The murder, on 24 January, was a cardinal chance for freedom: Gaius had no children of an age to take over. However, the senators behind the murder were divided. Should they destroy the whole beastly Julio-Claudian family? Should they keep the system but insist on electing the next First Citizen? Should they go further and somehow restore the Republic? Like Julius Caesar"s murderers, they dithered, despite their talk of restoring "liberty" and the rule of law. The power of the palace troops then a.s.serted itself. One of the German bodyguards found an ignored Julio-Claudian who was hiding behind a curtain in the Palace. The guards then acclaimed him as emperor and forced the divided conspirators to give in. The new emperor, Claudius, was on the face of it preposterous. Fifty years old, he drooled and could not co-ordinate his movements; he laughed uncontrollably and his voice sounded like some hoa.r.s.e sea-monster. He has been plausibly diagnosed as suffering from cerebral palsy. Augustus had found him a public embarra.s.sment and even his mother used to describe him as "a monstrosity of a human being, one which Nature began and never finished".4 Claudius mayhave been aware of the plan to murder Gaius, but it seems he was unaware, like the partic.i.p.ants, that the result would ever be power for himself. Claudius mayhave been aware of the plan to murder Gaius, but it seems he was unaware, like the partic.i.p.ants, that the result would ever be power for himself.
Claudius began with severe disadvantages. The senators promptly declared war on him when they heard that the guards had championed him. He himself had no military experience, but he did raise the guards" wages, an effective subst.i.tute. An attempted revolt by the respected governor of Dalmatia in the following year collapsed within five days because the legions were still loyal to Claudius. In their eyes, he had a crucial quality: he was a proper household heir. He claimed a kinship with Augustus and he was grandson of Mark Antony.
Claudius went on to rule for thirteen years in a fascinating mixture of application and cruelty, over-compensation and attempted populism. To compensate for his lack of military prowess, he invaded Britain in 43: he even crossed the river Thames on an elephant. But he kept on citing his victory "beyond the Ocean" and accepting military salutations for a campaign to the action of which he had personally contributed nothing. Perpetually at odds with the Senate, he relied excessively on the accessible freedmen in his own household. He was not creating a new "Civil Service": he was simply turning to would-be wise advisers who were near to hand. He also had an antiquarian mind. He had written copiously during his years as a marginal figure, finishing eight books on the Carthaginians and twenty books on the Etruscans, while writing an ongoing history of Rome, unfortunately lost to us. He had even written a book on gambling with dice, one of his pa.s.sions. However, he had the vanity and vengefulness of the academic manque manque. In power, he fussed about such sillinesses as adding new letters to the alphabet; his speeches in the Senate were conceited and poorly constructed; he ordered that his long Etruscan history should be read aloud monthly in the Museum at Alexandria.
Lacking senatorial credibility, Claudius found an alternative in the responses of the Roman populace. He would sit, in popular style, on the tribunes" bench; he played up to the crowds at public shows, especiallythe gladiatorial ones where his taste was definitelyfor blood. He encouraged overdue improvements to the grain-harbour for Rome; he improved the city"s aqueducts and he attended to popular shows. His displays, however, were excessive and fatuous. At Ostia, he showed off by personally fighting against a whale which had been trapped in the new harbour. On his return from Britain he boated in and out of the harbour at Ravenna in an extravagant mock floating palace.5 He even forced through a ma.s.sive plan to drain the Fucine Lake near Rome, and at the grand opening in 52 he staged an enormous sea-battle to amuse the crowds. Some 19,000 combatants were encouraged to fight, shedding blood, but the waterworks went wrong and drenched the spectators, including Claudius and his wife, who was dressed in a golden robe, like a mythical queen. He even forced through a ma.s.sive plan to drain the Fucine Lake near Rome, and at the grand opening in 52 he staged an enormous sea-battle to amuse the crowds. Some 19,000 combatants were encouraged to fight, shedding blood, but the waterworks went wrong and drenched the spectators, including Claudius and his wife, who was dressed in a golden robe, like a mythical queen.
These ma.s.sive displays for the crowds did nothing to endear him to the senators. They saw him as a self-willed bungler. They said that 321 knights and 35 senators were killed off by him in secret trials, and his habit of judging these cases personally in private rooms in his household was detested. Lacking senatorial friends, Claudius was recognized as a soft touch for those who had access to him, whether they were his personal doctor, prominent Gauls from the region of his birthplace Lyons or corrupt palace freedmen (who sometimes took bribes for arranging gifts of citizenship). Most memorably, there were the strong, self-willed women, a distinctive presence at court in the Julio-Claudian years.
Tiberius had lived awkwardly at Rome among two elderly imperial widows, each of whom became honoured in due course as "Augusta". One was Augustus" wife Livia, the great survivor. The other, also a great survivor, was Mark Antony"s second daughter, Antonia: she had a beauty and an orderly style which preserved her even during long years of refusing to remarry. On Augustus" death, some had suggested honouring Livia as "Mother of the Fatherland": it was in AD AD 20 that the Senate decreed and circulated praises of her for "serving the commonwealth exceptionally, not only in giving birth to our First Citizen but also through her many great favours towards men of every rank": they also affirmed that Antonia was the stated object of their "great admiration", "excellent in her moral character". 20 that the Senate decreed and circulated praises of her for "serving the commonwealth exceptionally, not only in giving birth to our First Citizen but also through her many great favours towards men of every rank": they also affirmed that Antonia was the stated object of their "great admiration", "excellent in her moral character".6 Republican traditionalists would have been scandalized by the reference to Livia"s "many great favours" and would have enjoyed the rumours that she had in fact poisoned Augustus and his adopted grandsons. Eleven years later Antonia was probably quick to bring down the Emperor Tiberius" controversial favourite, Seja.n.u.s, by a well-judged letter in the interests of her terrible grandson, Gaius. However, when Gaius took power she quickly proved irritating to him and had to commit suicide. Republican traditionalists would have been scandalized by the reference to Livia"s "many great favours" and would have enjoyed the rumours that she had in fact poisoned Augustus and his adopted grandsons. Eleven years later Antonia was probably quick to bring down the Emperor Tiberius" controversial favourite, Seja.n.u.s, by a well-judged letter in the interests of her terrible grandson, Gaius. However, when Gaius took power she quickly proved irritating to him and had to commit suicide.
