Ben O.
It seems as though part of Frilingos' central argument is that the appearance of Roman imperial power and culture was a central part of what reenforced Roman power. The visual interaction between the spectator and the spectacles put before them served to almost demonstrate the power of Rome 's imperial might and grandeur. Frilingos' reading of the Ara Pacis, the emperor cult, and the Roman spectacles illustrate this point by showing that active participation on the part of the observer is critical in the formation of Roman power. As an example of this is the power of the imperial cult. “Rome did not force emperor worship on it's provinces, nor did the provinces simply adopt roman religious practice.”(23) Because of the majesty and the spectacle of what Roman power meant to the provinces the imperial cult was adopted based on appearances. Because of this the meme of imperial power was perpetuated as the spectators engaging with Rome became themselves spectacles of devotion to outsiders looking in. By simply being complicit and participating in the system people became part of the spectacle attracting new participants to Rome.
It is important to make note that the spectator might become the spectacle because it seems that is how Rome functioned. Maintaining central authority in a time where connections to the hub of power could be weeks or moths away is exceedingly difficult, but if all of the connecting branches seem as devoted and strong as those places closest to the heart of Roman power they influence people that may be one step farther removed. By being so visually based the Romans can use images as a facsimile of their power that seem to be functionally the same as a view of the real thing. A show of gladiators or beast hunt, or imperial statue serves the same purpose in Asia Minor as it does in the forum itself, to be a symbol of Roman authority.
It seems as though part of Frilingos' central argument is that the appearance of Roman imperial power and culture was a central part of what reenforced Roman power. The visual interaction between the spectator and the spectacles put before them served to almost demonstrate the power of Rome 's imperial might and grandeur. Frilingos' reading of the Ara Pacis, the emperor cult, and the Roman spectacles illustrate this point by showing that active participation on the part of the observer is critical in the formation of Roman power. As an example of this is the power of the imperial cult. “Rome did not force emperor worship on it's provinces, nor did the provinces simply adopt roman religious practice.”(23) Because of the majesty and the spectacle of what Roman power meant to the provinces the imperial cult was adopted based on appearances. Because of this the meme of imperial power was perpetuated as the spectators engaging with Rome became themselves spectacles of devotion to outsiders looking in. By simply being complicit and participating in the system people became part of the spectacle attracting new participants to Rome.
It is important to make note that the spectator might become the spectacle because it seems that is how Rome functioned. Maintaining central authority in a time where connections to the hub of power could be weeks or moths away is exceedingly difficult, but if all of the connecting branches seem as devoted and strong as those places closest to the heart of Roman power they influence people that may be one step farther removed. By being so visually based the Romans can use images as a facsimile of their power that seem to be functionally the same as a view of the real thing. A show of gladiators or beast hunt, or imperial statue serves the same purpose in Asia Minor as it does in the forum itself, to be a symbol of Roman authority.