Roman Emperors

This article examines the performance context of Synesius of Cyrene’s
(ca. 370–415 CE) On Kingship. Synesius draws heavily on the classical tradition, and also incorporates many elements of Themistius’ philosophical style into his speech. But the work was not delivered before the emperor, as it purports, and hints at the fictionality of its own dramatic situation. These hints are not mere play but fit very closely the rhetorical needs of the circumstances. The performance appears to have been a success.

Tios (Zonguldak-Filyos) kentteki arkeolojik kazılar 2007 senesinden beri Karadeniz Ereğli Müzesi adına, sırasıyla Prof. Dr. Sümer Atasoy ve Doç. Dr. Şahin Yıldırım’ın bilimsel danışmanlıklarıyla akropolis, antik liman, tiyatro ve nekropolis alanlarında yürütülmüş ve bölge tarihinin güncellenmesine olanak veren önemli buluşlara sahne olmuştur. Arkeolojik çalışmalara paralel olarak yürütülen epigrafik araştırmalar da kentten günümüze ulaşmış Hellenistik ve Roma dönemlerine ait mezar taşlarını, onurlandırma heykel kaidelerini, adakları, miltaşlarını, ticari ağırlıklarını ve diğer türlerdeki yazıtlı buluntuları gün yüzüne çıkarmıştır.

Bu buluntular arasından beyaz mermerden silindir bir onurlandırma heykel kaidesinin üzerindeki yazıtının ise sadece bu kentin değil aynı zamanda Anadolu’nun Roma tarihi açısından önem arz ettiği anlaşılmıştır. Zira antik literatürde sadece ünlü yazar Nikaialı Cassius Dio’nun (MS yak. 150-235) Roma tarihini kaleme aldığı eserinde (Rhomaika, 79.39.5) adı geçen Roma İmparatorluğu’nun Pontus-Bithynia Eyaleti Valisi Caecilius Aristo, bu unvanıyla ilk defa bu yazıtta belgelenmiş oldu. Yazıtın çevirisi şöyledir:

Tiosluların pek görkemli/gösterişli kenti, legatus Augusti propraetore (imparatorun praetor mertebesindeki elçisi) Caecilius Aristo’nun yönetim döneminde... (şu kişi/kişileri onurlandırdı)

Bilinen tarihe göre, Roma İmparatorluğu’nun iç savaşlarla çalkalandığı bir dönemde Roma İmparatoru Caracalla’yı, kendisinin tertiplediği bir suikastla (MS 08.04.217) öldürtmeyi başaran Macrinus imparator olmayı başarmıştı. Ancak bu kez kendisi Iulia Maesa’nın himayesinde olan torunu Varius Avitus’a yani namı diğer Elagabalus’a karşı Antiokheia’daki savaşı kaybetmiştir. Bir seneden biraz fazla tahtta kalabilmiş devrik imparator Macrinus bunun üzerine gizli bir şekilde Roma’ya gitmeye ve Senato ile halkı ikna ederek iktidarını yeniden elde etmeyi amaçlamıştır. Böylece kılık değiştirerek Kilikia, Kappadokia, Galatia ve Bithynia bölgeleri üzerinden Eribolon’daki (İhsaniye) limana ulaşmış buradan Kalkhedon’a varmıştır. İşte Cassius Dio tam da bu noktada Macrinus’un, Vali Caecilius Aristo’nun korkusundan (Eyalet Başkenti) Nikomedeia’ya girmeye çekindiğini belirtmiştir. Dolayısıyla, Dio’nun MS 08.06.218’den kısa bir süre sonrasını kayda geçen bu cümlesi, bugüne kadar Aristo’nun o dönemde bölge valisi olduğunun dolaylı yoldan belgesiydi. Ancak şimdi Tios’ta ortaya çıkan bu yazıtla, önceki kariyerinin ufak bir kısmı Roma’daki birkaç belgeden tanınan Caecilius Aristo’nun hem adı hem de eyalet valiliği doğrulanmış oldu.