Feminine influence on Claudius was more overt. It was not only that he lived among women at Rome who were "gaping for gardens", in the historian Tacitus" fine phrase,7 even to the point of pressing him for the death of a rich garden-owner so that they could take his property. Claudius" own third marriage was to the well-born and pa.s.sionate Messalina (twenty years old or more at the time); she bore him a son, and then encouraged him in condemning enemies and rivals (she cited the warning dreams which were granted to herself and a freedman). In 48 she herself went too far with a younger senator, consenting to a sham "marriage" during the grape-vintage in the absence of her ignorant husband. Claudius then took the bad advice of a freedman and married the formidable Agrippina instead. She was the sister of Gaius and thirty-three years old; disastrously, she brought a son of her own with her (born by Caesarian section). During six memorable years of new-wife syndrome the old drama of the h.e.l.lenistic royal families was played out all over again. To a.s.sure her son"s succession, the new wife, Agrippina, arranged for Claudius" murder on 13 October 54. Supposedlyit was done bya mushroom laced with poison, although a second dose on a feather was said to have been needed. even to the point of pressing him for the death of a rich garden-owner so that they could take his property. Claudius" own third marriage was to the well-born and pa.s.sionate Messalina (twenty years old or more at the time); she bore him a son, and then encouraged him in condemning enemies and rivals (she cited the warning dreams which were granted to herself and a freedman). In 48 she herself went too far with a younger senator, consenting to a sham "marriage" during the grape-vintage in the absence of her ignorant husband. Claudius then took the bad advice of a freedman and married the formidable Agrippina instead. She was the sister of Gaius and thirty-three years old; disastrously, she brought a son of her own with her (born by Caesarian section). During six memorable years of new-wife syndrome the old drama of the h.e.l.lenistic royal families was played out all over again. To a.s.sure her son"s succession, the new wife, Agrippina, arranged for Claudius" murder on 13 October 54. Supposedlyit was done bya mushroom laced with poison, although a second dose on a feather was said to have been needed.
Agrippina"s young son Nero then succeeded and proved another political disaster. Like Tiberius, he had a proud and n.o.ble ancestry, but extreme cruelty ran in its past. Members of his family had staged exceptionally b.l.o.o.d.y gladiatorial shows and one had even driven a chariot contemptuously over a member of the lower cla.s.ses. After the boy"s birth Nero"s own father was said to have told a well-wisher that "nothing born of me and Agrippina can be other than detestable and a public menace".8 He was quite right. Like Gaius, Nero had no military experience and no experience of public service. He became emperor when he was far too young, before his seventeenth birthday. For five years the combination of his mother, his tutor Seneca and his able Praetorian Prefect Burrus kept him relatively steady. Thereafter it was ever more clear that he combined vanity with irresponsibility. He expressed both in the way such people still do, by a misplaced wish to perform as an artist in public. He competed as a charioteer and worse, he sang and played the lyre. He was serious about it all, exercising with lead weights to improve his lungs and drinking the diluted dung of wild boar to help his muscles. He was quite right. Like Gaius, Nero had no military experience and no experience of public service. He became emperor when he was far too young, before his seventeenth birthday. For five years the combination of his mother, his tutor Seneca and his able Praetorian Prefect Burrus kept him relatively steady. Thereafter it was ever more clear that he combined vanity with irresponsibility. He expressed both in the way such people still do, by a misplaced wish to perform as an artist in public. He competed as a charioteer and worse, he sang and played the lyre. He was serious about it all, exercising with lead weights to improve his lungs and drinking the diluted dung of wild boar to help his muscles.
The natural outlet for such aspirations was Greece, and Nero did at least make the most of it. On tour in 66/7, he competed at Delphi and Olympia, and the rumour was that he won more than 1,800 first prizes, even in a ten-horse chariot race where he fell off. In return, he gave Olympia a new club-house for athletes, the first Roman emperor to do anything for the site. Spectacularly, he even declared Greece free and ended its tribute. Athletics, being nude and queer, were bad enough for traditional Romans, but with his elaborate hairstyle, Nero was an embarra.s.sment to right-thinking Roman opinion. He was also inexcusably savage: in 59 he had his own mother murdered. He did attract the most glamorous wife, "auburn-haired" Poppaea, but when she died, he picked the freedman who looked most like her, had him castrated and used him as a s.e.x-object in her absence. His extravagance was atrocious. He was not to blame for the Great Fire which destroyed much of the city of Rome in the year 64, but his plan to build a huge Golden House for himself afterwards in the centre of the city was megalomaniac. His continuing lack of restraint and moral standards encouraged two major conspiracies against him. The second was backed by important provincial governors and proved mercifully successful. On 9 June 68 Nero antic.i.p.ated events by killing himself, saying "What an artist dies in me." It was his final vanity.
In this Julio-Claudian household, one ancestor was taking his genetic revenge: Mark Antony. Tiberius" dangerously popular young rival, Germanicus, was Antony"s grandson; so was Claudius; Gaius was Antony"s great-grandson, as was Nero too. It was a dreadful time to be a senator at Rome, when the unopposable palace guards protected, and even promoted, such people as emperors. For some thirty years senators had to compromise under a mad wastrel, a cruel and susceptible spastic and a vain and self-obsessed profligate. The best place to be was in a province, away from spies and informers. At Rome, the same inadequacies kept recurring in bad rulers: impossible financial extravagance (Gaius and Nero), a touchiness about the lack of military prowess (Gaius, Claudius and Nero), excessive trust in non-senatorial favourites (Tiberius, Claudius and Nero), s.e.xual perversion (Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius and Nero) and an inappropriate line between the palace, including wives and mothers, and the traditional rule of law (Claudius and Nero). Young Nero"s initial "honeymoon" period owed something to the wise counsels of the philosopher Seneca, but he was then encouraged in his natural extravagance by the odious Tigellinus. "Obscure in parentage and debauched in early life",9 Tigellinus was a Sicilian bybirth who capitalized on his good looks and his breeding of racehorses. They were pa.s.sions to which Nero was highly susceptible. Tigellinus was a Sicilian bybirth who capitalized on his good looks and his breeding of racehorses. They were pa.s.sions to which Nero was highly susceptible.
