Onno van Nijf Staying Roman - becoming Greek - working paper

8/14/2019 Onno van Nijf Staying Roman - becoming Greek - working paper

1/22

OVN Staying Roman- Becoming Greek DRAFT VERSION 20-09-2009 1

Staying Roman - Becoming Greek: the Roman Presence inGreek Cities1 Introducing the RomansWith the arrival of the Roman legions in the cities of Greece and AsiaMinor from the second century BCE, individual Romaioi started to makean appearance in the Greek cities:

in Latin texts they are known as the cives romani qui negotiantur(theRomans who are doing business) or as the Romani consistentes (theRomans who are resident). In the Greek inscriptions we find them undernames as hoi Romaioi; hoi Romaioi pragmateuomenoi and hoi Romaioi

katoikountes.Terminology:

'

A diverse terminology was used to describe a unusually high degree ofpersonal mobility and large scale immigration, that altered the historyand the social make-up of the Greek city for ever integrating it into theglobalizing world of the Roman empire.1

This is a draft version, and the annotation is still limited.1 The terms globliazation is of course a modern concept that is usually applied onlyto the study of the modern world, mainly from an economic perspective. Although


2/22


In this paper, which is meant as preliminary study for what mightbecome a bigger project on cultural, religious and political connectivityof the eastern Mediterranean

in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, I want to explore some elementsof this ancient form of globalization. I shall not consider the oftencomplicated ways in which the Roman state got involved with - evenentangled in - the Hellenistic East, I shall not speak about senatorialPhilhellenism, or about the political or economical motives behindRoman imperialism. Nor shall I discuss the instruments of empire -although tax farmers will make an appearance.

In fact my perspective will not center on Rome, but on the Greek cities,

and my focus will be on the personal mobility of the Romans whotraded and settled in the Greek cities. I am interested in these groups ascultural and politcal brokers, and on the form and effect of theirpresence in the greek cities of Roman Grece and Asia Minor

What happened to these new-comers in the Greek city: how did theyoperate, and how did they find their place in the Kosmos of the Greekcity? Did they remain a colonial elite, who merely lived inside the Greekcity, but who were not an integral part of the city? How did Romansaccommodate themselves to the social, cultural and political realities oflife in a post-classical polis? Did they develop a collective identity, andwas the place of this collective in the city?

this seems to change, as I have seen (but not yet read) studies that apply thisconcept to footbal, or other cultural forms such as music. Chris Bayly has suggestedthe term archaic globalisation for earlier forms of globalising proceses, (with anemphasis on the developments round the Indian Ocean). He applies his analysis alsoto the cultural and religious fields. Bayly, C. A. (2002). 'Archaic' and 'modern'

globalization in the Eurasian and African arena. c. 1750-1850. Globalization in worldhistory. A. G. Hopkins. London, Pimlico: 46-73, Bayly, C. A. (2004). The Birth of theModern World. Global Connections and Comparisons. Oxford, BlackwellPublishing.In a recent article on the role of athletes and performers as the culturalagents of aglobalising roman empire I have used the term ancient globalisation,as Archaic would be confusing. van Nijf, O. M. (2006). Global players: Athletes andperformers in the Hellenistic and Roman World. Between Cult and Society. Thecosmopolitan centres of the ancient Mediterranean as setting for activities ofreligious associations and religious communities (Special Issue ofHephaistos,Kritische Zeitschrift zu Theorie und Praxis der Arcologie undangrenzender Gebiete). I. Nielsen. Hamburg, van Nijf, O. M. (2006). "Global players:Griekse atleten, artiesten en de oikoumene in de Romeinse keizertijd." Leidschrift..


3/22


In this paper I shall discuss the developments in rough chronologicalorder: focusing on four aspects of Roman presence:1: I shall first discuss the settlement of individual Romans in the Greekcities, with special attention for their participation in social and cultural

sides of Greek civic life2: I shall then discuss on the basis of some politic-religious ritualpractices how the Greek cities responded by granting the Romans acollective status, though which they were allowed to connect with thekosmos of the later Greek polis3: And finally I shall discuss how in the imperial period Romans weregetting fully enshrined in urban life, by organizing themselves in moreformally structured associations that seem to have acquired a quasi-political status in the cities

4: in this form they appear to have served as cultural an politicalbrokers between the cities and rome.

There are two major omissions: I shall skip in this paper an importantphase: the troubles of the first century BCE and more in particular the Ephesian Vespers the massacres of the Mithridatic wars and theiraftermath. Nor shall I discus the Romans in Delos, which was not anormal Greek city, and which I suspsect distr]ort the picture.These I shall have leave to a different occasion, but I had to beginsomewhere.

Who were the Romaioi?First the terminology: There has been some scholarly interest in thefact that some texts that talk about Romans (Romaioi) and other aboutItalians, but I dont think that we need to worry too much about thesedifferences in terminology. First, because I think that terminologicalprecision was rarely a major concern in the world of ancientassociations, which is the vantage point from which I first addressedthese issues, But also because it has become clear that these subtle

differences were of little interest to the Greek cities, who would lumpall Italians and Romans together as Romaioi.Moreover, after the Social Wars of the first century BC this distinctionwould loose its force anyway.

Economic interestsEven though Roman foreign policy was not mercantilist in the sensethat it was shaped by the commercial interests; it is still obvious thatthe presence of Romaioi was closely connected with the growth of

empire, even though it was more a case of trade following the flag, thanthe other way around.


4/22


Romaioi were active in a range of economic activities: they appeared asshippers (naukleroi) traders (mercatores or negotiatores),2 but equally asfinanciers and moneylenders (trapezitai). In fact they seem to haveturned a hand to anything that could bring in a handsome profit, and

appear almost anywhere where reasonably ordered commercialconditions could be found.3However, as all entrepreneurs in pre-industrial economies, they wouldinvest their money as soon as possible in the only stable source ofincome, land. So quite a few Romaioi were in fact (colonial) landowners:which is in fact proven in some inscriptions that list them explicitly aslandowners: romaioi engaiountes etc.

Romaioi were clearly among the main beneficiaries of the growing

empire, but they had an active function in this process as well. It isprobably redundant to add that the economic activities of these Romaioiwould have included tax farming: the Roman state practiced what wenow call outsourcing or privatization, by farming the provincialtaxes to companies ofpublicani, that were based in Rome, but with largenetworks in the provinces.In Greek cities you would, therefore, also encounter all kinds of Romanpublicani, ranging from high ranking negotiatores who had a stake in atax-farming company, their agents who negotiated with the authoritiesof the Greek cities, as well as the more humble telonai, who were hadthe job of actually extracting the money from the Greek cities, or fromtraders and travellers who passed by the toll-stations along the bordersof city territories and tax regions.4 The reputation of these publicans forrapacity and corruption is well-known, not to say notorious. But tax-farmers and moneylenders may have colluded, and all negotiatores wereimplicated in the exploitation of the Greek provinces. Together withthe Roman soldiers, such men would have represented to many, the(ugly) face of Roman imperialism.

To the Greeks there may have been simply not too much difference, asbecame in fact clear in the early first century BC. When Romannegotiatores andpublicani the usual villains- were so closely associated,that they were massacred together during one of the most terribleevents of the first Mithridatic War the so-called Ephesian Vespers in

2 The term negotiator seems to have conveyed the idea of trade and commerce on awider scale, and may have given them an air of respectability3 Errington, R. M. (1988). Aspects of Roman acculturation in the East under theRepublic. Alte geschichte und Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Festschrift fr K. Christ zum65. Geburtstag. P. K. a. V. Losemann. Darmstadt: 140-157., 1434 See Van Nijf (Forthcoming) The social world of Roman Tax farmers.


5/22


the spring of 88 BC. The eighty thousand Romans or more that arereputed that were massacred were surely not only tax farmers.

Although I shall not discuss these events, It is worth pointing out,

however, that the stories about the thousands of Roman victims of theMithridatic Wars prove at least that the Romans must have had asizeable presence in the Greek cities. It is a fact of Roman imperialhistory, that many Romans had settled in the Greek cities, and that theyhad a role to play there. Is it possible to come to a more positiveappreciation of the nature of their involvement in these communities?It has been argued (by Ferrary among others) that it is very difficult toappreciate the relationships between the Romaioi and the Greek city inthe Republican period, but it is worth making the attempt.5

Greek citiesWhere do we find these Romans? It is clear that we should differentiatebetween the different types of cities: the integration of the Romans didnot happen everywhere in the same pace or along the same lines. JeanLouis Ferrary has recently argued that Roman business men would havebeen particularly attracted to cities where Roman magistrates and pro-magistrates were based.6 The absence of a system of international lawwould have made it attractive for Roman traders to have easy access toa Roman official with imperiumor iuris dictio, who could guarantee thesecurity of personnel and property, and intervene when transactionswent wrong. Roman traders will have sought protection one way oranother: protection of the law where available, but there is sufficientevidence to proof that they will have resorted to exerting pressure andbullying or buying their way around where necessary.In these bigger centres, Romans may have been numerous enough toform a kind of large expat-communities, but Romans were also to befound in smaller or larger numbers- in many different smaller cities.We find evidence for the presence of associations and groups ofRomaioi

in many cities, including as Pagai, Amorgos, Adramytteion, Priene,Abydos, Ilion Erythrae and many others (but the number of cities inwhich individual Romaioi are attested is many times greater), wherethey will have had to accommodate themselves to their newenvironment and way of life more or less on their own.

5 Ferrary, J.-L. (2001). Rome et la gographie de l'hellnisme: rflexions sur les"hellnes" et "panhellnnes" dans les inscriptions d'poque romaine. The GreekEast in Roman context. Proceedings of a colloquium organised by the FinnishInstitute at Athens, May 21-and 22 , 1999. O. Salomies. Helsinki, Finnish Institute atAthens: 19-36.6 Ibid.


6/22


What was the place in the cities of these settlers? Were they all (hated?)outsiders, or do we find evidence of their integration within the kosmosof the polis?

Romans and other foreignersTo appreciate this we need to know how Greek cities normally copedwith foreigners. Foreign traders had existed before, of course: the majorGreek harbours had always hosted larger or smaller groups offoreigners, who often banded together, and developed a collectiveidentity on the joint basis of origin, shared cult or occupation. Suchgroups were sometimes allowed privileges: temples, headquarters andburial places. In some cases they were also allowed to express theirown ethnic and religious identity collectively in public ritual.

In most cases this was a matter of toleration than of integration,however: even though the Thracian Bendis worshippers of Athens seemhave been connected to aspects of city life, these men and theirassociations remained ultimately outsiders, marginal to the concerns ofthe Greek city:

So, what happened when Roman xenoi began to establish themselves inthe Greek cities? As I said, much of the scholarly interest in theseRomans has focused on the tensions that they caused. However, in aninteresting article of 1988, Robert Malcolm Errington has taken adifferent perspective: he investigated aspects of Roman acculturation inthe East, focusing on the (mainly epigraphic) evidence for Romansettlers and traders.7 Errington shows that there is evidence that -rightfrom the start- Romans were actively participating in many aspects ofthe life of the city. There is particularly good epigraphic evidence forthe integration of Romans in the world of the gymnasia and festivals.

Romans as athletes and ephebesWe are all aware of the crucial role of athletic training in thegymnasium and athletic competition in the religious festivals for thecreation of Greek identity at a personal level, and at the level of cities. 8Moreover, these manifestations of Greek culture underwent an

7 Errington, R. M. (1988). Aspects of Roman acculturation in the East under theRepublic. Alte geschichte und Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Festschrift fr K. Christ zum65. Geburtstag. P. K. a. V. Losemann. Darmstadt: 140-157..8 I have discussed this question i.a in: van Nijf, O. (1999). "Athletics, festivals andGreek identity in the Roman East." Proceedings of the Cambridge PhilologicalSociety 45 : 175-200.


7/22


explosive growth precisely in the Hellenistic period: festivals werefounded in increasing numbers and the gymnasia of this perioddeveloped into monumental masterpieces that started to play a crucialrole - as a second agora it has been said- in the social, cultural and

political life of the cities.

From the third century BCE we see individual Romaioi are asparticipants in and, not infrequently, as victors of athletic competitionsthroughout Greece. In fact the first attested Roman victories attraditional Greek Games go back to the end of 3rd century, when Romanathletes took part in (and won) the great Panhellenic Games of theIsthmia of 228. Cassius Dio reports the name of the victor as Plautus,and many modern historians may have their suspicions about his

identity. Yet, Roman participation in Greek games seems plausibleenough.

In subsequent years Romaioi appear as frequent players at a growingnumber of lesser games and festivals as well. From the mid 2nd centurythis became quite common: in 142 BC a long list of victors at theAthenian Theseia list a Roman as the victor of the hoplomachia (armedfight);9 around the same time we find that in Chalkis in one single yearno less than 5 Romans won at the local Herakleia. And there are manyother examples: a list of victors of the Romaia of Xanthos includes aRoman victor in the major horse race: Caius Octavius Pollio, who evenhad himself announced as a Telmessian.10The success of these festivals, and the increasing participation andathletic successes of Romans in them, are indeed an indication of thesuccessful integration of Romans in Greek cities and certainly in theirgymnasia. For, in order to succeed in these contests with the best full-time Greek athletes, the Romaioi must have been frequenting the Greekgymnasia for some time.

9 IG II.2, 96010 Robert, L. (1978). "Catalogue agonistique des Rmaia de Xanthos." RevueArchologique: 277-290 [= OMS VII, no 176].. - Incidentally, this texts shows thatmany of these games had their part to play in the symbolic integration of Greekcities in the Roman imperial system. From the third onwards we also find games intraditional Greek style that were celebrated in honour of Rome the Romaia- thatwere celebrated separately or joined with existing festivals, as for example inXanthos where the Koinon (league) of the Lycian cities organised Roman Games. Ishall discuss this feature in more detail in a forthcoming paper Sporting for Rome:Greek athletic festivans in the servie of the cult of Rome and the Emperors.


8/22


Errington identifies in fact quite a number of Romans among theephebes 11who trained in the gymnasia, that were gradually opening upto foreigners: from big centres like Athens and Pergamon to smallerports as Naxos and Larissa.

But their acculturation went beyond the mere adoption of Greekphysical culture: it must rank as a sign of the thorough culturalintegration of Roman expats, that they were also able to win in literarycontests as well: A Quintus Ocrius Quinti Filius is on record as the victorin a competition for the Egkomion logikon (contest in laudatory rhetoric)at Tanagra in Boeotia, and a man called Publius Romaios won thesecond prize in the dramatic competition of the Sarapieia in the same

place at the turn of the second to first century BCE.Roman traders may have had a modest social status in their homecountry, but whatever their status in Italy, in the East young Romanswere able join thejeunesse dore of the Greek cities who spent their timein the gymnasia and share in their athletic and intellectual pursuits.This can only have promoted their successful integration into their hostcommunities. Membership of the ephebeia would even open up theroad to local citizenship - whatever the Roman rules about theincompatibility between roman and local citiznship

Romans as benefactorsErrington also mentions as another symptom of their integration thewillingness of some Romaioi to invest in their host communities: fromthe third century Roman benefactors we find large numbers ofmonumental inscriptions that rewarded Roman benefactors for theirgenerosity with proxenia (appointment as an official friend of the cityi. a kind of honorary consul), proedria (the right to reserved seats in thefront rows at games) ateleia (exemption from import/export duties), ges enktesis (the right to own property) in sum by all the traditional

Greek rewards for public generosity. Errington suggests that thisimplies a basic identity of interest between the Greek communities andthe Roman traders, but I am less optimistic about this identity ofinterest and the civic spirit of these benefactors and magistrates.

This type of honorific inscriptions was often set up for individuals whowere not so much members of the community, but outsiders whosomehow towered over the cities, like kings, military commanders, andmagnates. Many of the inscriptions were actually set up for Roman

11 NB the ephebeia was of course an entry into citizenship. Cf Habicht


9/22


bankers and moneylenders. The tone of the honorific inscriptions set upfor them suggest that rather than as local men, such men were seen aspowerful outsiders who held the cities more or less in their grip.

An example of this is an honorific text for the Cloatii Marcus andNemerius who were proclaimed proxenoi and euergetai by the city ofGytheion on account of their devotion and honourable ambitiontowards the city, but who also appear to have been the cities maincreditors.12

Since Numerius and Marcus Cloatius, sons of Numerius Romansproxenoi and benefactors of our city, from the beginning havecontinued to act justly both towards our polis and, privately towards

those of the citizens who approached them (with a request) , neverlacking in zeal and honourable ambition, because of which the citygratefully made public mention and voted suitable honours for them, inthe year of Lachares magistracy when they were negotating our releasefrom the obligations of the first loan; and in the year of Phleinosmagistracy, when concerning the second loan of 3965 drachmas, whichthe city had borrowed in the year of Damarmanos magistracy, theyaccepted the people of Athens, as arbitratror in the time of Marciliusand then after being implored by the citizens they permitted thepayment of what the citizens persuaded them etc

Euergetism, like patronage, is often a myth used to dress upfundamentally skewed relationships. We have no way of telling howoften a honorific monument was used to present a respectable faade toa relationship that turned around extortion and fear.I conclude therefore, that these instances do not tell us much about theintegration of the Romans in these cities.

Collective presence of Romans in civic festivals:My discussion has focused so far mainly on the evidence for individualRomaioi, who were often identified on the basis of their names. Suchmen may have been integrated in their cities, but in the end they were(albeit important, wealthy or powerful) treated not fundamentallydifferently from other (wealthy) foreigners.

What I want to discuss now, however, is evidence for collective action,or rather for a collective presence of Romans as a recognizable groupwith a special status in the city. To find out more about this, we can

12 IG 5.2, 1146.


10/22


investigate the evidence for the rich ritual life of the post-classicalGreek cities. Civic rituals and ceremonies, and in particular sacrificialbanquets and processions are a particularly good place to look as theseoften serve as a dramatic representation of the social and political order

in the city. Moreover, regulations about and records of ritual activitiesoften list the participants, and can serve as a kind of Who is who? inthe Hellenistic city.

In this context I can only discuss to the public banquets, that wereorganized by priests, magistrates or benefactors in the Greek cities ofthe Hellenistic period. Banquets (and especially sacrificial banquets)had always been a major event in Greek cities. The distribution ofsacrificial meat, which is at the core of banquets, had always been one

an important collective activity. In the words of Pauline Schmitt-Pantelwho has studied public commensality in the Greek city, participationin the civic sacrifices and the civic banquets is of the same nature asintegration into the civic group.Rules about participation to Greek civic banquets had always beenstrict. In the third part of her study Schmitt-Pantel investigates thedevelopment of public commensality in the Hellenistic period. Sheshows how the organization of public banquets responded to, and was afactor in, the structural transformation of Greek polis society in thisperiod. Just as Greek cities were gradually taking on a morecosmopolitan character there was also A gradual widening of thegroups that were entitled to participate, and an increasing participationof strangers in these quintessential civic rituals.13

From the second century BC onwards we find that Roman citizens gotinvited to these banquets, as a separately mentioned category. Theearliest examples are found in Eretria (IG 12.9, 234)14 and Aigiale onAmorgos (IG 12, 7, 515)15, but they are also found in Priene, Pergamon,

13 une ouverture plus grande du groupe des ayants droit et la participationsfrquente des trangers, quils soient domicilis dans la cits ou de passage. SP 49014 at the sacred gathering of the Artemisia he met the expenses of the unguentsout of his own pocket; accepting this expense not only for the citizens but for therest of those who attended the gathering and shared common privileges, and, inundertaking the sacrifice to Hermes, he invited by public proclamation both thecitizens and those Romans who were resident, and on the fourth day he banquetedthose who shared the common privileges and on the fifth others of the citizens andmany of the strangers15 ... he provided a deipnon (meal) to all citizen who happened to be in Aigiale andthe residents and the foreigners and those of the Romans who happened to bepresent and their sons (or wives)


11/22


Kyme, Eresos (Lesbos), et Pagai (Megaris). What is important to me hereis that in these case the Roman were not singled out individually, asbefore, but listed collectively as hoi Romaioi (The Romans).This is clearly an indication that they had developed a corporate status,

a collective identity that was now being recognised by the organisers ofthe civic banquets.It is interesting to note the difference with the other foreigners, whowere normally simply referred to collectively as xenoi (foreigners), butwho were rarely identified by their individual place of origin. This liftedthe Romans to a level somewhat between foreigners and citizens. Yet, acertain ambiguity remained: the Romaioi were invited as a recogniseablegroup, above other foreigners, but in the end, they remained -and werelisted as- foreigners, outsiders to the city.

There are some caveats here: this may not have happened everywhereat the same rate, and the inclusion of the Romans may at times havebeen a personal choice of the benefactor who paid for the banquets.This was so in the case of Kritolaos, the benefactor from Aigiale whowas one of the first to invite the Romans (2BC), but this appears to havebeen still the case at the end of the first century BC when thebenefactor Kleanax invited Romans to a number of banquets in Kyme(SEG 32, 1243)16.

So, we find an growing number of texts that refer to the Romans as agroup, as a collective with a certain status in the city. The Romans werecertainly visible collectively: they had their own associations, and theycould be invited collectively to take part in festivals and ritual occasionsthat were organised in the polis.They were a specially recognised group of foreigners, that could occupya position between citizens and other foreigners. But Roman traders,and even Roman residents, were still relatively marginal to the Greekcities. They lived in the cities, but they were not a fully integral part of

the cities.

Yet, an important step had been made which had repercussionthroughout the Greek world. Epigraphic material from Delos illustratesthis from an other perspective: early Delian inscriptions often refer toAthenians, Roman and other xenoi (foreigners), but from the first

16 ... As the first and only person he hosted in the prytaneion (town hall) thecitizens and the Romans and the foreigners and after a proclamation he gave atreat in the market place to the Hellenes by Phyle (district) and to the Romans, andthe residents and the foreigners


12/22


century inscriptions on the island start refer to Athenians, Romans andother Greeks, which was clearly a major upgrade in the status of theRomans - from a Greek perspective. A process of adaptation andacculturation had apparently been set into motion, that would continue

well into the Imperial period.Getting organised: Romans in Greek cities of the PrincipateSo far I have been discussing the Romaioi of the Hellenistic (orRepublican) era, but now I shall discuss the developments in theimperial period - with a focus more on Asia Minor than on Greece. Atthe end of the first century BC the epigraphical record of Roman tradersand settlers shows two fundamental changes. First a quantitativechange: There is a sharp increase in the number of texts that refer toassociations of Romans. In Asia Minor alone we know about 20inscriptions from the Republican period, but in the first centuries ADtheir number quadruples to about 80. I havent done the numbers yetfor all the areas, but it is my impression that they rose as well in Greeceand the islands.

But a more important development is qualitative. During the lateHellenistic period Romaioi had appeared largely in the inscriptions thatwere set up by others, by natives of the Greek cities in which they werementioned as guests to public banquets and other festivities, as aprivileged category, as benefactors or as victors in games. But from thelate first century onwards the situation seems to be reversed. Romansstart to appear in their own right, as the collective authors of publicinscriptions in the Greek cities, thereby using monumental languageactively to claim a place in the civic world. My interest here, therefore,is not so much to explain this rise, but rather to draw attention to theway the Romans represented themselves and to the implication of thisself-fashioning for their role in the civic communities.

It is important to emphasise that these texts were set up by Romans as agroup, as a community. They present themselves as a clearlydemarcated group with a corporate identity, and capable of takingcollective action. They behave like civic bodies: They have magistrates,and make decisions, pass decrees, erect buildings and set up their owninscribed monuments in public space; in every respect they mimick theestablished civic institutions. In my book I dubbed this development,that we also find with other types of associations, ordo-making. Insome cases they even started to behave like proper cities (or like other

building blocks of empire such as provincial koina, and associations of


13/22


performers17) by sending out envoys especially to Rome-just as thoughthey were cities themselves.

In short the epigraphic record suggest that the Romans started to

organise themselves formally and that they began to play a more activerole in the public sphere of their host communities.

The status of Romaioi: conventus?There has been some interest in the exact legal status of theorganizations of Romans in Greek cities. Unfortunately it is not alwayseasy to understand the exact nature of the relationship between theseassociations and the cities. Traditionally it has been suggested byKornemann and Schulten- that they operated in the form of a conventus which was supposedly a formal body instituted in each city by theRoman state under a kind of state appointed direction: curatores,(Kornemann). There are some texts that support this view, such as aninscriptions from Hierapolis in Phrygia (Judeich 32) where the Romanshonour a conventarch.The most shining boule (council) and the most shining demos ( people)of Hierapolis and the gerousia (council of elders) and the synedrion ofthe Romaioi and the neoi (young men) and the associations haverepeatedly honoured Ageleius Apollonides from Ania, a man whobelonged to (a family of) excellent councillors, who was a strategos ofthe city and agoranomos (market supervisor) and dekaprotos (one ofthe ten rich men who were responsible for the payment of centraltaxes) and 'conventarch' (Greek for official responsible for theconventus) of the Romans, and responsible for the oil distributions, andformerly auditor, and supervisor of public building, who had shownhimself most useful on matters to do with the emperor (?)

and from Thyateira in Lydia (TAM 5.2, 1002)

The leather workers honour T. Flavius Alexander of the tribus Quirinason of Metrophanes, having been agoranomos for 6 months with vimand vigour, and with many expenses, having been curator of the Romanconventus, having been 3 times ambassador to the emperor in Rome,

17 For an interpretation of associations of athletes and perfoprmers as quasi agentsin the servie of Rome see my: van Nijf, O. M. (2006). Global players: Athletes andperformers in the Hellenistic and Roman World. Between Cult and Society. Thecosmopolitan centres of the ancient Mediterranean as setting for activities ofreligious associations and religious communities (Special Issue ofHephaistos,Kritische Zeitschrift zu Theorie und Praxis der Arcologie undangrenzender Gebiete). I. Nielsen. Hamburg..


14/22


and having succeeded in his missions concerning large sums of money,having been priest of Artemis at his own expense, piously andgenerously, and who has dedicated... on behalf of Flavia Alexandra andFlavia Glycinna his daughters.

But there are some problems: the term conventus for a group of tradersis awkward, as these conventus would have to have been distinguishedfrom the juridical conventus, which had a precise and recogniseablemeaning of court districts, as well as the court assemblies that wereheld there on fixed days with the governor presiding. Moreover, it isnot clear to that the term conventus of traders was universally adopted-and even less that it was promoted by the Roman state. This view was,therefore, discredited, i.a. by Hatzfeld, but in an unpublished Leiden

MA thesis, Hermann Roozenbeek has argued that we need to reconsiderour views, as these groups of Roman residents and traders must havehad a kind of more formal status. He suggests that these conventus werelinked to the cities in a kind ofsympoliteia (joined citizenship), whichwould have given them a separate status and a close link to the city atthe same time: again an expression that is found in the epigraphicalrecord.

sympoliteia (IGR 3, 294) []The Boule and the Demos of the Isaurians and the Romans who are injoined citizenship with us (have decided etc)

However, I am not sure that this solution can be employed in all cases.Surely not all Romans would have established a settlement that couldbe described in terms ofsympoliteia. In some cases groups of Romansseem to have an identity that exceeded the limits of an individual city:various inscriptions refer to the Romans that were active in a region oran entire province, which suggests that these associations could have a

translocal character, which would preclude any idea ofsympoliteia.We find, for example: associations of romaioi : (IEphesos 5, 1517)The Roman businessmen throughout AsiaAnd In Smyrna (IK 24.1, 642) .The Roman businessmen in Asia

For the purpose of this paper I suggest that we leave this matter open: I

for one am ready to accept that associations of Romans often enjoyed apermanent and fixed status in the cities, but that the precise legal


15/22


installation of such groups could differ from case to case, and that itmay have been a matter of local conditions and local preferences.

Civic identityMore important than their legal status is to see what these Romanswere actually doing in the city, and how they expressed their role inwhat I have called the civic world. It is quite obvious that theseRomans often expressed a close tie, if not their identity, with the Greekcities in which they were active. Associations of Roman negotiatoresoften had titles that clearly indicated their belonging to a particularcityThey could be known as- (Chios 5-14 AD SEG 22, 507)

The Romans who are with them- [ ] .) (Ilion IK 3, 230)The Romans who are living in Ilion

- ' in Assos (IK 4, 26)The Romans who do business amongst us

- (Kyzikos, SEG 28, 953)The Romans who do business in the city

- E I or (Ephesos, IEphesos 3, 800) The Roman (or Italian) traders who do

business in Ephesos.- O T, in Tralleis, ITralleis, 77 TheRomans who live in Tralleis

- IIasos 90 The Romans whodo business in Iasos

And such examples could easily be multiplied. Another perhapsstronger argument for their increasing identification with the interestsof the city and hence of their integration into the city- is to be foundon honorific monuments and dedications that were set up by theRomans for local priests, magistrates and benefactors of the city as awhole.The first instances of this identification are to be found on funerarymonuments that simply represented side by side the honorific crownsthat the deceased had received from the city and from groups such asthe RomansErythrae 2, 405:in corona: dmos[ ---- son of Krateas , (greetings good man)in corona Romans


16/22


But later texts were much more detailed. When we consider theaforementioned inscriptions from Hierapolis and Thyateira we seeRomans appearing as a civic institution, passing its own honorific

decrees for important citizens. Such inscriptions highlighted theessential solidarity of the Romaioi with the city, and by adopting thediscourse of public praise the Romaioi now showed that they hadeffectively internalised the core values of their host communities.Initially the Roman associations acted still alone, but it becameincreasingly common that Romaioi appeared as the (joint) authors ofinscriptions and even decrees, alongside cities, or alongside politicalinstitutions of cities, suggesting that they were fully integrated in thedecision making process. This phenomenon, which we encounter also in

the case of artisanal collegia associated the Romans even closer to thecore interests of the city in which they were active.A text from Apameia in Phrygia shows that the Romans were evenallowed to take part in a pandemos ekklesia a general assembly- whicha clear sign of a near full social and political integration in the city.IGR 4 791; formal statusThe boule and the demos and the resident Romans, at a plenarymeeting of the assembly, honour Publius Manneius Ruso, son ofPublius, of the tribe Romilia, a good and high-minded man for thebenefactions of his ancestors and his own comparable benefactionstowards the fatherland. He frequently nourished the city in difficultcircumstances and he led embassies to the emperors concerning manyuseful matters, and he obtained generosities from the imperial priests,and he was a friend of the people at every occasion and he increased theincome of the people. The statue was set up by the tradesmen (ergastai)of the Thermaia Plateia. Eumenes son of Dionysios and Iulius son ofDoubassion were responsible. In accordance with a decree of the city.

These examples show, I think that full integration into the city, that anidentity of interest was not, as Errington suggested achieved, whenRomans started to appear as the recipients of civic honour, but ratherwhen they start to side with the cities and make an appearance as theauthors of inscriptions and honorific monuments for civic benefactors.

Romaioi as cultural and polit ical brokersHaving said that, it want to emphasise that this was not simply a case ofRomans going native, of Romans becoming Greek as it were, gradually

shedding their Roman character and loosening their links with Rome.On the contrary: Romanness was the basis of their name and of the


17/22


identity of their organization, and it was exactly in becoming Greek andsimultaneously maintaining links with Rome that they found theirraison dtre.In this final part I want to discuss the evidence that the Romans started

to play an ideologically significant role as agents in the representationof the emperor and of imperial power in the cities of the Greekprovinces.It is quite obvious that the representation of these associations ofRomaioi was often closely bound up with the representation of Romeitself an imperial power.About half the number of inscriptions that were set up by associationsof Romans in Asia Minor (that is to say 40 out of 80) - were used toconvey loyalty to the city of Rome and most of all to the emperors. (also

in Greece most of the inscriptions set up by the Romaioi were in oneway or another declarations of loyalty).

Dedications- IK 4. 240 : Thea Rome, benefactress of the world- IK 4, 13: Gaius Caesar hgemon of the neotes(princeps juventutis)by the

dmos and the Roman traders- IK4, 19 to Livia Hera- IEphesos 2, 409 To Claudius-

IGR 4, 684 To Domitian and the Demos Romain

Moreover many other inscriptions that were not used to explicitlly forthe emperor can still be read as an expression of loyalty with Rome:

Honours for Roman (pro)magistrates and imperial priests

And a striking number was involved or at leat concerned with thesending of ambassies to Rome, or with praising past ambassadors.

Mantineiathe city of the Antogoneans and the Roman businessmen there honourEpigone, their benefactresshaving paid for a variety of benefactions to the polis he went beyondthe boundaries of Hellas and sailed until the signet ring of the Augustus,over the Adriatic -a sea that even the coastal residents hesitate to sailonly once, he the landlubber despesed by sailing it a second time

Maroneia


18/22


Only a few years ago Kevin Clinton published an inscription thatillustrates this interest in a spectacular fashion. I am talking of courseabout the decree from Maroneia on the privileges the city wantedreconfirmed under Claudius. This is a decree by Boule and demos, in

praise for a successful embassy to the emperor Claudius (who is hailedas the most conspicuous god of the universe and creator of newbelssings for all men) as well s mking provisions for future embassies todeal with new threats to the citys freedom and privileges.It is striking that this degree was passed on a gnome (resolution) of aselection of civic groups:

Resolution of the bouleutai and priests and the magistrates and theRomans resident in the city and all other citizens

This text shows how the roman residents - as the co sponsors of thedecree- were playing a major part in organising and regulating therelations between the city and the emperor.

Moreover, the texts also shows how the mention of the Romans in theseries of decision making bodies contributed to a new representation oflocal society- not as an isonomic community- but as a hierarchy ofstatus groups that were linked symbolically and effectively to theimperial centre:other examples of this practice (alo involving romans) are not difficultto find: the text from Apamaiea in Phrygia that I mentioned earlier(where the Romans took part in a pandemos ekklesia) was another. Butthe most spectacular example of this practice is found in a longinscription of Assos that I shall quote in full:18

IK 4.26In the consulship of Gnaeus Acerronius Proculus and Gaius PontiusPetronius Nigrinus. The Assians on motion of the people.

Whereas the rule of Gaius Caesar Germanicus Augustus, hoped andprayed for by all men, has been proclaimed and the world has foundunended joy and every city and every people has been eager for thesight of the god since the happiest age for mankind has now begun, itwas decreed by the council and the Roman businessmen among us andthe people of Assos to appoint an embassy chosen from the foremost

18 IK 4. 26. Other texts that show the involvement of the Roman communities in suchdeclarations of loyalty, include a text of the year 3BC that records the oath ofloyalty sworn to Augustus by the inhabitants of Paphlagonia. The Romans fromAssos were clearly not exceptional.


19/22


most distinguished Romans and Greeks to seek an audience andcongratulate him, and beg him to remember the city with solicitude, ashe personally promised when together with his father Germanicus hefirst set foot in our city's province.

Oath of the Assians:We swear by Zeus the Savior and by the deified Caesar Augustus and bythe ancestral Holy Maiden, to be loyal to Caius Caesar Augustus and allhis house and to regard as friends whomever he chooses and asenemies whomever he censures. If we remain faithful to our oath may itgo well with us; if we swear falsely the opposite.The envoys proposed themselves voluntarily at their own expenseCaius Varius C.F. Voltinia CastusHermophanes son of Zolos

Kttos so. Pisistratos

What we have here, is a decree of the city of Assos referring to a jointdecision of the city and the Romans to send envoys to Caligula on theoccasion of his elevation to the imperial purple. The envoys conveyedthe citys congratulations, but also the text of a public oath of loyalty inwhich the Romans joined in with the Greeks of Assos. Joined in isperhaps not the right expression as the Romaioi seem to have had a poleposition among the authors of the decree: as in the text from Akmoneiathey were mentioned after the boule but before the demos which clearlyshows that they had played an active -perhaps initiating- part in thenegotiations.

And, finally, the leading role of associations of Romans in establishinglinks with rome is also in evidence on a long inscriptions fromKlaudioneapolis in Paphlagonia. When in about 5 BCE the provincePaphlagonia was created, all inhabitants took an oath of loyalty toAugustus and his descendants:19

IGR ??Gangra

.. on the day before the Nones of march (6 March) in Gangra, incamp(or in the agora) , the oath completed by the inhabitants ofPaphlagonia and the Romans who do business among them: "I swear byZeus, eart, Sun, all the godsand goddesses and Augustus himself that Iwill be favourably disposed toward Caesar Augustus and his children

19 IGR ?? cf Herrmann, Peter. 1968. Der rmische Kaisereid. Untersuchungen zuseiner Herkunft und Entwicklung. Hypomnemata; untersuchungen zur Antike undzu ihrem Nachleben, Heft 20. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck u. Ruprecht.


20/22


and descendants all the time of my life in word and deed and thought ....etc.In the same words was this oatch sworn by all the inhabitants of theland in the temples of Augustus throughout the districts of the

province, by the altars of Augustus. And likewise the Phazimomiansliving in what is now called Neapolis swore the oath, all of them, in thetemple of Augustus by the altar of Augustus

Again we see that the Romans took a prominent part in this highlycharged occasion.

It would appear then that the one of the functions of these associationsof Romans in the civic world of the Greek city was somehow to monitor

or channel the symbolic exchanges between the Greek cities and theimperial center. It is not possible to establish whether in these cases theRomans took the initiative, or whether they merely responded to localdemands or pressures, but that may be besides the point. One way oranother, the associations of Romans in Greek cities had an importantpart to play as a exemplry trait dunion, as the political and culturalbrokers in a globalising Roman empire.

Conclusion and envoyI have presented a fairly rough sketch of the changing nature of Romanpresence in the Greek city in a period of a crucial transformation of theImperium Romanum in the East. I have discussed how at the earlystages Roman negotiatores settled in Greek cities in the slipstream ofRoman diplomatic moves and of the army. Initially they seem to havesettled as individual expats, who show considerable sign of adaptationand acculturation to their new environments. I have shown how theGreek cities responded, granting these newcomers a kind of collectivestatus, that found expression i.a. in their collective participation ingrowing numbers of community rituals, and in particular public

banquets, with which the cities celebrated their collective identity. AndI have argued how in the imperial period Roman identity formed thebasis of increasingly formally structured associations that seem to haveacquired a fixed place in the social and political hierarchy of the city. Inthis context it turned out that the association of Romans began to playthe role as a kind of symbolic or ideological intermediaries. They had akey role in the spread of the imperial cult and in the representation ofRoman imperial power in the city.

There is one final stage of this history that I have not discussed as yet:how did it finish? When I started my research for this paper. I was


21/22


mainly interested in the role of the formal associations of Romans inGreek cities, and that story is fairly straightforward. The associations ofRomans are widely attested in the first two centuries AD, but when theConstitutio Antoniniana extends Roman citizenship to all the free

inhabitants there is no need for clubs of Roman citizens - and theydisappear from the record: after 212 there are no associations ofRomaioi attested - as every Greek was now a Roman.But when we think of Roman identity, the story does not end, quite yet.The history of the Greek city of the imperial period, which coincideswith the cultural movement that we call the Second Sophistic. This iswas a Greek cultural phenomenon of course, that affected elite cultureand civic identity to a high degree. But it can also be seen to make roomfor a specifically Greek interpretation of Roman identity. Throughout

the Greek East, Greek culture was used to give expression to a personaland political identity that was both Greek and Roman, or even primarilyRoman.20 I am cutting corners here, and will probablt seem to deril tomany of you, but this development culminates in the well-knownphenomenon that the Greeks of the Byzantine empire were able topresent themselves as the Romaioi - the true and only Romans. ThisGreek notion of Roman-ness - Romaiosyne- remained relevant in theGreek world well into the twentieth century, but that is another story.

BibliographyBayly, C. A. (2002). 'Archaic' and 'modern' globalization in the Eurasian

and African arena. c. 1750-1850. Globalization in world history. A.G. Hopkins. London, Pimlico: 46-73.

Bayly, C. A. (2004). The Birth of the Modern World. Global Connectionsand Comparisons. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

Errington, R. M. (1988). Aspects of Roman acculturation in the Eastunder the Republic. Alte geschichte und Wissenschaftsgeschichte.Festschrift fr K. Christ zum 65. Geburtstag. P. K. a. V. Losemann.

Darmstadt: 140-157.Ferrary, J.-L. (2001). Rome et la gographie de l'hellnisme: rflexions

sur les "hellnes" et "panhellnnes" dans les inscriptionsd'poque romaine. The Greek East in Roman context. Proceedingsof a colloquium organised by the Finnish Institute at Athens, May21-and 22 , 1999. O. Salomies. Helsinki, Finnish Institute atAthens: 19-36.

Robert, L. (1978). "Catalogue agonistique des Rmaia de Xanthos."Revue Archologique: 277-290 [= OMS VII, no 176].

20 I argue this more fully in a forthcoming paper.


22/22


van Nijf, O. (1999). "Athletics, festivals and Greek identity in the RomanEast." Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 45 : 175-200.

van Nijf, O. M. (2006). Global players: Athletes and performers in the

Hellenistic and Roman World. Between Cult and Society. Thecosmopolitan centres of the ancient Mediterranean as setting foractivities of religious associations and religious communities(Special Issue of Hephaistos,Kritische Zeitschrift zu Theorie undPraxis der Arcologie und angrenzender Gebiete). I. Nielsen.Hamburg.

van Nijf, O. M. (2006). "Global players: Griekse atleten, artiesten en deoikoumene in de Romeinse keizertijd." Leidschrift.

Onno van Nijf Staying Roman - becoming Greek - working paper

Documents

Transcript of Onno van Nijf Staying Roman - becoming Greek - working paper