Peoples of the Roman World

2003

Academia Letters, 2021

Romans 1by1 and the quest for the Roman Empire's 'ordinary' people Rada Varga When studying the people of the ancient world, the historian is faced with a million questions and we would often like to know so many more details on how they lived, what they aspired to, what they loved and hated in their everyday routines. Sometimes, the sources help us, other times they leave us hoping for more. But, nonetheless, when researched deeply and systematically, the ancient sources can tell us more that the obvious, visible at a first glance. Prosopography is the science which takes research a step further from biographical investigation, underlining the connections between people, as well as the individual's role within a group or relating to the institutions of one's time.[1]As a branch of historical research, it emerged during the 19th century and soon became of major interest for the researchers of Antiquity. While it was initially oriented towards well known elite personalities of the past, on whom information is rich, it has nowadays turned more and more towards the regular inhabitants of the ancient world, thus going into the depths of the socioeconomic fabric of societies, revealed through micro-networks and the connections between them. One of the main stakes when researching Roman provincial history is identifying the similarities and differences between 'meta history', written from afar, for a large and generally educated audience (ancient historical writing), and ego-history, written by provincials for provincials, by R. Knapp's 'invisible Romans',[2] and transmitted through epigraphy. When working on the latter, onomastics and prosopography play an important part, as they can shed light on phenomena of multiculturalist integration, acculturation and identity construction, which otherwise would remain completely obscured. In order to have a solid basis for the prosopography of the non-elite layers of the Roman provinces, we have created a population database recording people attested in Greek and

Course Description: This course offers a thorough introduction to the early Roman Empire (ca. 30 BCE-284 CE), drawing on both source materials and modern works. This is a student-driven seminar based on readings, presentations, and in-class discussions on the societal, religious, and political developments of the Roman Principate. This was the “Golden Age” of Roman rule and what one historian considered the best time to live in human history. This course focuses on imperial Rome but also discusses important topics like provincial administration, commerce and agriculture, the Roman army, early Christianity, and law and order in the Roman world. Students will investigate the monumental impact that the early Roman Empire had on the development of Western Civilization. Having some background courses in ancient history would naturally be helpful but is not required. This will be a seminar course driven by student participation. It will focus on modern studies but also will feature a wide array of literary and archaeological source material. Students will investigate historiographical arguments, lead class discussions, and prepare presentations. This course requires weekly preparation and active participation. There are no exams; however, each student will have to prepare and write three college research papers. This course offers students the opportunity to learn how to analyze source material, weigh historiographical arguments, and write more professionally. These are skills that will be useful in senior level courses, graduate school, and in scores of careers that necessitate writing, research, and the ability to manage individual projects.

The English Historical Review, 2013

This volume originated with the sixth 'shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity' conference, held in the University of illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2005. The shifting Frontiers conferences-not normally anything to do with the Roman limes, but rather with the political, religious and cultural shifts of Late Antiquity-have been held every two years since the inaugural conference in Lawrence, kansas, in 1995, and the proceedings were published by various presses before Ashgate took over in 2006, with Hal Drake's Violence in Late Antiquity. in 2009 Ashgate published the papers from the 2007 conference (The Power of Religion in Late Antiquity, ed. A. Cain and N. Lenski); and they are due to publish the proceedings of the 2009 conference in 2012 (Shifting Cultural Frontiers in Late Antiquity, ed. D. Brakke, D.M. Deliyannis and e. watts). it was at a shifting Frontiers conference that the society for Late Antiquity was founded, and, later, the Journal of Late Antiquity launched; Ralph w. Mathisen, editor of the Journal and co-editor with Danuta shanzer of this volume, has been the main driving force behind the whole enterprise, and thus a crucial figure in the flourishing state of Late Antique studies in North America, of which this volume is an elegant demonstration. Not all the twenty-five essays published here originated at the conference: some were written specially for this volume, and the other contributions have clearly been updated. They range very widely across the theme of Romans and barbarians, being grouped together into three main sections, dealing with the construction of images, with cultural interaction, and with the creation of identity. The geographical range is also considerable, from an evaluation of the DNA evidence for Anglo-saxon migration and a discussion of the emergence of the vascones/Basques through to, at the eastern end of the empire, two papers on the sasanians, one on the saracens, and one on the barbarians in kush, south of egypt. in common with the previous six shifting Frontiers volumes, this one is well-focused on its theme, which has as much to do with the tight organisation of the conferences as with the determination of the editors. Romans were probably less obsessed with barbarians than historians of our own day have been. They enjoyed lists of barbarians, but, as Mathisen argues in the opening chapter, largely for the evocation of exotic otherness. some Romans had no interest in barbarians at all: Augustine was one, as elizabeth Clark shows, and he had no truck with orosius' idea of the merciful barbarian, which offered a way forward for a post-Roman world. Barbarians could be useful polemically or ideologically, and Roman writers use them in ways that tell us as much about themselves as about the barbarians; thus, scott McDonough suggests, Agathias' negative assessment of sasanian Persia was an attack on the enthusiasm of some of his contemporaries -whose own