Once again, luxury, justice and freedom played important roles in the Julio-Claudian family"s history. "Luxury", as personal extravagance, continued to increase with the general progress of crafts and the rivalry of consumers. It was not just that the volume of wine consumed by all cla.s.ses at Rome rose sharply: a "vigorous drinking-place culture" among urban communities in Italy has also been detected.10 In the Julio-Claudian era we begin to have firm evidence for senatorial landowners" involvement in vine-growing. Much more extravagantly, we have evidence for their spiralling pursuit of "luxuries", especially those in limited supply. In the Roman upper cla.s.s, a personal fortune might as well be spent now, as otherwise it would be left partlyto the emperor on death; legacies left bychildless donors would be penalized, anyway, under Augustus" moral laws. In Tiberius" reign the prices of special luxuries, whether bronzes in pseudo-Corinthian Greek style or big mullets in the fish market, were rising so sharply that there was legislation by the emperor to control them. In 22 there were fears that Tiberius would restrict spending on anything luxurious, ranging from silver plate to dinner-parties. In fact, Tiberius wrote to the Senate that he wished that such restrictions could be effective, but that the problems were insoluble. Indeed, there was so much more now to want. Romans had discovered a taste for much that was rare, including tables made from the beautiful wood of the citrus tree, native to north Africa: the trees were wiped out as they gratified it. Craftsmen had developed the complex technique of fluorspar and of cameos in which layers of precious metals were set in gla.s.s. Like modern house-prices or salaries on Wall Street, the unchecked cost of bronzes and villas, paintings and pearls were topics of conversation at the very Roman dinner-parties which flaunted them. According to the historian Tacitus, there was also discussion of the "effeminate" dress of rich men. In the Julio-Claudian era we begin to have firm evidence for senatorial landowners" involvement in vine-growing. Much more extravagantly, we have evidence for their spiralling pursuit of "luxuries", especially those in limited supply. In the Roman upper cla.s.s, a personal fortune might as well be spent now, as otherwise it would be left partlyto the emperor on death; legacies left bychildless donors would be penalized, anyway, under Augustus" moral laws. In Tiberius" reign the prices of special luxuries, whether bronzes in pseudo-Corinthian Greek style or big mullets in the fish market, were rising so sharply that there was legislation by the emperor to control them. In 22 there were fears that Tiberius would restrict spending on anything luxurious, ranging from silver plate to dinner-parties. In fact, Tiberius wrote to the Senate that he wished that such restrictions could be effective, but that the problems were insoluble. Indeed, there was so much more now to want. Romans had discovered a taste for much that was rare, including tables made from the beautiful wood of the citrus tree, native to north Africa: the trees were wiped out as they gratified it. Craftsmen had developed the complex technique of fluorspar and of cameos in which layers of precious metals were set in gla.s.s. Like modern house-prices or salaries on Wall Street, the unchecked cost of bronzes and villas, paintings and pearls were topics of conversation at the very Roman dinner-parties which flaunted them. According to the historian Tacitus, there was also discussion of the "effeminate" dress of rich men.11 Female hairstyles at court were still relatively cla.s.sical, but their accompaniments did become recherche. We can compare the rather simple recipe for toothpaste of the Empress Livia with the infinitely more exotic compound of Messalina, requiring mastic gum from Chios (still used in the fine local toothpaste), salt from north Africa and powdered stag"s horn, which was thought to be an aphrodisiac. Female hairstyles at court were still relatively cla.s.sical, but their accompaniments did become recherche. We can compare the rather simple recipe for toothpaste of the Empress Livia with the infinitely more exotic compound of Messalina, requiring mastic gum from Chios (still used in the fine local toothpaste), salt from north Africa and powdered stag"s horn, which was thought to be an aphrodisiac.
Since the fourth century BC BC historians had so often cited luxury as a cause of defeat or disaster: in the 60s historians had so often cited luxury as a cause of defeat or disaster: in the 60s AD AD it did at last claim its first major victim, the Julio-Claudian household itself. Nero"s hopeless extravagance was a direct cause of his overthrow and the ending of the family line. Justice, meanwhile, was more subtly corrupted by the emperors" habits. In the Senate, Tiberius had sat in on cases which included alleged slights to his own "majesty": how could senators then be impartial in his brooding presence? Claudius heard far too many cases in private; he often refused to hear more than one side of the argument and simply imposed his own personal view. The underlying trend throughout was for officials, both at Rome and abroad, to hear cases and pa.s.s judgements in their own right. Appeals to authority thus developed a new range. it did at last claim its first major victim, the Julio-Claudian household itself. Nero"s hopeless extravagance was a direct cause of his overthrow and the ending of the family line. Justice, meanwhile, was more subtly corrupted by the emperors" habits. In the Senate, Tiberius had sat in on cases which included alleged slights to his own "majesty": how could senators then be impartial in his brooding presence? Claudius heard far too many cases in private; he often refused to hear more than one side of the argument and simply imposed his own personal view. The underlying trend throughout was for officials, both at Rome and abroad, to hear cases and pa.s.s judgements in their own right. Appeals to authority thus developed a new range.
As for freedom, it had had a real chance with Gaius" murder in January 41, but the failure to secure it was revealing. It was a hundred years, on a long view, since freedom had really been rooted in the Republic, since the gentlemen"s agreement between Caesar, Pompey and Cra.s.sus in 59 BC BC. In the face of a vast Empire, an army loyal to a dynasty and a populace fearful of senatorial rule, how ever could freedom be restored by senators who had now never even known it? Nor would that sort of freedom have been workable. Rather, the survival of the underlying imperial structures during these four grotesque emperors is evidence of their increasing strength and necessity. When the provincial governor who led the western rising against Nero declared himself to be acting for the Senate and people, the declaration led to his recognition by the Praetorian guards at Rome and then to his being empowered by the Senate as the next emperor. What senators most hoped for was a defined area of business which the Senate, if possible, should decide, while the emperor retained a restrained, moral competence in all settings. Affability and accessibility without extravagance were the crucial attributes for a good emperor.
In protest under Nero, there were senators who took a principled stand against his tyranny, partly by drawing on a veneer of ethical "Stoic" values. Upper-cla.s.s Romans were not true philosophers, but these principled ethics did at least suit the moral aspirations of new men, rising into the ruling cla.s.s: theylacked the world-wearycynicism of the older intake and they wished to be principled and rather too earnest when placed in apparent honour at the centre of affairs. For other, more quizzical characters, there was always the possibility of n.o.ble and eloquent suicides, acts which were not in any way condemned by Roman religion. Seneca the philosopher cut his veins; the engaging Petronius, "arbiter of taste",12 compiled an exact list of Nero"s s.e.xual debaucheries with men and women and sent it to him while opening his veins and joking meanwhile with his friends. Above all, there was the example of the immensely rich senator and ex-consul, Valerius Asiaticus. By origin a Gaul, he had inherited by marriage a fine park on the Esquiline hill in Rome. "Gaping for gardens", Claudius" wife Messalina then urged his destruction. Among all the various charges laid against him, Claudius hesitated before giving in. But he did allow Asiaticus to choose his own death. So Asiaticus exercised, dressed up and dined well. He then opened his veins, but not before he had inspected the siting of his funeral pyre. Small freedoms still remained: he ordered the pyre to be moved so that the fire would not burn his trees. compiled an exact list of Nero"s s.e.xual debaucheries with men and women and sent it to him while opening his veins and joking meanwhile with his friends. Above all, there was the example of the immensely rich senator and ex-consul, Valerius Asiaticus. By origin a Gaul, he had inherited by marriage a fine park on the Esquiline hill in Rome. "Gaping for gardens", Claudius" wife Messalina then urged his destruction. Among all the various charges laid against him, Claudius hesitated before giving in. But he did allow Asiaticus to choose his own death. So Asiaticus exercised, dressed up and dined well. He then opened his veins, but not before he had inspected the siting of his funeral pyre. Small freedoms still remained: he ordered the pyre to be moved so that the fire would not burn his trees.13 Claudius then confiscated the park as soon as Asiaticus was dead. Claudius then confiscated the park as soon as Asiaticus was dead.
