Você está na página 1de 26

Sarah Vorreiter December 14, 2013 Hist 399 Mathisen How Representation Preserved the Power of the Roman

Empire Tacitus once stated, great empires are not maintained by timidity, and this is clearly the case with the Roman Empire. From its beginnings, the Roman Empire achieved remarkable feats during its long reign that extended over three continents. It arguably boasted the most powerful army in its time and arguably throughout history. It also built beautiful cities and urbanized much of its enormous population. Moreover, the Romans developed innovations including aqueducts and networks of roads, brought the language of Latin to global prominence, and created a legal system that became a precedent for future governments of the world. None of this could have been accomplished by an empire that had not been keen on becoming the world power of the time. At its peak in 117 AD, the borders of the Roman Empire stretched from present day Britain in the north to northern Africa in the south. It also covered the entire Iberian Peninsula, much of the continent of Europe, and even present day Turkey and the Middle East. This vast empire was home to nearly one hundred million people, who all found themselves in a different position in the rigid hierarchy of Rome. These societies were significantly different from one another, as each had its own culture, religious practices, and way of life. Nevertheless, they were united by their newly established Roman identity and the empires standards of honor and pride. However, many people were not included in this Roman identity despite living under the empires control and abiding by its laws. These individuals were those who lived outside of the center of the empire, Rome, and those who lived in territories that were at some point annexed into the Roman Empire. These individuals were from places with different political and culture values. First, this essay will examine the identities of those who did not fit in to the

Vorreiter 2 Roman identity. Second, this essay will explore how the Romans viewed their provincial subjects. Finally, one will understand the impacts of these perceptions on the Roman Empire as a whole, and better understand how the empire is viewed today, and evaluate if there is a dark side to the Roman Empire that has contributed so much to the modern understandings of it. To preserve the power and prestige of the Roman Empire, the Roman citizens misrepresented their provincial subjects out of fear, ignorance, and apathy. The Power and Prestige of Rome Roman citizen, especially males, enjoyed a collection of privileges due to their legal status as citizens of the dominant group. The hierarchy of Rome was an extremely rigid one. The male Roman citizens always held a superior position to females, as the latter lacked some of the political freedoms of voting or holding public office. Groups with substantially less power included the individuals who lived in Romes provinces, the slaves, and the freedmen. There were cases of individuals being able to move up or down the hierarchy or altering their citizenship status. For example, a Roman male could lose his dominant position if he was caught committing a crime, while a slave could gain a more superior status as a freedman if his master died. However, the process of becoming a Roman was difficult, which preserved the link between Roman citizenship and social status. This relationship was so strong that it is estimated only a quarter of city residents were genuine Italian-Roman citizens during the first century of the empire.1 What exactly determined status during this time? Power and privilege were distributed across a matrix created by the interaction of several different criteria of distinction, including citizen status, geography, rank, and a hierarchy of status among the individual

J.P.V.D. Balsdon, Romans and Aliens (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1979), 14.

Vorreiter 3 communities.2 Clearly, Roman citizens felt that they were the master-race, and it was through these beliefs that they developed a culture of annexation and expansion. There are several interpretations explaining the Romans rationale behind their desire to expand their empire. Historian Francis Haverfield views the Romans goal and efforts as a safety net to ensure their cultures survival. He stated that, Our civilization seems firmly set in many lands; our task is rather to spread it further and develop its good qualities than to defend its life. If war destroys it in one continent, it has other homes.3 He goes on to say that the Roman Empire was the civilized world; the safety of Rome was the safety of all civilization. Outside roared the wild chaos of barbarism.4 The Romans ideology focused on expanding the territory outward rather than trying to maintain the existing territories with additional force. This plan allowed them to minimize threats from outside forces, as the former enemy had become another piece of the empire. Other historians disagree with Haverfields assessment of the motives behind the Romans actions. One scholar, Ton Derks, personifies the Roman people in a more negative way. He states that, The growth of the Roman Empire in fact has been described as a history of ethnicity being harnessed, and certainly the Romans were enthusiastic ethno-hunters. It was an easy sport when you had access to archives of formae provincials, geographic commentaries or itineraries.5 Whether the Roman conquest was political strategy or merely a ploy to ethnohunt, the Romans enacted several major reforms and programs during their reign. Urbanization went hand-in-hand with Roman conquest and acculturation, and was an integral part of Roman
2

Ton Derks and Nico Roymans Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity: The Role of Power and Tradition (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009), 137. 3 Greg Woolf, Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provincial Civilization in Gaul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 4. 4 Ibid., 4. 5 Derks and Roymans Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity, 190.

Vorreiter 4 imperial expansion.6 Once Rome gained control over foreign lands, they were very involved in the city foundation process and eager to connect it closely to Roman law. Different periods of Rome brought about different levels of urbanization, as the reign of Augustus initiated a more uniform urban culture. Besides the way they rapidly colonized other lands, what else made the Roman Empire powerful and prestigious? Some of the central values of Rome that shaped most, if not all, aspects of society were the concepts of honor and deference. It was a social must to protect and preserve ones honor during this time, including kin and the family. For example, children deferred to their fathers and freedmen deferred to their clients and their patrons.7 Therefore, it is not difficult to imagine that Romans expected provincials to defer to them. What exactly did this life look like for a provincial or non-citizen? There was actually not a large difference between life for a Roman citizen or a non-Roman, despite different levels of taxation. The vast size of Rome's empire prevented it from imposing all aspects of their culture on the places they conquered. Therefore, it often ruled in conjunction with the existing rulers in a particular province. This arrangement may have helped the citizens of the conquered provinces transition into the Roman Empire. The set-up was also beneficial to the Romans, as it was easier to maintain control of a population that was somewhat satisfied instead of angry and hostile. In addition to sharing territorial control, the Romans were also lenient about enforcing a common language throughout their empire. Latin was the official language of the Roman Empire, but it was not imposed upon subjects. Despite these accommodations, it does not seem that the provincial subjects were ever completely welcomed as equals into the empire. Some

Ray Laurence and Joanne Berry (Cultural Identity in the Roman Empire. New York: Routledge, 1998), 64. 7 Balsdon, Romans and Aliens, 18.

Vorreiter 5 believed that the non-citizens should feel privileged and a sense of obligation towards Rome. In Panegyricus, Pliny the Elder states, how fortunate for all the provinces to have come into our trust and power, now that there is an emperor who transports the bounty of the lands back and forth, and who feeds and protects an overseas people as if it were part of the Roman people and plebs.8 Pliny does address several of the valid protections of being a part of the Roman Empire, but this attitude does not seem conducive to positive relations between the two groups. The Vocabulary of Difference In this portion of the essay, the opinions of the Romans and the experiences of the provincials will be addressed from several key areas of the Roman Empire and neighboring areas. These will include the regions of Gaul, Germania, Africa, Egypt, and Asia Minor. However, one must first understand the language that is used to classify the other people in Rome before we analyze their circumstances in each of these regions. Two words that were commonly used to refer to the non-citizens of Rome are barbarians and provincials. The word barbarian was originally used in Ancient Greece, as the antonym of the word citizen. The sound of the word itself connotes the image of a person stuttering or struggling with the official language of a particular region. The word province stems
Figure 1 Barbarian

from a military concept, since the boundaries of the empire were aligned with the boundaries of the governors military power.9 When judicial action took place between

Myles Lavan, Slaves to Rome: Paradigms of Empire in Roman Culture (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 168. 9 John Richardson, Roman Provincial Administration (London: Bristol Classical Press, 1976), 48.

Vorreiter 6 the provincials and Roman citizens, the action originated from Roman military power.10 Gradually, the word usage of citizen and non-citizen transformed into Italians and either the provincials, or prouinciales, or the allies, or socii.11 However, the word prouinciales is used far more often than the word peregrini, which means foreigners or aliens.12 This is interesting because prouinciales was theoretically tied to geography, while peregrini could be used as a marker of ethnicity, culture, origin or even legal status.13 The meaning of socii is quite flexible, as it was utilized in the military, the general population, literature, and inscriptions. It was sometimes even used to refer to the Italians alone. The word illustrates both an association to the empire while maintaining a separation. Often, the words socii and prouinciales were used together or in similar circumstances. Regardless of the term used, Romans used the process of granting citizenship as a way to exclude those in the provinces and keep them out of the locus of power and privilege.14 Who thought more positively about the relationship between the Romans and their subjects? A passage from Ciceros De Officiis reveals his belief that the Romans were making a positive difference in the lives of their subjects, and emphasizes the honor in defending the provinces.
But as long as Roman supremacy was maintained through generosity and not abuse, wars were fought either on behalf of the allies or to maintain our power, wars were settled leniently or as necessity dictated, the senate was a safe harbor and refuge for kings, peoples and tribes, and our magistrates and generals thought that the greatest glory lay in fairly and faithfully defending the provinces and allies. 15

10 11

Ibid., 48. Lavan, Slaves to Rome, 26. 12 Ibid., 26. 13 Ibid., 33. 14 Ibid., 59. 15 M. Tullius Cicero, De Officiis, trans. Walter Miller (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1913), 2.26-7.