Plinius der Jüngere (61/62-113 n. Chr.) verlieh als senatorischer homo novus durch die Epistulae, den Panegyricus sowie einige Inschriften seiner aristokratischen Existenz dauerhaften Ausdruck. Diese literarischen und epigraphischen Zeugnisse ermöglichen aber nicht nur tiefgehende Einblicke in die sozialen, politischen und kulturellen Entwicklungen seiner Zeit. Sie belegen zugleich Plinius’ Bestreben, die eigene Person als in überragendem Maße wert- und normerfüllend zu präsentieren, um auf diese Weise sowohl soziopolitische Anerkennung als auch den eigenen Tod überdauernde memoria zu erlangen.

Insbesondere in seinen Briefen thematisiert Plinius dabei zahlreiche Bestandteile eines idealen aristokratischen Lebensentwurfes. Ihre systematische Auswertung ermöglicht es, die konstituierenden Betätigungs- und Bewährungsfelder der römischen Aristokratie zu identifizieren sowie die Werte, Normen und Handlungsmaximen zu bestimmen, nach denen Plinius wie auch seine Standesgenossen ihr Leben ausrichteten – oder doch ausrichten sollten.

Der zeitgenössische Diskurs über den idealen Aristokraten in der Kaiserzeit und dessen Habitus gewinnt in der vorliegenden Studie schärferes Profil.

Violence in Roman warfare is certainly not a myth. But until recently, historians have understood violence in terms of their own standards instead of considering the thresholds of Roman sensibilities. Within the framework of the “histoire des representations”, a discussion is made about the discourses that underly the violence in Roman warfare. We aim to reassess the methodological basis of such an analysis by close observation of its vocabulary. By scrutinizing the appearance of the terms uis and βία, we undermine their traditional relevance in war contexts. Then, we apply methods of correspondence analysis on the example of Latin verbs for killing. It reveals their meaning and stresses the strengths and flaws of text analytics, still not much employed in ancient history. In the end, returning to the texts and their contexts is necessary to qualify and refine this technique.

http://annalesdejanua.edel.univ-poitiers.fr/index.php?id=2003

La violence de Rome à la guerre n’est certes pas un mythe. Mais, jusqu’à très récemment, les historiens l’ont davantage évaluée à l’aune de leurs propres normes qu’ils n’ont abordé la question des seuils de sensibilités proprement romains en la matière. Dans le cadre d’une histoire des représentations, l’étude de la violence guerrière romaine implique par conséquent un examen des discours qui la sous-tendent. Cet article a ainsi pour ambition de repenser les fondements méthodologiques d’une telle analyse à travers l’observation serrée du vocabulaire de la violence guerrière. Un examen complet des contextes d’apparition des termes uis et βία permet de relativiser leur pertinence en contexte guerrier. Dès lors, le recours à d’autres méthodes est nécessaire. À travers l’exemple des verbes latins signifiant l’action de tuer, on entend montrer les atouts et les limites de l’analyse factorielle des correspondances, branche de la statistique textuelle encore peu mobilisée en histoire ancienne. Enfin, un retour aux textes et à leurs contextes est une démarche nécessaire afin de nuancer et d’affiner cette technique.

http://annalesdejanua.edel.univ-poitiers.fr/index.php?id=2003

This text gives some very small selection of details included in the forthcoming Caracalla: A Military Biography (as an advertisement) due to be published by Pen & Sword this year and in fact provides also a short overview of some of the unconventional strategies and tactics employed by Caracalla together with some quite new info regarding period equipment and military practices. A much fuller discussion of all things connected to military matters in its widest sense can be found in the book.

The paper examines the peculiarities of Cassius Dio’s narrative in Julio-Claudian books of his «Roman History». Dio’s work, as a whole, reveals a remarkable combination of contradictory features, which are specifically mirrored in books LI–LXIII. Here he combines traditional annalistic narration with considerable biographical component, an antiquarian interest for Roman past with actual political allusions of his own time, superficially descriptive account of the events with rather thin penetration into an essence of things and characters of mentioned persons, aristocratic class bias with realness (sometimes even cynicism) of author’s view on the course of history and human nature, multiple rhetorical stamps with genuine dramatics in drawing situations and characters, banality (or even naivety) of many his judgments with originality of offered answers to challenges of time, and so on. Dio’s personality and topical problems of Severan age are directly reflected in the general character and maintenance of the Julio-Claudian books. Because of his own life experience and assiduous study of the beginnings of the Principate, Dio was convinced of possibility to unite monarchical rule and liberty (in its senatorial sense). Especially, Augustus’ example showed how a decent output from the turn of civil wars and an imperial arbitrariness can be found. Hence the historian’s special interest to the first imperial dynasty results.

Ky botim, i shtypur në 2000 kopje, nuk është në shitje.
Iu shpërndahet falas të gjithë të interesuarve që vizitojnë
Muzeun Arkeologjik Apolloni deri në përfundim të
rezervave.
Fotografitë e publikuara në këtë botim janë origjinale dhe
të realizuara nga institucionet e përfshira në projektin
3D-IMP-ACT, si dhe institucionet mbështetëse të
projektit që kanë kontribuar në përgatitjen e këtij botimi.
Mbështetja financiare për hartimin dhe publikimin e këtij
materiali është siguruar nga Programi Interreg IPA CBC,
Itali - Shqipëri - Mal i Zi 2014/2020.


The publication printed in 2000 copies, is not intended for
sale. It shall be distributed free of charge to all interested
visitors of the Archaeological Museum of Apollonia until
the number of copies available finish.
The pictures published in this publication are original
and are realized from partner institutions of 3D-IMPACT project and stakeholder institutions that have
contributed to the realization of this publication.
The preparation and printing of this publication was made
possible with the financial support of Interreg IPA CBC
Italy-Albania-Montenegro 2014/2020 Program.

"Még a kockajátékból származó nyereséget sem vetette meg, hanem akár hazugsággal, sőt hamis esküvel is igyekezett többet nyerni. Egyszer átadta a játszmát a mellette ülő játékosnak, kilépett az atriumába, és két gazdag római lovagot, akik éppen elhaladtak a ház előtt, azon nyomban elfogatott, vagyonukat pedig elkoboztatta. Aztán ragyogó arccal visszatért társaihoz, és eldicsekedett, hogy ilyen remek dobása még sohasem volt." 1 E szavakkal jellemzi Suetonius, a római életrajzíró Caligulát, a zsarnok császárt. A kocka (alea) kevésbé volt fontos számára, mint a játék során szerzett nyeremény, amit akár tisztességtelen úton is hajlandó volt megkaparintani. Talán különösnek tűnhet, hogy Suetonius majdnem mindegyik császár életrajzába beleszövi azok kedvenc játékait, illetve azt is fontos jellemvonásnak tartja, ha valaki egyáltalán nem játszik, mint például Tiberius. Ebben az írásban azt vizsgálom meg, hogy milyen tulajdonságok bemutatására használja Suetonius a játékokat.

Agrippa's Pantheon remains the subject of lively debates. A much-discussed passage is found in Cassius Dio's Roman History (53.27.2-3), which is most often treated as a stand-alone, self-explanatory whole. However, in order to be comprehensible, each text needs a broader range of reference points in order for meaning to be extracted. In this paper, I analyze part of that contextual spectrum (including Dio's attitude to the so-called imperial cult and the roles played in his narrative by the cults of both Augustus and Caesar), and I argue that we should view his account of the Pantheon with considerable caution. That account contains three different narrative threads: one based on the annalist tradition, but also one which drew on the author's own experiences, and one that constituted a literary and rhetorical overlay aimed at realizing the general objectives of the Roman History. In this account, the 'former Caesar' has been placed in between twice over: between the author's historical knowledge and his present circumstances, and between the realms of gods and humans. That imprecise nature of this expression was no accident. I believe the expression was not so much a reference to a specific statue as a figure of speech emphasizing the difference, fundamental from Dio's perspective, between the incumbent emperor and his deceased predecessor.

Quali istituzioni politiche hanno accompagnato - e in parte determinato - la straordinaria vicenda storica di Roma antica? Cosa conosciamo del loro funzionamento e della loro evoluzione? Quali sono stati i principali interrogativi della lunghissima tradizione esegetica della quale siamo debitori? In base a quali suggestioni, invece, per secoli si è reinterpretato, attualizzato e, non da ultimo, strumentalizzato il vincente – e avvincente – “modello romano” nelle sue varie declinazioni? Per quali ragioni la comprensione di concetti politici d’indubbia attualità non può prescindere dallo studio di Roma antica? Tenendo presenti questi interrogativi di fondo, l’autore propone una guida sintetica al complesso sistema politico-istituzionale romano: un sistema che, sebbene lontano, offre ancora molti spunti di riflessione

Da sempre considerato un imperatore sciocco, incapace e succube delle mogli e dei potentissimi liberti di corte, Claudio si può ritenere senza alcun dubbio una vittima della storiografia senatoria a lui ostile e, soprattutto, degli studi scientifici pubblicati a partire dalla fine dell’Ottocento. La sua fama di homo philologus e di storico è troppo riduttiva e deve essere necessariamente associata con l’immagine di un raffinato politico capace di comprendere a fondo le dinamiche di corte. Consapevole di dover costruire un solido consenso al suo potere, Claudio promuove la carriera dei suoi uomini più fidati e anche l’ascesa di alcune comunità provinciali come, per esempio, i Galli. I fenomeni di mobilità sociale e di integrazione sono, quindi, la cifra distintiva della politica del penultimo imperatore giulio-claudio e ci permettono di riconsegnare al pubblico l’immagine di quello che possiamo definire, forse ancor più di Caracalla, il “principe dell’integrazione”.

Publius Helvius Pertinax (126-193 CE) was Roman emperor in the early months of 193, following the murder of Commodus. While feted by the senatorial order, he struggled to win the loyalty of other political constituencies within the Roman state. After a reign of only eighty-seven days, he was assassinated in the imperial palace by soldiers of the praetorian guard.

For EAH, see:  https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781444338386

Octavian took the title of princeps senatus during the first lectio senatus of his long reign. The article deals with the role of the title of princeps of the Senate in the system of government under Augustus. I argue that the first Roman Emperor attached importance to his position of the princeps senatus not only in the context of the First settlement but during his whole long reign. The Emperor was eager to highlight the overall importance of this post. Moreover, he defined his place in the Senate with this position and it had functional significance for him during sessions of the consilium publicum. The restoration of the title of princeps senatus took place in a new circumstance. The reality of the epoch led to some transformations in the title’s functionality.

In the Old Royal Palace in the Middle Ages and early Modern Age cycles of rulers evolved, the idea of which was to confirm the legitimacy of the ruling monarch.
Around 1360 Charles IV, after being crowned Emperor in Rome in 1355, had a large cycle of world rulers placed in the Throne Room. Two inscriptions found on the south side designated the panel paintings of Emperors Leo IV and Charles III the Fat. According to this it is possible to determine that the cycle ran clockwise and probably began next to the entrance to the hall on the north side. The basis for its compilation was probably a list, stored now in the Třeboň archive (A 7). The panels, possibly 104 in all, were of a similar size to the panel paintings in the Holy Cross Chapel at Karlstein Castle and possibly also executed by Master Theodoricus and his workshop. During the construction of the Vladislav Hall the cycle vanished, but a new one was created elsewhere, evidently in 1502 by a painter named Hans, perhaps Hans Elfelder. The cycle was placed in the antechamber of the Royal Apartment in the west wing of the Palace and represented Czech rulers, beginning with Přemysl the Ploughman. It perished following the fire in 1541, but we know of it from the codex created by order of Jan Zajic of Hazmburk (ONB, Cod. 8043). In 1548 Paolo della Stella, the architect and sculptor of King Ferdinand I, proposed the renovation of this cycle in the Vladislav Hall, where the cycle was to be bordered by the symbols of the Order of the Golden Fleece. The splendid design, comprising forty rulers and a hundred figures in the vaulting, was not adopted for financial reasons and in its place a greatly reduced cycle was started in 1561, consisting of perhaps only seventeen monarchs on the west facade of the wing of the New Office of the Land Rolls. Because of improper technique, the work was stopped before it was even completed and the paintings were whitewashed over. Subsequent proposals for the interior of the Old Diet were not realised either and so the Palace remained without its cycle of rulers. It was not until the arrival of Rudolf II in the new Castle Palace that there were several cycles, but these comprised emperors only.

One of the great maxims of history is that it is written by the victors, and nowhere does this find greater support than in the later Roman Empire. Between 284 and 395 AD, no fewer than 37 men claimed imperial power, though today we recognize barely half of these men as 'legitimate' rulers and more than two thirds died at their subjects' hands. Once established in power, a new ruler needed to publicly legitimate himself and to discredit his predecessor: overt criticism of the new regime became high treason, with historians supressing their accounts for fear of reprisals and the very names of defeated emperors chiselled from public inscriptions and deleted from official records. In a period of such chaos, how can we ever hope to record in any fair or objective way the history of the Roman state?