45.
Ruling the Provinces It is the most unjust thing of all for me to tighten up by my own edict what the two Augustuses, one the greatest of G.o.ds (Augustus), the other the greatest of emperors (Tiberius), have taken the utmost care to prevent, namely that anybody should make use of carts without payment. But since the indiscipline of certain people requires an immediate punishment, I have set up in the individual towns and villages a register of those services which I judge ought to be provided, with the intention of having it observed or, if it shall be neglected, of enforcing it not only with my own power but with the authority of the best of princes [Augustus], from whom I received written instructions concerning these matters.
Edict of s.e.xtus Sotidius Strabo, legate of Galatia, soon after AD 14 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.Jesus, in the Gospel of Matthew 5.41 Outside Italy, nonetheless, Rome"s provinces are said to have viewed Augustus" new order as not unwelcome. Perceptions, as always, will have varied with social cla.s.s and cultural background, but in western Asia, with the governor"s encouragement, a new calendar was adopted, beginning on Augustus" birthday. From Spain to Syria, cults of emperors, both dead and alive, proliferated in varying forms. What was there to celebrate? From Augustus onwards there were certainly changes in the appointment and regulation of governors, including new procedures for trying them for extortion and (eventually) a fixed annual wage, or "salary", for their tenure of office (the first instances of the word in this sense). Their republican predecessors had left bad memories on this score. But what counted most to the provincials was the return of peace and the ending of all the looting, money-raising and damage done abroad in the 40s and 30s during Rome"s Civil Wars. Their total population is likely to have fallen sharply in all the chaos: an Empire-wide figure of 45 million has been suggested, 25 per cent below the levels reached later after a century of peace.
This new era developed into our idea of a Roman Empire. Already under Augustus, Romans wrote of ruling "from Ocean to Ocean": maps of this world were constructed, especially the map which Agrippa displayed publicly at Rome.1 There were still no clear ideas of frontiers, and the basic notion of empire was still not so much a territorial one as one of obedience to Romans" commands. By Hadrian"s reign the territory under Roman command would stretch from Northumberland in Britain to the Red Sea, from the coast of modern Portugal to the river Euphrates. This huge territory has never been ruled by one power since. It would also shape Hadrian"s career, as he spent more than half his reign touring round more than thirty of its provinces. There were soldiers in each of them, but not every province even had a full legion. The remarkable thing is how few officials were still being sent out to govern such a huge area. There were still no clear ideas of frontiers, and the basic notion of empire was still not so much a territorial one as one of obedience to Romans" commands. By Hadrian"s reign the territory under Roman command would stretch from Northumberland in Britain to the Red Sea, from the coast of modern Portugal to the river Euphrates. This huge territory has never been ruled by one power since. It would also shape Hadrian"s career, as he spent more than half his reign touring round more than thirty of its provinces. There were soldiers in each of them, but not every province even had a full legion. The remarkable thing is how few officials were still being sent out to govern such a huge area.
At the top of a province, both "public" and "imperial", the crucial figure was still the governor, who was usually a senator. A few underlings might a.s.sist him and he could always call on any local army-officers and troops: military architects in the local camps would also be helpful in carrying out major building projects. The governor had detailed instructions from the emperor, a practice which began with Augustus and which Augustus had probably extended already to both types of province. The governor"s overriding duty was to preserve peace and quiet. After the 30s BC BC Rome"s provinces were never seriouslyat risk to an outside invader until long after Hadrian"s death. The greater danger was a rebellion by Rome"s subjects or civil strife between or within the province"s local communities. Most governors, then, were focused on judging and resolving local disputes. Like Cicero in his province, they visited their provinces yearly on an a.s.size-tour, during which they dispensed justice and settled disputes in recognized a.s.size-cities. Calls on their time were potentially very heavy: we happen to know that at least 1,406 pet.i.tions were prepared for submission to a governor in one town in Egypt on a single visit. Rome"s provinces were never seriouslyat risk to an outside invader until long after Hadrian"s death. The greater danger was a rebellion by Rome"s subjects or civil strife between or within the province"s local communities. Most governors, then, were focused on judging and resolving local disputes. Like Cicero in his province, they visited their provinces yearly on an a.s.size-tour, during which they dispensed justice and settled disputes in recognized a.s.size-cities. Calls on their time were potentially very heavy: we happen to know that at least 1,406 pet.i.tions were prepared for submission to a governor in one town in Egypt on a single visit.2 Naturally, justice could not be done solely by one annual visitor. Local cities and communities did retain their courts in which they would try most of the civil cases. They heard criminal cases too, but usually only those without serious penalties. There were also cases heard by Roman procurators, officials who were of two different types. In imperial provinces, some of the procurators were financial officials with the duty of overseeing tax-collection. This business always provokes disputes and the procurator was likely to try such cases himself. Undesirably, he was both the prosecutor and the judge of those before him. Other procurators were the emperor"s land agents: they managed lands and properties owned by the emperor in his provinces. Under Claudius, they too were confirmed in the right to try cases arising from such properties and then, near the end of his life, their judgements were made final, without the possibility of appeal.
These alternative sources of justice did help the governors" workload, but nonetheless governors were kept busy. On entering a province, a governor still published an edict which announced offences which he would particularly consider, but in the new age, the emperor"s instructions might guide him. Above all, he alone could impose the death penalty (with very few exceptions). There was also the bother of civil cases which were referred back to him from the emperor. For communities and individuals would sometimes take a case directly off to the emperor, only to find that they were encouraged by him to approach their local governor with (or without) a particular recommendation. It was then quite hard for governors to apply the law, because many of these cases were not covered neatly by accepted rulings of Roman law, and Roman law did not apply to most of the provincials anyway. There was a real need for patience and discretion on a governor"s part. After a preliminary hearing, he could send a case off for trial by a local court; he could also consult with local advisers before deciding. Under the Empire, he could attend to a case personally as "inquisitor" and after investigating it in person, he could pa.s.s sentence on it. All sorts of twisted cases and allegations would be brought up for his decision and it was best if he was impartial: he was urged in law books to avoid becoming too friendly with his provincials. It was also best if he left his wife in Rome, as she might become too involved: governors were made liable for their wives" misbehaviour in their province.
