Cassie
Brynn
Summary: The section’s title, “Domination”, does a great job of summing up the focus of the chapter. Emma Dench runs through a variety of power relationships, and emphasizes the social and financial inequality of the Roman Empire. One overarching theme seems to be the oversimplification of certain classes of people within Roman society by modern historians. For instance, some women were able to move beyond their role as housekeeper and enter the public eye through a display of masculine characteristics (“androgyne”, p.114) or by wealth (p. 115). Similarly, there is a hierarchy among slaves. Mine workers and agricultural slaves receive less attention from elite writers and are less likely to be freed (p. 133). Domestic slaves (and some agricultural slaves who are given control over others) are characterized as more civil and appear more frequently in Roman literature (although Dench notes that their inclusion is primarily intended to describe relationships between the poor and the Roman elites, p.136). In order to protect against revolt, Roman authorities seemed to deliberately avoid classifying the whole slave population as a collective group. The achievement of a superior “job-title” and the hope for “career progression” among slaves supports Dench’s assumption about the complexity of the social hierarchy (p. 130). The slave-master relationship is also representative of the Empire as a whole, and its dominance over its conquered territories. Dench sees signs of this in the rhetoric of the powerful and the dissident, pointing out the use of the words “freedom” and “slavery” used to describe the same thing; Roman authorities claim that they are freeing the newly conquered people, while some of them see it instead as an act of oppression (p. 128). The desire for Roman citizenship, among many other sought after signs of superiority, emphasizes the achievement of social status as a prime motivator and source of meaning for ancient Romans. Analysis: It is clear by the Augustus reading, and his many assertions of his triumphs over others, that the domination (both politically and militarily) exemplifies some of the most significant indicators of high social status. Some examples of Augustus’s accomplishments in enacting authority over less powerful individuals are his passing of laws, his success in war and punishment of the disobedient, the naming of popular athletic events in his honor, his perceived adoration from the senate and ordinary citizens, and the worship of “the Divine Augustus” as leader of the “imperial cult”. Because of these accomplishments, sacrifices are made to the gods and his name is immortalized in the “Augustalia” day. Echoing Dench’s point about “freedom” and “slavery”, Augustus says, “peace had been secured through victory” (p.2). And it isn’t just his threatening command of the senate and the military that gives him power, but also his generosity (seen in his many donations), which conforms to the ideal Roman man of humility and authority. Ben O.
Chapter 4, The Gods of Empire is a digest of Roman religious practice and belief as it changed shape over the course of the empire's existence. Demonstrating the importance of Roman religion Valerius Maximus wrote, “our state has always thought that everything should take second place to religio” (260). This religio, however is not analogous with what we conceive as modern religion. Rather religio is the practice of venerating the Gods, the most important part of this being animal sacrifices. The Main roman pantheon of Gods was fairly similar to the Greek pantheon with a a lot of cross over in the deities roles, but it was not solely Greek in nature. The Romans had no problems appropriating the God's of foreign lands if they felt it would benefit them. As an example of this, when an enemy could not be defeated in battle they performed the rite of evocatio, essentially asking the God to abandon their homelands and go to Rome where they would be worshiped with a cult much like the rest of the Roman pantheon. In addition to this the Romans would appropriate God's as a response to major problems that needed an immediate answer. An example of this process is when Asclepius was added to the pantheon in an attempt to end a major plague that had be wrecking havoc in Rome. A later development in Roman religion was the deification of the emperor after they died. Their apotheosis let them to be worshiped as a God and they were venerated by the imperial cult. This imperial cult was key in some of the Roman expansion to the west. The imperial deity was pushed as it would encourage loyalty to Rome and Roman culture. It seems that what was most paramount in Roman belief was not what you believed, but the things that your belief could do for you and the state. It seems clear that the Roman state's involvement with deities was most concerned with real world effects of worship, as well as being more concerned with religious practice than belief. When change was wanted it could be made possible though the God's or just as quickly slowed down. “A delicate balance of religious conservatism and change existed throughout the Republic. The state continued to keep a careful watch over which gods could be brought to and installed in Rome, adjusting its religious practice to fit the particular needs of the city.”(267) For the Roman state religion was a tool to be used to change or preserve situations as they saw fit. Jerome Jacobson
The city of Rome stands out as one of the grandest and most achieved urban centers of Western culture. The imperial metropolis is well known for its great size and ornamental magnificence from the numerous pieces of iconic architecture and public art found throughout the city. Temples, public houses, obelisks, colossal statues, baths, and various other grand buildings and monuments filled every urban area. Rome was a very epigraphically active city, and inscriptions could be found on almost structure. These inscriptions were often made to honor the elites of Roman society for their patronage. However, no one contributed more directly to the building of Rome to its status as the crown jewel of the Roman world more than the Emperor. The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Roman World describes how “Senators could sponsor public games, but could never compete with the lavishness of imperial entertainments. Senators could also erect buildings, but never on a scale which could serve the whole city” (CIHRW 153). Each Emperor thus served as a supreme patron to the city of Rome. There were many responsibilities and expectations associated with this role. Emperors served the religious community and priesthoods of the city by patronizing the traditional cults. They accomplished this by erecting new temples and dedicating them to specific gods. In addition to their role as a religious leader, the people of Rome looked to the emperors to provide them with entertainment. In the imperial period it was expected for the emperor to put on special games to commemorate victories or anniversaries (CIHRW 160). In 29 BC Rome began to see the construction of more permanent amphitheaters to regularly accommodate the festivals and games. This movement led to the construction of the Colosseum, Rome’s first official permanent amphitheater. Each emperor was also known to construct grand forums. Started by Julius Caesar, this trend consisted of each emperor building a new forum which was closely linked to each donor’s family. These Imperial fora were dynastic monuments, designed to advertise the achievements of the individual and their families (CIHRW 153). Essentially the emperor was directly related to any new major structure, which gave the city’s architecture a very politically charged feeling. The secondary reading describes how the emperors would compete with their predecessors by building bigger and better monuments, forums, temples, etc… (CIHRW 158). If being the best patron of Rome was a contest, the Augustus certainly was one of the top competitors. From looking at the articles of the Res Gestae Divi Augusti, he clearly excelled in every role expected of him as the supreme patron of the city. Article 17 describes how it was from his personal wealth that he aided the treasuries of the city. Article 20 is a prime example of Augustus’ patrimony to Rome. He rebuilt the theater of Pompey, he rebuilt and improved the aqueducts, he finished the Forum of Julius, and he rebuilt 82 temples of the gods. In addition, article 21 and 22 clearly demonstrate his fulfillment as a religious leader and provider of entertainment. According to his life record, it was as an individual patron that Augustus accomplished all of these constructions and achievements. There is hardly any shared credit found anywhere in the Res Gestae. From this document it would appear that without Augustus the city of Rome would look nothing like the metropolis it turned into during the imperial period. It almost seems like he is not only trying to prove his superiority as a patron over all his predecessors, but to prove his dominance over any possible future emperors as well. Jenna Landry
|