Author: AdamAH

by

The World of The Blood Road – Part III – Communis Patria: The Constitutio Antoniniana

Welcome back to The World of The Blood Road! 

I hope you’ve enjoyed this blog series so far. If you missed Part II on travel and transportation in the Roman Empire, you can read that by CLICKING HERE.

In Part III, we’re going to take a brief look at one of the more unique acts of Emperor Caracalla: The Constitutio Antoninia.

As we shall see, this act had pros and cons, and it’s effects on the Roman world were far-reaching.

When we think about Emperor Caracalla, it’s hard to think of anything but blood and violence. After all, he may have begun his reign with a massacre in York, and then committed fratricide and ordered mass executions when he returned to Rome from Britannia.

The beginning of his reign was also punctuated by another act that has caused some debate among scholars over the years.

In A.D. 212, shortly after murdering his brother, Caracalla created an edict named the Constitutio Antoniniana which was, according to eminent historian, Michael Grant, “one of the outstanding features of the period, although whether it seemed the same to contemporaries is uncertain.”

So, what was the Constitutio Antoniniana? Why was it created? And what were the effects of this curious piece of legislation?

Let’s take each of these questions in turn.

Giessen Papyrus 40 of the Constitutio Antoniniana

Basically, the Constitutio Antoniniana was an edict that granted citizenship to all freeborn men and women within the Roman Empire.

Think about that for a moment… 

Whereas before, Roman citizenship had been primarily held by few, namely those who were from Italy itself, it was now held by every free man and woman across the whole of the Roman world. The only ones who appear to have been excluded were a group known as the dediticii, thought to be tribesman beyond the Danube and Euphrates frontiers who had recently been conquered by Rome.

This act had far-reaching impacts which we will look at shortly, but why was it created, and why at that particular moment in time?

There are a few possibilities.

Map of the Roman Empire at its greatest extent (Oxford Research Encyclopedias)

During the reign of Septimius Severus, Caracalla’s father, it is important to remember there there was a general shift happening, a more egalitarian movement in policy-making that sought to embrace all inhabitants of the Empire. Severus had previously, made drastic changes within the army itself by allowing legionaries to marry and by making it possible for men of equestrian status to move higher in the ranks into positions normally reserved for the senatorial class. This was the case for Lucius Metellus Anguis in the Eagles and Dragons series.

It is possible that Caracalla’s Constitutio Antoniniana was a next step in what was already his father’s policy-making direction. Let’s remember that Severus himself had been from Leptis Magna in Africa Proconsularis.

It is also important to remember that after the fall of the Praetorian prefect, Gaius Fulvius Plautianus, Septimius Severus appointed the legal jurists, Papinianus and Ulpianus as joint Praetorian prefects, clearly with a view to using their skills in drafting legislation. Of course, Papinianus perished during Caracalla’s proscriptions at the outset of his reign, but Ulpianus almost certainly had a hand in drafting the Constitutio Antoniniana.

It was a major step in the creation of the first, Roman Communis Patria, a commonwealth in which provincials and Italians were now on equal footing. This would have appealed to Caracalla as well, for he was obsessed with Alexander the Great who had sought to create a grand, pan-Hellenic world. Caracalla sought to emulate Alexander, and this may have been an extension of that obsession. 

Apart from being in line with Severus’ policies, however, it is quite possible that one of the main reasons Caracalla issued this edict at that time was to distract the world from the murder of his brother, Geta.

As discussed in Part I of this series, fratricide was frowned upon, even though Rome’s founding was based on such an act (poor Remus!). 

The She-Wolf suckling the brothers, Romulus and Remus

But we would be doing ourselves a disservice if we explained the creation of this important legislation by saying it was merely a distraction from murder. It had other uses.

As we know, after his brother’s murder, Caracalla needed to secure his position, and so he emptied the imperial coffers in order to bribe the Praetorian Guard and give more money to the legions. His father had always taught him that ensuring the loyalty of the military was of utmost importance, and this is exactly what Caracalla did. But it left him with few funds.

So, by granting citizenship to all freeborn men and women across the Empire, he instantly increased the tax revenues many times over. Citizens had to pay manumission and inheritance taxes to the state, and his tax collectors no doubt set about their work.

Roman Re-enactors on the March

Another important aspect of the Constitutio Antoniniana is that by greatly increasing the citizenry, many more men could enlist in Rome’s legions. To be a legionary, one had to be a Roman citizen, and previously, anyone not a citizen could only join the army as an auxiliary. It is possible that with his military goals in Germania, and perhaps for other campaigns to come, Caracalla was seeking to bolster Rome’s military, though his father had done that to a large extent already.

Lastly, we cannot ignore the possibility that the Constitutio Antoniniana may partly have been a play for popularity by Caracalla. With rumours of his brother’s murder circulating, he needed to win some popular appeal, and so this grand gesture of granting citizenship would have – he probably hoped – ingratiated him to those outside of Italy, while perhaps the increased tax revenues might have won him some support within the Italian peninsula.

Even people on the edge of the Empire were affected by the Constitutio Antoniniana.

Strangely enough, there is not much mention of the Constitutio Antoniniana, no great commemoration of the event. Why is that?

One reason may be that Caracalla was simply not liked. Certainly, contemporaries such as Cassius Dio, our main source for the period, did not like him and would never sing his praises.

Another possibility for the silence around the creation of the Constitutio Antoniniana could be that its effects upon the Empire left a lot to be desired.

What then were the effects of this important legislation on the Roman world?

Certainly for many, Roman citizenship would have been a boon, for it had always been a prized possession. For a provincial being granted equal status to an Italian, it would have seemed a good thing on the surface. Certainly, it had a levelling effect in the law courts where the law treated citizens differently to non-citizens.

Increased taxation, however, would have been a bitter pill to swallow for anyone, and this would not have been welcomed.

A relief thought to portray Roman tax collectors

When it comes to the military which Caracalla and his father so relied upon, the Constitution Antoniniana did increase the pool from which Caracalla could recruit legionaries, but there was a negative side to this as well.

It now became harder to attract ambitious people into the army, because now all soldiers were citizens. The non-citizen auxiliaries that made up the important cavalry alae, forces of archers, slingers and others, now ceased to exist. There were still native formations of numeri, but the army was permanently changed and now, being open to all, the desirability of being a Roman legionary was fast dwindling.

Lastly, by granting citizenship to all freeborn people across the whole of the Empire, Roman citizenship itself was now cheapened by the Severans’ equalizing tendencies. Citizenship had its privileges, including access to higher civilian and military offices. Now, however, this was greatly watered down, and the few who previously possessed citizenship would now have to compete with many more for prized positions.

This is perhaps one of the greatest impacts of the Constitutio Antoniniana. With the loss in status of citizenship over the following years after A.D. 212, a new elite began to evolve. It was no longer about citizens and non-citizens, or Romans vs. provincials. Rather, class distinction came to the forefront across the Empire with the formation of the honestiores and humiliores classes. Eventually, this class distinction became law, and where honestiores enjoyed legal privileges, the humiliores suffered more severe punishments. It is almost as if the entire Empire was regressing to the time when there was division among Patricians and Plebeians in Republican Rome.

When one reads this, it is hard not to wonder whether such class distinctions are a natural human state or tendency, but that’s a debate for another time.

Debate in the Senate over the Constitutio Antoniniana must have been furious. (Senate scene from the movie Fall of the Roman Empire, 1964)

I can’t help but admire – in an idealistic, and perhaps naive way – the equalizing goals of the Constitutio Antoniniana. After all, isn’t that something we are still striving for today? It is often at the heart of many modern political debates.

However, it is difficult for us – as it was, I suspect, for Caracalla’s contemporaries – to get past the man that Emperor Caracalla was, and the actions he had taken at the outset of his reign. He had proved himself to be cruel and spiteful. He was not a good emperor. And so, it is possible that anything ‘good’ that he might have attempted was probably lost behind a scrim of blood.

Despite its strong democratic note, the Constitutio Antoniniana is also believed, by some, to be one of the causes for the degeneration of the Roman Empire.

What do you think? Let us know in the comments below.

Tune in for Part IV in The World of The Blood Road when we will be looking briefly at the Praetorian Guard and the Castra Praetoria, in Rome.

Thank you for reading.

The Blood Road is available on-line now in e-book and paperback at major retailers. CLICK HERE to get your copy. You can also purchase directly from Eagles and Dragons Publishing HERE.

If you are new to the Eagles and Dragons historical fantasy series, you can check out the #1 best selling prequel, A Dragon among the Eagles for just 1.99 HERE.

 

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

The World of The Blood Road – Part II – Travel and Transportation in the Roman Empire

Salvete history-lovers!

Welcome back for the second part in The World of the Blood Road in which we are taking a brief look at the people, places and history involved in the research for this newest Eagles and Dragons novel.

In Part I, we looked at Emperor Caracalla and the murder and fratricide that marked the beginning of his reign. If you missed that post, you can read it by clicking HERE.

In Part II, we’re going to be taking a brief look at travel and transportation in the Roman Empire. As we shall see, this is something the Romans did really well!

The Blood Road is an epic story that spans the Roman Empire from Britannia all the way to Parthia in the East. Travel is, naturally, a part of the story.

However, travel is something that we take for granted today. We decide we need to get somewhere, and we just go, be it nearby, or over a great distance across the ocean. We often take it for granted in fiction too; characters often need to get from point A to point B, and it happens.

But in the ancient world, travel wasn’t so easy. It required planning, and it took time.

There were also many factors involved such as destination, budget (not unlike today), mode of transportation, and time of year. Unless one was a soldier, or merchant, or someone wealthy, chances are that you might never have left your community.

So, when people did travel in the Roman Empire, how and why did they do so?

Ptolemy’s world map, reconstituted from Ptolemy’s Geography, circa AD 150, in the 15th century, indicating Sinae, China, at the extreme right. (Wikimedia Commons)

First off, we should probably discuss maps. We use maps today, and the Romans had maps. Geography was important, especially if you were planning a large scale invasion or military campaign, or even surveying for a new settlement. Not many maps from the Roman period survive, but copies of maps were made from originals. Sometime they were even rendered in paintings or mosaics.

Maps, geography and cartography are mentioned by some ancient authors such as Strabo, Polybius, Pliny the Elder, and Ptolemy. We also know that large wall maps of the world were commissioned by Julius Caesar, and then by Agrippa, during the reign of Augustus.

Much of our knowledge of place names and geography from the Roman world comes from what are called ittinerarium pictum, or ‘iteneraries’, which were travel itineraries accompanied by paintings. Perhaps the most well-known of these is Ptolemy’s Geography which included six books of place names with coordinates from around the Empire, including faraway places such as Ireland and Africa.

Another source is the Ravenna Cosmography. This was a compilation by an 11th century monk of documents dating to the 5th century A.D. It was made up of copies by a cleric at Ravenna, dating to around A.D. 700. This particular source gives lists of stations, river names and some topographical details.

Details of a map based on the 11th century Ravenna Cosmography (Wikimedia Commons)

The Notitia Dignitatum is a late Roman collection of administrative information which included lists of civilian and military office holders, military units and forts. The maps that accompanied this were medieval, but it is believed that they were derived from Roman originals of the fourth and fifth centuries A.D.

Perhaps the most important surviving example of an itinerary, however, is the Itinerarium Antoninianum, the ‘Antonine Itinerary’, which was a collection of journeys compiled over seventy-five years or more and assembled in the late 3rd century. It describes 225 routes and gives the distances between places that are mentioned. Some believe it was probably used for travel by emperors or troops. This particular source also included a maritime section with sea routes entitled Imperatoris Antonini Augusti itinerarium maritimum. The longest route in this itinerary appears to represent Caracalla’s trip from Rome to Egypt in about A.D 214-215, the exact time period for The Blood Road.

Map of Roman Britain based on the Antonine Itinerary, plotted by William Stukeley in the 1700s using the Itinerary as its source. (University of Kent)

Next, one cannot talk about travel in the Roman Empire without talking about one thing in particular: Roads.

There is a reason the expression ‘All roads lead to Rome’ exists. It was true, at least for a time. This is believed to have originally referred to the milliarium aureum, the ‘golden milestone’ near the temple of Saturn in the Forum Romanum, from which all distances were measured. It is believed that distances to specific cities or settlements were written upon it.

Roman roads, such as this section of the Fosse Way in Leicestershire, are still in use today. (photo: Geograph.org)

When it comes to roads, Rome was the best. In fact, Roman roads forever altered the empire and travel itself. Not only did Roman roads make troop movements much easier – with the troops building the roads themselves! – but they also opened up parts of the empire to trade and further settlement. They spread out from Rome like a titanic spider web connecting the eternal city to the farthest outposts.

There were also various types of road too, not just the broad, paved roads upon which vehicles and legions could travel. There were also small tracks, causeways, narrow streets, embanked roads or strata, lanes and more. Whether you were crossing the world, or crossing a settlement, roads of all types were useful.

The Roman empire in the time of Hadrian, showing the network of main Roman roads. (Wikimedia Commons)

Of course, with Roman roads, came Roman bridges over rivers that might have added days to a journey in order to reach a suitable crossing point. Travel was shortened in many ways by using Roman roads.

Now that we know how important roads were to the Roman Empire, how did people travel upon them?

When it came to the legions, marching was the order of the day for most troopers, and the average Roman soldier, fully laden, could travel up to 25 Roman miles in one day. For the average person living within the bounds of the Empire, walking was also the norm. This mode of travel was slower, to be sure, though roads made it much easier.

Apart from walking, there were of course other, faster modes of transportation such as by horse, pack animal, two-wheeled cart, and four-wheeled wagon. Obviously, these required one to have the funds to own or rent such animals and vehicles, but they did greatly cut back on the travel time.

A Roman relief showing a four-wheeled, covered wagon (photo – Penn Museum)

The time of year and the weather were obvious factors when it came to travel upon roads, but also when it came to water routes open to travellers such as by river, open sea, and coastal sea travel.

When it comes to seafaring, the Romans had no such tradition until after the wars with Carthage which forced them to come to terms with the need for a navy. With the creation of that navy, Roman troops could be moved more quickly from Rome to Africa, for instance.

The other reason for travelling by sea or waterway was, perhaps more importantly, trade. The Roman Empire at its peak was vast and varied, and there was an enormous trade network that ensured raw materials such as lead and marble made it to construction sites as far away as Britannia, or from there to Rome itself. Perhaps the officers on Hadrian’s wall missed their favourite garum produced in Hispania, or wine from their family’s Etrurian estate? 

A Roman cargo ship, or ‘corbita’ (image: naval-encyclopedia.com)

To transport large amounts of goods where they needed to be at the farthest reaches of the Empire, or to the heart of Rome itself, sea transport was the way to go, and massive ports such as those at Ostia, Carthage, Alexandria, and Piraeus were constantly alive with trade.

There were various types of ships, both commercial and military, but despite the efficiency of this mode of transport, it was even more restricted by the seasons and weather than travel over land. Sea travel could be absolutely treacherous, and the number of ancient shipwrecks that dot the coasts of the former Roman Empire are a testament to this.

The wreck of a 110-foot (35-meter) Roman ship, along with its cargo of 6,000 amphorae, discovered at a depth of around 60m (197 feet) off the coast of Kefalonia. (Photo: CNN)

If you want to read more about the various types of ships used in the Roman Empire, be sure to check out the Naval Encyclopedia page HERE.

As mentioned before, we often take travel for granted in the modern world, but it cannot be overstated how important travel was during the Roman Empire, nor how much Roman road and ship building opened up the world and the economy of Europe at the time. Yet another thing the Romans did for us!

The Port of Ostia, today and in the 2nd century A.D. (photo: BBC/The Portus Project)

I hope you’ve enjoyed this brief post about travel and transportation in the Roman Empire.

If you are interested in taking a look, one particular tool that was especially useful when researching and writing The Blood Road was Orbis: The Stanford Geospatial Network Model of the Roman World. This special GIS tool uses ancient and modern source information to accurately create itineraries for travel between destinations in the Roman Empire, taking into account mode of transport, time of year, and whether travelling by land or sea. You can check that out HERE.

Stay tuned for Part III in The World of The Blood Road in which we will be taking a look at one of the stranger acts of legislation during the reign of Emperor Caracalla: the Constitutio Antoniniana.

Thank you for reading.

The Blood Road is available on-line now in e-book and paperback at major retailers. CLICK HERE to get your copy. You can also purchase a copy directly from Eagles and Dragons Publishing HERE.

If you are new to the Eagles and Dragons historical fantasy series, you can check out the #1 best selling prequel, A Dragon among the Eagles for just 1.99 HERE.

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

The World of The Blood Road – Part I – Caracalla: Emperor and Murderer

Salvete, Readers and Romanophiles!

Welcome to this first post in our exciting new blog series The World of The Blood Road! In this nine-part series, we’re going to be taking a look at some of the history, people, and places that appear and provide the settings for this sixth book in the #1 best selling Eagles and Dragons historical fantasy series.

If you’re a fan of the series, and don’t want any spoilers at all (such as where the story will lead you across the Empire), then you may wish to hold off until you’ve read the book.

However, if you just want to get stuck into the history and research that went into this novel, read on! We hope you enjoy it!

Emperor Caracalla

When we look at lists of Rome’s emperors, inevitably there are a few names that jump out at us because of their infamy and the brutality of their deeds. Emperors such as Caligula or Commodus might stand out to some. But, the beginning of the 3rd century A.D. is no less marred by the presence of another such Roman Emperor: Caracalla.

Fans of the Eagles and Dragons series will already be familiar with the bloody deeds which Caracalla may have perpetrated in Eburacum after the death of his father, Septimius Severus. If you missed the post on mass murder in Roman York, you can read that by CLICKING HERE. 

After the death of Severus, Caracalla and his brother, Geta, became co-emperors, and each of them hurried back to Rome separately to establish their own power at the heart of the Empire.

This tumultuous beginning to their reign is where The Blood Road begins.

Septimius Severus

It could be said that Caracalla and Geta’s father, Septimius Severus, was the only great emperor of the Severan dynasty. However, even good emperors can have major flaws and, like Marcus Aurelius before him, Severus’ greatest flaw was, perhaps, that he trusted in his sons far too much.

One theory about the Caledonian campaign is that Severus saw it as a way to force his sons to mend their troubled ways and end their squabbling. But this did not have the intended outcome. As soon as Severus died, people braced themselves for the inevitable quarrel between the two brothers. Cassius Dio describes the scene in Rome when the two emperors returned from Caledonia:

As for his own brother, Antoninus had wished to slay him even while his father was yet alive, but had been unable to do so at the time because of Severus, or later, on the march, because of the legions; for the troops felt very kindly toward the younger brother, especially as he resembled his father very closely in appearance. But when Antoninus got back to Rome, he made away with him also. The two pretended to love and commend each other, but in all that they did they were diametrically opposed, and anyone could see that something terrible was bound to result from the situation. This was foreseen even before they reached Rome. For when the senate had voted that sacrifices should be offered on behalf of their concord both to the other gods and to Concord herself, and the assistants had got ready the victim to be sacrificed to Concord and the consul had arrived to superintend the sacrifice, neither he could find them nor they him, but they spent nearly the entire night in searching for one another, so that the sacrifice could not be performed then.

(Cassius Dio, The Roman History, LXXVIII-1)

Rare bust of Geta in the Louvre (Wikimedia Commons)

There was even talk of ill-omens within the city, specifically one mentioned by Cassius Dio in which “two wolves went up on the Capitol, but were chased away from there; one of them was found and slain somewhere in the Forum and the other was killed later outside the pomerium. This incident also had reference to the brothers.”

In the middle of the tense stand-off between the two brothers was their mother, Julia Domna, who was constantly seeking to reconcile her sons, just as her husband had.

Julia Domna

When, according to Herodian, the brothers devised a pretence of dividing up the Empire that their father had worked so tirelessly to unite, Julia Domna pleaded with them:

As the brothers were now completely at odds in even the most trivial matters, their mother undertook to effect a reconciliation.

And at that time they concluded that it was best to divide the empire, to avoid remaining in Rome and continuing their intrigues. Summoning the advisers appointed by their father, with their mother present too, they decided to partition the empire: Caracalla to have all Europe, and Geta all the lands lying opposite Europe, the region known as Asia.

For, they said, the two continents were separated by the Propontic Gulf as if by divine foresight. It was agreed that Caracalla establish his headquarters at Byzantium, with Geta’s at Chalcedon in Bithynia; the two stations, on opposite sides of the straits, would guard each empire and prevent any crossings at that point. They decided too that it was best that the European senators remain in Rome, and those from the Asiatic regions accompany Geta.

For his capital city, Geta said that either Antioch or Alexandria would be suitable, since, in his opinion, neither city was much inferior in size to Rome. Of the Southern provinces, the lands of the Moors, the Numidians, and the adjacent Libyans were given to Caracalla, and the regions east of these peoples were allotted to Geta.

While they were engaged in cleaving the empire, all the rest kept their eyes fixed on the ground, but Julia cried out: “Earth and sea, my children, you have found a way to divide, and, as you say, the Propontic Gulf separates the continents. But your mother, how would you parcel her? How am I, unhappy,  wretched – how am I to be torn and ripped asunder for the pair of you? Kill me first, and after you have claimed your share, let each one perform the funeral rites for his portion. Thus would I, too, together with earth and sea, be partitioned between you.”

After saying this, amid tears and lamentations, Julia stretched out her hands and, clasping them both in her arms, tried to reconcile them. And with all pitying her, the meeting adjourned and the project was abandoned. Each youth returned to his half of the imperial palace.

(Herodian, History of the Roman Empire, 4.3)

Sadly, it seems the Goddess Concord turned her back on the situation, just as Caracalla and Geta had turned their backs on her. Rome’s ‘wolves’ were determined to destroy each other, and each was aware of plots against him. They both became obsessed and paranoid (perhaps rightly so) and as Herodian tells us: “They tried every sort of intrigue; each, for example, attempted to persuade the other’s cooks and cupbearers to administer some deadly poison. It was not easy for either one to succeed in these attempts, however: both were exceedingly careful and took many precautions. Finally, unable to endure the situation any longer and maddened by the desire for sole power, Caracalla decided to act…”

Palace of Septimius Severus, Palatine Hill, Rome (photo by Lasse Lofstrom; Trek Earth)

Throughout the history of Rome, there have been many heinous acts perpetrated by emperors, but what happened next is perhaps near the top of the list.

Frustrated by another failed attempt upon Geta’s life at Saturnalia in A.D. 211, Caracalla decided enough was enough:

Antoninus [Caracalla] induced his mother to summon them both, unattended, to her apartment, with a view to reconciling them. Thus Geta was persuaded, and went in with him; but when they were inside, some centurions, previously instructed by Antoninus, rushed in a body and struck down Geta, who at sight of them had run to his mother, hung about her neck and clung to her bosom and breasts, lamenting and crying: “Mother that didst bear me, mother that didst bear me, help! I am being murdered.” And so she, tricked in this way, saw her son perishing in the most impious fashion in her arms, and received him at his death into the very womb, as it were, whence he had been born; for she was all covered with his blood, so that she took no note of the wound she had received on her hand. But she was not permitted to mourn or weep for her son, though he had met so miserable an end before his time…she alone, the Augusta, wife of the emperor and mother of the emperors, was not permitted to shed tears even in private over so great a sorrow.

(Cassius Dio, The Roman History, LXXVIII-2)

Geta Dying in his Mother’s Arms by Jacques-Augustin-Catherine Pajou, Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart, Germany (Wikimedia Commons)

Dio tells us that Caracalla ordered the centurions to murder Geta, and Herodian says that Caracalla did the deed himself. Either way, it seems that Geta bled to death in his mother’s arms.

Fratricide was highly frowned upon, and Caracalla knew that Geta had a lot of supporters among the people, the senators, and in the legions. Herodian tells us that he fled, under guard, to the Praetorian camp where he explained to the troops that he had escaped a plot against his life, and that the Gods had chosen him as sole emperor.

In gratitude for his deliverance and in return for the sole rule, he promised each soldier 2,500 denarii and increased their ration allowance by one-half. He ordered the praetorians to go immediately and take the money from the temple depositories and the treasuries. In a single day he recklessly distributed all the money which Severus had collected and hoarded from the calamities of others over a period of eighteen years.

When they heard about this vast amount of money, although they were aware of what had actually occurred, the murder having been made common knowledge by fugitives from the palace, the praetorians at once proclaimed Caracalla emperor and called Geta enemy.

(Herodian, History of the Roman Empire, 4.4)

After this bloody act, when he emerged from the protection of the Castra Praetoria with his guard, Caracalla set about securing his position as sole emperor with further acts of blood.

In a long series of proscriptions, with the legions and Praetorian Guard behind him, safely purchased with all of the funds he could muster, Caracalla set about eliminating anyone who could pose a potential threat, or even whisper a word against him:

Of the imperial freedmen and soldiers who had been with Geta he immediately put to death some twenty thousand, men and women alike, wherever in the palace any of them happened to be; and he slew various distinguished men…

(Cassius Dio, The Roman History, LXXVIII-4)

Many perished with the beginning of Caracalla’s sole rule as emperor, and one wonders if he ever lived that down. His father’s past advice about securing the loyalty of the legions was, it seemed, the only thing that saved him, at least for a time. No matter one’s station, anyone with a passing connection to Geta was slain, and the list is a lengthy one, according to Herodian:

Geta’s friends and associates were immediately butchered, together with those who lived in his half of the imperial palace. All his attendants were put to death too; not a single one was spared because of his age, not even the infants. Their bodies, after first being dragged about and subjected to every form of indignity, were placed in carts and taken out of the city; there they were piled up and burned or simply thrown in the ditch.

No one who had the slightest acquaintance with Geta was spared: athletes, charioteers, and singers and dancers of every type were killed. Everything that Geta kept around him to delight eye and ear was destroyed. Senators distinguished because of ancestry or wealth were put to death as friends of Geta upon the slightest unsupported charge of an unidentified accuser.

He killed Commodus’ sister [Cornificia], then an old woman, who as the daughter of Marcus had been treated with honour by all the emperors. Caracalla offered as his reason for murdering her the fact that she had wept with his mother over the death of Geta. His wife [Plautilla], the daughter of Plautianus, who was then in Sicily; his first cousin Severus; the son of Pertinax; the son of Lucilla, Commodus’ sister [Pompeianus]; in fact, anyone who belonged to the imperial family and any senator of distinguished ancestry, all were cut down to the last one. 

Then, sending his assassins to the provinces, he put to death the governors and procurators friendly to Geta. Each night saw the murder of men in every walk of life. He burned Vestal Virgins alive because they were unchaste. Finally, the emperor did something that had never been done before; while he was watching a chariot race, the crowd insulted the charioteer he favoured. Believing this to be a personal attack, Caracalla ordered the Praetorian Guard to attack the crowd and lead off and kill those shouting insults at his driver.

The praetorians, given authority to use force and to rob, but no longer able to identify those who had shouted so recklessly (it was impossible to find them in so large a mob, since no one admitted his guilt), took out those they managed to catch and either killed them or, after taking whatever they had as ransom, spared their lives, but reluctantly.

(Herodian, History of the Roman Empire, 4.6)

Despite the bloodbath, Caracalla was not yet finished with his brother, and what he did next was, perhaps, indicative of the extreme hatred he had for Geta.

Caracalla now sought to fully erase his brother Geta’s very existence from the historical record in an act that has come to be called, in modern times, damnatio memoriae, the ‘condemnation of memory’.

All across the empire Geta’s name was ordered to be struck from documents and his image erased or destroyed in paintings, statuary, upon monuments, and coinage. Anywhere Geta appeared, he was to be erased.

Portrait of the Severan family with Geta’s face erased.

Due to the bloody start to his reign, Emperor Caracalla’s infamy was now solidified. His survival was due mainly to the loyalty of the troops, but as we shall see later in this blog series, even that would last for a finite amount of time. Caracalla was not his father, Septimius Severus, and he would prove that to the world he was so desperate to rule. It would only be a matter of time before his enemies caught up with him.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this first post in The World of The Blood Road blog series. Stayed tuned for Part II in which we will look at travel and transportation in the Roman Empire.

The Blood Road is available on-line now in e-book and paperback at major retailers. CLICK HERE to get your copy. You can also buy direct from Eagles and Dragons Publishing for any device HERE.

If you are new to the Eagles and Dragons historical fantasy series, you can check out the #1 best selling prequel, A Dragon among the Eagles for just 1.99 HERE.

Thank you for reading.

 

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

NEW RELEASE! – The Blood Road: Eagles and Dragons Book VI

Hello Readers and History-Lovers!

We’re very excited to announce that the The Blood Road, Book VI in our #1 best selling Eagles and Dragons historical fantasy series is out now!

This has been a long-time coming, and many of you who love the series have been exceptionally patient.

Here is the synopsis:

At the peak of Rome’s might, a dragon is born among eagles, an heir to a line both blessed and cursed by the Gods for ages.

Lucius Metellus Anguis is dead. That is what his enemies believe.

However, within the safety of the Isle of the Blessed, Lucius and his family have been healing since the Praetorians attacked their home and destroyed their lives.

With wounds that run deep, Lucius’ wife and children slowly come to terms with their new reality, but as Lucius emerges from the shadows, he finds himself a changed man, a man bent on revenge. Trapped between worlds and tormented by pain, Lucius becomes obsessed with the thought of making his enemies pay for what they have done.

Out in the world once more, Lucius discovers that the destruction wrought by Rome is far worse than he imagined, and so he sets out on a bloody quest that takes him to the farthest reaches of the Empire.

It is said that the world is a dangerous place for good men, but what happens when a good man is set on vengeance?

Despite the pleas of his family and friends, and the warnings of the Gods themselves, Lucius seeks to pursue and punish his enemies at all costs.

Will the Dragon survive his own anger and hate and let go of the reins of war, or will he perish in the crucible of life that burns both men and gods?

Only Lucius can decide…

Kylix from Delphi showing Apollo himself pouring a libation

There it is. We hope you like the sound of it!

If you missed the full series synopsis leading up to this novel, and need a reminder about what has happened to this point, you can read it HERE.

The paperback version is coming soon, and we’ll let you know as soon as it is available.

As for the e-book version, here are the places you can get it:

The main place to go to is, of course, right here on the Eagles and Dragons Publishing website:

https://eaglesanddragonspublishing.com/books/the-blood-road-eagles-and-dragons-book-vi/

The book is available, as ever, on Amazon, Apple and Kobo, but we cannot control the exact timing for when the book will be posted to the Google Play Store, Barnes and Noble, and others.

But don’t worry! If there is a store where you buy your books but it is not yet posted there, you can buy the e-book direct from Eagles and Dragons Publishing (for any device). Just visit this link:

https://eaglesanddragonspublishing.com/buy-direct/

So, there you have it. Be sure to get your copy of The Blood Road today, and join us on another adventure in the Roman Empire!

Stay tuned for the accompanying blog series, The World of The Blood Road, coming soon!

In the meantime, stay safe and strong, and happy reading!

 

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

Ambition in the Roman Republic – A guest post by A. David Singh

Salvete Romanophiles!

We have a special guest post on Writing the Past this week!

Author, A David Singh is here to talk to us about the idea of ambition in Roman society. We may not be surprised by the fact that Romans were ambitious – one doesn’t build an empire without ambition – but ambition took different forms for people at all levels of Roman society. David has done an excellent job of outlining this, so be sure to keep reading!

If you haven’t read David’s previous guest post about slavery in ancient Rome, then you should also read that by clicking HERE.

For now, it’s time to learn all about Roman ambition!

Ambition in the Roman Republic

By A. David Singh

As some of history’s pre-eminent over-achievers, ancient Romans championed a quality that transformed their city-state to the foremost civilization of antiquity: ambition!   

At its core lay the desire for wealth, power, and prestige. In that respect it was no different from ambition as seen in today’s world. 

Let’s start by looking at this need to create a better life among those at the lowest rung of the Roman strata.

Slaves

Slaves were not citizens of Rome. Not only were they denied statehood, they were also stripped of personhood. Roman society considered them as mere objects or possessions—with no more agency than a piece of furniture or cattle.

Given these circumstances, one might be tempted to imagine slaves as men and women devoid of ambition, with no hope for rising above their lot in life. But that was hardly the case.

Most slaves harboured one viable ambition—to break free from the shackles of slavery and become Roman citizens. 

The Slave Market – oil painting by Gustave Boulanger, 1886 (Wikimedia Commons)

If a slave showed the “right” attitude toward his servitude and discharged his duties satisfactorily—these attributes being open to interpretation by the masters—the slave could be set free by appearing before a magistrate. Once the magistrate had confirmed that the slave was a freedman, the master would slap the slave as a final insult before he started his new life.

Quite often, masters bequeathed freedom to their slaves in their wills. Rarely, slaves could earn their own freedom if they were able to raise enough coin to buy themselves out of slavery. 

The process of becoming freedmen and freedwomen was called manumission.

Because house slaves worked in direct contact with their masters, they could endear themselves to those who held power over them. As a result, house slaves had a better chance of getting manumitted compared to those working on country estates and in mines.

Once manumitted, the slaves transitioned into freedmen/freedwomen, and became citizens of the great city of Rome. Now they were deemed human, and not objects anymore—a significant upgrade in their station.

Freedmen and freedwomen

As citizens, freedmen and freedwomen were entitled to all the civil rights in Rome. However, they were not entirely free of their former masters. Those masters exercised some degree of hold over them by becoming their patrons. 

As patrons, the former masters helped them make strides within the Roman society—by opening doors and helping them both financially and professionally. In return, the clients (freedmen and freedwomen) had to provide services to their patrons, most of which involved either making the patrons wealthier, or by extending their patrons’ prestige further into Roman society. 

Freedmen could not hold political office. So they endeavoured to make a better life for themselves through other means. The easiest avenue was to acquire wealth from business ventures.  

Rome was filled with waves of such newly manumitted freedmen eager to make their mark. Blacksmiths, butchers, barbers, cloth-merchants, and tradesmen dotted the over-populated city, with a singular goal in their minds: make more coin! 

Some even amassed their own slaves—the more slaves a man had, the more prestigious he was considered. This was their way to prove their “equality” to the society that had once enslaved them.

Over time, rich freedmen started marrying into traditional but impoverished Roman families. This became a cultural norm, as it proved to be of mutual benefit—the old Roman families became richer, thanks to the nouveau riche, while the freedmen elevated their prestige and circle of influence.

Even though the freedmen and freedwomen (or children born to them before manumission) could not hold political office, that was not the case for children born to them after they’d gained freedom. Many freedmen and freedwomen encouraged these children to hold political office, thereby vicariously fulfilling their own ambition through their children.

Lastly, the option to join the Roman legions was readily available. Rome was an ever-expanding war machine, eager to recruit men younger than forty-five years. As a legionary, a young freedman could travel the Roman world, earn coin, and even rise to become a centurion. All in all, that was a good plan, unless one was unlucky enough to feel the pointy end of a barbarian’s sword.

The Roman legions

Legionaries—or the foot-soldiers—were the lowest rank in the Roman legion. They fell into several categories, although these categories did not have official standing. 

If a legionary held a modicum of ambition, he’d aspire to become an immunis—or a legionary with special skills, like carpentry or weapon-making. It was even better if he could read and write. He could then become a clerk and be responsible for communications and record-keeping. 

Becoming an immunis allowed one to leave the common herd behind, along with all the menial tasks like latrine duty and heavy-lifting. Though this was only a minor step-up in prestige, it was not an unattractive one by any standard. 

A legionary with no aptitude for special skills aspired to become a principalis. Examples include a tesserarius, who was responsible for sentry duty, and an optio—who was the second-in-command of a century.

Though the salary of a legionary did not increase with these step-ups, any legionary mindful of his dignity and prestige aimed to climb this unofficial hierarchy. His reputation and influence within the legion played a critical role in his ascent. 

Roman legionaries marching in uniform, re-enactment (courtesy Pixabay)

The first official non-legionary rank was a centurion. Principales stood the best chance of becoming centurions. 

Centurions were the backbone of the legion. They were responsible for the day-to-day activities of their legionaries, escorting prisoners, and conducting diplomatic missions. During battle, centurions led the charge alongside their men.

Interestingly enough, not all centurions in a legion were equal (or, to borrow from Animal Farm, some were more equal than others). The centurion of the 1st century, 1st cohort (Primus Pilus) was the senior-most, while the centurion of the 6th century, 10th cohort ranked the lowest. Among other privileges, this gradation determined who got the best seat in a tavern, and who was the last to conduct a fatigue party in the rain. 

That’s prestige on raw display, isn’t it?

The annual salary of a legionary was 1,200 sesterces, and a centurion’s was 20,000 sesterces. The Primus Pilus commanded a whopping 100,000 sesterces (during the 1st & 2nd centuries CE).

While a legionary—upon becoming a centurion—might feel satisfied with his progress up the ladder, that was likely to be the last stop in his career. The ranks above a centurion were populated by men of senatorial classes.

The only exception was the Camp Prefect, or Praefectus castrorum, who outranked the military tribunes (we’ll meet them shortly). The camp prefect was chosen from long-standing centurions of a legion, and would have likely been a Primus Pilus in the past. As the third senior-most officer in a legion—outranked only by the Legatus and Tribunus laticlavius—he was responsible for training and equipment, and held the command of his legion in his superiors’ absence.

And that brings us to the senatorial classes.

Senators and the Path of Honours

During the early republican period, senators were a group of unelected men who advised the magistrates. From the 3rd century BCE onwards, the senate increased its power, and virtually functioned as the government of Rome by exercising control over the assemblies and the magistrates.

Education in rhetoric and experience in law were considered essential preparations for political life. And boys from prominent families were groomed from an early age in these disciplines.

Young men harbouring senatorial aspirations might even join the legions as military tribunes. They were responsible for the administrative duties of their legions. Military tribunes outranked the centurions, but were below the camp prefect.

Their military competence varied (some may have had prior experience in auxiliary units), but what remained constant was their shark-like determination to ascend the Path of Honours.

The Path of Honours (Cursus Honorum) as in the time of Julius Caesar – 1st century BCE (courtesy C. K. Ruppelt – Wikimedia Commons)

Elected officials in the republic were called magistrates. Once a man was elected to his first magistracy, he was automatically admitted to the Senate. 

Quaestores were the lowest magistrates, responsible for the state and military treasuries. They were stationed in Rome and its provinces, and were also embedded in the legions. 

On the next rung were aediles, who supervised public works—repair of temples, streets, sewers, public buildings, and aqueducts. They were in charge of markets (weights and measures, and distribution of grain). Lastly, the aediles organized festivals and public games. Ambitious aediles spent prodigious amounts of coin to attract publicity and vote-catching, to advance their political careers even further.

Tribune of the Plebs: This office was formed in the early republican days to protect plebeians from patricians, when patricians held all public offices. As the title suggests, only plebeians could hold this office. Though technically not magistrates, they functioned very much like the magistrates of the Roman state; they could propose legislation and summon the senate. An important function of the plebeian tribunes was to veto decisions by the consuls and other magistrates, thus protecting the interests of the plebeians.

Praetors were magistrates responsible for the Roman judiciary. They acted as chief judges and at times as deputies to the Consuls. By 80 BCE, Sulla increased the number of Praetors to eight: two were responsible for civil matters, and six for criminal.

Two consuls were elected each year. They were the joint heads of the Roman state and commanders-in-chief of the legions. Consuls presided over Senate meetings and implemented its decisions. Both plebeians (from 367 BCE onwards) and patricians could become consuls. Interestingly, years were named after the Consuls, e.g. what we call 63 BCE was known as the “Year of the Consulship of Cicero and Hybrida”.

In times of crisis, a Dictator could be appointed. His term could be no longer than six months. But during his time in office, he possessed supreme military and judicial authority. An exception was Julius Caesar, who was proclaimed Dictator for life.

Partial view of the Roman Forum. The Curia Julia (or Senate House) is seen in the centre (courtesy Pixabay).

Governors of the Roman Provinces were selected from former praetors and consuls. Accordingly, they were named pro-praetors, or pro-consuls. They also held military command when directed by the Senate.

Governorship of the provinces gave these men free rein over the provinces, and this position was vastly abused to accumulate enormous amounts of wealth. However, most governors considered this their right, since they were not paid a salary during their decades as senators.

The ascent from military tribune to consul (and beyond) brought incremental prestige and influence to the men. No wonder, the senatorial classes aggressively engaged in the pursuit of political power for themselves, and for their family and friends. 

Volatile alliances, political factions, bribery, corruption, one-upmanship, and even marriages and divorces formed the backdrop against which the lives of senators unfolded.

In the Roman republic, senatorship and the Path of Honours remained the sole domain of men. Women could not vote, become senators, or hold any political office. 

So, what did women do to quench their ambition in a male-dominated Rome?

Women and ambition

Roman women lived under the guardianship of the primary male member of their family—the paterfamilias. Fathers played this role during their childhood, and the responsibility was handed over to husbands at marriage. Thus, the social identity of women was defined by being someone’s daughter, and later, by being someone’s wife.

Although there was no shortage of loving marriages in Rome, by today’s standards those women lived in relative submission and obscurity. Therefore, their avenues of ambition have to be understood within the context of their societal limitations.

Trades were open to free born women and freedwomen—both married and unmarried. Plebeians took on vocations like midwifery, hair-dressing, basket-weaving, and cooking, among others. Even patrician women were expected to sew and weave.

On the home front, wives of prominent families would co-host banquets with their husbands and preside over religious activities of the household. Many were well read in Greek and Latin literature.

The last decades of the republic saw the emergence of independent women—especially among the patrician families—who were unwilling to live within the sphere of traditional female virtues like modesty, devotion, and frugality. 

Although women could not vote in elections or hold office, the political milieu of the 1st century BCE was not impervious to women’s influence. 

Graffiti found on the walls in Pompeii indicate that women frequently endorsed candidates for political office. It is quite likely that women attended rallies and canvassed for their candidates.

Some even played a robust role in Roman politics, e.g. Servilia, who—because of her proximity to Julius Caesar—was a figure to reckon with.

Rome was steeped in religion. Priesthood conferred prestige and special privileges upon women, that others did not enjoy. 

Vestal priestesses belonging to the cult of goddess Vesta were considered fundamental to the continuance and security of Rome. 

They could free slaves and criminals by touching them; they had a reserved place of honour to watch games and spectacles; they could own property, and give evidence without anyone doubting their word, and were even entrusted with the safe-keeping of important wills and state documents. 

Vestal priestesses fulfilled their duties for a period of thirty years, after which they would command marital alliances in prestigious Roman families. 

Although Roman ambition came in many flavours, the core drive was to excel and elevate as a collective whole. That ancient model still shines a light for today’s world, nudging us to strive for a better tomorrow. Thank you for your kind attention.    

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BCE) – Roman senator, lawyer, scholar, and consul (63 BCE) (courtesy Pixabay).

Author Bio

A neurosurgeon by profession, A. David Singh operated on brains invaded by tumors, aneurysms, and other vile maladies. Funnily, after turning a couple (or more) gray hairs, a rather strange affliction invaded his own brain. Characters from a parallel universe besieged his brain cells and refused to leave, unless David transcribed their lives onto paper. At first, he resisted the assault on his cerebral faculties, but these denizens of the Magical Rome Universe kept prodding his gray cells with their antics, forcing him to write their story.

You can enter the Magical Rome Universe through the novel Dead Boy’s Game and the Broken Vow. 

In Magical Rome, three Romans strive to become senators—each to satisfy their unique and diverse ambitions. Villius is a senator’s apprentice, Julius is a victorious centurion, and Calpurnia…well, Calpurnia is a woman living in a man’s world.

To read this story, please visit   https://MagicalRome.com 

I’d like to thank David for writing such an interesting post about ambition. It’s fascinating how ambition plays a part at every level of society. 

Be sure to check out David’s website and his new book in the Magical Rome Universe.

And if you have any questions about ambition in Roman society, be sure to ask your questions in the comments below so that David can answer them.

Thank you again to A. David Singh, and thank you to all of you for reading!

 

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

Happy Holidays from Eagles and Dragons Publishing!

Adam and the team at Eagles and Dragons Publishing would like to wish all of our patrons, readers, subscribers and fellow-history lovers a wonderful holiday season filled with love, laughter and joy.

We all need it this year!

So, wether you celebrate Saturnalia, the Solstice, Christmas or some other ancient holiday with its roots in history, we hope that you and your families enjoy, whether you are in isolation or safely gathered.

May 2021 be a much better year for all of us.

In the meantime, stay safe and healthy, and thank you for following us along on this amazing journey!

Some great releases and blogs are coming in 2021, so get ready for more adventures with Eagles and Dragons Publishing.

Cheers!

Adam and the Eagles and Dragons Publishing Team

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

An Introduction to the Republican Roman Legion

Greetings history-lovers!

Welcome back to the blog. I hope that you are all keeping well and safe during the continuing pandemic, wherever you are.

Today is Remembrance Day in Canada, the UK, and Australia, and Veteran’s Day in the United States, so I thought that it would be fitting to post something something on a military theme in honour of our men and women in service.

This week on the blog, we’re going to be taking a brief look at the foundation and organization of the Republican Roman legion.

Many readers will already be familiar with the organization of the Imperial Roman Legion, but perhaps not the formation of Rome’s early army? How did a little village on the Tiber develop into such a dominant military force in the Mediterranean world? What did the early Roman army look like, and how was it organized?

Servius Tullius, sixth king of Rome (580-530 B.C.)

In the early days, of course, Rome was ruled by kings. From 753 – 509 B.C., beginning with Romulus and ending with Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, Rome’s army was the king’s army. The king had direct command of the military.

However, as Rome conquered more neighbours in the Italian peninsula, its army grew bigger, and so a hierarchy of command was needed.

This early Roman army under the king, was made up of approximately three thousand men from the three tribes of Rome: the Ramnenses (named after Romulus himself), the Titiensies (named after Titus Tatius), and the Lucerenses (name origin unknown). The men from these tribes formed one, big army, a citizen army.

At this time, the army was commanded by a tribunus, or ‘tribal officer’, beneath the king. Other than this, however, little else is known about the chain of command in the army before the fourth century B.C.

What we do know is that Servius Tullius (580-530 B.C.), the sixth king of Rome, divided the people into classes with his constitution, and these divisions had both political and military purposes. There were financial groupings or ‘centuries’ that meant men of military age were divided according to their ability to provide their own arms and equipment for military service.

Equites were the richest, and the rest of the population, which formed the infantry, were divided into five classes with descending degrees of weapons and armour.

Below these five classes were the capite censi, or landless men.

Basically, the Servian reforms created a sort of hoplite army, based on the phalanx used in the classical Greek and Hellenistic world.

Depiction of a Greek hoplite battle

In 509 B.C. when Lucius Junius Brutus and other noblemen expelled the last king, Tarquinius Superbus, and the Roman Republic was born, the king was replaced by two consuls, also known as praetors. These men were elected every year and they held supreme civil and military power.

By 311 B.C. the army was divided into four legions, and the command of these legions was divided between the two consuls.

Each legion had six military tribunes that were elected by the comitia centuriata. 

The first detailed account of the military hierarchy of the Republican Roman army comes down to us from Polybius (200-118 B.C.) who was a Greek historian during the Hellenistic period, and an eyewitness of the sack of Carthage in the third Punic War as well as the Roman annexation of mainland Greece, both in 146 B.C.

This army of the middle Republic (c. 290-88 B.C.) has come to be known as the ‘Polybian’ army, and this army was divided not into cohorts and centuries, but rather maniples.

Stele depicting Polybius (200-118 B.C.)

The total force of the Roman army at this time was four legions with a total of sixteen to twenty thousand infantry and fifteen-hundred to twenty-five hundred cavalry. Allied forces could also be called upon, and mercenaries hired, if Rome needed to bolster its forces.

At this time, praetors, who were lesser magistrates beneath the commanding consuls, could also command a legion, and in times of crisis, a dictator was appointed for a six month period, taking over full command of the army from both consuls. The dictator could himself, appoint a second-in-command known as the magister equitum, or ‘master of horse’. During the dictatorships of Julius Caesar, both Marcus Antonius and Marcus Aemilius Lepidus served as magister equitum, appointed by Caesar himself.

Apart from overall command by the dictator, from about 190 B.C., the army was still under the control of the consuls or praetors, but forces could also be commanded by legati, or ‘legates’ who were senior senators. One or more legati went with a governor or magistrate when he took control of a new province, and so they had both civil and military duties.

But what were the other officer ranks in the manipular army?

Rome’s four legions included twenty-four tribunes at this time. These were equestrian class men. Senior tribunes could also command extra legions that needed to be raised beyond the standard four.

Each tribune in the legions could select ten centurions who chose their own seconds. The most senior centurion was known as the centurio primi pili, or ‘first spear’. Centurions themselves were able to appoint an optio as a rear-guard officer, and two standard bearers, or signiferi. 

Republican Roman army formation from 1960 film, Spartcus.

Each legion was divided into maniples which were composed of two centuries each. The primus pilus centurion normally commanded the right hand maniple.

When it comes to cavalry, the legion’s force of horsemen was divided into ten turmae of thirty cavalrymen. Each turmae had three decurions who led ten men.

With all of these titles and ranks, one might think that the Republican army was actually quite similar to the imperial Roman army we are so familiar with. However, when you look at it more closely, the manipular army was quite different. Here, Polybius explains:

The tribunes in Rome, after administering the oath, fix for each legion a day and place at which the men are to present themselves without arms and then dismiss them. When they come to the meeting place, they choose the youngest and poorest to form the velites; the next to them are made hastati; those in the prime of life principes; and the oldest of all triarii, these being the names among the Romans of the four classes in each legion distinct in age and equipment. They divide them so that the senior men known as triarii number six hundred, the principes twelve hundred, the hastati twelve hundred, the rest, consisting of the youngest, being velites. If the legion consists of more than four thousand men, they divide accordingly, except as regards the triarii, the number of whom is always the same…

…From each of the classes except the youngest they elect ten centurions according to merit, and then they elect a second ten. All these are called centurions, and the first man elected has a seat in the military council. The centurions then appoint an equal number of rearguard officers (optiones). Next, in conjunction with the centurions, they divide each class into ten companies, except the velites, and assign to each company two centurions and two optiones from among the elected officers. The velites are divided equally among all the companies; these companies are called ordines or manipuli or vexilla, and their officers are called centurions or ordinum ductores. Finally these officers appoint from the ranks two of the finest and bravest men to be standard-bearers (vexillarii) in each maniple. 

(Polybius, The Rise of the Roman Empire, Book VI.6)

The Roman legion c.160 B.C. according to Polybius (image: The Making of the Roman Army, p.34, Lawrence Keppie)

So, the Republican army contained battle formations of maniples of velites (light-armed troops in the first line), hastati (spearmen in the second line), principes (chief men in the third line), and triarii (older men in the fourth line). Around 130 B.C., men were placed in the battle lines not according to their financial status, but according to their age and experience.

Each legion had ten maniples of one-hundred and twenty men each of hastati and principes, and ten maniples of sixty men each of triarii. In addition to these, a legion had reserves of rorarii and accensi in the rear who were, it seems, servants of some sort.

When it comes to Italian allied forces, these were known as the socii, and they served in cohorts of five hundred men commanded by a praefectus. Ten cohorts of socii formed an ala sociorum which was about the same size as a legion with similar organization. This was the precursor of Roman alae, or auxiliary forces (such as Sarmatian or Numidian cavalry), during the imperial period.

Mercenary forces, such as Cretan archers, were also employed.

When it comes to the army of the late Republic (c. 88-30 B.C.), there was an increase in the delegation of military power to the legati who were, as a requirement, senators who had served as quaestors as a minimum. (For more information of the various levels of office, check out this post on the Cursus Honorum)

In 52 B.C. a law was created that required five years between holding an office and a provincial military command, and because Rome was a republic at the time, there were several commanders-in-chief of the army, the idea being that no one man could become too powerful. As we know, however, this was not a foolproof system!

The legions were still commanded by six tribunes but these men were increasingly young and ambitious and hoping to enter into the Senate. Tribunes and prefects could go on to be legates too.

As new territories were acquired, and as Rome expanded, new legions were raised to hold those new territories. Magistrates were given more powers and longer terms beyond the previous one-year, and proprietors and proconsuls were given command of legions for longer periods. An example of this is Caesar’s command in Gaul.

Growth from Republic to Empire (Wikimedia Commons)

The greatest, most long-lasting changes to the Roman army occurred around 107 B.C. under what has come to be called the Marian Reforms.

Gaius Marius was a pro-Plebeian statesmen and successful general who served seven terms as consul of Rome. He led successful campaigns in North Africa and Germania. But Marius is perhaps best known for the major changes to the Roman army in which he moved things from a citizen, manipular militia to a standing, professional army.

Under Marius’ leadership, the Roman army became better, more evenly equipped, and went from the widespread use of maniples to cohorts as the main sub-unit of the Roman legion. This was the birth of the imperial Roman legion we are familiar with today.

The maniple vs. the cohort (image: The Making of the Roman Army, p. 65, Lawrence Keppie)

But perhaps one of the biggest reforms Gaius Marius made, and one which won him a lot of enemies in the upper classes, was to open up the ranks of Rome’s legions to the capite censi, that class of landless men who, once in the army, were seen by some to be the cause of greed and lawlessness in the ranks.

Nevertheless, this new Roman army made a marked improvement. Soldiers had better weapons and carried all their equipment on their own backs which made troop movements and marches more efficient. This is where the term, ‘Marius’ Mules’ comes from.

Gaius Marius is also credited with the introduction of the eagle standard, the aquila, given to each legion and which became a focus of loyalty and affection for the troops.

Image of a Roman eagle standard, or ‘aquila’ (Wikimedia Commons)

The Roman army of the early Republic was now drastically changed, larger, and more efficient. More legions were created as Rome expanded its reach around the Mediterranean basin and into Europe. As the lower classes of Rome’s citizens were allowed to enlist, they found purpose, coin, and opportunities in a new, professional, standing army.

Of course, the army would continue to evolve with career soldiers serving for twenty years or more, and other classes moving up the ranks during such periods as the reign of Septimius Severus who also allowed soldiers to marry. The soldiery would later make emperors, or destroy them.

One thing was certain: wherever in the world Rome could be found, the Roman army had got there first.

Thank you for reading.

As always, we would like to thank all our men and women in service, and their families, for the sacrifices they have made, and continue to make, to keep us all safe and free.

On November 11th, and every other day of the year, we remember you and are grateful.

This year, Eagles and Dragons Publishing is proud to have supported Wounded Warriors Canada and their important PTSD Service Dog Program, and the Couples-Based Equine Therapy Program both of which play an important role in the healing process for service men and woman and their families.

Check out the Wounded Warriors Canada website here:

https://woundedwarriors.ca

 

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

The Delphic Maxims – An Ancient Light in the Dark

Greetings readers and fellow history-lovers!

I hope that you have all had a good and safe summer where you are, despite the chaos that has been gripping our shared world.

My apologies for the extended silence on the blog, but the focus these last several weeks has been on writing the next Eagles and Dragons novel, The Blood Road, and I’m happy to report that the first draft is almost finished.

This leads us to the subject of this new blog post which was inspired by one of the settings in The Blood Road. In this instance, I’m referring to ancient Delphi.

The archaeological site of Delphi as seen from above the theatre, with the temple of Apollo below.

Delphi is one of my favourite archaeological sites in Greece, and I’ve visited it several times (you can read about one of my visits HERE). It has never really made an appearance in my fiction except very briefly in The Dragon: Genesis, and Killing the Hydra. I had planned on visiting this summer and filming a documentary there, but alas, those plans have been put on hold.

Delphi is one of those places that was sacred to both the ancient Greeks and Romans. It symbolized more that just a place where Apollo had his most famous oracle – the Pythia – but was also a guiding light in the ancient world. The ‘Navel of the World’, as Delphi was known, also carried with it a philosophy for living, or rather a series of philosophies known as the Delphic Maxims.

The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy defines a maxim as a “simple and memorable rule or guide for living”. The Delphic Maxims were written and memorized by ancient students, discussed by philosophers, for hundreds of years.

In a way, this post is timely. It’s fitting that, during times of both physical, mental, and spiritual strain, we look elsewhere for some inspiration and guidance to get us through. Adversity can be a good thing that makes us stronger, but we all have a breaking point.

Temple of Apollo at Delphi, by Albert Tournaire (Wikimedia Commons)

Most of you will be familiar with the most famous of the Delphic Maxims, ‘Know thyself’. It, along with ‘Nothing in excess’ and ‘Surety brings ruin’, was inscribed on the pronaos, the entrance to the temple of Apollo at Delphi. These three maxims, especially the first, were discussed at length by some of the greatest philosophers of the ancient world, including Socrates and Plato in his many dialogues.

“Tell me, Euthydemus, have you ever been to Delphi?”

“Yes, certainly; twice.”

“Then did you notice somewhere on the temple the inscription ‘Know thyself’?”

“I did.”

“And did you pay no heed to the inscription, or did you attend to it and try to consider who you were?”

“Indeed I did not; because I felt sure that I knew that already; for I could hardly know anything else if I did not even know myself.”

(Socrates on ‘Know thyself’ in Xenophon’s Memorabilia 4.2.24)

During my research for The Blood Road, I’m a little embarrassed to admit that I discovered there were more than the three Delphic maxims mentioned above. There were, in fact, 147 of them!

Perhaps it was because I had not studied philosophy in depth at university that these were not brought to my attention, or that I just never dug deep enough, focussing, like most, on ‘Know thyself’. Whatever the case, this long list of maxims were important to ancient ways of thinking, and provided a moral code or principles for living that were taught to students and to be considered throughout a man’s life.

Apollo and the Pythia who uttered his prophecies to mortals

But where did the Delphic Maxims come from? Who came up with them?

There are two traditions or answers to this.

The first is that they were said to have been originally given by Apollo, through his oracle, the Pythia.

The second, as mentioned by several ancient writers, including Diogenes Laertius (3rd century A.D.) and Stobaeus (5th century A.D.) is that the Delphic Maxims were developed by the Seven Sages of ancient Greece. These seven men were philosophers and law-givers in the sixth century B.C. 

In the fore-temple at Delphi are written maxims useful for the life of men, inscribed by those whom the Greeks say were sages… These sages, then, came to Delphi and dedicated to Apollo the celebrated maxims, “Know thyself,” and “Nothing in excess.”

(Pausanias, Description of Greece 10.24)

Who were these wise men that are frequently mentioned in ancient sources? Some of them you may recognize, but most you may not unless you have studied ancient Greek history in depth. Also, there is some disagreement among ancient sources about a few of the names. Nevertheless, here they are:

The first is Thales of Miletus (c. 624-546 B.C.). He is generally thought to be the first well-known Greek philosopher. He also wrote about the concept of philotimo which is a central theme of the Eagles and Dragons series. If you would like to read my previous post on philotimo and Thales of Miletus, you can check that out by CLICKING HERE.

The other commonly named men of the seven sages are Pittacus of Mytilene (c. 640-568 B.C.) who was a governor of Mytilene (Lesbos) who tried to curb the power of the nobility, and Bias of Priene (6th century B.C.) who was also a politician.

Oh, for the days when politicians were considered ‘wise men’ or ‘sages’!

Carrying on…

There was, of course, Solon of Athens (638-558 B.C.) whom many of you will know as the great lawmaker of Athens who helped to give form to Athenian democracy. Then, there was Chilon of Sparta (c. 555 B.C.) who was a Spartan ephor and politician who helped to militarize Spartan society.

When it comes to the fifth and sixth names on the ancient lists of the seven sages, there is some variation among the following names:

There is Cleobulus (c. 600 B.C.) who was a tyrant of Lindos and related to Thales, Periander of Corinthos (634-585 B.C.) who was a successful administrator in Corinth, Myson of Chenae (6th century B.C.) who was a Cretan or Laconian farmer, and finally, Anacharsis the Scythian (6th century B.C.) who travelled from what is today northern Iran to Athens where he made a surprisingly good impression on the normally xenophobic Greeks.

3rd century A.D. mosaic of the Seven sages with the muse, Calliope in the center. (Wikimedia Commons)

Such men were Thales of Miletus, Pittacus of Mytilene, Bias of Priene, Solon of our city, Cleobulus of Lindus, Myson of Chen, and, last of the traditional seven, Chilon of Sparta. All these were enthusiasts, lovers and disciples of the Spartan culture; and you can recognize that character in their wisdom by the short, memorable sayings that fell from each of them they assembled together 

and dedicated these as the first-fruits of their lore to Apollo in his Delphic temple, inscribing there those maxims which are on every tongue—“Know thyself” and “Nothing overmuch.” To what intent do I say this? To show how the ancient philosophy had this style of laconic brevity; and so it was that the saying of Pittacus was privately handed about with high approbation among the sages—that it is hard to be good.

(Plato’s Protagoras, 343 a-b)

Whatever the true origins of the Delphic Maxims, it is clear that they were revered in the ancient world, and used by teachers, as the Roman writer Quintilian said of students, to “improve their moral core”.

The world could certainly use some of that today, no?

But what sorts of things do the Delphic Maxims say, instruct or advise?

Well, there is, to be honest, quite a bit of variation and, in looking at them, you can see how very laconic they are (hence the many references to their Spartan influence!). These short, punchy phrases give us a good idea of what the ideal moral code was in ancient Greece and even Rome and, though some may seem anachronistic to us today, many could certainly apply to our current world situation.

I won’t list them all here, but some of them make a whole lot of sense…

‘Obey the law’

‘Respect your parents’ (you parents out there will understand!)

‘Know by learning’

‘Listen and understand’

‘Pursue honour’ (remember Thales’ idea of philotimo)

‘Shun evil’

‘Look to the future’

and

‘If you have, give’

There are others that are of a highly religious theme, an aspect of life that many have lost today but which was central to ancient ways of thinking and living:

‘Pray for what is possible’

‘Respect the Gods’

‘Embrace your fate’

‘Exercise [religious] silence’

and

‘Do not wrong the Dead’

Then, there are some that may sound absurd to our modern minds:

‘Set out to be married’

‘Educate your sons’ (education is good, but what about our daughters?)

‘Control your wife’ (mine was not impressed with this one!)

and

‘Admire oracles’

But some of my favourites are those that could really guide us in these dark times of ours:

‘Listen and understand’

‘Exercise nobility of character’

‘Embrace friendship’

‘If you have received, give back’

‘Despise slander’

‘Shun violence’

‘Deal kindly with everyone’ (this one’s for you, Leon Logothetis!)

‘Pursue harmony’

‘Shun hatred’

and

‘Do not abandon honour’

There are others, but these are the ones that stand out to me at the moment. 

2nd century B.C. inscription of some of the Delphic Maxims from a find in Afghanistan (Wikimedia Commons)

Perhaps the most resonant of the Delphic Maxims, however, are some of the final ones on the list…

‘Do as well as your mortal status permits’

and

‘At your end be without sorrow’

This last one hits particularly hard, especially when one actually thinks about one’s end being near, for it is really contingent on most of the other maxims.

A thoughtful life, well-lived, is a life without regret.

Would that we could all know and feel that when the time comes…

The sacred valley before Delphi

You can read the full translated list of the Delphic Maxims HERE.

Take a look and let us know in the comments below which ones stand out to you?

There is a lot to be learned and guided from in ancient philosophy, and the Delphic Maxims are but one source of wisdom.

Personally, the concept of philotimo is important to me, but I also love the Golden Verses of Pythagoras as words to live by.

We all have the potential to live a ‘Good Life’, even when it seems that things are at their most dire.

As ever, let history be our guide…

Thank you for reading.

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

Ancient Everyday: Government in Ancient Rome – Part II

Welcome back Readers and History-Lovers!

Previously, in Part I of this two-part series on government in ancient Rome. we looked briefly at the popular assemblies which gave all male Roman citizens a measure of decision-making power when it came to their city and growing empire. If you missed that post, you can read it HERE.

In Part II, we’re going to be taking a brief look at what was arguably the real power behind Roman government during the Republican era: the Senate.

SPQR. Senatus Populusque Romanus. The Senate and People of Rome.

For a very long time, the initials SPQR stood for power, civilization, democracy and a government that spoke and worked for the people.

We’ve already taken a look at the ‘People’ portion, so now let us take a very brief look at the Senate of ancient Rome.

The Senate was really the ruling body behind Roman government. It was made up of a group of unelected men, and in the early Republican era, those men were only Patricians. It was later that Plebeians were permitted to join the ranks of the Senate.

Debate In The Early Roman Senate (by Severino Baraldi)

In the mid to late Republic, if a man was elected to a magistracy by the comitia, the popular assemblies we spoke of last time, he was automatically admitted to the Senate for life. The only way a senator could be expelled was if he was found guilty of some sort of severe misconduct.

Originally, there were one hundred members of the Senate. Then, this was increased to three hundred, and then in 80 B.C. to six hundred. Under Julius Caesar, when he was padding the Senate with his own supporters, the number reached nine hundred!

But what was the purpose of the Senate?

Originally, the Senate was a body of noble men who were to advise Rome’s elected magistrates and put forward laws, or leges, which the comitia could vote on. From the third century B.C., with the advent of the second Punic War and the great threat posed by Hannibal, the Senate’s powers were increased greatly.

Not only did the Senate prepare legislation to be voted on by the comitia, it also administered Rome’s finances, was in charge for foreign relations, and oversaw state religion. By the second and first centuries B.C., the Senate was pretty well the government of Rome, largely controlling the comitia and the elected magistrates.

The Senate of Rome in session in the Curia Julia (screen shot from the 1964 film The Fall of the Roman Empire)

Early on, the Senate could not make laws – those had to be voted on by the comitia – but it could issue decrees or decreta, also known as senatus consulta.

There was a lot of power and influence up for grabs when one was a Senator, but other than being an elected magistrate, what were the other criteria for joining the Senate?

To be a senator, one had to have a private income. There was no salary involved.