Emperors and Usurpers in the Later Roman Empire is the first history of civil war in the later Roman Empire to be written in English and aims to address this question by focusing on the various ways in which successive imperial dynasties attempted to legitimate themselves and to counter the threat of almost perpetual internal challenge to their rule. Panegyric in particular emerges as a crucial tool for understanding the rapidly changing political world of the third and fourth centuries, providing direct evidence of how, in the wake of civil wars, emperors attempted to publish their legitimacy and to delegitimize their enemies. The ceremony and oratory surrounding imperial courts too was of great significance: used aggressively to dramatize and constantly recall the events of recent civil wars, the narratives produced by the court in this context also went on to have enormous influence on the messages and narratives found within contemporary historical texts. In its exploration of the ways in which successive imperial courts sought to communicate with their subjects, this volume offers a thoroughly original reworking of late Roman domestic politics, and demonstrates not only how history could be erased, rewritten, and repurposed, but also how civil war, and indeed usurpation, became endemic to the later Empire.


CONTENTS:
Frontmatter
List of Figures
List of Abbreviations
Typographical Note
PART I
I: Usurpation, Legitimacy, and the Roman Empire
I.1: Why usurpation?: the problem of the imperial succession
I.2: 'This litany of manifest usurpers and rebellious generals': why had the imperial succession become so unstable by the third century?
I.3: 'The difference between a tyrant and a king is one of deeds, not of name': how was usurpation understood in the late Roman Empire?
I.4: 'Let these things go unspoken': usurpation and modern research
II: Usurpation, Legitimacy, and Panegyric
II.1: Known unknowns, and unknown unknowns: how to use panegyric as a source
II.2: 'In which I would tell many lies': who dictated the content of panegyric?
II.3: 'And would be viewed with favour by those who knew them to be such': panegyric, audience, and influence
II.4: Propaganda and power
PART II
III: A House Divided Against Itself
IV: 'At last Roman, at last restored to the true light of Empire': Dyarchy, Tetrarchy, and the Fall of the British Empire of Carausius
IV.1: Birthing the late Roman state: dyarchs, tetrarchs, and a new language of power
IV.2: Emperors and bandits: the British Empire under Carausius and Allectus
V: Tyranny and Betrayal: Constantine, Maximian, Maxentius, and Licinius
V.1: Constantine's usurpation: Constantine, Galerius, and Maximian
V.2: The tyrannus: Maxentius and the rewards of civil war
V.3: Notable by his absence: Licinius and the rise of the Constantinian dynasty
VI: Tyranny and Blood: Constantius, Constans, Magnentius, and Vetranio
VI.1: Smiling for the cameras: the sons of Constantine, 337-50
VI.2: The son of the father: Constantius the tyrant-slayer
VII: Usurper, Propaganda, History: The Emperor Julian
VII.1: The voice of a usurper: Julian's rise to power
VII.2: Bleaching the stains: Julian's sole rule
VIII: Panegyric and Apology: The Accession of Jovian and the Usurpation of Procopius
VIII.1: The need for victory: Jovian and the demands of imperial rhetoric
VIII.2: The enemy inside: Valentinian, Valens, and Procopius
VIII.3: 'He who sought rule for himself behind the cloak of a little boy': the usurpation of Valentinian II
IX: Dismembering the House of Valentinian: The Usurpation of Theodosius and the War with Magnus Maximus
IX.1: 'And nobly he made the vote his own': the usurpation of Theodosius
IX.2: Divided loyalties: the usurpation of Magnus Maximus
X: Crisis and Transformation: Imperial Power in the Fifth Century
XI: Conclusion: Those Made Tyrants by the Victory of Others
Appendix I: The Panegyrics
Appendix II: Quantifying Usurpation: Notes to Accompany Figure I.2
Endmatter
Bibliography
Index

La mostra del Colosseo nasce, per così dire, con un vizio di forma: ci si aspetta una mostra sul solo Vespasiano e in realtà si ha a che fare con una rassegna sull'intera dinastia dei Flavi. Le ragioni dello scarto sono, di questi tempi, facili da indovinare: nel 2009 si compiono due millenni da che l'imperatore è venuto al mondo e dunque la ricorrenza non poteva non essere celebrata dall'appositamente istituito comitato e ricordata al pubblico con una mostra. Non c'è da stupirsene, visto che spesso le agende degli 'eventi' (esposizioni, convegni, pubblicazioni) sembrano determinate più dai calendari che dal progresso delle conoscenze: e la cosa è ancor più sorprendente, quando il festeggiato non rientra certo tra i punti fermi della memoria collettiva, come è il caso di Vespasiano.

Paper demonstrating the origin of Popes (or Bishops of Rome) from the Calpurnius Piso family, giving the actual identities of the first 10 Popes. 18 pages.

This paper also makes the case for the mention of Christ in the works of Flavius Josephus as being original to that work and points out the need for change in the study of ancient history.

I remember the first time I came upon the figure of Augustus. It wasn't a very good first impression for I met him in the movie Cleopatra (1963) with the beautiful on and off-screen couple of Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor. I remember pounding at the TV screen wailing in agony as I blamed him for stomping in a place that had nothing to do with him and for destroying Cleopatra and Mark Anthony's "perfect" love. As I watched the main couple die in suicidal ecstasy I pictured myself slapping the smug and triumphant smile off of Octavian's face and ripping his expertly coiffed Hollywood blonde curls out. I was deplored by his narcissistic figure and self-importance. My father warned me that I shouldn't dwell too much on the way they presented Augustus for it was after all, just a movie. Like the dramatic little girl I was, I stomped my foot and declared that I hated Octavian and that I would always hate him. So hate him, I did.

What does it mean to be a leader? This collection of seventeen studies breaks new ground in our understanding of leadership in ancient Rome by re-evaluating the difference between those who began a political action and those who followed or reacted. In a significant change of approach, this volume shifts the focus from archetypal “leaders” to explore the potential for individuals of different ranks, social statuses, ages, and genders to seize initiative. In so doing, the contributors provide new insight into the ways in which the ability to initiate communication, invent solutions, and prompt others to act resonated in critical moments of Roman history.

This short paper considers the evidence for the small number of cities in the eastern provinces that were named after Trajan or bore the name/title Ulpia.  It also looks in detail at the two eastern cities with which the emperor was most closely associated, Antioch and Miletus.

Come da ben 1946 anni, oggi, primo luglio, ricorre l'anniversario della proclamazione di Titus Flavius Vespasianus a imperatore di Roma, che governò nel decennio fra il 69 e il 79 d.C. col nome di Caesar Vespasianus Augustus. Fondatore della dinastia flavia, fu il quarto a salire al trono nel 69 d.C. (l'anno dei quattro imperatori) ponendo fine a un periodo d'instabilità seguito alla morte di Nerone. Figlio di Tito Flavio Sabino e di Vespasia Polla, Tito Flavio Vespasiano, meglio conosciuto come Vespasiano, nacque in Sabina presso l'antico Vicus Phalacrinae, corrispondente all'odierna Cittareale, il 17 novembre 9. La sua famiglia aveva origini contadine e lui stesso aveva aspetto agreste, ma non si vergognò mai della sua estrazione ne tanto meno del suo soprannome «il mulattiere». Vespasiano era fiero dei suoi umili natali e rideva degli adulatori che volevano far discendere da Ercole. Educato in campagna, vicino al vicus di Cosa, sotto la guida della nonna paterna (chissà se anche lei avrà mai usato il battipanni o il cucchiaio di legno per farsi obbedire!), all'età di ventisette anni (36-37 d.C.) sposò Flavia Domitilla da cui ebbe tre figli: Tito e Domiziano, in seguito imperatori, e Flavia Domitilla minore. La moglie e la figlia morirono entrambe prima che diventasse princeps. Tuttavia, Svetonio (Vita di Vespasiano, 3) racconta come dopo la morte della moglie Domitilla, Vespasiano non si perse certo d'animo, tanto da unirsi a Caenis, liberta di Antonia, madre dell'imperatore Claudio, che già prima aveva amata e che, quando divenne imperatore, egli considerò quasi come legittima moglie. Antonia Caenis, dapprima amante e poi concubina, ebbe una forte influenza su Vespasiano e accumulò ingenti fortune attraverso i doni offerti da coloro che tentavano così di guadagnare i favori dell'imperatore.

L’état de fébrilité du public lors des courses de chars de la Rome antique apparaît, à certains égards, comme un lieu commun dans de nombreux passages de la littérature ancienne parvenus jusqu’à nous. Néanmoins, l’engouement suscité par ces spectacles à Rome, comme dans les provinces de l’Empire, est confirmé non seulement par les ruines de cirques antiques encore visibles de nos jours à Rome, et ailleurs en Europe ou en Afrique du Nord, mais aussi par un grand nombre de représentations de cochers et de chevaux sur des mosaïques, des fresques ou encore des objets dits du quotidien (manches de couteaux, lampes à huile, coupes en verre…) conservés dans plusieurs musées à travers le monde. Après une présentation des sources dont nous disposons sur les spectateurs des cirques romains et des difficultés d’interprétation qu’elles posent, cet ouvrage propose dans un second temps une analyse du comportement des foules dans les cirques durant les jeux, principalement à Rome, en s’appuyant aussi sur des recherches récentes concernant les réactions des supporteurs dans les stades de football de nos jours. Enfin, la dernière partie de cette étude est consacrée aux relations entretenues par les empereurs romains avec les jeux du cirque et leurs spectateurs. Elle met en évidence les nombreux intérêts, mais aussi parfois les inconvénients, que présentaient ces divertissements de masse pour le pouvoir politique dans la Rome impériale.

The public’s state of excitement during the chariot races in ancient Rome appears, in some respects, as commonplace in many passages of ancient literature that have come down to us. However, the enthusiasm aroused by these shows in Rome, as in the provinces of the Empire, is confirmed not only by the ruins of ancient circuses still visible today in Rome and elsewhere in Europe or North Africa, but also by a large number of representations of charioteers and horses on mosaics, frescoes, or even everyday objects (knife handles, oil lamps, glass bowls, etc.) held in numerous museums around the world. The first part of this volume presents the sources which we have on the spectators in the Roman circuses and the difficulties of interpretation that they pose. The second part of this work proposes an analysis of the behavior of the crowds in the circuses during the games, mainly in Rome, which is based in part on recent research concerning the reactions of supporters in modern football stadiums. Finally, the last part of this study examines the relationships maintained by the Roman emperors with the circus games and their spectators. It highlights the many advantages, but also sometimes disadvantages, that these mass entertainments presented for the political establishment in imperial Rome.

At the turn of the fourth century, four soldiers ruled the Roman Empire: Diocletian, Maximian, Constantius and Galerius. This Tetrarchy, as modern scholars call it, was the brainchild of Diocletian, and under this emperor's leadership, the regime brought stability to an empire shaken after a half-century of political and military convulsions. These Tetrarchs defeated the resurgent enemies of the empire, they ended an epidemic of military rebellion that had lasted decades, and they attempted numerous reforms in an effort to better the empire both economically and spiritually.

This dissertation examines the Tetrarchy as an imperial dynasty, and it uses the concept of dynasty to highlight how the Tetrarchic regime was often at odds with imperial precedents. Like other Roman dynasts, the Tetrarchs employed adoption, marriage and shared nomenclature in the expression of their rule, but they also ignored certain dynastic norms. Diocletian and Maximian presented themselves as brothers despite being unrelated, and they used the names Jovius and Herculius to imply a close connection to Jupiter and Hercules. Diocletian and Galerius repeatedly excluded the sons of the Tetrarchs from the succession, and the sons themselves were variously hostages, symbols of imperial unity and targets of assassination. Moreover, for most of the Tetrarchic period, imperial women were neither empresses nor deified.

This study investigates these issues through the lens of the Roman army, and it presents the Tetrarchic dynasty as a military experiment, created by and tailored to soldiers. At the beginning of Tetrarchic rule, Rome's armies exerted an unprecedented influence over imperial politics, and the Tetrarchs themselves were products of these armies. This thesis shows that the Tetrarchs gave their sons and the imperial women important but subdued roles within their regime. It proposes that these approaches to dynasty and the decision to create the Tetrarchy came about because of military experience and responded to the pressing need to forestall army rebellion. Furthermore, the study argues that the regime represented the Augusti and their Caesars as pairs of brothers, and that it did so to appeal to the army. It is concluded that friendship, namely the camaraderie of Diocletian and Maximian, was central to dynastic cohesion and imperial unity during the Tetrarchic period. Whatever the intentions of the Tetrarchs, their dynastic junta could only be temporary, since the friendship of the Augusti could not be replicated.