Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Late roman emperors - some thoughts...
#1
Salvete!

I was thinking today about Alexander the great`s problems as a ruler of greek, macedonian veterans and persian people etc. Alexander found himself in a schizophrenic situation having to be a king to greeks & macedonians and somewhat larger than life figure as "king of kings" for the persians. This led to the situations like the "proskynesis" (prostration) incident and rejection / abhorrence of it by his macedonian comrades. Suddenly I started to think about rome`s third century emperors and how they started to get little by little more oriental influences in handling the empire & court, being clearly visible by the time of Diocletian. It is usually explained away by growing amount of contacts with the sassanids etc. It occurred to me that could the reason for "orientalizing" of the roman emperors have something to do with the background of the so called soldier emperors of the third century?

The close-cropped soldier emperors of the crisis- filled third century were usually from humbler backgrounds, from the danube area provinces etc. They certainly didn`t have the time and opportunity to learn all the eloquence (in greek and latin) and form the political relations needed (with the senate in Rome etc.) to run the empire succesfully like the emperors in the previous centuries had to. So did the more ritualized way of ruling with greater outward signs of power & more elaborate court routines offer a kind of readymade tool / framework to rule the empire in a time when emperors sometimes didn`t even see Rome in their lifetime and the traditional ways to rule the empire didn`t work anymore (like dealing with the senate in a more subtle ways etc.)?

The rulers of the persian empire ("king of kings") did have as their subjects vast amount of people / peoples and perhaps the only way to rule them effectively was having an identity of this kind highly-formalized demigod and not some "inherent" cruelty in in oriental persons? I will apologize if this sounds silly but could there be any grounds of thinking more pragmatically about third century roman emperors and their "new" conduct too in this context?
Virilis / Jyrki Halme
PHILODOX
Moderator
[Image: fectio.png]
Reply
#2
One consequences of the endless political assassinations of the crisis of the third century was the increasing isolation of its rulers. The elaborate rituals and bowing and scraping that characterise the later empire would certainly act as a means of reducing assassinations by reducing access. One positive of the early empire was the ability of even ordinary people to gain access to the centres of power, the downside being more people have an opportunity to stick the dagger in. With everyone having citizenship and the army filled with provincials during the 3rd century more people could have a realistic prospect of becoming emperor compared with the early empire where the emperor really only had to worry about plots from fellow senators. The record of successful assassinations in late antiquity is pretty low (Gratian and possibly Julian come to mind) compared to the third century while the record of long running civil wars got worse as assassination became a less viable option at regime change

With the more humble background of the danubian emperors would have come less respect from the traditional ruling elite and thus ceremony would also serve as a means to elevate the rulers above their subjects. Tied to the ceremonial aspect of rule would be the increasing emphasis on the rulers claiming their power deriving directly from the divine rather than the troops or the ruling elite. The sad consequence of that being if political legitimacy derives from correct religious belief as the ancients believed the Gods/God granted victory in war then incorrect religious belief becomes a political crime. Thus minor doctrinal disputes become matters of life and death and lead to conflict and dissension when religion was intended to create unity.

The delicious irony being the more autocratic and centralised the empire became the weaker it got.
Andrew J M
Reply
#3
Good points Andrew, thanks Big Grin !
Virilis / Jyrki Halme
PHILODOX
Moderator
[Image: fectio.png]
Reply
#4
It's a fascinating question, certainly. It might be worth asking where this supposed 'oriental' influence came from, and how it entered the bloodstream of the Roman state - I would suggest it was actually prior to the 'crisis' of the third century. Septimius Severus was a Libyan provincial, but married into a powerful Syrian priestly dynasty - Roman acceptance (for a while, at least) of the wilder excesses of Elagabalus suggests that, by this point, the concept of a more symbolic and sacralised type of rulership, closer to 'eastern' monarchy, was not totally alien to the Roman mind. His sending of a portrait of himself to Rome, rather than visiting in person, is already close to the later idea of emperor-as-image.

Perhaps the change in philosophical and religious ideas also played a part - the rise of neoplatonism, particularly later in the third century under Gallienus, tended towards a conception of the universe in symbolic terms, approaching monotheism. Seen in this way, the emperor becomes the manifestation of divine order - more than just a man. Aurelian's adoption of Sol Invictus, and later of course the tetrarch's direct identification with Jupiter and Hercules, essentially set them apart from mortality and elevated them to a level of godlike authority.

What's also interesting is the depersonalisation of the figure of the emperor from the mid third century onwards, typified by the tetrarchs - in comparison with the fabulous meglomaniacs of the principiate (up to and, I suppose, including Elagabalus!), the later emperors appear almost faceless. The famous statue of the tetrarchs, now in Venice, shows four almost identical men, dressed the same and with essentially identical faces - I doubt whether even contemporaries could have told them apart - and this was surely the point. The mask of power - the godlike image of authority - remains immaculate, whatever balding, crop-haired, jowly, Danubian-accented ex-peasant might lurk behind it. With the emperor himself abstracted and depersonalised, the power of the state can be seen as abstract too - much harder, I suppose, to rebel against an abstract force than the caprices of a single man.

