Search

The work, Dialogue between the Emperor Hadrian and Epictetus the Philosopher, is a fictional dialogue consisting of seventy-three questions and answers, probably written in the 2nd or 3rd century AD. It features the Roman emperor Hadrian as the questioning pupil and the Stoic philosopher Epictetus as the responding teacher. Most of the questions can be divided into two main categories. The smaller part is written in the form of riddles. The others are definitions. The questions deal with a variety of topics: things to do with death (e.g. gravedigger, funeral pyre), definitions of various metals (gold, silver, iron), useful things (e.g. letter, picture, sword), relationships and emotional terms (e.g. friendship, hope, love), celestial objects (sun, moon, sky, stars, earth), and realities related to seafaring (sea, ship, sailor), nightlife (sleep, night, pillow) or religion (god, sacrifice). This work was particularly influential in the development of medieval dialogue. The most famous adaptation is the Enfant Sage, which originated in the 13th century somewhere in the region of Provence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The figure of the Roman emperor – ubiquitous yet ever-elusive – remains the flame to which Roman historians are ever drawn. And Fergus Millar's The Emperor in the Roman World remains the yardstick against which all subsequent efforts are judged, and with which they are all inevitably in dialogue. That is true too of Caesar Rules , the major new offering from Olivier Hekster, a one-time doctoral student of Millar's, and now one of the leading contenders for his crown. Hekster's core interest is what the emperor was ; in particular, how this institution could survive and adapt to changing circumstances despite the fact that formally it did not exist, certainly was not defined, and practically existed in a society antithetical on principle to both monarchy and change. Hekster finds the key for this long-worried lock in 'the presentation and perception of power' (10), and in particular the expectations – from all sides, and at all times – that both consolidated and constrained emperors' authority. To demonstrate this he conceives a largely unprecedented ambition in this context: to consider source material in all media from the late Republic to the reign of Justinian. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Like the First Emperor, Augustus created both the title and form of the emperor, and like the former he was both celebrated for his achievements and condemned for his cruelty and deceitfulness in climbing to power. Accounts mock the First Emperor's paranoia in hiding away behind covered passageways, but the emperor's invisibility was an ideal from the early Han. These additional approaches to examining Qin and the First Emperor are not offered as criticisms of Barbieri-Low, who has provided more than anyone could demand, but instead as further demonstrations of the validity of his argument that the First Emperor is indeed "good to think.". [Extracted from the article]

The node centered by the volume deals with the political-cultural ties between the late medieval german emperors and the plural world of the Italian humanists. Particularly, conveying a double and corresponding line of exchanges between North and South of the Alps, the point was re-focused over emperor's presence and their retinues in the peninsula as the fulcrum of this long-term exchange. Thus, new perspectives open up regarding spaces and men involved in this political experience. Regional spaces more in contact than others with the imperial presence and the collection of sources, on the basis of macro-areas in the wake of Peter Moraw's scheme, are very useful tools to adapt our knowledge of the multiple links between emperors and Reichsitalien, not only in the 14th century and in the previous two centuries (12th-13th) but also for the crucial subsequent period (15th-16th) - considering the entire autumn of the Medieval Empire and, at the same time, the Renaissance - still relatively little focused on by the new research fields. In order to include these centuries as well, Moraw's thesis should be proficiently reconsidered, however, in light of the political-cultural ties with the emperor. Thus, it would broaden the field of research from mere jurisdiction - even this principle remains unaltered still for centuries - to political culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Der Tod des Ptolemaios von Mauretanien im frühen 1. Jahrhundert n. Chr. erscheint auch heute noch rätselhaft. In dieser Untersuchung soll daher neues Licht auf ein vieldiskutiertes Thema geworfen werden. Dabei wird insbesondere eine Passage in Suetons Schrift über den römischen Kaiser Caligula in den Blick genommen, der für den Tod des Ptolomaios verantwortlich gewesen sein soll. Dort wird berichtet, dass Caligula den mauretanischen König habe ermorden lassen, da dieser in einer purpurnen abolla in Rom erschienen sein und somit den Kaiser öffentlich brüskiert haben soll. In der Analyse der schriftlichen Quellen wird deutlich, dass es sich bei der abolla um eine typische Tracht hellenistisch geprägter Herrscher handelte, die von der römischen Gesellschaft als fremd konnotiert wurde. Die prestigeträchtige Farbe des Purpurs stellte eine zusätzliche Komponente einer traditionellen monarchischen Selbstdarstellung dar, die von Ptolemaios als König von Mauretanien auch so zu erwarten gewesen sein muss. Doch zeigt es sich, dass das Auftreten des Ptolemaios von Caligula vor dem Hintergrund der Spannungen der Gaetulicus-Lepidus-Verschwörung und der selbst gewählten Herrschaftskonzeption des princeps – einer expressiven Repräsentation des eigenen Ranges – missverstanden wurde. Dies führte schließlich zur drastischen Reaktion des Kaisers. Summary: The death of Ptolemy of Mauretania in the early 1st century AD remains a mystery to this day. Therefore, this study aims to shed new light on a much-discussed topic. Intending to do so, a passage from Sueton's book on the Roman emperor Caligula will be taken into account, who is believed to be responsible for Ptolemy's death. In this book, it is reported that Caligula himself ordered his assassination, because of Ptolemy's appearance in Rome, allegedly wearing a purple abolla, which is said to have publicly affronted the emperor. The analysis of written sources illustrates that the abolla is a typical costume of Hellenistic-shaped rulers, which was connoted as alien by Roman society. The prestigious colour of purple displays another component of traditional monarchic self-staging, which Ptolemy, being the king of Mauretania, made use of, which must have been expected anyways. However, it shows that Ptolemy's appearance was misunderstood by Caligula, which may have occurred in the light of the conspiracy led by Gaetulicus and Lepidus and because of the princeps's chosen conception of rulership, manifesting as an expressive representation of his own rank. Eventually, this led to the emperor's drastic reaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most distinctive rituals of Roman imperial accession was the adlocutio , the speech delivered by the new emperor to a military assembly, which can be documented from the first to the fifth centuries a.d. This article seeks to explain the extraordinary endurance of this neglected genre of speech by examining its origins, setting and content. After outlining the unusual nature of the accession adlocutio when set against both earlier and contemporary Mediterranean practice, the first half of this article traces its origins to the military culture of the late Roman Republic. In particular, the adlocutio is related to two other rituals which rose to new prominence in the era of the Civil Wars: the acclamation of the victorious general as imperator and the granting of military gifts. In the second part of this article, the setting for the typical adlocutio of the Imperial era is discussed using the often-problematic evidence of our ancient historical sources. The content of the speech itself is then reconstructed primarily through a close reading of our one surviving example, the brief address of Leo I preserved by Peter the Patrician. Finally, the evidence for the origins and content of the speech are brought together in an argument for the speech's survival as a useful tool for emperors seeking to establish a permanent bond with the soldiers they commanded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Lombards and the Gepids, who are Germanic tribes that have important influences on European history, have been the two decisive political figures of the Pannonia region in terms of early medieval history. In particular, the Scandinavian origin of the Lombards is supported by creation myths and archaeological studies. After the collapse of the Hun Empire, the Gepids established their kingdom around Pannonia as of the second half of the 5th century and existed here as an independent kingdom for more than a century. The Lombards, who were settled in the region as an ally of the empire long after the Gepids, frequently fought with the Gepids in the history of Pannonia, which lasted about thirty years. As a result of the Lombard-Gepid conflicts, in which the Roman Empire was also involved from time to time, two wars were waged 15 years apart. In the second war in 567, Lombards under the leadership of King Alboin won a crushing victory over the Gepid and the Gepid kingdom was destroyed by the Lombards. The policy followed by Emperor Justinian has also an effect on the tense relations of the two peoples. The aim of this study is to examine the Lombard-Gepid relations and to determine the effects of the relations of both Germanic tribes with the Empire on their political existence, considering the Balkan policy of the Eastern Roman Emperor Justinainus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One widely derided aspect of autocratic regimes is that they frequently feature nepotistic systems for political organization and management of power transfers, with inexperienced or unqualified individuals taking power solely because of their familial relation to the prior ruler. Such systems are thought to be more unstable and ineffective, reducing desirable outcomes for autocratic leaders, as well as the states they govern. We argue that this characterization ignores several important features of autocratic governance: rulers must constantly negotiate with other elites and rely on political networks based around loyalty and agreed-upon divisions of power, spoils, and prestige. Beneficiaries of nepotism enter office with many advantages that should make their reigns more stable and effective than those of less connected rulers. Specifically, we find evidence from the backgrounds and tenures of Roman emperors that dynastic relation to the previous ruler explains the likelihood of an emperor surviving in office without deposal as well as their effectiveness while in office. Rulers with close familial ties to their predecessor enjoyed longer rules and were associated with periods of imperial prosperity. Moreover, we also find that youth in autocratic office is a strong predictor of longevity without deposal, and that young rulers came to power owing to their dynastic relation to a predecessor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are abundant examples of negative assessments of cultic honors to Roman emperors by nineteenth- and twentieth-century researchers. In the minds of historians raised in modern societies, in which monotheistic Abrahamic religions usually reign supreme, this is a completely understandable a priori approach; nevertheless, it hinders a correct understanding of Roman society in antiquity. This paper examines the need to provide a complex answer to the question of whether the inhabitants of the Roman world really believed in the divinity of their rulers. A complex answer to the question can only emerge from a historical contextualization of the phenomenon under analysis, an examination of the imperial cult within the wider changes that were taking place in Roman religion at the time, and application of the necessary empathetic approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Studia Historica Brunensia is the property of Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

"The Emperor and the Elephant: Christians and Muslims in the Age of Charlemagne" by Sam Ottewill-Soulsby challenges the common perception of Emperor Charlemagne as a defender of Christendom against Muslims. Ottewill-Soulsby argues that the historical reality was much more complex, with instances of Christian-Muslim alliances and diplomatic contact. The book highlights the multipolar nature of the Islamic world and the dynastic problems faced by both Christian and Muslim societies. Ottewill-Soulsby's use of Islamic sources alongside Carolingian sources provides a comprehensive understanding of the relations between Christians and Muslims during this era. [Extracted from the article]

Trajan's status as a model emperor is perhaps most famously expressed in Eutropius' catchphrase "More fortunate than Augustus, better than Trajan" (Eutr. Brev. 8.5.3). Modern scholarship has similarly stressed Trajan's exemplary status, assuming that Trajan's virtues were already a point of departure by which to measure second- and third-century emperors. This article challenges that notion; it argues that Trajan's status as a model emperor was a late-antique literary construct. Trajan only entered the repertoire of exemplary emperors during the course of the fourth century to become the model emperor in the very late-fourth- and early-fifth century. This development depended on the historical context and ideological demands, as well as on the availability of the then-existing material discussing and depicting the historical Trajan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When the Eastern Roman Emperor Manuel I Komnenos came to the throne, although he had many enemies in the east and west of his country, he preferred to follow a predominantly western foreign policy. The reason for this is the idea of establishing a world-wide empire by making the Eastern Roman Empire the worldly leader in the west. For this reason, he tried to establish close relations with the Germans and the Papacy against the Normans in the west. However, II. The start of the Crusade and the Germans being at the forefront in this expedition, and the Pope's support of this Crusade, nullified these alliance efforts. Taking advantage of this situation, Emperor Manuel I Komnennos, who produced new policies in the face of the attacks of the Norman King Roger II, was able to re-establish an alliance with the German King Kondrad III, and also provided their naval support thanks to the commercial concessions he gave to the Venetians. However, since the death of the German King Kondrad and the presence of Eastern Rome in Italy and the Adriatic coasts were against the interests of the Venetians, their opposition to Eastern Rome ruined the plans of Manuel I Komnenos. Despite the successes in Southern Italy and Sicily, the dominance in these areas did not last long and the Eastern Roman armies had to withdraw from these regions as a result of an agreement with the Normans. These western- oriented policies of the emperor caused the army to be filled with mercenaries and the country to fall into a difficult economic situation. The weakness of the emperor to the Latins for the sake of being the only world emperor has led to the reaction of the people of the country. Emperor Manuel I Komnenos, who appeared as an ambitious emperor in terms of world-wide policies, could not achieve this goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Derecho UNED is the property of Editorial UNED and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of CEDRUS is the property of Mediterranean Civilisations Research Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Wieki Stare i Nowe is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Slaskiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Relationes 10-12 stand out from Q.A. Symmachus' reports written to give an account of his activities at the position of the prefect of Rome (praefectus urbis Romae). These three relationes were written and sent by Symmachus to Roman emperors to inform them of the death of V.A. Praetextatus, who was a famous and influential Roman dignitary as well as Symmachus' close friend. Rel. 10-12 are not only thematically related, but also - unlike the rest of the reports - clearly marked with personal and laudatory accents and thus their nature significantly differs from the formal documents sent to emperors from the chancellery of an imperial administrative dignitary. In this paper, we aim at presenting Rel. 10-12 as an elogium, in which in three separate reports Symmachus included a coherent eulogy of Praetextatus and presented his idealized portrait tinged with his own personal feelings, underpinned by the aspects of conservative ideology cultivated then within the circles of the Roman senatorial aristocracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Kunstkammer of Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II (1552–1612) in Prague was one of early modern Europe's most famed princely collections. Part of this renown stemmed from the collection's abundance of rare, exotic, costly and artfully produced objects. However, Rudolf's Kunstkammer not only contained copious numbers of diverse objects, it also housed many objects that took copiousness (that is, sexual fertility and seasonal productivity) as their subject. This essay considers how copiousness affected the use of Rudolf's collection. In the end, it reveals that copiousness complicated and made difficult the use of Rudolf's collection on both a practical and an interpretative level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Studii de Ştiintă şi Cultură is the property of Studii de Stiinta si Cultura and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Martial dedicated many epigrams to the four successive emperors of Rome with whom he had been contemporary: Titus, Domitian, Nerva and Trajan. In all the poet’s volumes, his epigrams were similar with respect of their underlying strategy even if they were praising a different sovereign. Each time the poet depicted the current emperor as a perfect ruler, endowed with the most noble virtues and in total contrast with the previous monarch who was loaded with vices. During the reign of Nerva, while recurring to his usual tactics of praising the current leader and attacking the previous one, Martial arrived in the position of posthumously denigrating Domitian whom he had adulated many years before. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The gigantic fortified palace compound of the Roman Emperor Diocletian in Spoleto/Split on the Adriatic coast in Dalmatia took only about 10 years to build. It had already been in existence for more than 930 years when Emperor Frederick II began to build the Castello dell' Imperatore in Prato, not far from Florence, in 1237. The Hohenstaufen emperor had never set eyes on the famous Roman palace in Split, but he is likely to have been aware of it through the intermediary of his praepositus aedificorum, Riccardo da Lentini. The design of the castle in Prato, which was never completed, gives the impression of having been influenced by the palace in Split. An analysis of the main gateway in Prato suggests a measure of imitation of the Protyron at Spoleto. This magnificent part of the palace there comprises four enormous porphyry columns with attic bases and composite capitals. These bear a triangular pediment with a console frieze, the middle of which forms a Syrian arch. In Prato there is too little space at the site of the castle for any influence of the Protyron in Split to be directly apparent in terms of its dimensions. Two different masons/sculptors clearly worked on the gateways in Prato, one of whom was still in thrall to Roman art. The other, who may possibly have been a young Niccolò Pisano, worked in a far more 'modern' style. He was clearly responsible for the four columns immediately adjoining the portal, with their splendid capitals. It is striking how little expense was spared in the architecture at Prato. For example, in each gateway two different types of stone, of contrasting colours, were used: green and white in Prato and red and white in Split. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the character of Caligula in Alexandre Dumas’ Caligula (1837) in comparison with the image left by the Roman emperor in ancient literary sources. Dumas highlights a tyrannical regime based on denial and flattery, shows the emperor as a tyrannical lover and mocks aspirations to the divinity of the one who takes himself for Jupiter, but is afraid of thunder, who wants to be the master of the destiny of all, but doesn’t master his own, falling under Messalina’s machinations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationship between jurists and political authority has a profound importance in every society. This is especially true for Ancient Rome where law was related so directly to politics and jurists had significant influence in public life. This paper aims to give an insight on the evolution of the relations between Roman jurists and the political authorities. When the legal science emerged in the Late Republican period jurists enjoyed a considerable freedom and autonomy, then during the Early Pricipate emperors begun to restrict their autonomy through ius respondendi. In the Late Principate the majority of the leading jurists were governmental officials and the balance in relations between jurists and the politics shifted towards the later. During the Dominate jurists were anonymous and under the total control of the emperor. The treatment of the relation between Roman jurists and emperors through centuries usually reflects the political climate of the time, some favoring the freedom of jurists while others the sovereign authority of emperors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Teología y Vida is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Facultad de Teologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Roman emperors were at the pinnacle of society. They were supreme commanders of the armies, the highest priests and the ultimate source of law and justice. These three roles were made clear to the inhabitants of the empire from the reign of Augustus onwards through a variety of media. Public ceremonies showed emperors leaving the city for campaigns, and returning in triumph, at sacrifice, or sitting in judgement. Inscriptions likewise indicated the main roles of emperors through titulature or narrative. The military and the religious leadership of emperors were also made abundantly clear through public monuments and on centrally issued coinage. Yet, throughout Roman imperial history these last two types of source material are surprisingly silent on the emperors' legal role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The military troops as well as the Roman administration were pulled back from Dacia in 271 AD. Nonetheless, the territory of the quondam province was still considered as a strategically important zone of influence by the Roman Empire. Having suffered a defeat at Naissus in 269 AD by the Emperor Claudius II, the Tervingi (Visigoths) departed from the Greuthungi (Ostrogoths) and moved to the territory of Transylvania in 271 AD. This was probably based on an agreement with the Romans, occupying basically the already abandoned land of Dacia province. They named their new land Gutþiuda (Gothia). Their presence can be identified by the archaeological culture Sântana de Mureº - Csernyakhov. The Tervingi were led by an elected law speaker or judge, referred to in Latin texts as the "iudex", and not by a king. There are at least two objects from the 4th century treasure hoards that are relevant from the point of view of Tervingian "public law": an oath ring and an onyx brooch. Functionally, the oath ring reaffirmed the jurisdictional role of the leaders. The large onyx or "imperial" brooch could be originally among the insignia of Tervingian law speakers at least from the middle of the 4th century, symbolizing that they saw themselves as being of equal rank with the Roman emperor. The meeting of Emperor Valens and iudex Athanarich at the Danube in 369 could definitely represent a suitable event for the judge of the Tervingi to show off that he is on par with the emperor. In 376 AD the Huns defeated the Tervingi, who fled from Transylvanian territory to the Roman Empire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emperor Constantine was a mysterious figure. It is only logical that outstanding political and cultural persons draw attention not only during their active life but also after their deaths. It is possible to say that they possessed at least one additional alter-ego. In consequence, there is a significantly large number of sources that can be used to uncover Constantine’s real character and life. They are, however, simultaneously partisan, deformed and fragmented. They were created by either contemporary boarders and ideologues or by authors who did not manage to suppress their prejudice. One might wonder to what degree these interpretations are fiction. In addition, the paper also analyses the growing number of historiographies in later times and presents complicated, sensitive, contradictory, and maybe because of this fascinating cognitive interests like heroization, the creation of myths and cult around the first Christian emperor in historiography. It is quite logical that prominent political or cultural personalities attract attention not only during their active work, but also after their death. It can be said that they have two imaginary lives. One real and the other created by their adherents, followers or ideological opponents, or by political power or historiography. These personalities provoke controversy over their bequest, their real or apparent ideological orientation, their deeds and their plans and intentions. This usually, depending on the need and circumstances, leads either to exaltation, glorification and inviolable mythologization, or to a complete, and absolute condemnation. The figure of the Roman emperor Constantine I is in such a situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among the changes brought about by the Reformation was a new interpretation of the role of the ruler as a person who bore responsibility for his subjects. In the administration of the state, this led to the establishment of councils responsible for particular fields, whose members were now mostly drawn from university backgrounds, and it also led to the building of chancelleries to administer everyday affairs. In Weimar, through good fortune, the chancellery of a model Protestant state has survived in the form of the 'Bastille', and the highly instructive pictorial programme of the gatehouse bears witness to the humanist-inspired attitude towards government adopted by John Frederick I, Elector of Saxony (ruled 1532-1547), known as John the Magnanimous. Metaphorical images inspired by the Roman poet Virgil propagate his reign as a new 'Golden Age', modelled on that of the Roman Emperor Augustus. The iconographic programme devised by Nicolaus Gromann (c. 1500-1566) for the ornamental gatehouse, which is charged with political significance, was realised shortly before the fateful battle at Mühlberg in 1547, as a result of which Elector John Frederick forfeited both his freedom and his status as an elector, while the Reformation lost its political leader. In subsequent centuries, the gatehouse in Weimar stood as a memorial to the legitimate claim of the House of Saxony-Weimar to the electorship of Saxony and the leading role to which Protestant-ruled states within the Empire aspired. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Adalya is the property of Koc University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanitas: Revista de Estudos Greco-Latinas is the property of Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article argues that Constantine the Great, until he was recognized by Galerius, the senior Emperor of the Tetrarchy, was an usurper with no right to the imperial power, nothwithstanding his claim that his father, the Emperor Constantius I, conferred upon him the imperial title before he died. Tetrarchic principles, envisaged by Diocletian, were specifically put in place to supersede and override blood kinship. Constantine's accession to power started as a military coup in which a military unit composed of barbarian soldiers seems to have played an important role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The microphotogrammetric survey of the roman emperor Maximianus Herculeus' medallion, described in this report, demonstrated that, despite the use of an "old" and, nowadays, "low cost" camera sensor it is still possible to obtain a detailed 3D textured model useful for different scientific purposes and virtual enhancement. Here are presented the photogrammetric results reached with the selection of the best solutions in terms of number of images, in order to speed up the entire photogrammetric workflow and pursue the goals previously explained. This medallion is one of the most important examples of roman medallions which belongs to the numismatic collection stored at the Correr Museum in Venice. Its 3D survey was developed as a parallel step of a main project which aims to acquire in three-dimensions, with a structured light scanner, the complete roman collection of medallions. This digitization project proposes to record the volumetric information of these small archaeological remains and to realize an online virtual gallery in the web site of the museum (using 3DHOP, an open source web viewer developed by the Visual Computing Lab of the CNR-ISTI of Pisa). At the end of the microphotogrammetric workflow, a distance analysis was computed to highlight the differences between the meshes obtained with a photogrammetric approach and a structured light scanner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of CEDRUS is the property of Mediterranean Civilisations Research Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In the study of the divinization of Roman emperors, a great deal depends upon the sequence of events. According to the model of consecratio proposed by Bickermann, apotheosis was supposed to be accomplished during the deceased emperor's public funeral, after which the Senate acknowledged what had transpired by decreeing appropriate honours for the new diuus. Contradictory evidence has turned up in the Fasti Ostienses, however, which seem to indicate that both Marciana and Faustina were declared diuae before their funerals took place. This suggests a shift away from the Augustan precedent, whereby the testimony of a (well-compensated) witness had been required to establish divinity (Suet. Aug. 100.4, Dio Cass. 56.46.2, 59.11.4; cf. Sen. Apocol. 1.2–3), to a procedure in which the senators were able to jump ahead to the politically foreordained conclusion and bestow the honour at once. Careful re-examination of the evidence in Tacitus (Ann. 12.69.3, 13.2.3) and Suetonius (Ner. 9) has made it possible to assign this development to the year 54, with the consecration of Claudius. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the correspondence between Innocent III and Kalojan of Bulgaria (1197–1207), the title of the Bulgarian ruler is recorded both as rex and imperator. While the pope consistently employs the title rex, Kalojan refers to himself, in every occasion, with the title imperator. Some scholars have speculated that the use of this title was a deliberate political move: styling himself imperator, Kalojan was claiming a much greater political dignity than that of king of Bulgaria, putting himself on the same level as the emperor of Constantinople. On the other hand, while Innocent’s letters were obviously written in Latin, Kalojan’s letters were originally in Bulgarian, translated in Greek, and finally translated from Greek to Latin. Therefore, the use of the word imperator may be just an attempt at translating the term βασιλεύς, not in the sense of Emperor of the Romans but merely in that of autocrat, a ruler whose power was fully independent from any other external political authority. This recognition was of a fundamental importance for Kalojan, since the rulers of Bulgaria’s neighbouring states, the kingdom of Hungary, the Byzantine empire, and especially the Latin empire of Constantinople, were not willing to recognize his legitimacy as an independent sovereign. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Savvas Kyriakidis considers the image of the emperor in the History of John VI Kantakouzenos, which was coined in the conflict between Andronikos II and Andronikos III, supported by Kantakouzenos himself (p. 264-277). Oscar Prieto Domínguez takes into account the process of shaping the image of emperor Theophilos in Byzantine hagiography (p. 216-234). They show that the legacy of the Roman tradition was a crucial factor in establishing the military role of Byzantine emperors as a fundamental aspect of the reign, which was to be realized even by emperors who were not militarily active. [Extracted from the article]

From Augustus' principate onward, the Roman emperor was heavily involved in religious matters – as priest and as monarch. He was on the one hand responsible for the pax deorum and on the other hand used religion for his self-representation. It is mainly within these fields that the emperor encountered the diverse forms of divination. The interpretation of prodigies had always been an essential part both of government action and of private decision making, and it is important to keep the two areas separate when considering the emperor's involvement with divination and its practitioners. This paper concentrates on how the policies of the Christian emperors concerning these matters developed during the 4th century. It further asks whether their legislation should be exclusively understood as part of an effort of depaganisation, or whether it was to some extent a continuation of the policies of their pagan predecessors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Euphrosyne is the property of Euphrosyne and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 398 CE the western Roman emperor Honorius issued a law condemning attempts by Jewish town councillors in southern Italy to seek exemptions from compulsory public services. While this law is usually read for the light it sheds on the legal situation of Jews in the Christian Roman Empire, it is argued here that the ruling is also concerned with another issue. It was issued three years after the division of the Roman Empire into two halves, East and West, each with its own administrative structures, and with its emperor issuing laws for territories under his jurisdiction. Honorius notes that Italian Jews claimed exemptions in accordance with recent eastern legislation but rejects its validity for the West. This indicates how tensions between East and West caused difficulties for Italian Jews who, because of their pan-Mediterranean connections, did not fit easily into the empire's administrative frameworks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]