of imperial letters. They throw light on provincial attitudes to Rome, on Roman policies in the provinces, on the relation of Octavian with Antony, and on many fascinating details of Roman administrative practice.

Eyewitness by Proxy: Nelson M. Beckwith's Evaluation of Garibaldi, September 1861

EYEWITNESS BY PROXY: NELSON M. BECKWITH'S EVALUATION OF GARIBALDI, SEPTEMBER 1861 Joseph A. Fry During the late summer of 1861, President Abraham Lincoln and Secretary of State William Henry Seward offered Giuseppe Garibaldi a command in the Union army. Henry S. Sanford, the United States minister resident to Belgium, traveled to Italy in August and ultimately proffered the rank of major general to the old Italian hero. Garibaldi, whose ambitions focused on the capture of Rome rather than Richmond , declined, saying he would accept nothing less than the position of commander-in-chief together with the discretionary authority to emancipate the slaves. This bizarre episode has stirred the interest of historians for more than seventy years.1 By editing a September 1861 letter from Nelson M. Beckwith to Paul S. Forbes, Professor Herbert Zettl has provided the most recent scholarly commentary on the incident .2 Beckwith, an American businessman residing in Paris, claimed to have accompanied his friend Sanford to Italy, and he rendered a detailed report of the trip, a penetrating and unflattering evaluation of Garibaldi and avivid description of the famed guerrilla fighter's humble household. The author wishes to thank Richard H. K. Vietor, who helped secure a copy of the original Beckwith correspondence with Forbes, and also Paul E. Burns and Thomas C. Wright for reading and commenting on the manuscript. 1 H. Nelson Gay, "Lincoln's Offer of a Command to Garibaldi: Light on a Disputed Point of History," Century Magazine 75 (Nov. 1907): 63-74; Charles F. Adams, Jr., "Lincoln's Offer to Garibaldi," Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, 3d ser., 1 (1908): 321; Charles C. Tansill, "A Secret Chapter in Civil War History," Thought: Fordham University Quarterly 15 (June 1940): 215-24; Howard R. Marraro, "Lincoln's Offer of a Command to Garibaldi: Further Light on a Disputed Point ofHistory,"Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 36 (Sept. 1943): 237-70; R. J. Amundson, "Sanford and Garibaldi," Civil WarHistory 16 (Mar. 1968) :40-45;JosephA. Fry, "The Messenger to Garibaldi: Henry S. Sanford and the Offer of a Union Command to Giuseppe Garibaldi," Essays in History 17 (1972-73): 37-50; Herbert Mitgang, "Garibaldi and Lincoln," American Heritage 26 (Oct. 1975): 34-39, 98-101; Herbert Zettl, ed., "Garibaldi and the American Civil War," CivU War History 22 (Mar. 1976): 70-76. 2 Zettl, "Garibaldi and the American Civil War," pp. 70-76; the original ofthis letter is in the Forbes Collection, Gl-19, Baker Library, Harvard University. Civil War History, Vol. XXVIII, No. 1 Copyright«1982 by The KentState University Press 0009-8078/82/2801-0004 $01.00/0 66CIVIL WAH HISTORY According to Beckwith, he journeyed with Sanford to Turin and remained there as a close adviser for "3 weeks."3 This stay ostensibly enabled him to influence Sanford's decision to send Garibaldi an exploratory letter before personally visiting the general's rocky isle of Caprera, to discern Garibaldi's attempted use of the potential American offer as leverage for pressuring King Victor Emmanuel II into a more aggressive Roman policy, to recount the king's conversation with Garibaldi's messenger, and to learn of theking's approval for Garibaldi's trip to America. At this point (although Zettl's editing partially obscures Beckwith's actions),4 Beckwith alleged that he returned to Paris while Sanford continued on to Caprera and made the abortive offer to Garibaldi. Beckwith's letter to Forbes also described this portion of Sanford's trip in some detail, including the specifics of Sanford's exchange with Garibaldi, the Italian's unsuitability for service in America, and a vivid portrayal of the stark, barren environment on Caprera. Both Beckwith's authoritative tone and his explicit complaint of having "wasted near a month on this business" convey the impression of an eyewitness account. In verbally relating the episode to John Bigelow, the United States consul general in Paris, Beckwith explicitly confirmed this impression. Omitting the important detail of having returned to Paris after three weeks, he told Bigelow that when the king granted Garibaldi permission to go to America, "Sanford and I went down to Caprera and made the offer he had been authorized to make...

The Roman Conquest of Cisalpine Gaul (201-191 B.C.)

For those who study the Roman conquest of Cisalpine Gaul — let it be said at once — there is little or no hope of writing an adequate historical account. To say this is not to disparage what has been done. The subject has been treated admirably, with full critical care, by scholars who combined intimate knowledge of the region with personal feeling for its importance in Italian history, in the light of Gallic social conditions and Roman policy and military methods — always with the reservation ‘as far as the recorded evidence allows’.

The Family and Early Career of T. Quinctius Flamininus

There is hardly a more important character in the history of the Roman Republic than the young Patrician who first laid down the lines of Roman policy in Greece and the East—and hardly a more mysterious one, despite frequent discussion. It is only the first and perhaps the most puzzling of the problems concerning him that will occupy us here; but the very fact that it is the first gives it an importance quite independent of other considerations: we are not likely to solve the others as long as this one is ignored.How did a young man of about twenty-nine come to be elected to a consulship and entrusted with a major war that had been going badly for Rome, after holding no office higher than the quaestorship—and holding even this lowly charge so inconspicuously that Livy does not even mention him in it? The very facts make it clear that we cannot give a certain answer: the evidence is not good enough.

Another Look at the Barbarian Settlement in Southern Gaul

In an important study which appeared in 1956, Professor E. A. Thompson discussed imperial policy in southern Gaul during the first half of the fifth century. According to Professor Thompson the purpose of the Romans in settling four groups of barbarians in southern Gaul between the years 418 and 442 was to control the Bacaudae who, he contends, threatened to overthrow the existing social and economic order. By focusing all his attention on the Bacaudae Professor Thompson distorts Roman policy by attributing to it a precision which it lacked. A less selective study of the evidence suggests that Rome's policy in southern Gaul (and probably throughout the Empire as well) was directed toward control of all the potentially and actively hostile elements in the Empire rather than, on balance, being preoccupied exclusively with the activities of the Bacaudae.

Illyris, Rome and Macedon in 229–205 B.C.

In JRS LVI (1966) I gave a description of the Aoi Stena which was based on autopsy, and I discussed the campaigns of Rome against Philip V of Macedon in the years 200 to 198 B.C. In this paper I am concerned with the area farther north which Rome acquired in 229 B.C. and with the actions which took place there before 200 B.C. Many scholars have discussed Rome's early activities in Illyris but practically none of them has trodden the ground. My knowledge of most of the area may help me to advance more down-to-earth views of the extent of Rome's sector in Illyris and of Roman and Macedonian policies. I include some new evidence on the position of Dimallum.The salient feature of Central Albania is the belt of coastal plain which extends from north of Lesh (Lissus) to north of the Gulf of Valona (see fig. 1). The widest and richest part of this plain is in the Myzeqija, which extends southwards from Kavajë. The Myzeqija in particular is integral to the economy of Central Albania, the area which was called Southern Illyris in the third century B.C. The transhumance of sheep has always been practised in this part of the Balkans, and the coastal plain of Albania with months of very heavy rainfall in October and March affords exceptionally fine pasturage for the winter period.

Polybius and Rome's Eastern Policy

Any discussion of the policy of the Roman Senate towards the Hellenistic world at the end of the third century B.C. must inevitably take account of the work of two men who wrote their most important books around this topic. One is, of course, Polybius, the other Maurice Holleaux. Holleaux's book on Rome, Greece and the Hellenistic monarchies appeared in 1921; but it came as the culmination of several studies on this subject, which had been exercising his attention particularly since 1913. Today, then, we stand virtually at the fiftieth anniversary of Holleaux's thesis, and we can appropriately consider how far it has stood the test of time. However, that is not my main purpose in this paper, which will be concerned much more with what Polybius has to say on the subject. As everyone knows, it is the evidence of Polybius that stands behind Holleaux's remarkable reconstruction of Roman policy; and Holleaux's problem is quite central to Polybius' interests—indeed it is very close to, though not identical with, his main theme. ‘Who,’ he asks, ‘is so worthless and so indolent as not to want to know by what means and under what constitutional system the Romans in less than fifty-three years have succeeded in subjecting nearly the whole inhabited world to their sole government—a thing unique in history?’ It is perhaps not unfair to judge a historian by the degree of success he attains in tackling his main theme. If that seems a reasonable proposition, we may ask ourselves: Does Polybius in fact offer a satisfactory answer to the question he has raised?