Vorreiter 7 This passage praises Roman rule and even refers to the provinces and allies in a supportive way. However, this might be an idealized notion of the past. Perhaps the selection and use of the word barbarian was not even intended to be inherently negative. Several accounts of the word seem to use it purely as a label without much emotion or hostility in the tone of the account. An example of this is how Caesar frequently mentioned the barbarians in Gallic War, but the term is merely used as a label rather than an insult. This text mostly details a battle and does not intend to dehumanize the barbarians.16 This does not necessarily make the usage of these words right, but the widespread use of the word barbarian might imply that it was an everyday word in a Roman vocabulary. Some of the provincial regions actually used the word barbarian to describe themselves. They felt that the term illustrated their cultural heritage and provided a sense of empowerment. Galatia, a region of Asia Minor, understood the words ethnic-historical representation in the eyes of the Romans. Nevertheless, its people chose to use barbarian as a way to distinguish themselves from other groups in Asia Minor.17 What are some successes of the interactions between the Romans and the provincials? One successful example comes from the role of law during the late Roman Empire in Narbonne (present-day France) where the barbarian king collaborated with Roman subjects to construct a written Code of Law that applied to both the Romans and barbarians.18 A rulers success in ruling a provincial territory could come down to whether or not he had a fluid understanding of its culture. This collaborative undertaking served beneficial for both parties. However, each group had to acknowledge the others as equals, or at least provide them with respect. Ultimately,

16

C. Julius Caesar, Gallic War, trans. by W. A. McDevitte (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1869), 4.23-24. 17 Derks and Roymans, Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity, 137. 18 Stephen Mitchell and Geoffrey Greatrex, Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity (London: Duckworth & Co, 2000), 39.

Vorreiter 8 this is just one example of how the two sides were somewhat able to work together, but this was definitely the exception and not the norm, which will be illustrated in the upcoming paragraphs. Due to the strict hierarchy of Rome, it would have been quite the feat for Roman citizens to respect the non-citizens. Unfortunately, this exchange did not take place. Gaul One of the first regions of the Roman Empire to discuss is Gaul. The area of modern day France became under the control of Rome after Julius Caesars conquest. The Romans managed to bring several parts of Gaul together after conquering the region, which was no small feat since the region had been heavily divided prior to Roman rule. While the Romans suppressed Gaulish culture, language, and religion, they also brought in new ideas and concepts that the conquered people came to value over time. This is true especially in the arts; Gaul experienced a significant transformation in regards to its architecture, art forms, and clothing during Roman occupation. However, the people of Gaul did not discard all of their values as they assimilated into Roman culture. They maintained many of their Celtic traditions and continued to exude pride about their heritage. Some of Romes leaders did not believe that the empire could or should sustain a relationship with Gaul. Cicero portrayed the Gaulish people as arrogant and vicious even though he did not know much about their culture, or how to speak their language.
Are you then hesitating, O judges, when all these nations have an innate hatred to and wage incessant war with the name of the Roman people? Do you think that, with their military cloaks and their breeches, they come to us in a lowly and submissive spirit? Nothing is further from the truth. On the contrary, they are strolling in high spirits and with their heads up, uttering threatening expressions, and terrifying men with

Vorreiter 9
barbarous and ferocious language.19

Caesar was another Roman who presented the Gaulians as a vicious people, which was perhaps due to his own ignorance toward the latters culture and values. He declared that, The whole Gallic nation is virtually a prey to superstition, and this makes the serious invalids or those engaged in battle or dangerous exploits sacrifice men instead of animals. They feel that the spirit of the gods cannot be appeased unless a mans life is given for a life.20 In these examples, the ignorance and hostility of both Cicero and Caesar tarnished their representations of the Gaulish people. There are also clear distinctions between the Romans and the Gaul people in Roman art and architecture. One example can be seen in the Triumphal Arch, which is located in southeastern France. It was constructed just outside the city and stood as a symbol of power and authority. There are several
Figure 2 Triumphal Arch

sculptures that decorate the arch that show both the Gaulish people and the Romans. The power structure is clearly defined and visible in terms of attire and position of the people. On the left, the Gaulish people are pictured, and their hands are chained and tied behind their backs, indicating the status of prisoners. Their attire is not as formal as the Romans pictured on the right. The Romans, especially the one on the left,
19

M. Tullius Cicero, For Marcus Fonteius, trans. C. D. Yonge (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1856), 33.4. 20 Caesar, Gallic War, 4.13

Vorreiter 10 have taken a dominant stance even though their hands clamped. Perhaps this was out of the pride of defeating the Gauls. The figures positioning on the front of the arch provided a constant reminder to the Gaulish people to respect the dominance of the Romans.

21

22

The following artwork includes both full body sculptures and busts of people from Gaul and Rome, respectively. One can see within these examples that there is a variation between the looks of the Gauls and Romans. These differences seem to indicate that the Romans, who created each of these works, thought that they were superior to the foreign people. If we take a look at the bust of the Gaulish man on the left, we can see that his face is marked with imperfections. His features include greatly elongated ears with gauges, a sunken face, facial hair, and somewhat of a furrowed brow. On the other hand, the bust of Caligula on the right is clean-cut and pristine, despite the impact of old age on his left ear. He appears confident and has a strong appearance and build. There are no signs of aging or abnormal features as there are in
21 22

Les Antiques, Triumphal Arch, 10-25 CE, Glanum (St. Remy), France. Les Antiques, Triumphal Arch.

Vorreiter 11 the previous bust. These examples illustrate how the artistic representation of both the citizens and non-citizens was a way that the Roman preserved power and dominance. Furthermore, it was a method for them to influence how the Gaul people were viewed by others in the empire.

23

24

In terms of sculpture, the statues of Augustus and the Gaulish warrior further illustrate the discrepancies between the representation of the two groups. The style of the sculptures are completely different, although the subjects are men and they may have had similar impacts in their respective communities. The Gaulish warrior on the left is kneeling and appears to be more timid or withdrawn. Meanwhile, Augustus is standing tall and actively reaching out, potentially using his size to intimidate. Again, observations of facial structure and attire leave the viewer much more impressed by Augustus and with the notion of the Gaulish warrior was simply an ordinary man.

23

Head of a Gaul, 3rd-4th cent., Stucco, 10 X 6 X 6.9. Monastery of Tapa-Kalan, Hadda. 24 Marble portrait bust of the emperor Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus. 37-41 CE, Marble, 50.8 X 18 cm. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York.

Vorreiter 12

25

26

Germania Although the Roman Empire was never able to fully conquer Germania, the two regions still bordered one another, and thus developed opinions about each other. Some of the best accounts of this region come from Tacitus. In Germania, he describes his insights from his ethnographic fieldwork of studying the German population. A race not naturally clever or intelligent finds its innermost secrets of the heart revealed by the freedom of the occasion If their drunkenness were indulged to the limit of their desire, their defeat would be easier to accomplish by playing on these vices than it is by force.27 When Tacitus described their physical appearance and habits of war, the German people no longer sounded humanlike. Their shields are black, their bodies dyed. They choose dark nights for battle, and, by the dread and gloomy aspect of their death-like host, strike terror into the foe, who can never confront their
25 26

Gaul: Leader from Vacheres. Second half 1st C. BCE, Stone. Augustus as Imperator, Early 1st century CE, Marble, 68, Museo Chiaramonti, Vatican City. 27 Cornelius Tacitus, Germany and its Tribes, trans. Alfred John Church (New York: Random House, Inc., 1942), 14.

Vorreiter 13 strange and almost infernal appearance.28 On a similar note, Tacitus identifies other warlike behaviors in the Germanic peoples, to the extent that it interferes with other aspects of their lives, such as with farming. Nor are they as easily persuaded to plough the earth and to wait for the year's produce as to challenge an enemy and earn the honor of wounds. Nay, they actually think it tame and stupid to acquire by the sweat of toil what they might win by their blood.29 On a level of both practicality and status, Tacitus argues that they do not know how to build or to construct their cities. Rather than place buildings close together, they are spread out with a fair amount of land between each residence, either to prevent fire or because they dont know how to build. No use is made by them of stone or tile; they employ timber for all purposes, rude masses without ornament or attractiveness.30 In these passages, Tacitus critiques the personality and physical characteristics, behaviors, and architecture of the Germanic peoples, as a way of dehumanizing them and tarnishing their reputation within the Roman Empire. One of the dangers of ethnography is that it is easy for observers to be too judgmental of the people they are studying. While Tacitus provides good observations about the Germanic peoples, it seems that everything comes back to Rome in terms of comparisons and the consistent assertions of Roman power and superiority. His views seem to be clouded by competing Roman ideals, such as when he describes marriage and monogamy. Their marriage code, however, is strict, and indeed no part of their manners is more praiseworthy. Almost alone among barbarians they are content with one wife, except a very few among them, and these not from sensuality, but because their noble birth procures for them many offers of alliance.31 In this passage, Tacitus almost seems surprised by their marriage traditions, and compares their practices to those of
28 29

Tacitus, Germany and its Tribes, 35. Ibid., 14. 30 Ibid., 16. 31 Ibid., 18.

Vorreiter 14 other barbarian behaviors. Since Germania was never part of the Roman Empire, one might wonder if that altered the way the Romans viewed the region, especially if they had an enemy status from failed conquests. It does not seem that Tacitus was especially ignorant about the peoples he were studying, but perhaps the concept of fear or tensions from previous conflict shaped the tone of his writing, and ultimately, the representations of the Germans. The Romans conquered all of the other regions mentioned in this essay, but Germania never was, which puts it as a similar level as the Roman Empire. There is a different reason for the Romans to despise the Germans, since they legitimately challenged the authority of the Roman Empire, and they succeeded. Africa There is little question that Africans were the recipients of the worst of the Roman Empires hostility and ignorance. The most obvious explanation for Africans maltreatment stems from their different skin color. The Romans quickly developed negative perceptions of the Africans upon conquering the province after the fall of Carthage in the Third Punic War. One individual, Pliny the Elder, promoted ideas of African inferiority in his work, Natural Histories. He wrote:
The same, too, was the case with the tribe of the Psylli, in Africa, according to the account of Agatharchides; in the bodies of these people there was by nature a certain kind of poison, which was fatal to serpents, and the odor of which overpowered them with torpor: with them it was a custom to expose children immediately after their birth to the fiercest serpents, and in this manner to make proof of the fidelity of their wives, the serpents not being repelled by such children as were the offspring of adultery. 32

Plinys ignorance is apparent when he describes the physical appearance of the Africans. He stated that, Ethiopians are burnt by the heat of the heavenly body near them and are born with a
32

Pliny the Elder, The Natural History, trans. John Bostock (London: Taylor and Francis, 1855), 7.2.

Vorreiter 15 scorched appearance, and they have curly beards and hair.33 In these passages, Pliny the Elder recalls what he knows to be true about different people across the Roman Empire and beyond to show the diversity of human kind. While a modern day reader may be more apt to question the texts content, one who was able to read Plinys work would most likely have treated this as fact, as his Natural Histories served as an encyclopedia of all types of natural phenomena. Pliny the Elder was certainly not the only Roman to make ignorant comments and present flawed depictions of the African people. Some believed that Africans were oversexed, like some of their wild animals.34 In Satyricon,
Figure 3 Lamp in the form of a black man

Petronius insults the Africans physical appearance when he recalls a time that he and some Roman companions tried to disguise themselves as the latter. He exclaimed, How could we make our lips swell to hideous thickness? Or change our hair with curling-tons? Or walk bowlegged.35 The Romans did not only dislike the Africans because of their different race and physical appearance. They also attributed geography as a reason to explain African deceitful characteristics. Cicero made this assumption in his assessment of the Carthaginians, as he exclaimed, Geography, not race, explains the fraudulence and mendacity of the Carthaginians. Thanks to their harbors, they were involved in a wide variety of intercourse with merchants and foreigners; and so, with their minds set on profit, here was an open invitation to skillful
33 34

Pliny the Elder, The Natural History, 5.3. J.P.V.D. Balsdon, Romans and Aliens (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1979), 69. 35 Balsdon, Romans and Aliens, 217.

Vorreiter 16 deception.36 In this passage, Cicero chose to represent the Carthaginians in a cunning and heartless way, perhaps because the Romans were feeling threatened by the degree of intermarriage and relations that ensued between the Roman citizens and the foreigners. Modern historian Dick Whittakers work finds fault with the works of Pliny, Cicero, and others. He feels that their accounts do not include or understand ethnicity, especially in their representations of the different African tribes. Whittaker states that the Romans knew all about wandering nomads, for example, especially since fecklessness and vagabondage were supposedly typical of all barbarians. And the very name of the Numidae, so they believed, was a corruption of nomad. But Roman and Greek writers were all outsiders and in reality had no more interest in the anatomy of African tribes.37 This quote highlights the importance of understanding the biases of the authors who wrote these discriminatory statements. The Roman authors had an agenda to assert their dominance over Africa, and that may explain why many of their statements regarding African people were so harsh. Egypt As mentioned previously, the concept of honor was central to Rome, so if a group of outsiders sought to question this honor and authority, then backlash would follow. However, the concept of honor was also important to the Egyptians, who valued their culture and their natural resources, especially the Nile River. One particular issue that developed was the Romans dependence on Egyptian crops. Pliny wrote in Panegyricus, that haughty and arrogant people prided themselves on the fact that the people that had conquered them were nevertheless fed by them, and that whether we had plenty depended on their river and their ships.38 No one can

36 37

M. Tullius Cicero, De Republica trans. C. F. W. Mueller (Leipzig: Teubner, 1889). Derks and Roymans, Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity, 190. 38 Lavan, Slaves to Rome, 170.

Vorreiter 17 deny the power of the Nile River and the array of resources and wealth that it generated, but Pliny jumped at the chance to assert Romes power and dignity. He goes on to add, Let Egypt know that she is not necessary to the Roman people, but let her slave for us all the same.39 Clearly, this reveals a lack of respect as Pliny belittled the Egyptians contributions to the empire. However, the Egyptians did receive some appreciation for their exceptional crop production. We can see this in the image of a Roman coin below, which shows Hadrian receiving grain from Alexandria. This illustration indicates that the Romans somewhat relied on the Egyptians and subtly acknowledges the latters contributions to the Roman Empire.

40

This example is not the only instance of misunderstanding stemming from the Nile River. Several Nilotic Mosaics were painted in an attempt to educate Romans about Egypt and the Nile. The mosaics intended to portray the nature of the Egyptians, and some of the flora and fauna of Egypt, as well as satisfying a Roman fascination with these exotic peoples. The resulting
39 40

Ibid., 170. Coin Showing Emperor Hadrian, 131 C.E., Billon Tetradrachm, 2.5 cm diameter, The Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Vorreiter 18

41

mosaics depict scenes of the naked Egyptians fighting several animals. The individuals in the mosaics look almost as animalistic as the creatures themselves. This representation discredits the

41

Nilotic Mosaic. Late I century CE, Mosaic, 570 X 485 cm. Muse Archologique, Sousse, Tunisia.

Vorreiter 19 Egyptians and conveys that they need the Roman Empire to bring order to the anarchy in their society.

42

Asia Minor Asia Minor was a central part of the Roman Empire, and was quite ethnically diverse, with countless tribes existing amid blurred boundaries, each speaking their own language. It was relatively stable during the heart of the Roman Empire, and Roman influence brought about even greater political stability and the development of administration. However, as Asia Minor was gradually incorporated into the Roman Empire, the Greek geographer and historian, Strabo, recorded the changes that occurred in his Geography. The Romans consolidated this region,
42

Mural painting, Nilotic scene in which nude Pygmies are struggling with crocadiles and a hippopotamus, I century CE, Fresco, 76 X 126. Museo Nazionale, Napoli, Italia.

Vorreiter 20 referred to it as Asia, but, as many imperial powers fail to do, they did not consider the existing regional boundaries of the native settlement when they staked their claim.43 Following the consolidation of power, some groups aimed to promote and preserve their heritage. Some ethnic groups were even able to accomplish this with Roman permission, and thus developed koina, or provincial associations. However, not all groups were approved, especially if the Romans believed that they contradicted the Roman way of governing or could be a threat to Roman power.44 As the culture transitioned from regional to universal, many of the cultural traditions, such as religious festivals, were no longer practiced. Still, some regions, such as Galatia, were very successful in their development of the koina, as they helped to preserve the historical identity and ethnic traditions of Galatia with vitality.45 Still, Roman interaction with Asia Minor was not all represented in a positive way. Cicero is quick to remind the Asian subjects that they should be appreciative to be under Roman rule and willing to pay their taxes to Rome. Let Asia remember that she would not enjoy this escape from the disaster of external warfare and internal strife, if she were not held by Roman power. As it would be impossible to maintain that power without the taxes, she should be happy to buy everlasting peace and freedom from worry in exchange for some part of her income.46 While Cicero nicely acknowledges the benefits and rationale for taxes, it seems a bit harsh since the people from Asia Minor did not choose to be a part of the Roman Empire. Rather, the Roman Empire chose them. In The History of Rome, Livy references the people of Asia several times, and is quick to assert Roman superiority. I quite admit that Asia as a whole produces somewhat empty heads and that the language of my countrymen is somewhat inflated because we fancy
43 44

Mitchell and Greatrex, Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity, 122. Ibid., 126. 45 Derks and Roymans, Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity, 138. 46 Richardson, Roman Provincial Administration, 49.

Vorreiter 21 ourselves superior to our neighbors.47 He goes on to say, there are Syrians and Asiatic Greeks, the meanest of mankind, and born only for slavery.48 These harsh remarks cause Ciceros comments to pale in comparison, as he only asked for taxation, rather than condemning a population to slavery. Why Did These Perceptions Develop? In the previous pages of this paper, Roman representations of the Gauls, the Germans, the Africans, the Egyptians, and the Asians have been shared. Most of the examples contain elements of fear, ignorance, or apathy on behalf of the Romans, but one must unpack why these themes exist. One of the most common sources of fear stems from what one does not know or understand, or from something that seems inherently different from oneself. This most likely helps to explain why the regions of Africa and Egypt received the most negative perceptions from the Romans. They were from a different continent than Europe, and clearly did not look like the Romans and their immediate neighbors did. This visibility of difference may have been an instant dividing factor, as it only takes one second to see how an African appears different from a Roman. There is nothing technically wrong or right about this difference, but it is clear that a difference in appearance exists, and perhaps was very clear to both sides. It was easy for the Romans to be ignorant of what was happening outside of the empire in terms of distance. Many Romans would have never visited these places, and if one wanted to learn about the happenings of these individual regions, they needed to rely on the few individuals who had been to those places, or the stories that were passed through the empire. Ignorance is

47

Titus Livius, The History of Rome, trans. Rev. Canon Roberts, (London: J.M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1905), 45.23. 48 Livius, The History of Rome, 36.17.

Vorreiter 22 linked to ethnographic interpretation, as it involves devising classifications to be used to better understand or make sense of another culture. Unfortunately, when individuals are trying to interpret or classify another culture in their own terms, it is easy for judgment to surface. Is one culture fundamentally better than another? Absolutely not, but foundations of ethnocentrism root themselves firmly in the minds of people everywhere, as ones own culture is what is one knows best. Apathy is another frequent theme of Roman attitudes towards their foreign subjects. With the sheer size of the Roman Empire and the matters that it dealt with, it would be impossible to be consistently aware of all that was happening. Cicero attested to this in a speech he gave before visiting Cilicia, one of the Roman provinces. There is so much happening at Rome, that events in the provinces are hardly heard of.49 Sometimes the only reason some Romans were motivated to keep up with the provincial news was when powerful Romans were living in these territories.50 Now that the concepts of fear, ignorance, and apathy have been addressed, why did these factors shape the way the provincial people were represented in Roman culture? It all comes down to preserving the power of the Roman Empire. While acquiring vast amounts of land does provide some security, it also poses a greater risk for conquest and war, and it also thins out the resources of the empire. If the Roman Empire was seeking greatness and consistent expansion, it did not want to waste its resources and effort in subduing the people in the provinces. Dehumanizing inferior groups can make them weaker, or less likely to rebel, so it was a successful tool to minimize threats within the empire. In many cases, Roman leaders illustrated the provincial people in a way that exaggerated their behaviors and made them seem more
49 50

Richardson, Roman Provincial Administration, 54. Ibid., 55.

Vorreiter 23 childlike or barbaric. This in turn led to other Roman citizens to view them with less respect and honor, thus perpetuating the notions of Roman superiority. The Romans critique of the other had the dual effect of inflating the egos of Roman citizens at the expense of dehumanizing the non-Roman people. Individuals who have been deemed some of the greatest thinkers and philosophers of all time were given the privilege to disseminate their messages far and wide, during the Roman Empire and beyond, as their words echo through history. These messages give glory to Rome, at the price of the other. When Roman citizens would have heard or read these messages, they would feel an artificial sense of pride and support for Rome, in comparison to the barbarian or devilish beasts nearby. This would encourage support for the political, economic, and cultural affairs of Rome. Training the Roman citizens to fear their neighbors promoted further support of Romes military campaigns, and ultimately created a climate of xenophobia that prevailed throughout the extent of the Roman Empires existence. There are several considerations that need to be taken into account when evaluating Romes relationship with the other. First, it is possible that some societies were not at all interested in becoming Roman. This was arguably the case with the Germans, who avoided urbanization since it was associated with Rome.51 However, others saw the development of a more Roman settlement and city layout as a chance to achieve a higher status.52 It is also critical to understand that Roman actions were held to a different standard during their era, as opposed to how they are viewed today. That the Romans were cruel by nature is certain; it is not so certain that, in their contemporary world, they were abnormally cruel.53 Most historians

51 52

Laurence and Berry, Cultural Identity in the Roman Empire, 66. Ibid., 66. 53 Balsdon, Romans and Aliens, 170.

Vorreiter 24 understand the importance of applying the context of a particular time period to what actually happened, as a way to prevent the judgment of a historical event based upon present day standards. The historical narrative of humankind has time and again illustrated that individuals in power can oppress the weak and impose stereotypes that damage the latters reputation and creditability. Moreover, the possessor of this power oftentimes is able to influence and modify the history that is preserved and shared across generations. Consequently, it is not always possible to see the other side of the story- to hear the voice of the marginalized population. It is no exception in the relationship with the Roman Empire and its subjugated provinces that have been discussed here. The textual evidence available today about the empire is far more rich and voluminous in comparison to the accessible information on the others. It is critical that one remains conscious of this disparity and the imbalance of power when analyzing records of history.

Vorreiter 25 Bibliography Augustus as Imperator. Early 1st century CE, Marble, 68. Museo Chiaramonti, Vatican City. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 07. 2013). Balsdon, J.P.V.D. Romans and Aliens. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1979. Caesar, C. Julius. Gallic War. Translated by W. A. McDevitte. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1869. Cicero, M. Tullius. De Officiis. Translated by Walter Miller. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1913. Cicero, M. Tullius. De Republica. Translated by C. F. W. Mueller. Leipzig: Teubner. 1889. Cicero, M. Tullius. For Marcus Fonteius. Translated by C. D. Yonge. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1856. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi007.perseuseng1 Coin Showing Emperor Hadrian. 131 C.E., Billon Tetradrachm, 2.5 cm diameter. The Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 05. 2013). Derks, Ton and Nico Roymans. Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity: The Role of Power and Tradition. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009. Gaul: Leader from Vacheres. Second half 1st C. BCE, Stone. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 03. 2013). Head of a Gaul. 3rd-4th cent., Stucco, 10 X 6 X 6.9. Monastery of Tapa-Kalan, Hadda. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 03. 2013). Laurence, Ray and Joanne Berry. Cultural Identity in the Roman Empire. New York: Routledge, 1998. Lavan, Myles. Slaves to Rome: Paradigms of Empire in Roman Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Les Antiques, Triumphal Arch. 10-25 CE. Glanum (St. Remy), France. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 03. 2013). Livius, Titus. The History of Rome. Translated by Rev. Canon Roberts. London: J.M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1905. Marble portrait bust of the emperor Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus. 37-41 CE, Marble, 50.8 X 18 cm. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York. Available from: ARTstor,

Vorreiter 26 http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 07. 2013). Mitchell, Stephen and Geoffrey Greatrex. Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity. London: Duckworth & Co, 2000. Mural painting. Nilotic scene in which nude Pygmies are struggling with crocadiles and a hippopotamus. I century CE, Fresco, 76 X 126. Museo Nazionale, Napoli, Italia. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 04. 2013). Nilotic Mosaic. Late I century CE, Mosaic, 570 X 485 cm. Muse Archologique, Sousse, Tunisia. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 05. 2013). Pliny the Elder. The Natural History. Translated by John Bostock. London: Taylor and Francis, 1855. Richardson, John. Roman Provincial Administration. London: Bristol Classical Press, 1976. Tacitus, Cornelius. Germany and its Tribes. Translated by Alfred John Church. New York: Random House, Inc., 1942. Woolf, Greg. Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provincial Civilization in Gaul. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Workman, B. K. They Saw It Happen in Clasical Times: An Anthology of Eye-Witnesses Accounts of Events in the Histories of Greece and Rome. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1964.

Supplemental Images (Not Previously Cited and Explained in the Text) Fig. 1. Barbarian. 1-100, Bronze Sculpture, 8.5 X 3.25 X 1.75 cm. Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland, Ohio. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 04. 2013). Fig. 2. Les Antiques, Triumphal Arch. 10-25 CE. Glanum (St. Remy), France. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 03. 2013). Fig. 3. Lamp in the form of a head of a black man with tight curls, broad nose with flaring nostrils, thick lips, and mouth open to reveal teeth with spout projecting from it. Roman period, Terracotta, 5.5 X 12 cm. Muse National du Bardo, Tunis, Tunisia. Available from: ARTstor, http://www.artstor.org (accessed December 04. 2013).

Você também pode gostar