For Patricians in ancient Rome, becoming a Senator was another a part of the pursuit of power for themselves, for their families, and their friends. The education of Patrician or Senatorial class men was preparation for politics, for to the nobles of Rome, politics was everything, and it influenced friendships, marriages and divorces.

But this was a small percentage of Rome’s population, and there were intense rivalries. There were divisions, of course.

Senators included a group whose ancestors had held curule magistracies and consulships, and these men were known as nobiles, or ‘well-knowns’, and they could be Patrician or Plebeian.

Another group that later emerged in the ranks of the Senate was the novus homo, or ‘new man’. A novus homo was the first man in a family to hold a curule magistracy. The most famous such ‘new man’ is perhaps Cicero.

For an excellent novel on the rise of Cicero, you may wish to check out Robert Harris’ Cicero trilogy, beginning with Imperium.

Cicero

Meetings of the Senate were only attended by senators and the Flamen Dialis, the high priest of Jupiter. But the public could gather at the open doors in the vestibule of the Senate.

The meetings were originally held in the Curia Hostilia in the northwest corner of the Forum Romanum, but in actuality they could take place in any consecrated, public place within 1.6 kilometres of Rome. There was no fixed order for seating.

But what happened to the Senate under Rome’s emperors? Did it still have the power and sway that it used to?

The simple answer is no, not really.

However, in ancient Rome, tradition itself was a powerful thing, and the Senate was central to Rome’s traditions. For the sake of tradition, and perhaps popular opinion, no emperor tried to abolish the Senate, but they did impede its powers.

The Senate House, or ‘Curia’. This is the Curia Julia, built by Caesar and finished by Augustus after the previous two – the Curia Hostilia and the Curia Cornelia – were destroyed.

Under Augustus, the Senate was granting increasing powers to the emperor and, as a result, its own power was greatly reduced. However, by Augustus’ reign, there were over one thousand senators. Rome’s first emperor reduced that number to six hundred and also imposed a property qualification of one million sesterces for being admitted to the Senate.

Because Rome’s empire was expanding greatly, the Senate began to fill with men from noble families from the provinces.

What the Senate still did was control the state treasury, the aerarium, and create laws as a legislative body.

For better or for worse, perhaps depending on the type of emperor upon the throne, the power of the Roman Senate was gradually waning, and in A.D. 359, Emperor Constantine created another senate in his new capital of Constantinople, thereby creating two senates in the empire. 

By A.D. 384, each senate had about two thousand members, and though it continued as a legislative body, it would never be the same.

The last mention of the Roman Senate was in A.D. 603 around a declaration of new statues of Emperor Phocas and Empress Leontia.

Constantine the Great (c.272 – 337) – Statue outside York Minster

 We’ve only barely scraped the surface on the subject of the Senate of ancient Rome. This is a massive and fascinating subject. Hopefully this short post has given you an idea as to how the Senate fit into the government and workings of ancient Rome.

The slow death of tradition is not an easy thing. We are loathe to let go of our traditions. One can imagine the hardcore republicans during the time of Caesar and Augustus experiencing many a sleepless night at what they probably knew was coming.

Of course, they managed to stop Caesar, but by the time Augustus was on his imperial throne, the damage to the Senate had already been done, the gradual process of waning power was underway.

Forum Romanum reconstruction (The Roman Forum: A Reconstruction and Architectural Guide – Cambridge University Press)

Would Rome have been better off controlled by the Senate, and People, as it was in the early Republican era, come as it might with all of the corruption and politicking of senators and magistrates? Or was Rome better off with an emperor in place who could curb the Senate’s power and be a father to the Empire and its citizens?

Those are massive questions that have been debated for a long time, and will continue to be so. Of course, it would depend on the emperor at the time. Would you prefer to be in Rome during the height of the Republic or, say, during the reign of Emperor Antoninus Pius?

The answer might not be as easy as one thinks.

Tell us what you think in the comments below. If you could choose any period in Rome’s history in which to live, which would it be and why?

Whatever the period, there is no doubt that life in Rome was never dull, and we will always find the everyday world of that ancient city interesting and entertaining.

Thank you for reading.

Facebooktwitterpinterest
by

Ancient Everyday: Government in Ancient Rome – Part I

Salvete Readers and History-Lovers!

It’s been a while since our last blog on Religious Rites in Ancient Rome, and in that span of time a lot has happened abroad and at home.

Despite the lingering presence of COVID-19 in many countries around the world, some have started to risk staged re-openings, including our beloved Greece and Italy where summers would be incomplete without ancient sites and the sense-tickling blues of sea and sky. Eating al fresco is still a risky business, but people are trying things out.

I wonder if ‘re-openings’ were similar in the terrible wake of the Antonine Plague of the second century? Then, as now, the theatres and games must have been the last to open.

It has been an eventful period for myself as well. During this time of plague, my family and I decided to quit Rome for the quiet and less crowded countryside of Etruria. Well…in truth, we’ve completed our long-planned move from Toronto to Stratford, Ontario, home of the famous Shakespeare festival (yes, named after the English one!). Once again, as happened in ancient Rome or Elizabethan England, the theatres are dark due to plague. But they will re-open again!

But now for this week’s blog post…

During this pandemic, we have been hearing a lot about governments, how they have been dealing with this pestilence, how they have been trying to keep the populace safe, how they have developed economic plans for support and recovery at various levels and for various sectors etc.

So, I thought it would be a good time for a short, two-part blog series on government in ancient Rome.

What did government look like in the world of ancient Rome? How were decisions made? What did it look like in the Republic versus the Principate? What was the difference between the Popular Assemblies and the Senate?

In Part I of this series, we’re going to be taking a very brief look at the Popular Assemblies during the Republican era.

For a long time, Roman citizenship was something of value, something to be cherished for many reasons, not least of which was the ability to have a say in who was elected to political office, but also which legislation was passed in the growing empire that was Rome. Roman citizenship, for free men that is, was something to be proud of. It offered protection, commanded respect, and so much more.

All male citizens of Rome could vote on legislation and in the election of government officials, and this voting was done in the Popular Assemblies, or comitia. All male citizens were automatically members of a comitium, of which there were four.

The important thing to keep in mind is that these comitia met only to vote, not to discuss or initiate action.

Legislation, laws, or a proposed action (ex. to go to war against an enemy) was initiated by an elected magistrate and discussed by the Senate of Rome. This happened before being taken to the Popular Assemblies, or comitia, for a vote. In this way, the senators of Rome controlled the nature of legislation.

Denarius with image of a voter casting a ballot (Wikimedia Commons)

Laws were known as leges (singular, ‘lex’), and laws passed by the Plebeian assembly were known as plebiscita.

There was no discussion during assemblies, but there could be informal discussions known as contiones before a vote which male and female citizens, slaves and foreigners could attend, hence the importance of public opinion and the favour of ‘the mob’ in ancient Rome if you were a senator or magistrate who wanted something to be passed by the Popular Assemblies.

As Rome’s empire grew, many citizens could not vote because they were far from Rome where the voting took place.

To Romans, Rome really was the centre of the world.

Ancient Rome (image from Ancient History Magazine)

There were four types of comitia in ancient Rome during the Republican era, and the first group were the comitia curiata.

In ancient Rome, there were thirty wards or curiae, ten wards for each of the three original tribes (Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres) of Rome. Just as we do today, people voted in their respective wards.

However, little is known of the comitia curiata. What we do know is that the comitia centuriata grew out of it, and that by the late Republic the comitia curiata met only formally to confer imperium on consuls and praetors.

The next popular assembly we are going to take a look at is the comitia centuriata. This is the assembly that decided between War and Peace in ancient Rome, so you can imagine them meeting quite often as Rome’s empire expanded. They also elected higher magistrates and were the court of appeal for death sentences.

The comitia centuriata could only be summoned by a magistrate with imperium. They met on the Campus Martius (the Field of Mars) at Rome, and the voters of this assembly were divided into units called centuries, of which there were 373 in total. These centuries were based on male citizens’ ages and property asset values, the latter meaning that the poor had fewer votes. It was the rich who ran Rome.

Will it be War or Peace?

The third group of comitia we’re going to take a look are the comitia tributa or ‘assembly of the tribes’.

These comitia met in the Forum Romanum and the voters were divided into their thirty-five tribes, including the three original Roman tribes. They were summoned by consuls, praetors or tribunes for the purposes of electing lesser magistrates or to act as a court of appeal. They also voted on bills which the magistrates put before them.

Lastly, there was the concilium plebis, or Plebeian Assembly.

This assembly consisted of Plebeians only and met in the Forum Romanum. The citizens were divided into the thirty-five Plebeian tribes whose duty is was to elect tribunes and plebeian aediles. After 287 B.C., their resolutions or ‘plebiscita’ were binding on all citizens of Rome.

Gaius Gracchus, tribune of the people, presiding over the Plebeian Council (Wikimedia Commons)

So, there you have it: a very brief outline of the Popular Assemblies in ancient Rome.

Even though it appears that the rich – ie. the senators – controlled Rome, the popular assemblies were important in that they are what gave the people their say. Yes, the system could be corrupted, votes surely bought, but it was a say and every male citizen of Rome had his duty to vote. No vote, no say.

For those of you who are interested, the novel ROMA, by Steven Saylor, delves into the early government of ancient Rome. It’s a fantastic read and I highly recommend it.

But it is true that during the Republic, the Senate was perhaps the true power behind Rome’s growing empire.

Next week, in Part II of this blog series on government in ancient Rome, we’ll be taking a brief look at the senate, and its powers and duties.

Thank you for reading.

Facebooktwitterpinterest