The Journal of Roman Studies, 2004

REVIEWS elusive praefectus praesidiorum et monitis Berenicidis, the size of military garrisons (there is no 'hard' evidence), duration of service in the region, and the nature and status of the curatores praesidiorum. The ostraka yield much that is interesting about communication, military operations and barbarian attacks, and water supply, but, as we can expect, the evidence falls frustratingly short of being full. There are new texts, which provide much more information on everyday life in the praesidia, and greatly supplement the existing picture. A short chapter on transport shows that there is little evidence for how transport was organized, and that most is anecdotal in nature. Information on the commodities transported fits well with what we know of the rather diverse diet enjoyed by soldiers and workers in the Eastern Desert. A long chapter on languages and writing offers much that is useful to understanding the bilingual culture (Latin and Greek), and, odd spelling and phonetic interchanges aside, the documents provide useful evidence for literacy and documentary practice. The remaining part of the volume (some 160 pages) is devoted to material culture. There is a considerable diversity in the ceramic material; much comes from outside Egypt-Ephesus, Cnidus, Crete, Gaul, and Tripolitania-and this compares well with the pattern found at Mons Claudianus. A large amount of glassware and leatherware has also been found. The faunal remains equate with the details of foodstuffs consumed preserved on ostraka, as well as with what is known at other Eastern desert sites. Oddly, there is no account of floral remains-foodstuffs-and, on the whole, environmental archaeology is under-represented. The volume is completed with an extensive survey of the small finds and textile remains, some illustrated by excellent colour plates. To sum up, there is a wealth of material here for anyone interested in the Roman army, ancient documents, and trade. For those specializing in the Eastern Desert, it is indispensable, and a welcome addition to the ever-growing body of material relating to this important region.

Contemporary historians of the Roman Empire have frequently sought to explain why this multiethnic and multicultural state endured and thrived for as long as it had. Rome remained the dominant player in the ancient Mediterranean until the 3rd century CE, its power undermined neither by its ongoing internal turmoil nor its multiple violent coups d'état. The Empire owed its stability to its efficient administration, military power and, significantly, nuanced domestic policies, with Roman emperors employing a gamut of measures to keep their subjects content. Although we have a relatively thorough understanding of Roman administration, we still know little about relations between the imperial administration and various ethnic and religious groups that made up the Empire. A group of scholars congregated at the École française de Rome (May 10-12, 2017) to take part in a conference devoted to studying Roman social and religious policies in the imperial provinces. The international conference, a capstone of the European Research Council grant ("Judaism and Rome," principal investigator: Katell Berthelot), included twenty papers that were later issued as its proceedings, with seventeen contributions in English and three in French. The volume divides into five thematic blocks. The first section: "Rome and Previous Empires: translatio imperii and Comparative Perspectives," focuses on Greek and Jewish texts reflecting on Rome's place among empires of the ancient world (F. Russo, "Rome as the Last Universal Empire in the Ideological Discourse of the 2nd century BCE," pp. 21-36; N. Sharon, "Rome and the Four-empires Scheme in Pre-Rabbinic Jewish Literature," pp. 37-60; H. Inglebert, "Compare Rome, Alexandre et Babylone: la question de l'exceptionnalité de l'empire de Rome aux IV e-VI e siècles," pp. 61-82). The contributions consider the strand of Greek historiography that recast the political history of the known world as the succession of four great empires. In the eyes of the Greeks, the four empires were those of the Assyrians, Medes, Persians and Macedonians. Nevertheless, resounding Roman victories over the Macedonians and Antiochus III induced several Greek historians of the 2nd century BCE to designate Rome as the fifth empire. The four empire tradition also appears in the Jewish tradition: unlike the Greeks, Jewish writers did not add to the four empires but included Rome among their number. The author of the Book of Daniel pioneered the notion of Rome as the fourth empire (cf.

McInerney/A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean, 2014

The following winter was taken up by measures of a most beneficial kind. His intention was, in fact, that people who lived in widely dispersed and primitive settlements and hence were naturally inclined to war should become accustomed to peace and quiet by the provision of amenities. Hence he gave encouragement to individuals and assistance to communities to build temples, marketplaces and town houses. … Further, he educated the sons of the leading men in the liberal arts and he rated the natural talents of the Britons above the trained skills of the Gauls. The result was that those who just lately had been rejecting the Roman tongue now conceived a desire for eloquence. Thus even our style of dress came into favour and the toga was everywhere to be seen. Gradually, too, they went astray into the allurements of evil ways, colonnades and warm baths and elegant banquets. The Britons, who had had no experience of this, called it "civilization," although it was a part of their enslavement.

2018

The topic of this paper is complementary to Nicola di Cosmo's contribution on 'China-steppe relations in comparative perspective'; the theoretical framework he has presented is also useful to the study the Roman Empire. Similar to Nicola di Cosmo, I am going to argue that we should not take the basically useful shorthand dualism-'Romans/barbarians'-for granted. Unlike him, I cannot resort to the 'steppe' as a rather neutral common denominator for the populations beyond Rome's frontiers, because many of the European barbarians lived in different ecological zones. I will call all these 'others' 'barbarians' although this is problematic. I am aware that this term was coined in a derogatory sense, and can still be used in that way. However, for want of a better designation it has become a household term in research about European Late Antiquity, and is intended in a purely descriptive sense. Greek and Roman Antiquity coined both the words for 'empire' and for the 'barbarians' still used in most European languages, and created their juxtaposition, so it is hard to avoid using this scheme. The cultural significance of perceptions of alterity in Antiquity is still a matter of intense research and controversial debate. Benjamin Isaac has collected considerable material about prejudices against Jews and barbarians and interpreted it as "the invention of racism". 2 Erich S. Gruen, on the contrary, has tried to show "that ancient societies, while certainly acknowledging differences among peoples (indeed occasionally emphasizing them) could also visualize themselves as part of a broader cultural heritage, could discover or invent links with other societies, and could couch their own historical memories in terms of a borrowed or appropriated past." 3 These two influential studies taken together mark out a wide range of cultural practices, perceptions, conflicts, interactions, exchanges and xenophobic reactions. Rather than controversial debate (was it racism or not?), what we need is differentiation. Greek/Roman-barbarian relations need to be set in different contexts in which they mattered: