These upheavals cost thousands of lives, especially in the large Jewish population on Cyprus and the yet bigger Jewish communities in Egypt. There was even a glimpse of the end of the world. Down in southern Mesopotamia, war among the 'angels of the north' was seen at this time in a vision byone Elchasai, evidentlya Christian member of a strict Baptist community.6 Elchasai's concerns were very different to Trajan's. What he saw was a vision of an angel and a (female) HolySpirit who were promising one last forgiveness of sins to Christian sinners: this 'sin', to a pagan outsider, would have seemed like a condition created by their foolish Christian faith. Then the world as Trajan knew it would end. Elchasai wrote up his vision in a book which survived to inspire another Christian visionaryin this region more than a century later, Mani. Mani's post-Christian 'Gospel of Light' survived for many centuries and was called Manichaeism by its many enemies. Elchasai's concerns were very different to Trajan's. What he saw was a vision of an angel and a (female) HolySpirit who were promising one last forgiveness of sins to Christian sinners: this 'sin', to a pagan outsider, would have seemed like a condition created by their foolish Christian faith. Then the world as Trajan knew it would end. Elchasai wrote up his vision in a book which survived to inspire another Christian visionaryin this region more than a century later, Mani. Mani's post-Christian 'Gospel of Light' survived for many centuries and was called Manichaeism by its many enemies.

There was to be no such second chance for Trajan. He left Hadrian with the armies in Syria and in 117 withdrew westwards. In early August he was declared ill, and he died in Cilicia on the southern coast of Turkey, aged sixty-two. It was a potentially chaotic moment, with so many rebellions still in progress around him. Who was to succeed him? Hadrian was nearby and, as he had been named consul already for the following year, he was a natural choice. But had he yet been chosen formally? On 9 August Hadrian could claim receipt of doc.u.ments in Syria which conveniently 'proved' his adoption. On 11 August news then came to him, even more conveniently, that Trajan was dead. Later historians wrote of Trajan's sickness and described symptoms which suggest a heart attack. But there were other strong possibilities. On 12 August Trajan's intimate palace-secretary Phaedimus died too, the man who had once been Trajan's official 'taster' of foods and his personal butler. Only after many years were Phaedimus' ashes conveyed back to Rome: had there been a wish not to draw too much attention to the emperor's taster's death? Later in the century, the senatorial historian Dio was told firmly by his father that Hadrian had never been adopted by Trajan at all, that his death had been concealed for a while by those close to him and that the letter informing the Senate of Hadrian's 'adoption' was actuallysigned by Trajan's wife, Plotina. Was the cause of death sickness, or was Trajan poisoned along with Phaedimus the butler? Scandal later alleged that Hadrian had bribed Trajan's freedmen and had had s.e.x with his boy-favourites in the hope of a.s.suring his own succession. What we do know is that Hadrian promptly withdrew from Trajan's 'conquests' in Mesopotamia.

The truth of his predecessor's death remains buried with Hadrian. It is an ironic silence because the distinction of this period is not military but historical: it saw two Latin accounts of the imperial past, both of which are cla.s.sics for our understanding of the Roman emperors. One of them is also a work of genius which sets freedom, luxury and justice among its prominent themes. Significantly, neither of their authors risked writing the history of Trajan's reign itself.

54.

Presenting the Past I strongly predict and my prediction does not mislead me that your histories will be immortal: so, all the more (I will admit it, candidly) I want to be included in them...

Pliny to Tacitus, Letters Letters 7.33 7.33 From Augustus to Hadrian, the Roman 'First Citizens' live on for us as individuals. The reason for this afterlife is only marginally their archaeological remains; their sculptures and buildings spread such lies by presenting their patrons only as they wished to be seen. Until Domitian, the emperors live so vividly because they are described in texts, in the biographies of Suetonius and the penetrating histories of Tacitus.

Both of these authors ranked among Pliny's friends. Suetonius was the younger of the two and benefited from Pliny's patronage: Pliny exercised 'suffrage' for him by writing and asking for favours on his behalf. Significantly, the word 'suffrage' now applied to intercession, not (as formerly) to the free exercise of a Roman citizen's vote.1 Tacitus, by contrast, needed none of Pliny's suffrage. His formidable learning was recognized early. Hence, in 88 he was appointed one of the Roman priests who oversaw foreign cults, of which Christianity would have been one. Tacitus was a fine orator and was a consul three years before Pliny. Pliny published eleven letters to him in order to show proof of a friendship which would dignify himself. Like Pliny, Tacitus loved hunting, but he also had a style, an insight and a capacity for judgement which Pliny, his good friend, lacked. Tacitus, by contrast, needed none of Pliny's suffrage. His formidable learning was recognized early. Hence, in 88 he was appointed one of the Roman priests who oversaw foreign cults, of which Christianity would have been one. Tacitus was a fine orator and was a consul three years before Pliny. Pliny published eleven letters to him in order to show proof of a friendship which would dignify himself. Like Pliny, Tacitus loved hunting, but he also had a style, an insight and a capacity for judgement which Pliny, his good friend, lacked.

Suetonius was of equestrian rank. Perhaps his family hailed from north Africa. He was never a senator, but he held three literary posts in the emperor's household, including the job of librarian, and travelled very interestingly. He was with Pliny in Bithynia and later he was with Hadrian in Britain. In 122 his career came to a halt there. Later gossip alleged that he had been 'too familiar' in Britain with Hadrian's disgruntled wife, Sabina.

Suetonius' most famous surviving works are his Lives of the Caesars Lives of the Caesars which included, revealingly, a which included, revealingly, a Life Life of Julius Caesar: Suetonius did not avoid describing the life of the real founder of 'the Empire'. The strengths of the best of his of Julius Caesar: Suetonius did not avoid describing the life of the real founder of 'the Empire'. The strengths of the best of his Lives Lives are their vivid details and their use (in the case of Augustus' are their vivid details and their use (in the case of Augustus'Life) of the emperor's own letters and autobiography. Through anecdotes, they bring out each emperor's fondness for 'luxury' and they observe each man's practice of giving justice. They are interested in astrology and in most of the emperors' revealing fondness for it. They are also our best sources for each emperor's origins and physical appearance. The best emperors, in Suetonius' view, were Augustus and Vespasian, the two obvious choices.

Suetonius' Lives Lives became a model for later biographers, especially for the important life of the post-Roman 'emperor' Charlemagne, written by Einhard ( became a model for later biographers, especially for the important life of the post-Roman 'emperor' Charlemagne, written by Einhard (c. AD AD 850). However, their understanding and their accuracyare limited. The further Suetonius went on, the weaker the 850). However, their understanding and their accuracyare limited. The further Suetonius went on, the weaker the Lives Lives become: perhaps, after his dismissal in Britain, research became harder. He is at his best with anecdotes, especially when reporting stories contemporary with himself. Did Nero really dress himself up in animal skins, have himself let out of a cage and then attack the private parts of men and women who were tied to stakes, before being s.e.xually gratified by a freedman whom he had married? Such was the gossip fifty years later. Suetonius also insisted that he had discovered from 'quite a few people' that Nero was convinced that n.o.body was chaste in any part of his body, and that everyone concealed this fact. become: perhaps, after his dismissal in Britain, research became harder. He is at his best with anecdotes, especially when reporting stories contemporary with himself. Did Nero really dress himself up in animal skins, have himself let out of a cage and then attack the private parts of men and women who were tied to stakes, before being s.e.xually gratified by a freedman whom he had married? Such was the gossip fifty years later. Suetonius also insisted that he had discovered from 'quite a few people' that Nero was convinced that n.o.body was chaste in any part of his body, and that everyone concealed this fact.2 His researches are evidence, at least, for people's later att.i.tudes to Julio-Claudian debauchery. His researches are evidence, at least, for people's later att.i.tudes to Julio-Claudian debauchery.

What he ignores is the cardinal issue of liberty. Here, we have to look to his greater contemporary, Tacitus. Whereas Suetonius was only an equestrian and a functionaryin the emperor's service, Tacitus was a senator and a consul, ranks for which 'liberty' was a living issue. Pliny was already aware that Tacitus was the real genius of his age, the one with whom he would do well to be a.s.sociated. Like Pliny, Tacitus was not born in Rome. Almost certainly, he came from southern Gaul, perhaps from Vasio (modern Vaison). The south of Gaul was heavily Italianized, however, and was no more 'provincial' than north Italy. Tacitus' career rose quickly to a consulship and then to the grand provincial governorship of Asia: the rise was even more rapid and the result more distinguished than Pliny's own. Born in c. c. 58, Tacitus' progress has now been confirmed in more detail by renewed study of what appears to be part of his funerary inscription, found in Rome. 58, Tacitus' progress has now been confirmed in more detail by renewed study of what appears to be part of his funerary inscription, found in Rome.3 Like Pliny, Tacitus had prospered as a senator under Domitian, but he was explicit about the compromises which were imposed on him at that time. As a senator, he knew the relevance of hypocrisy and fraudulence in human nature. 'Liberty' was a cardinal value to him, but he also fraternized with contemporaries 'who knew too much to be hopeful'.4 He wrote variously, on oratory (where he diagnosed correctly the connection between great oratory and a free political context) and on his father-in-law, Agricola, the governor of Britain (Tacitus gave fine words on 'freedom' to a northern Caledonian chieftain). He was not at all blind to provincial life. He wrote good things on the Gauls (though nothing on Spain). He also wrote a remarkable text on Germany, where his father had served and where he himself had also, probably, spent part of his career. Liberty, he wrote, is beloved by Germans, but discipline is not. Germans are p.r.o.ne to strong emotions, and their priests are more powerful than their kings. There is real thought and observation here and he is not inventing his Germans simply by crediting them with the converse of Rome's own vices. The text has been called 'the most dangerous ever written'; it became extremely important for Germans' later independence from the Roman Catholic Church and more recently, for the n.a.z.is' pathological 'German' nationalism. A high-level operation was mounted by Hitler's SS to seize the main ma.n.u.script of Tacitus' He wrote variously, on oratory (where he diagnosed correctly the connection between great oratory and a free political context) and on his father-in-law, Agricola, the governor of Britain (Tacitus gave fine words on 'freedom' to a northern Caledonian chieftain). He was not at all blind to provincial life. He wrote good things on the Gauls (though nothing on Spain). He also wrote a remarkable text on Germany, where his father had served and where he himself had also, probably, spent part of his career. Liberty, he wrote, is beloved by Germans, but discipline is not. Germans are p.r.o.ne to strong emotions, and their priests are more powerful than their kings. There is real thought and observation here and he is not inventing his Germans simply by crediting them with the converse of Rome's own vices. The text has been called 'the most dangerous ever written'; it became extremely important for Germans' later independence from the Roman Catholic Church and more recently, for the n.a.z.is' pathological 'German' nationalism. A high-level operation was mounted by Hitler's SS to seize the main ma.n.u.script of Tacitus'Germania from its Italian owners, but fortunately it was frustrated. from its Italian owners, but fortunately it was frustrated.5 Tacitus was shocked, like many, by the later years of Domitian. It was this experience, not the brusque 'adoption' of Trajan, which did most to shape his historical interpretation. His two masterpieces are the Histories Histories, which run from 69 until Domitian's reign, and then later, the Annals Annals, which run from Augustus' death until Nero's. Unfortunately, neither has survived intact, but their style, human insight and penetration are the cla.s.sics of Roman history-writing.

As a 'new man' in the Senate, Tacitus' social views were certainly not liberal. He had no faith in the political wisdom of the mob and no respect, either, for men and women on the make or take. He was similarly prejudiced against Greeks and Jews. He did, however, endorse the inclusive policy of Rome towards its subjects: he revised a speech by the Emperor Claudius so as to make the merits of this inclusion explicit (as a provincial, he had benefited from it). But as a new man at Rome, he liked episodes of old-style robustness, whether in battle or religion or diplomacy. The very form of his Annals Annals was old-world: he followed the year-by-year arrangement of the earliest Roman historians, a form which had existed long before the emperors transformed the nature of the state. was old-world: he followed the year-by-year arrangement of the earliest Roman historians, a form which had existed long before the emperors transformed the nature of the state.

Tacitus' supreme gift is to see the gap between profession and reality and the need for constant distrust of the devious 'spin' and professed morality of one-man rule. Tacitus did do research by reading the 'acts' of previous senatorial meetings, and perhaps he did it in the s.p.a.cious rooms of Trajan's new libraryin Rome. Brilliantly, he appreciated the oratorical style of individual emperors and their eras, while also seeing through the abundant official deceptions and euphemisms about events. The recent find of the inscribed official response of the Senate to events in Tiberius' family in AD AD 20 confirms, in essentials, the penetration of Tacitus' own version and its mistrust of the clouds of rhetoric around these happenings. 20 confirms, in essentials, the penetration of Tacitus' own version and its mistrust of the clouds of rhetoric around these happenings.

Theoretical const.i.tutions, Tacitus remarks, are hard to realize and very quick to fail. Unlike Cicero, he did not waste time on ideal republics nor did he praise, like Thucydides, a 'moderate blend' of opposing cla.s.ses. There is a wonderfully truculent sarcasm in Tacitus' judgement. He is not an incurable pessimist, but he is always wry about events and about what their partic.i.p.ants were hiding. In him, posterity found the supreme historian of absolute rule, both how to sustain it and how to react to it. For despite Tacitus' sarcasm and his sense of what had been lost, he was also prepared to serve under a despot (like his friend Pliny). While regretting lost liberty, he advocated the middle path in politics and hoped that chance or destiny would bring some ruler who might be better than the worst. In the 30s BC BC Sall.u.s.t had acidly described the Republic's loss of freedom: Tacitus, heir to Sall.u.s.t's style, described the effects of that loss, but not the ways in which to reverse it. Sall.u.s.t had acidly described the Republic's loss of freedom: Tacitus, heir to Sall.u.s.t's style, described the effects of that loss, but not the ways in which to reverse it.

In due course, his stress on liberty and 'moderate' accommodation with a ruler intrigued Edward Gibbon and left a profound mark on his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire : conversely, Tacitus was abhorred by the fraudulent Napoleon. His greatest age of influence was the seventeenth century. He showed readers of that age how to react under despotism and how to cherish a contrary notion of 'freedom'. He also addressed their concerns about the many court 'favourites' whom contemporary rulers in England and Europe were promoting so wantonly. Tacitus had seen both the rulers' need for favourites and the favourites' foibles, exemplifying them in his descriptions of Tiberius' hated Seja.n.u.s or Claudius' a.s.sertive freedmen. : conversely, Tacitus was abhorred by the fraudulent Napoleon. His greatest age of influence was the seventeenth century. He showed readers of that age how to react under despotism and how to cherish a contrary notion of 'freedom'. He also addressed their concerns about the many court 'favourites' whom contemporary rulers in England and Europe were promoting so wantonly. Tacitus had seen both the rulers' need for favourites and the favourites' foibles, exemplifying them in his descriptions of Tiberius' hated Seja.n.u.s or Claudius' a.s.sertive freedmen.6 But he also described how despots induce servility, how freedom becomes artful subservience and how justice is distorted by informers and 'sneaks'. This picture of the Romans' predicament was powerfully received byEnglish lawyers and political gentlemen when confronted with the vanities of James I and the luxurious demands of his successor, Charles I. At Rome, lawyers had obsequiously found precedents and a context for autocracy; in England, by contrast, lawyers trained in the cla.s.sics upheld the conception of 'liberty' whose loss, they found, had been so poignantly described by Tacitus. And yet Tacitus saw that full liberty was impossible in the existing Roman system and that other values now mattered since the republican days of Cicero's youth. But he also described how despots induce servility, how freedom becomes artful subservience and how justice is distorted by informers and 'sneaks'. This picture of the Romans' predicament was powerfully received byEnglish lawyers and political gentlemen when confronted with the vanities of James I and the luxurious demands of his successor, Charles I. At Rome, lawyers had obsequiously found precedents and a context for autocracy; in England, by contrast, lawyers trained in the cla.s.sics upheld the conception of 'liberty' whose loss, they found, had been so poignantly described by Tacitus. And yet Tacitus saw that full liberty was impossible in the existing Roman system and that other values now mattered since the republican days of Cicero's youth.

To us, his insights are still highly relevant in our age of one-party rule, of 'spin' and 'favourites' and 'democracies' emptied of the word's real content. His works still guide a real understanding of the Roman Empire, rather than pseudo-bureaucratic studies of its 'structures'. For one major reason why the flavour of each decade was so different was because of the people whom Tacitus grasped so brilliantly at its centre the crafty, malign Tiberius, the foolish and pedantic Claudius, the depraved Nero. To complain that Tacitus focused on court politics, not on the social and regional diversity which appeals more to manymodern historians, is to miss the value of what he gives us. The emperors' characters did have profound consequences throughout society. The intertwined personalities of their females were also significant for structures and events. The Messalinas and Agrippinas are distinctive facts of the Julio-Claudian era, and only those who have no awareness of high-society women in such contexts are likely to mistake their portraits as mere rhetoric or a male-prejudiced stereotype.

His Histories Histories, describing events from 69 to 96, were the first of the long works to be finished, with their brilliant sense of the soldiers' varying reactions and the differing styles of the crowds who partic.i.p.ated in the year of Four Emperors (ad 69). The Annals Annals, from 14 to 68, followed next. The date of the Annals Annals 'completion continues to be disputed, but the clear sign is that they too were composed entirely in the reign of Trajan. Their terse, mordant style needed no long gestation: Sall.u.s.t and Cicero had been the staples of Tacitus' education as a young man. He was not writing them with one eye on Hadrian and the controversial early years of Hadrian's reign: the work had already been finished under Trajan. Perhaps it was the appearance of each of Tacitus' masterpieces which prompted Suetonius to attempt his own 'completion continues to be disputed, but the clear sign is that they too were composed entirely in the reign of Trajan. Their terse, mordant style needed no long gestation: Sall.u.s.t and Cicero had been the staples of Tacitus' education as a young man. He was not writing them with one eye on Hadrian and the controversial early years of Hadrian's reign: the work had already been finished under Trajan. Perhaps it was the appearance of each of Tacitus' masterpieces which prompted Suetonius to attempt his own Lives Lives of past rulers, beginning, however, with the life of Julius Caesar, whom Tacitus did not discuss. of past rulers, beginning, however, with the life of Julius Caesar, whom Tacitus did not discuss.

Like Suetonius and Pliny, Tacitus considered Christianity to be a 'pernicious superst.i.tion'. He observed, however, that people pitied those Christians whom Nero martyred on a false charge. Suetonius, by contrast, thought that Nero had been right. For Tacitus, rule by a 'First Citizen' was an evil, but in some ways an inevitable evil. By being moderate, 'civil' and law-abiding, the ruler could mitigate the evil, but the loser would always be st.u.r.dy liberty. Aspects of this liberty could still be defended, especially the liberty of free speech: speakers in Tacitus'Annals put the decisive case against repressive censorship, a case which Tacitus himself endorses. So, too, laws (he realizes) will never succeed in confining luxury: the standards of luxury simply change and evolve, with the pa.s.sing of time. Yet neither his own nor his speakers' conception of liberty is our idea of democratic freedom. They were Romans, after all, and they were senators. When the crafty Tiberius sat in on trials and expressed his own wishes concerning them, his conduct was regrettable to Tacitus, even when Tiberius' preferred verdicts were the true and just ones. For Tiberius was undermining a different liberty: the freedom of senators to exert influence on others' behalf, even if, as true Romans, they used that influence most unfairly. put the decisive case against repressive censorship, a case which Tacitus himself endorses. So, too, laws (he realizes) will never succeed in confining luxury: the standards of luxury simply change and evolve, with the pa.s.sing of time. Yet neither his own nor his speakers' conception of liberty is our idea of democratic freedom. They were Romans, after all, and they were senators. When the crafty Tiberius sat in on trials and expressed his own wishes concerning them, his conduct was regrettable to Tacitus, even when Tiberius' preferred verdicts were the true and just ones. For Tiberius was undermining a different liberty: the freedom of senators to exert influence on others' behalf, even if, as true Romans, they used that influence most unfairly.

Hadrian: A Retrospective That joke of his in the baths became famous. Once, he saw a veteran soldier whom he had known during his military service, and the man was rubbing his back and the rest of his body against the wall. So he asked him why he had given himself over to its marbles in order to be rubbed down, and when he heard that he was doing it because he did not have a slave, he gave the man both some slaves and the cost of their maintenance. But on another day, a number of old men started to rub themselves against the wall so as to provoke the emperor's generosity. But he ordered them to be summoned and then to rub each other down in turn.

Spartia.n.u.s, Life of Hadrian Life of Hadrian 17.67 17.67 The rights of Hadrian's accession were questionable, but he was quick to undo his predecessor's mistakes. Trajan's attempted conquests in the Middle East were abandoned. Then his conquests in eastern Europe were scaled down and reorganized. Hadrian quoted old Cato in support: 'they must have their freedom because they cannot be protected.'1 At least the remark gave his decision a 'traditional' precedent. At least the remark gave his decision a 'traditional' precedent.

More to the point, Hadrian had close personal ties with the prefect of the Praetorian guards, the elderlyAcilius Attia.n.u.s, who came from the same home town and had been his guardian as a young man. Back in Rome, four senior senators, all of them ex-consuls, were put to death on Attia.n.u.s' orders. While the shock subsided it was as well that Hadrian could travel slowly through the Greek East and not return to Rome for several months. On his arrival, he insisted in a speech to the Senate that the four men had not been killed on his orders. In his autobiography, at the end of his life, he stated again that he regretted these four executions. But by now they were a pattern, as was the guards' involvement, which marked the loss of liberty since the fall of the Republic and the 'cla.s.sical' age of Augustus' rule.

It was, then, instead of conquering that Hadrian took up touring and inspecting on the Empire-wide journeys with which this book began. From northern Britain to Egypt, he visited his provinces and made himself known to his troops. n.o.body who saw or heard him could have missed the differences from his predecessor Trajan. Hadrian chose to have a beard, a short trim one, but it came to be seen as a deliberate sign of his pa.s.sion for Greek culture. Although beards were the particular fashion of Greek-speaking philosophers, Hadrian himself was not a real intellectual. Unlike Trajan he did have an informed mind but he liked to show it off at intellectuals' expense. He did not like abstract ideas and reasoning and he had no theoretical views on politics and society: his preferred 'philosophy' was the least intellectual Epicureanism. Instead, he had a wide range of learning, and his pa.s.sion for antiquarian details was supported by his wide travels. He also had a taste for writing poetry and a keen interest in architecture and design. When he tried to interfere with plans of the architect Apollodorus, the master is said to have told him to confine himself to drawing 'still lives', not buildings.2 But Hadrian was certainly a 'man of taste'. But Hadrian was certainly a 'man of taste'.

In this taste, the two worlds of this book, the cla.s.sical Greek and the Roman, came closely together. Hadrian's love of Greek culture is evident in his patronage, his favours for Greek cities (especially Athens) and his personal romantic life. Trajan's patronage had already helped Greek-speakers from the East into the Roman Senate, but they tended to be dynasts and men from grandiose local families. The Greek senators in Hadrian's reign were abler men from educated and lettered Greek families: they were the sort of people he liked. For the city of Athens, Hadrian had enormous respect. Before his accession he had spent a year in the city and served as its senior magistrate; it became the centre of his new Greek synod, the Panh.e.l.lenion; it received such notable buildings that its town-centre was transformed. As emperor, he approved a new structure for its council, the august Areopagus; wearing Greek dress, he presided over the city's great theatrical festival, the Dionysia, and he was initiated into the Mysteries.

His love-life was more remarkable than anyruler's since Alexander the Great. Trajan had had s.e.xual affairs with males, but mostly (it was said) with boys in the army-camp or on his staff: Hadrian, by contrast, had a grand pa.s.sion which was lived out in the Greek style and involved that un-Roman object, a free-born young man. In Pliny's former province in north-west Asia, Hadrian encountered the young Antinous and fell madlyin love. Theyhunted together; theytravelled, but in October 130 young Antinous died in Egypt, drowned in the river Nile. For want of evidence the circ.u.mstances remain obscure. It is probably only gossip that Antinous had voluntarily killed himself as a votive offering for Hadrian's own poor health. But the effects of his loss are visible far and wide. Not only did Hadrian found a town near the Nile in his lover's honour: prominent citizens of this new Antinoopolis enjoyed an array of rare civic privileges and exemptions.3 He encouraged the worship of his dead lover as a 'new Osiris', the Egyptian G.o.d of rebirth. He promoted worship of Antinous in towns throughout his Empire. Images of him, therefore, have been discovered far beyond Egypt. Whereas Alexander promoted cult of the dead Hephaestion as a hero, Hadrian promoted the dead Antinous as a G.o.d, the most positive religious policy of any Roman emperor until the Christians' dominance. He encouraged the worship of his dead lover as a 'new Osiris', the Egyptian G.o.d of rebirth. He promoted worship of Antinous in towns throughout his Empire. Images of him, therefore, have been discovered far beyond Egypt. Whereas Alexander promoted cult of the dead Hephaestion as a hero, Hadrian promoted the dead Antinous as a G.o.d, the most positive religious policy of any Roman emperor until the Christians' dominance.

Hadrian's love of Greek culture was cla.s.sicizing because it imitated a cla.s.sical model but was pursued without the political context of a cla.s.sical Greek city-state. It also proved to be less flexible. In sculpture, Hadrian's cla.s.sicizing taste is still most evident. He favoured statues of white marble, not just for his beloved Antinous, and patronized manysculptors from the big city-centres of Greek western Asia, giving a new prominence to cla.s.sicism in sculpture at Rome. There was also a rigidityin his cultural tolerance. From Homer onwards, one cla.s.sical Greek inclination had been to understand foreign non-Greeks as being more like their Greek 'kinsmen' than they really were. Even so, the best-known Greek travellers, Herodotus or Alexander the Great, had not been cultural relativists for whom all customs everywhere were equally valid. Herodotus had been disgusted by the alleged prost.i.tution of Babylonian women, Alexander by the Iranians' very non-Greek habit of exposing their dead to wild birds and dogs: he banned the practice. But for Hadrian, the cla.s.sicizing Greekling, the boundaries of cultural tolerance were much more tightlydrawn. His cla.s.sical world-view could not accommodate the Jews.

We still do not have enough evidence to be sure of the origins of his major war against the Jews in Judaea (from 132 to 135). Unlike a truly cla.s.sical Greek, he was heir to a tradition of anti-Semitism, pa.s.sed on in literature since its Greek originators in Alexandria, especially since the second century BC BC. The year of Antinous' death (130) does show signs of being a turning point in Hadrian's own behaviour. Ancient sources do connect the major uprising among the Jews with Hadrian's decision, while in the Near East, to ban circ.u.mcision (a cla.s.sicizing Greekling would find it an offensive habit). He even planned to turn Jerusalem into a cla.s.sicizing city with pagan temples and to name it Aelia (after himself) Capitolina (after the Romans' great Jupiter of the Capitol hill). The result was a bitter rebellion, led in Judaea byBar Kochva ('son of a star') which cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of Jews during more than three years. From the Jews' own coins, we learn that the 'redemption' and 'freedom' of Israel were publicly proclaimed: Bar Kochva was probably seen as a Messiah.4 Hadrian had to send for one of his best generals, all the way from Britain, in order to defeat what was evidently a ma.s.sive challenge. Only then did he have his way, turning Jerusalem into a pagan city and banning the surviving Jews from entering it. 'What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?' the early Christian author Tertullian was soon to ask, challenging the link between cla.s.sical Greek culture and Christianity. Hadrian had to send for one of his best generals, all the way from Britain, in order to defeat what was evidently a ma.s.sive challenge. Only then did he have his way, turning Jerusalem into a pagan city and banning the surviving Jews from entering it. 'What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?' the early Christian author Tertullian was soon to ask, challenging the link between cla.s.sical Greek culture and Christianity.5 For Hadrian, the answer was simple: intolerance, and total destruction. For Hadrian, the answer was simple: intolerance, and total destruction.

Like Alexander the Great and his Successors, Hadrian was also a pa.s.sionate hunter, the sport which he most enjoyed in life. In northwest Asia, he founded a cityto commemorate his killing of a she-bear in the wild; in Egypt, he and darling Antinous killed a lion. At Rome, eight round sculpted reliefs portrayed Hadrian's great hunting moments on a building which was probably begun as a special hunting-monument.6 But Hadrian was not just being philh.e.l.lenic: hunting was part of a wider culture which cannot be split into 'Greek' or 'Roman' elements. It had already been championed by Trajan, another man from that paradise for the sport, Spain. Hadrian would surely have enjoyed it in Italy long before going east. The long days which he spent on it helped to shape his varied unintellectual gifts: his notable endurance on horseback in all weathers and his conspicuous openness to the company of his fellow men. But Hadrian was not just being philh.e.l.lenic: hunting was part of a wider culture which cannot be split into 'Greek' or 'Roman' elements. It had already been championed by Trajan, another man from that paradise for the sport, Spain. Hadrian would surely have enjoyed it in Italy long before going east. The long days which he spent on it helped to shape his varied unintellectual gifts: his notable endurance on horseback in all weathers and his conspicuous openness to the company of his fellow men.7 These manners linked him commendably to the difficult question of 'luxury'. As an emperor, Hadrian had the power and the money to gratify almost any personal taste, but nonetheless he cultivated the civility which befitted a 'good emperor'. In the city of Rome, on his travels and especially in front of his troops, he showed a popular plainness and openness. This accessibility had been a virtue in Greek tradition, but it was as a Roman soldier and traveller and, above all, as a hunter that Hadrian maintained it as his style. He was said to be the 'most self-proclaimed lover of the plebs':8 he would receive pet.i.tioners while in the bath; he would even bathe with the plebs in the public baths, no doubt in Trajan's vast new establishment in Rome. In the army-camps, too, he set a personal example of austerity and disdain for comfort. He consumed the cheese, bacon and coa.r.s.e wine which belonged in a proper soldier's diet. He avoided soft bedding, restoring standards of military discipline which were still being cited long after him. he would receive pet.i.tioners while in the bath; he would even bathe with the plebs in the public baths, no doubt in Trajan's vast new establishment in Rome. In the army-camps, too, he set a personal example of austerity and disdain for comfort. He consumed the cheese, bacon and coa.r.s.e wine which belonged in a proper soldier's diet. He avoided soft bedding, restoring standards of military discipline which were still being cited long after him.

In Homer's poems, our starting point, luxury was admired unreservedlyas the splendour of the heroes' palaces and the fairytale kings whom wandering Odysseus met. It first became problematic for the earlyGreek aristocrats who feared it as a source of disruptive compet.i.tion from the seventh century BC BC onwards. Philosophers then idealized 'austerity' against the 'softness' of luxurious Asia and its kings, a view which the puritanical Plato supported. After Alexander, nonetheless, the Greek kings, especially those in Egypt, exploited 'luxury' as part of their royal image and their fantasy 'world apart'. There was so much more now worldwide for them to want, acquire and display. onwards. Philosophers then idealized 'austerity' against the 'softness' of luxurious Asia and its kings, a view which the puritanical Plato supported. After Alexander, nonetheless, the Greek kings, especially those in Egypt, exploited 'luxury' as part of their royal image and their fantasy 'world apart'. There was so much more now worldwide for them to want, acquire and display.

At Rome, these att.i.tudes converged and became one of straightforward disapproval. Opposition to monarchy had been rooted in the Republic and its ruling cla.s.s from its very origins: royal luxury was out of the question. In the ideal peer group of free senators, 'luxury' was morally disreputable and socially disruptive. Together, this heritage persisted after the ending of Cicero's world and was maintained in the earlyEmpire and its increasingly uncla.s.sical culture: it belonged with the emperor's public image of restoration and moral 'back-to-basics'. So Hadrian, too, limited expenses on public banquets to the 'levels prescribed by ancient laws'. But public munificence had not been a bad sort of luxury: Hadrian also gave public beast-shows and days of human blood sports, setting a scale which made even Julius Caesar's seem limited. To enhance his marginal links with the previous dynasty, he built vast public monuments to family members, including women, and a big Mausoleum in Rome (the modern Castel Sant' Angelo), outdoing even Augustus. In Trajan's honour, he even had all the seats in the theatre washed with the most expensive of floral extracts, oil from the saffron-crocus, a gift which would have needed whole hillsides of these flowers to meet the demand. And in later life he withdrew more and more to his enormous villa at Tibur (modern Tivoli), which had no less than three sets of heated baths and a ca.n.a.l named after the notoriously luxurious Canopus, the waterway which ran beside Egypt's Alexandria. The visible, sprawling ruins of this villa are less than half of its probable extent: the rest still waits to be excavated.

'Luxury' had always promoted a gap between practice and public profession. ByHadrian's reign, it connected with changes in the scope of 'justice' and 'freedom'. In our collection of Roman legal opinions, Hadrian's own rulings survive identifiably; so does a collection, probably authentic, of the 'opinions' which he gave in answer to requests. In the history of Roman law, it is Hadrian who patronized a codification of the long-running edict of the annual praetors and saw that it was published in an agreed form.9 Much of our inscribed record of his reign around the Empire is the record of his judging and deciding pet.i.tions and local disputes. In Italy, he even appointed four ex-consuls to judge cases submitted to them. When hearing cases himself, Hadrian was particularly remembered for including specialized experts in law as his advisers. Much of our inscribed record of his reign around the Empire is the record of his judging and deciding pet.i.tions and local disputes. In Italy, he even appointed four ex-consuls to judge cases submitted to them. When hearing cases himself, Hadrian was particularly remembered for including specialized experts in law as his advisers.

This body of advice, writings and tribunals may seem very far removed from the giving of justice in the distant world of Homer and Hesiod. In the Roman Empire, judges were literate; textbooks and copies of previous rulings existed; complex distinctions of procedure and civil law under lay what Hadrian decided. Yet in another waythe distance travelled was no longer so very large. As in the Homeric world, justice was being rendered byan individual's inquisition, which was not subject to the decisions of a jury. This change in the structure of jurisdiction had re-entered the cla.s.sical world with the rise of King Philip and the age of monarchy. The randomly selected juries of cla.s.sical democratic Athens were no longer the main type of public adjudication. There was also another telling change. In Hadrian's reign a frank distinction between the 'more respectable' and the 'more humble' begins to be stated, for the first time in Roman legal texts.10 The 'more respectable' included army-veterans, but also those with the rank (to be paid for) of city-councillor, let alone the Roman knights and senators. The 'more humble' extended down to propertyless vagrants and below. For the same crimes, these two social orders were now to be liable to different punishments: there was to be no flogging, no torture for respectable citizens, and no beheading, crucifixion or deportation, either. Previously, protection from these extreme penalties had been linked to possession of Roman citizenship and was founded on that cardinal principle of Roman liberty, the right to 'call out' or appeal. Now a 'humble' Roman citizen was liable to the most brutal penalties like any one else of low status, as if his citizenship carried no privilege. Respectable persons were protected because they were respectable, whether citizens or not. The 'more respectable' included army-veterans, but also those with the rank (to be paid for) of city-councillor, let alone the Roman knights and senators. The 'more humble' extended down to propertyless vagrants and below. For the same crimes, these two social orders were now to be liable to different punishments: there was to be no flogging, no torture for respectable citizens, and no beheading, crucifixion or deportation, either. Previously, protection from these extreme penalties had been linked to possession of Roman citizenship and was founded on that cardinal principle of Roman liberty, the right to 'call out' or appeal. Now a 'humble' Roman citizen was liable to the most brutal penalties like any one else of low status, as if his citizenship carried no privilege. Respectable persons were protected because they were respectable, whether citizens or not.

Hadrian did not initiate this distinction, but in his reign there began to be explicitly 'one penalty for the rich, one for the poor'. This development had older roots in Roman practice, and the punishment of lower-cla.s.s citizens in Cicero's Rome mayalso have been as savage as it now became. But the distinction was now in writing, and to many Romans (including Pliny) it was not even unjust. For 'fair justice', such people thought, was proportional, varying according to the cla.s.s and worth of the recipient. Homer's Odysseus, speaking moderately to his fellow n.o.bles and thumping the lower cla.s.ses with his sceptre, is no longer very far away.

This frank calibration of justice by social status devalued Roman citizenship and went with a change in the scope of freedom. In Homer's poems, 'freedom' had been freedom from enslavement or conquest, individual or collective. In cla.s.sical Athens, it became the freedom of democracy, the freedom of the male citizens 'to do whatever they decide', with accompanying notions of their personal 'freedom from' undue influence. In the Roman Republic, founded by ending a monarchy, 'freedom from' one-man rule was historically a very strong value, together with the popular notion of a freedom which was 'freedom from' hara.s.sment by social superiors and the senators' notions of 'freedom for' their senatorial order to say or do what it wanted. Under the emperors' rule, freedom, as the opposite to slavery, was still prized in Rome's slave-society, as it had been prized everywhere else in the cla.s.sical world. But from the years of Augustus' dominance onwards, only 'traces' (as Tacitus stressed) remained of the senators' particular 'freedom', and throughout the Empire, the 'freedom' of cities and popular a.s.semblies had become a matter only of degree. Under Hadrian, his beloved Athens was still called a 'free city', but it honoured him, the emperor, as an Olympian G.o.d. On the Greek island of Lesbos, inscriptions honoured Hadrian as a 'liberator' while also paying him divine honours.11 The former 'freedom' of Athens and Sparta, so Pliny observed, was now only a 'shadow': in general, Roman rule had curbed or abolished democracies and popular rule in the Greek subject-cities. At Rome, meanwhile, the 'resolutions' of the Senate had acquired the force of law, because they communicated the emperor's own considered wish or even, in due course, the very words of his speech. In The former 'freedom' of Athens and Sparta, so Pliny observed, was now only a 'shadow': in general, Roman rule had curbed or abolished democracies and popular rule in the Greek subject-cities. At Rome, meanwhile, the 'resolutions' of the Senate had acquired the force of law, because they communicated the emperor's own considered wish or even, in due course, the very words of his speech. In AD AD 129 the consuls 'brought forward a bill, based on a paper of Imperator Caesar Hadrian Augustus, son of Trajan Parthicus, grandson of the deified Nerva, greatest First Citizen, father of the state, on 3 March...'. 129 the consuls 'brought forward a bill, based on a paper of Imperator Caesar Hadrian Augustus, son of Trajan Parthicus, grandson of the deified Nerva, greatest First Citizen, father of the state, on 3 March...'.12 The result pa.s.sed into our Roman law-books. The 'First Citizen', who initiated it, was himself now 'released from the laws', a status which was justified (for legal minds) by the law which had set out the Emperor Vespasian's powers. The result pa.s.sed into our Roman law-books. The 'First Citizen', who initiated it, was himself now 'released from the laws', a status which was justified (for legal minds) by the law which had set out the Emperor Vespasian's powers.

'Liberty' of speech and decision, as Cicero had known it, was now dead. While in Greece, in his mid-twenties, Hadrian had been one of the manyhearers of a noted teacher, Epictetus.13 Epictetus was himself the ex-slave of a freedman in the emperor's household: he discoursed on freedom, justice and moderation to large audiences, people who were mostly drawn from the respectable young men of cities in the Greek-speaking world. Epictetus taught the doctrine of Stoic philosophers which had been formulated in the decade after Alexander and was known, too, to Cicero and his contemporaries. For Epictetus, 'freedom' was an individual's reasoned control of his desires and pa.s.sions. A rich man, torn by fears and wants, was therefore as much, even more, of a 'slave' as any slave in the real world. Epictetus' surviving teachings never even mention his own experience of slavery in his youth. Rather, with first-hand ill.u.s.trations, he spoke of the court-life around a Roman emperor as 'futile' slavery. Epictetus was himself the ex-slave of a freedman in the emperor's household: he discoursed on freedom, justice and moderation to large audiences, people who were mostly drawn from the respectable young men of cities in the Greek-speaking world. Epictetus taught the doctrine of Stoic philosophers which had been formulated in the decade after Alexander and was known, too, to Cicero and his contemporaries. For Epictetus, 'freedom' was an individual's reasoned control of his desires and pa.s.sions. A rich man, torn by fears and wants, was therefore as much, even more, of a 'slave' as any slave in the real world. Epictetus' surviving teachings never even mention his own experience of slavery in his youth. Rather, with first-hand ill.u.s.trations, he spoke of the court-life around a Roman emperor as 'futile' slavery.

In the cla.s.sical Greek world, the freedom which had belonged with the greatest cultural expression was the freedom of democratic citizens, the political freedom of a male majority which was limited only by decisions to which they themselves consented. In Hadrian's world, freedom had become only a freedom from bad, cruel emperors or the unpolitical 'freedom' of an individual's control over his desires. From an admired teacher, Epictetus, Hadrian had heard what Pericles or Alexander never heard from theirs, that a public career at the centre of power was a dangerous, disturbing vanityand that its public honours were futile.

As a many-sided man, Hadrian would not have forgotten this view of the world which he dominated. But it was onlyone view, in a mind which entertained so manyothers. At his huge villa at Tibur, Hadrian could walk through monuments named after great places in the cla.s.sical Greek world: there was a Lyceum and an Academy, places where Socrates, Plato and Aristotle had taught, a Tempe where the Muses had once played, and a Prytaneum, where the free councillors of Greek democracies had typically dined and attended to public business. In the gardens of his villa, Hadrian even had a so-called 'underworld', a representation of Hades: it is probably still to be seen in some of the underground tunnels on the site. His own tastes in philosophywere for the Epicurean school, for whom the fear of death was an unwarranted 'disturbance' and the tales of an afterlife only fables for the superst.i.tious ma.s.ses.

From his provinces, Hadrian had already answered requests about the persecution of a most 'wicked superst.i.tion', the beliefs held by members of the Christian churches. Hadrian's answers continued to insist that trials must involve individual prosecutors, people who would bring formal charges in public against these Christians. Contrary to the wishes of some leading provincials, he thus insisted that the persecution of Christians must be a formal process, to be publicly pursued with rules. By his judgements, his letters and his edicts, it was Hadrian who now made the laws by which justice was done. As emperor, he was freed from the laws; as an educated man, he was personally free from fears of the underworld. Nonetheless, in a famous poem, he addressed consolatory words to his 'little soul', a future wanderer in a chillyand humourless afterlife. Long centuries of change in the scope of justice, freedom and luxury lay behind Hadrian's outlook from his villa garden. But he had no idea that the Christians, whose hara.s.sment he regulated, would then overturn this world by antiquity's greatest realignment of freedom and justice: the 'under-world' would no longer be a garden-designer's fancy.

BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

Alexander the Great

Pagans and Christians

The Unauthorized Version

The Making of 'Alexander'

[image]

1. A pentathlete doing the long jump with hand-held weights. Amphora of the Tyrrhenian group, c c. 540 BC.

[image]

2. A slave-girl entertains male symposiasts with music: red-figure krater krater, or mixing-bowl, fourth century BC.

[image]

3. Hunter, wearing the typical petasos petasos-hat, with his spears and hound, c c. 510500 bc, Edinburgh painter, Athens.

[image]

4. A s.e.xually aroused older male fondles a young, probably prepubic, boy in a gym or wrestlings.p.a.ce (palaestra). Brygos painter, Athens, c c. 480 BC.

[image]

5. Bronze figurine of a Spartan girl, from the rim of a bronze vessel. Her robe, cut away off the shoulder, suggests she is dancing. Late SIXTH century BC.

[image]

6. Marble statue of a G.o.d or hero, found on the Spartan acropolis. The sides of the helmet are decorated with male rams. Late fifth century BC.

[image]

7. Footguards of the Persian king, with pointed hats of Scythian style. From Persepolis, fourth century BC.

[image]

8. Painting on the inner surface of the coffin-lid of the 'Tomb of the Diver', found in 1968 about a mile south of Paestum. Four other paintings of scenes from a symposium decorated the inner sides: the young boy dives, holding his head awkwardly, from a plinth of uncertain significance. Like the symposium scenes, the scene surely refers to worldly life, perhaps to something in the dead man's earlier life, rather than symbolizing his dive out into the 'unknown' s.p.a.ce of the underworld, a favoured but fanciful interpretation. Painting on white stucco surface.

[image]

9. Small terracotta plaque from Locri, in the Greek West. A young woman handles a folded cloth at a decorated chest, beneath a mirror, a wool-basket, a flask and cup. c c. 470450 BC.

[image]

10. 'Riace Bronze' statue, Warrior A, evidently a hero, who held a shield. Fine cla.s.sical work, arguably Athenian, c c. 460 BC. Shipwrecked, and thus preserved, off southern Italy.

[image]

11. Marble relief of Athenian cavalryman, his gaze fixed on his fallen enemy. Possibly a reference to the first cavalry battle in the Peloponnesian War, c c. 431430 BC. If so, Pericles' Funeral Speech was spoken over the dead, including this warrior.

[image]

12. A rare Athenian representation of a slave, ugly, chained at the ankles and collecting stones. Attic black-figure, c c. 490480 BC.

[image]

13. A wreathed young boy, perhaps not a slave, fills his party-cup, or kylix kylix, with watered wine from the mixing-bowl. Attic red-figure cup, Cage painter c c. 490 BC.

[image]

14. White-ground oil-flask, showing a female, playing as a Muse, captioned with the word 'Helicon', signifying the muses' mountain. Achilles painter, c c. 440430 BC.

[image]

15. A pensive G.o.ddess Athena contemplates what is probably a grave monument; perhaps inscribed with names of Athenian casualties in war. Fine cla.s.sical marble relief, Athens Acropolis, c c. 460 BC.

[image]

16. Gravestone of Sosias and Kephisodorus: two citizen-hoplites shake hands; a man in a priestly tunic at left. Athens, c c. 410 BC.

[image]

17. A baby learns to crawl as its parents, surely, look on. Athenian red-figure jug, pelike pelike, c c. 430420 BC.

[image]

18. Copy of the marble statue by Polyeuctus to honour the democratic orator Demosthenes in 280 bc at Athens, fortytwo years after his death.

[image]

19. Legendary Alexander at the Last Judgement with Indian Porus, Cyrus the Persian and Nebuchadnezzar the Babylonian, two hundred years his senior. From Kastoria, in his home Macedonia. Late Byzantine wall painting, fourteenth c c. ad.

[image]

20. Grave monument of husband and wife, Thraseas and Euandria, watched by a young slave girl. Attica, c c. 350340 BC.

[image]

21. Reconstruction of a painting of a Macedonian lion- and boar-hunt, set in Asia. Alexander rides in to rescue what may be Lysimachus, a future Successor. Perhaps first painted in c c. 332/1 bc, and copied later in mosaic.

[image]

22. Silver tetradrachm, c c. 310305 bc, showing Alexander, struck for Ptolemy I, his friend, historian and commander.

[image]

23. Indo-Greek silver tetradrachm, c c. 170145 bc, with bust of King Eucratides the Great, ruler and conqueror in Bactria, Sogdia and north-west India long after Alexander.