This travelling circuit had formed Cicero"s career as a governor in the 50s BC BC and, as it spread, it did bring a new source of justice to many provincials" lives. Under the Empire, from Augustus onwards, there was also the new possibility of direct appeal to the emperor himself. However, there were limitations to both processes. To present a case, a pet.i.tioner had to travel in person, gain access and, if possible, speak eloquently. As ever, this sort of justice was not realistic for the poor, especially the poor in the countryside. It was also justice at the expense of local political freedom. The Roman governors monopolized penalties which even the Athenians" cla.s.sical Empire had only controlled at second hand. Offences now included many which had been created by the very existence of the Empire in the first place. From their own experience at Rome, Rome"s ruling cla.s.s had become very suspicious of popular a.s.sociations in a city, the "clubs" which might conceal political purposes: we thus find a governor being told to ban local fire brigades in his province"s cities ("better dead than red" and, as it spread, it did bring a new source of justice to many provincials" lives. Under the Empire, from Augustus onwards, there was also the new possibility of direct appeal to the emperor himself. However, there were limitations to both processes. To present a case, a pet.i.tioner had to travel in person, gain access and, if possible, speak eloquently. As ever, this sort of justice was not realistic for the poor, especially the poor in the countryside. It was also justice at the expense of local political freedom. The Roman governors monopolized penalties which even the Athenians" cla.s.sical Empire had only controlled at second hand. Offences now included many which had been created by the very existence of the Empire in the first place. From their own experience at Rome, Rome"s ruling cla.s.s had become very suspicious of popular a.s.sociations in a city, the "clubs" which might conceal political purposes: we thus find a governor being told to ban local fire brigades in his province"s cities ("better dead than red"3). Subjects also became liable to charges of "treason" for supposed insults to an emperor, his statues or property. Anonymous accusations were strongly discouraged, but these sorts of charges were a direct consequence of Empire.
So, above all, was tax. Here, Roman governors became responsible for a major Roman innovation, imposed under Augustus: the regular census of their subjects. Censuses listed individuals and property as a basis for the collection of taxes. Officials were charged with carrying them out and the details were often complex: Augustus never decreed "that all the world should be taxed", as the Gospel of Luke puts it, but he did record his holding of separate censuses in Rome"s provinces.4 Separate officials (quaestors and procurators) then took direct responsibilityfor the taxes" yearly collection. They had slaves, freedmen and the possibility of using soldiers to help them, but even so they were far less numerous than the tax-collectors of a modern state. Separate officials (quaestors and procurators) then took direct responsibilityfor the taxes" yearly collection. They had slaves, freedmen and the possibility of using soldiers to help them, but even so they were far less numerous than the tax-collectors of a modern state.
It was not even that taxes were very much simpler than ours nowadays. Direct tax took two rather complicated forms, a tribute on land and one on persons. The details varied between provinces, but they could include taxes on slaves and rented urban property and even on movable goods, including the equipment of a farm. Occasionally they were based on the produce of a farm rather than on its extent and value. There were also important indirect taxes, including harbour-dues, and further impositions, especially for the provision of animals, supplies and labour for public transport. It is this burden to which Jesus refers in the Gospel of Matthew: "whosoever shall go compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain", an idealistic bit of advice.
Occasionally, exemptions from taxes might be granted (especially to cities after a natural disaster) but they certainly did not belong by right to holders of Roman citizenship. In the provinces, Roman citizens and their land were liable to tax like everyone else. The one privileged area was Italy, which paid indirect taxes but no tribute. Rome also benefited from a particular type of payment: grain was taken as tax from Egypt and elsewhere and was shipped directly to the city. There, it supplied the huge population, including those who were ent.i.tled to free distributions. If we ask why further tax was necessary, the main answer is the big Roman army. Taxes paid its costs, even when the tax-paying province was itself a province without legions. Such are the injustices of Empire.
With hindsight, it might seem that the total levels of tax under Augustus were not too burdensome: the fact is that they could be doubled and extended in the 70s. At the time, however, they were more than enough of a load. Tax-collectors were ferocious and often used force. Conspicuously, there were revolts in Gaul, north Africa, Britain and Judaea soon after the imposition of direct Roman rule, and in each of them, the financial impact was the major cause. If provincials could not pay tax in cash, collectors were content to be paid in kind, including cattle-hides which supplied essential leather. Giving a provincial a thorough exaction was described as "shaking him down": in newly annexed provinces, Italian moneylenders were soon found to be profiteering from the inhabitants too.
Inevitably, there was scope for sharp practice. In Britain, governors are said to have bought up stocks of local grain and only then sold it back to the locals at a much higher price. In Gaul, Augustus" financial agent, or procurator, is said to have declared that there were fourteen months in the year, not twelve, in order to claim two more months" tax. In principle, such sharp pract.i.tioners could be accused at Rome under one of two procedures before senatorial judges. Augustus had introduced these procedures, and it is too cynical to see senators in the more serious of the two as simply acquitting their own kind. A harsh decision by the Emperor Tiberius had denied senators the right to make a valid will when found guilty of extortion. This penalty hurt an offender"s family and so, with good reason, fellow senators hesitated to impose it. Such cases were thus often examined at great length. But there was a parallel intrusion of Romans on provincial lives, one which was not regulated to this limited degree. In the Athenian Empire, individual Athenians had sometimes acquired land in allied territory, a practice which came to be widely resented. In the Roman Empire, individual Romans acquired land in the provinces on a vastly greater scale. Some of it was bought or acquired after owners had defaulted on a debt but some, no doubt, was the result of offers which owners could not refuse. The emperor and his family were major beneficiaries, not least through a process of bequests by provincials. In Egypt, members of the imperial house acquired properties by the score. In north Africa in the 60s most of the land was said to be owned by no more than six hugely rich senators (not necessarily African by birth). But even so, Romans" estates abroad were still liable for tax.
How ever did the tax system work if there was not a big bureaucracy to collect it all? Part of the answer is that collection was delegated. Generally, the sums required were a.s.sessed on communities who were left to raise what was necessary. The point here is that their politically dominant cla.s.s could pa.s.s most of the burden on to their inferiors. Rome thus reversed the pattern of the former Athenian Empire. Then, democracies in the allied Greek cities had voted that the rich should pay a hefty share of tribute. Under Roman rule, democracies were watered down or non-existent and so the dominant city-councillors could lessen the impact of tax on themselves. Even when they paid, the tax applied at the same rate to one and all: the poll tax was as unfair as always, and there was no surtax.
Collection was also eased by privatization. Julius Caesar had abolished the auctioning of direct taxes in a province to "private" companies of tax-collectors at Rome: as a result, the tax imposed at Rome on Asia is said to have been reduced by a third. In the Empire, however, the cities and local communities would still use such companies locally to raise the prescribed sums on their behalf. These tax-collectors, the "publicans" of the Gospels, guaranteed a sum in advance, but then collected much more from individuals as their profit. There was also the particular problem of indirect taxes. Their yield varied yearly with the underlying volume of business and, in order to be sure in advance of an agreed sum, Roman officials preferred to sell off, or "farm", the right to their collection. Privatization suited the authorities but not the taxpayers.
Roman taxation built on existing practices in most provinces, but it was most people"s main point of contact with Roman rule. Year in, year out, even small farmers and tenants were affected, whether or not they knew their governor"s name or a single word of Greek or Latin. The emperor"s image and its public prominence were less significant in his subjects" awareness of his rule, though for us this "image" is so much more evident in the art and objects which survive. Most provinces had public cults which offered sacrifices and prayers "for", or to, the emperors, but they were concentrated in cities, both in the city centres of provincial "a.s.semblies" and in individual cities with cults of their own. Statues represented emperors, often in military dress; coins carried their t.i.tles, and even the coins which were struck in provincial mints showed their images; in the third century we find the portrait of an emperor at his accession being escorted into a province"s cities and being lit by candles. There was scope for ingenious exploitation in all this publicity. In the 30s AD AD the governor of Asia had to curb people who were already celebrating all sorts of supposed "good news" from Rome, whether or not it existed. the governor of Asia had to curb people who were already celebrating all sorts of supposed "good news" from Rome, whether or not it existed.5 False rumours were a chance for sharp provincials to sell "celebratory" goods to other provincials. In Britain and Hungary, there have been finds of moulds, apparently for sacrificial cakes or buns, which were to be imprinted with stamps of the emperor shown sacrificing to the G.o.ds. The buns would be eaten by his subjects at their religious festivals. False rumours were a chance for sharp provincials to sell "celebratory" goods to other provincials. In Britain and Hungary, there have been finds of moulds, apparently for sacrificial cakes or buns, which were to be imprinted with stamps of the emperor shown sacrificing to the G.o.ds. The buns would be eaten by his subjects at their religious festivals.6 The Empire, however, did not rest on personalized cakes. There were two basic reasons for its overall stability. One was the absence of inflammable nationalism (except in troubled Judaea). There was ethnic self-consciousness in many provinces (Britain or Egypt or Germany) but it was complicated by competing cultures and, often, by bilingualism. In Syria, Greek-speakers and authors in Greek could refer to themselves as "Syrians" and even use Aramaic or write Syriac too. But they were not acknowledging a "Syrian nationalism" or a "Syrian ident.i.ty".7 Nor were Roman governors and administrators working with their subjects" eventual "national" independence in mind, unlike some of those in the British, or even French, empires. The historian Tacitus ascribes a st.u.r.dy value for "freedom" to faraway opponents of Roman rule and equates the adoption of Roman culture with "slavery". But he never argues that Rome"s subjects should one day be freed. Nor were Roman governors and administrators working with their subjects" eventual "national" independence in mind, unlike some of those in the British, or even French, empires. The historian Tacitus ascribes a st.u.r.dy value for "freedom" to faraway opponents of Roman rule and equates the adoption of Roman culture with "slavery". But he never argues that Rome"s subjects should one day be freed.
The second, crucial support was cla.s.s rule, both implicit and explicit. Rome did not "divide and rule" between cities: the Empire encouraged cities to combine in new provincial a.s.semblies. But she did benefit from the existing divisions between her subjects. One major reason for the loyalty of the ruling cla.s.s in less civilized provinces was their explicit awareness that, without Roman power, they would return to faction and fighting among themselves. In more urbanized provinces, including the Greek East, there was a parallel advantage for the cities" upper cla.s.ses: Roman rule secured them against political attack by their own lower cla.s.ses. There might be the occasional food-riot, but there was no real danger of the political challenges which had propelled so much of Greek historyfrom c. c. 500 to 500 to c. c. 80 80 BC BC. If a Greek city"s popular a.s.sembly proved too turbulent, a governor would intervene and simply abolish it. Roman citizenship was given to upper-cla.s.s beneficiaries in the provinces, protecting them against arbitrary hara.s.sment. Under Roman rule, meanwhile, they could pa.s.s on much of the local burden of direct tax and compete for new public honours. Democracy, as Cicero once put it, was a "hideous monster", and now, to their relief, they had masters who agreed.
46.
Effects of Empire There were always kingdoms and wars throughout Gaul until you submitted to our laws. Although we have so often been provoked, the only thing we have imposed on you by the rights of victory is what will enable us to keep the peace... Everything else is shared between us... If the Romans were ever driven out may the G.o.ds forbid! what else will happen except wars of all peoples, fighting among themselves?
Petilius Cerealis, in Tacitus, Histories Histories 4.74 4.74 The lasting memorials of the Roman Empire are roads and city-buildings, aqueducts and Roman law and the Latin which underlies so many European languages. Even at the time, Roman emperors were acclaimed for their "liberality" and the "benefits" which their peace brought. There is an apparent unity and openness in an Empire in which a German or a Briton could become a full citizen of Rome and a man from Spain could become a senator or even, like Hadrian, an emperor. The Roman citizenship certainly spread far and wide, as did Roman laws and Latin. The most admired Latin authors in the first century AD AD were not often men born in Rome or even Italy: many came from Spain, such as Seneca the philosopher or Lucan the poet, Martial and his witty epigrams, and Quintilian and his teachings on how to speak and write Latin well. Already in the age of Augustus, the geographer Strabo had written of the dominance of Latin, the abandonment of warlike ways and mountain strongholds and the ending of old barbarisms in southern Spain and Gaul. were not often men born in Rome or even Italy: many came from Spain, such as Seneca the philosopher or Lucan the poet, Martial and his witty epigrams, and Quintilian and his teachings on how to speak and write Latin well. Already in the age of Augustus, the geographer Strabo had written of the dominance of Latin, the abandonment of warlike ways and mountain strongholds and the ending of old barbarisms in southern Spain and Gaul.
A shared, educated culture allowed upper-cla.s.s provincials to communicate on equal terms with the existing upper cla.s.s at Rome. It is from such educated people in the provinces" upper cla.s.ses that the praises of Rome"s "benefits" come. There is, however, another side to this picture. Texts for Roman readers expressed some vividly "incorrect" stereotypes of non-Roman foreigners. Gauls were said to be big, blonde, long-haired lumps who were particularly keen on h.o.m.os.e.xuality; Syrians were boastful, typical traders and over-s.e.xed with it; in inland Spain, people were said to wash their teeth in their own urine; in Ireland, they were said to have s.e.x in public. The "civilizing" Romans, by contrast, brought human and animal blood sports to their subjects. The amphit heatres for both types of show were a major Roman contribution, albeit a cruel one, to the Empire"s quality of life. In comparison, their language, Latin, made verylittle headway among civilized Greek-speakers in the traditional Greek world. Even where it did, other languages persisted, "Celtic" in Gaul, Punic in much of north Africa or south-west Spain (the legacy of Carthage and its colonists) and Aramaic (Jesus" daily speech) in much of the Near East. Far and wide, there was more bilingualism than our barrage of surviving Greek and Latin texts might imply. Perhaps it even occurred among landowners when they returned to their country estates and liked to exchange local words with their old retainers and bailiffs.
Outside a few schools of higher learning, even such Latin as was spoken or written in the provinces was patchy or uneducated. A few phrases from important points in Virgil"s Aeneid Aeneid might be copied out, even by craftsmen in Britain, but they were probably known through writing exercises, not through a wider literary or theatrical culture. The more we find Latin outside the educated cla.s.s in papyri, graffiti or other inscriptions, the less it resembles our cla.s.sic rules for Latin grammar. Some of it was pa.s.sed on by Italians, who had settled overseas: they had not been as well schooled as Roman orators. The style is particularly vivid in the recorded replies of Latin-speaking Christians when on trial for their lives. Many of these martyrs would fail modern examinations in Latin with spectacularly low marks. might be copied out, even by craftsmen in Britain, but they were probably known through writing exercises, not through a wider literary or theatrical culture. The more we find Latin outside the educated cla.s.s in papyri, graffiti or other inscriptions, the less it resembles our cla.s.sic rules for Latin grammar. Some of it was pa.s.sed on by Italians, who had settled overseas: they had not been as well schooled as Roman orators. The style is particularly vivid in the recorded replies of Latin-speaking Christians when on trial for their lives. Many of these martyrs would fail modern examinations in Latin with spectacularly low marks.
"Liberality", at least, is evident in the Empire"s surviving ruins and in the texts and inscriptions (mostly from the eloquent Greek East) which attest it. Roman emperors are thanked or commemorated for giving cities their fortified walls and aqueducts, their granaries and scores of civic buildings. Of all emperors, Hadrian was the greatest urban benefactor. He personally transformed Athens with his new library and gymnasium and temples and colonnades. His buildings elsewhere in the province revived a Greece which was generally at a low point; in north-west Asia, too, he founded a whole cl.u.s.ter of cities named after himself. He was amazingly generous to his own home town, Italica in western Spain. He transformed this small sleepyplace into somewhere with the glamour of a capital city, giving it broad streets and walks, baths, an amphitheatre, excellent drains and a theatre. Yet as emperor he never returned to it himself. Previous emperors had done much the same to places which mattered to them (except, on the whole, the stingy Tiberius), but Hadrian"s "liberality" was on the grandest scale. He travelled more than any of them, and an imperial visit was so often the cue for a surge of new building, as we can see from the effects of Augustus" visits to southern Gaul and Spain.
What, though, was the source of this "liberality"? Emperors might donate raw materials to beneficiaries, whether timber from forests (Hadrian owned the cedar forests of Lebanon) or fine marble from one of the highly prized quarries. Yet these local a.s.sets were ones which theyhad confiscated, seized or inherited at local expense. Quite often, an emperor"s favour would amount to the suspension of a city"s taxes for a year or two; if so, the "liberality" was exercised with the provincials" own output. During the suspension the taxes were diverted to local public monuments, but for the ma.s.s of workers who paid most of them there was no respite.
There was another two-edged type of generosity: the giving of new lands abroad to new immigrant settlers. For the settlers, the gift was real enough. After Julius Caesar"s example, Augustus had had to settle veteran soldiers in perhaps sixty new sites outside Italy, sending out more than 100,000 emigrants in all. The resulting "colonies" were the greatest export of population since Alexander the Great"s conquests. These colonists were settled as Roman citizens. They began by speaking Latin and their towns, cults and buildings tended to evoke Rome itself. Worship of the three great G.o.ds of Rome"s Capitol (Jupiter, Juno and Minerva) was prominent in the colonies" major shrines, together with priests in Roman style. Nonetheless, in the Greek East the "Roman" stamp did not usually last. Intermarriage with locals and a.s.similation to the strong local culture meant that colonies tended to go over to Greek in the course of time: Berytus (modern Beirut), however, remained a st.u.r.dy bastion of Latin and of Roman law in the Lebanon.
Colonies" town plans could certainlybe made splendid veryquickly. In southern Asia Minor, Pisidian Antioch was settled on a conspicuous hill and rapidly acquired a ma.s.sive temple for worship of Augustus. It was approached through a big triple-arched gateway (dedicated to him in 2 BC BC) and straight streets, sculptures and other imperial buildings soon set it all off splendidly. In south-western Spain, the well-named "Emerita" ("Time-served", for the veterans: nowadays, Merida) was settled on the junction of two good rivers, from 25 BC BC onwards. Water was delivered to it by three smart new aqueducts; there were bridges, baths and, before long, an array of leisure-centres (a theatre in 16 onwards. Water was delivered to it by three smart new aqueducts; there were bridges, baths and, before long, an array of leisure-centres (a theatre in 16 BC BC and an amphitheatre for blood sports in 8 and an amphitheatre for blood sports in 8 BC BC). The biggest success was the racecourse, or circus, which was probably built under Tiberius and was modelled on the Circus Maximus at Rome. Spain"s horses were magnificent, and the races continued here for centuries, even after the end of direct Roman rule. In the forum, meanwhile, a big sculpted portico imitated the sculptures in Augustus" own great Forum at Rome.
At Pisidian Antioch in Asia, members of the Julio-Claudian family were elected as magistrates of the town in absence. It was a clever honour because like other magistrates they would be expected to give benefactions to "their" town. Elsewhere, the Roman governor"s impetus was important; it influenced the building of Emerita, as did the role of Augustus" reliable Agrippa who had campaigned nearby. On his travels, Agrippa showed a personal interest in construction: he had an Odeon built to impress the Athenians and may well have encouraged the design"s huge roof-span which required sixty feet of timber. He mayalso have encouraged the even bigger roof, eighty feet wide, which covered the great temple of Zeus at Baalbek in Berytus" new territory where he was also active. Great feats of construction and a.s.saults on the landscape always appealed to Romans and their architects. Hence they built great roads in Italy for Trajan or helped Hadrian to attack an age-old problem, the draining of Lake Copais in central Greece. The main uses of Roman roads were not for commerce or "provincial development": they were military and governmental, for inter-communication among the governing cla.s.s.
Where colonists settled, others had to leave, or keep out, because the veterans" rewards of land were not necessarilysited on virgin soil. But the colonies" showy new centres did encourage local imitation. Soon after Merida"s foundation we see it in a much simpler town in Spain, Conimbriga in the north-west. Conimbriga was no colony but it lay in a metal-rich area which had no doubt attracted Italian exploiters to it before the town was developed. In the Augustan age the leading citizens of Conimbriga built baths which were served by an aqueduct, and laid out an impressive forum with a temple, colon-nades and civic buildings. The Romans" new Merida was being copied by its neighbours: should we, then, reckon everywhere on provincials who "Romanized" themselves?
Modern empires have looked back on this process as a "blessing", like their own ideals, and ascribed to it a "civilizing mission". Certainly, we can point to new Roman styles and imports which travelled far beyond sites where Latin-speaking immigrants settled. Bath-houses are a widespread example, civic amenities which brought a new social style to East and West. But domestic styles changed too. Under Roman rule, people in Gaul or Britain began of their own accord to build houses in stone, not timber and thatch; they dined off smooth, shiny pottery in shapes which belonged with new table manners and new tastes. Wine took over from the pre-Roman habit of drinking almost nothing but beer. Olive oil was ma.s.s-produced for provincial use too, whether in southern Spain or inland, in what is now desert, in parts of north Africa. Saltyfish sauce, an Italian speciality, became a favourite seasoning outside Italy, while the new-style houses brought new divisions of s.p.a.ce and perhaps new daily boundaries between men and women, elders and children. In public s.p.a.ces, inscriptions and statues began to honour benefactors who had become drawn into a new public exchange of gifts. In return for their own giving, such people received the gift of publicly recorded honours, granted before the new focus of a town-crowd, whether in Spain or Gaul or north Africa. This exchange also encouraged social compet.i.tion by donors among themselves.
This "Romanization" was more accurately an Italianization. The veteran soldiers, the local immigrant traders, the friends whom provincial recruits made in the army were not Romans as old Cato had imagined them. Rome"s vast population was still a verymixed bunch, not purely "Roman" now (or ever) by origin. Most of the "Roman" colonists came from Italian towns which had themselves become Romanized during the Republic. What Romans first did to Italians, Italians then did to provincials. But the provincials were not a blank sheet of paper, either: they had their own cultures which varied from province to province. Greek and Aramaic, Hebrew and Egyptian were especially robust in the East, while Punic in south Spain and north Africa was the most robust culture in the West. Was, then, the Italianization adapted to fit the provincials" own existing lifestyle, and if so, how should we describe the process? Historians now stretch words to cover it: did Rome"s subjects choose to "acculturate" or did they "transculturate" by developing a culture which was a mixture of old and new? Or is "subculturation" somehow nearer the truth?
The process, surely, varied from place to place. In distant Britain, according to the historian Tacitus, it was helped along by the governor Agricola, Tacitus" own father-in-law. Agricola, he tells us, encouraged the building of "temples, forums and houses".1 Archaeologically, we cannot yet weigh up this initiative, and so the current inclination is to disbelieve it, because Tacitus was writing a highly favourable book about the man involved. But in the Greek East there are scores of well-attested cases when emperors or governors did indeed encourage such buildings, and by comparison Britain was wild and only recently conquered. As in the East, military specialists from the army could be sent to help the first building-projects off to a good start. Taxes, even, might be diverted to kick-start them: within the Empire as a whole Agricola"s initiative is not as unprecedented as local Western archaeologists sometimes suggest. Archaeologically, we cannot yet weigh up this initiative, and so the current inclination is to disbelieve it, because Tacitus was writing a highly favourable book about the man involved. But in the Greek East there are scores of well-attested cases when emperors or governors did indeed encourage such buildings, and by comparison Britain was wild and only recently conquered. As in the East, military specialists from the army could be sent to help the first building-projects off to a good start. Taxes, even, might be diverted to kick-start them: within the Empire as a whole Agricola"s initiative is not as unprecedented as local Western archaeologists sometimes suggest.
His son-in-law, Tacitus, described it as the softening of a warlike people by pleasures, in order to accustom them to "peace and quiet": if Tacitus thought in this way, his father-in-law Agricola could surely have thought on these realistic lines too. The sons of the British leaders are said, surely rightly, to have been exposed very quickly to Latin education. The toga became "frequent" and, on Tacitus" view, there was a gradual descent into seductive "vices", encouraged by "colon-nades, baths and elegant dinners". The "simple Britons called it "civilization", although it was part of their slavery".2 Here, Tacitus uses one of his (and antiquity"s) favourite contrasts, between "free" hardy barbarians and soft "enslaved" subjects. Yet he need not have been the only one to see "luxury" as an aid to imperial subjection. In southern Britain, such "slavery" to pleasure had already begun some while before Agricola arrived, as archaeology shows at London or St Albans and manifestly so at Bath. The Roman fashion for bathing was rapidly imitated by provincials: the local hot springs at Bath were already serving Roman bathers by Here, Tacitus uses one of his (and antiquity"s) favourite contrasts, between "free" hardy barbarians and soft "enslaved" subjects. Yet he need not have been the only one to see "luxury" as an aid to imperial subjection. In southern Britain, such "slavery" to pleasure had already begun some while before Agricola arrived, as archaeology shows at London or St Albans and manifestly so at Bath. The Roman fashion for bathing was rapidly imitated by provincials: the local hot springs at Bath were already serving Roman bathers by c. c. AD AD 65, about twenty years before Agricola. 65, about twenty years before Agricola.
In less barbarous provinces, the governors and emperors surely gave similar encouragement for the sake of maintaining peace and quiet. There was little need for official encouragement anyway. On their own initiative, the local upper cla.s.ses took swiftlyto the new avenues of display and compet.i.tion which Rome offered. There were new t.i.tles to be had, new privileges to be paraded. This "status display" even underlies the most individual and immediate art-works to survive from any imperial province: the portraits on wood panels found in Egyptian mummy-burials and dating from c. c. AD AD 40 onwards. Men and women are immortalized in these lifelike portraits, as if old age did not exist, yet the representations are also status-conscious. 40 onwards. Men and women are immortalized in these lifelike portraits, as if old age did not exist, yet the representations are also status-conscious.3 They are mostly painted on specially imported woods, lime-wood or box. Some of their women wear the up-to-date hairstyles, earrings and jewellery which we know in contemporary Italy, and yet only one of those depicted bears the names of a Roman citizen. Perhaps, like Roman funerary-masks, these portraits were displayed in funerary processions: it is attractive to connect them with the membership, or claimed membership, of the privileged Greek-speaking cla.s.s in Egypt"s main towns, people who had been benefited under the Empire by an exemption from paying poll tax. Their culture of po