Anyway - these are just a few more thoughts (possibly rather ill-thought actually)... I know there are a great many books which deal with more or less these issues, but I have a reduced library at present! No doubt others can be more insightful with reference to the learned sources :wink:

- Nathan
Nathan Ross
Reply
#5
Nathan, good points too! Thanks!
Virilis / Jyrki Halme
PHILODOX
Moderator
[Image: fectio.png]
Reply
#6
Hello, this source comes to mind talking about how an emperor should ceremonially conduct themselves:

Constantius

The emperor as he proceeded was saluted as Augustus by voices of good omen, the mountains and shores re-echoing the shouts of the people, amid which he preserved the same immovable countenance which he was accustomed to display in his provinces.

10. For though he was very short, yet he bowed down when entering high gates, and looking straight before him, as though he had had his neck in a vice, he turned his eyes neither to the right nor to the left, as if he had been a statue: nor when the carriage shook him did he nod his head, or spit, or rub his face or his nose; nor was he ever seen even to move a hand.

11. And although this calmness was affectation, yet these and other portions of his inner life were indicative of a most extraordinary patience, as it may be thought, granted to him alone.

12. I pass over the circumstance that during the whole of his reign he never either took up any one to sit with him in his chariot, or admitted any private person to be his partner in the consulship, as other emperors had done; also many other things which he, being filled with elation and pride, prescribed to himself as the justest of all rules of conduct, recollecting that I mentioned those facts before, as occasion served.

13. As he went on, having entered Rome, that home of sovereignty and of all virtues, when he arrived at the rostra, he gazed with amazed awe on the Forum, the most renowned monument of ancient power; and, being bewildered with the number of wonders on every side to which he turned his eyes, having addressed the nobles in the senate-house, and harangued the populace from the tribune, he retired, with the good-will of all, into his palace, where he enjoyed the luxury he had wished for. And often, when celebrating the equestrian games, was he delighted with the talkativeness of the common people, who were neither proud, nor, on the other hand, inclined to become rebellious from too much liberty, while he himself also reverently observed a proper moderation.

14. For he did not, as was usually done in other cities, allow the length of the gladiatorial contests to depend on |102 his caprice; but left it to be decided by various occurrences. Then, traversing the summits of the seven hills, and the different quarters of the city, whether placed on the slopes of the hills or on the level ground, and visiting, too, the suburban divisions, he was so delighted that whatever he saw first he thought the most excellent of all. Admiring the temple of the Tarpeian Jupiter, which is as much superior to other temples as divine things are superior to those of men; and the baths of the size of provinces; and the vast mass of the amphitheatre, so solidly erected of Tibertine stone, to the top of which human vision can scarcely reach; and the Pantheon with its vast extent, its imposing height, and the solid magnificence of its arches, and the lofty niches rising one above another like stairs, adorned with the images of former emperors; and the temple of the city, and the forum of peace, and the theatre of Pompey, and the odeum, and the racecourse, and the other ornaments of the Eternal City.

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/ammia ... 16.htm#C10

Julian

At the beginning of the new year, when the consular records had received the names of Mamertinus and Nevitta, the prince humbled himself by walking in their train with other men of high rank; an act which some praised, while others blame it as full of affectation, and mean.

2. Afterwards, when Mamertinus was celebrating the Circensian games, Julian, following an ancient fashion, manumitted some slaves, who were introduced by the consul's officer; but afterwards, being informed that on that day the supreme jurisdiction belonged to another, he fined himself ten pounds of gold as an offender.

3. At the same time he was a continual attendant in the court of justice, settling many actions which were brought in all kinds of cases. One day while he was sitting as judge, the arrival of a certain philosopher from Asia named Maximus, was announced, on which he leapt down from the judgment seat in an unseemly manner, and forgetting himself so far as to run at full speed from the hall, he kissed him, and received him with great reverence, and led him into the palace, appearing by this unseasonable ostentation a seeker of empty glory, and forgetful of those admirable words of Cicero, which describe people like him.

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/ammia ... k22.htm#C2

Ammianus doesnt care for Constantius but he has praise for him when it comes to his ability to do his bit for ceremony. Ammianus loves Julian but he appears reproachful that he walks amongst the ordinary people. I also recall but cant find the spot where Ammianus talks about how Julian did not have the senators prostrate themselves in his presence implying that it was normal for emperors to require it.
Andrew J M
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Complexion of the roman emperors Virilis 28 11,813 05-31-2021, 02:43 PM
Last Post: Till_When?
  Portraits of Roman Emperors Renatus 4 1,313 08-18-2020, 02:43 PM
Last Post: Athena Areias
  Roman Emperors and the \"King\" title Epictetus 13 4,273 02-04-2012, 08:29 PM
Last Post: Epictetus

Forum Jump: